The Traffic Ticket Industry
DonQuijote1954
slight violations of parking regulations, and having suffered and
still suffering daily from the lack of enforcement on our chaotic
roads, I'm inclined to say: "Hey, nice industry you got there." ;)
***
Taxation Without Representation
In response to your ongoing debate about parking tickets ["Letters,"
Oct. 16], in my opinion parking tickets are a plain and simple
taxpayer rip-off. Parking tickets (overnight and meter) are a
draconian method of "taxation without representation" that turns
innocent, non-violent citizens into criminals for one reason only:
revenue generation. Revenue generation that has no direct benefit to
those who are fined and penalized.
The laws need to be changed because non-moving parking citations are
simply stupid and ridiculous. Why is it a penalty to park in front of
your own home overnight? Why should you receive a ticket just because
you were on the "wrong" side of the street, even if you have paid for
an overnight parking permit? (They don't sweep the streets on a
regular basis, so what is the reason?) Why do you get a $20 ticket for
being 10 minutes over in a parking space you just rented for $2? Why
are students fined and penalized for attending classes while being
limited in the number of parking spaces and time to park? Why, in some
areas, does 25 cents get you one hour of meter parking, while in other
areas only 15 minutes? Why should you become a criminal when your
registration is suspended for paying the fine late or for contesting
an extortionate late fee?
On a further note, why is it that 60% of the criminal cases currently
being handled in Milwaukee County--Operating After Revocation
(OAR)--affect an unusually high number of already disenfranchised
African-American males who are trying to find work or get to work in
order to feed their families (see "Criminal charges jolt traffic
offenders," Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Oct. 19)? This in itself is
cruel and unusual.
The citation-appeal process is a penalty unto itself because so much
time and frustration is spent correcting an error too often not of
your own making. Yet the parking citation rip-off generates millions
of dollars. Where does it all go, and who benefits? If the city wanted
to suspend registrations and issue tickets for a legitimate reason,
they could concentrate on the speeders who pass on the right, those
who ignore red lights and stop signs, or the inattentive and reckless
cell-phone-using drivers.
Roy B. Evans
Attorney at Law
Milwaukee
Mike...@lycos.com
only obey the parking regulation and the 'tax' will
not be imposed. The purpose of parking restriction
is for the safety of the others that must also use the roadways.
As to metered parking the purpose is to create
a turnover of the available parking spaces so others
get to share the limited paring in specify areas for specified
time limits. ;)
mike hunt
Albert Nurick
news:4e4a3f58.04081...@posting.google.com:
> Parking tickets (overnight and meter) are a
> draconian method of "taxation without representation" that
IIRC, ticket policy is set by our elected officials, who we vote for in our
municipalities. Thus the "without representation" part is simply
incorrect, and I'm not encouraged to read farther, because the author of
the cited article isn't terribly intelligent.
--
Albert Nurick | If you "think" a reliable 1.8 horse power
alb...@nurick.com | per liter from a naturally aspirated engine
www.nurick.com | is weak, you're obviously a fool.
04 FJR1300A / EOB #3 | - Henry
Brent P
> nolionn...@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote in
> news:4e4a3f58.04081...@posting.google.com:
>
>> Parking tickets (overnight and meter) are a
>> draconian method of "taxation without representation" that
>
> IIRC, ticket policy is set by our elected officials, who we vote for in our
> municipalities. Thus the "without representation" part is simply
> incorrect, and I'm not encouraged to read farther, because the author of
> the cited article isn't terribly intelligent.
Well some are municipality determined, others aren't. And then for
it to be with representation, one's vote actually has to be meaningful.
There has to be an actual choice at election time. But when it comes
to these sort of issues both choices have the same view. Or in some
cases there is only one choice.
Alan Moore
(DonQuijote1954) wrote:
>Having been ticketed and nearly towed twice in *front of my house* for
>slight violations of parking regulations, and having suffered and
>still suffering daily from the lack of enforcement on our chaotic
>roads, I'm inclined to say: "Hey, nice industry you got there." ;)
>
>***
>
>Taxation Without Representation
<snip>
Sounds like you're talking about a "parking ticket" industry, not a
traffic ticket industry. It's a lot easier to ticket parked cars. For
one thing, they seldom run away.
I seem to get a ticket of this nature about once every 5 or 10 years.
Usually, I know in advance that I'll probably be ticketed, so I don't
bother to gripe. I do wish they'd ticket more of the bozos that park
blocking fire lanes and hydrants. I used to think they should tow
them, but that was before I saw what happened when the fire department
actually needed access to a hydrant with a car parked in front of it.
Al Moore
DoD 734
bowman
> Having been ticketed and nearly towed twice in *front of my house* for
> slight violations of parking regulations,
Slow learner?
Dallas Gal 27
> On a further note, why is it that 60% of the criminal cases currently
> being handled in Milwaukee County--Operating After Revocation
> (OAR)--affect an unusually high number of already disenfranchised
> African-American males who are trying to find work or get to work in
> order to feed their families
What a joke. If the niggers would obey the traffic laws they would not
get tickets. They are not looking for work, they are checking out their
next target for crime. Feed their families, bull shit. Most nigger males
abandon their families so that they will have more time to commit crimes
and more money to buy illegal drugs.
Niggers bring nothing positive to society, they just tear it down.
Albert Nurick
news:uvvUc.313504$JR4.195577@attbi_s54:
> In article <Xns954892EEF254...@24.93.43.119>, Albert
> Nurick wrote:
>> nolionn...@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote in
>> news:4e4a3f58.04081...@posting.google.com:
>>
>>> Parking tickets (overnight and meter) are a
>>> draconian method of "taxation without representation" that
>>
>> IIRC, ticket policy is set by our elected officials, who we vote for
>> in our municipalities. Thus the "without representation" part is
>> simply incorrect, and I'm not encouraged to read farther, because the
>> author of the cited article isn't terribly intelligent.
>
> Well some are municipality determined, others aren't.
All are determined by some sort of elected body.
> And then for
> it to be with representation, one's vote actually has to be
> meaningful.
It is. Remember Florida in 2000?
> There has to be an actual choice at election time. But
> when it comes to these sort of issues both choices have the same view.
> Or in some cases there is only one choice.
So run for office if you don't like your choices.
DonQuijote1954
> nolionn...@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote in
> news:4e4a3f58.04081...@posting.google.com:
>
> > Parking tickets (overnight and meter) are a
> > draconian method of "taxation without representation" that
>
> IIRC, ticket policy is set by our elected officials, who we vote for in our
> municipalities. Thus the "without representation" part is simply
> incorrect, and I'm not encouraged to read farther, because the author of
> the cited article isn't terribly intelligent.
Well, he's a lawyer. As good as the other lawyers who made the laws to
catch you. So I better listen to this one...
DonQuijote1954
> That may be so but it is a voluntary 'tax,' one need
> only obey the parking regulation and the 'tax' will
> not be imposed. The purpose of parking restriction
> is for the safety of the others that must also use the roadways.
> As to metered parking the purpose is to create
> a turnover of the available parking spaces so others
> get to share the limited paring in specify areas for specified
> time limits. ;)
>
The Traffic Ticket Industry doesn't work to make you obey the law. If
it did, you would see them where it most count: our deadly freeways.
What we got is a Cat and Mouse game, where the lazy Cat--working under
pressure to justify himself--always eats when you least expect it. ;)
Arif Khokar
> bring nothing positive to society, they just tear it down.
You should know, since they're your main source of income.
Brent P
>> it to be with representation, one's vote actually has to be
>> meaningful.
>
> It is. Remember Florida in 2000?
Follow an election for mayor in chicago recently?
>> There has to be an actual choice at election time. But
>> when it comes to these sort of issues both choices have the same view.
>> Or in some cases there is only one choice.
> So run for office if you don't like your choices.
Lame old arguement. Do you have a couple million dollars so I can?
DonQuijote1954
> news:4e4a3f58.04081...@posting.google.com:
>
> > Parking tickets (overnight and meter) are a
> > draconian method of "taxation without representation" that
>
> IIRC, ticket policy is set by our elected officials, who we vote for in our
> municipalities. Thus the "without representation" part is simply
> incorrect, and I'm not encouraged to read farther, because the author of
> the cited article isn't terribly intelligent.
What good can representation be if it gets paid by the government? I
mean you respond to whoever pays you, right?
Barry L. Camp
"Dallas Gal 27" <Dalla...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OpzUc.12244$M8....@fe2.texas.rr.com...
White punk-ass trash like you tears all of humanity down.
(Oh by the way, I am also white. Go figure... if you can.)
*plonk*
DonQuijote1954
No, late sleeper... ;)
DonQuijote1954
You mean the ones doing the fighting in Iraq?
DonQuijote1954
Nothing like a hydrant there. Just empty space while we got no space
to park whatsover. And when they give the ticket, they tow you right
away. Last time around I screamed and threw things out my window but
they pretended not to listen and I had to pay for the truck to lower
my car. 40 bucks right there. The officer who gave the ticket--black
lady--was nice though and dropped the ticket.
THIS AIN'T NO LAW OTHER THAN THE LAW OF THE JUNGLE. :(
DonQuijote1954
"The Iraqi police won't be handing out parking tickets anytime soon in
Najaf."
Najaf police chief faces chilling dilemma
Tue 17 August, 2004 04:46
By Michael Georgy
NAJAF, Iraq (Reuters) - Militants had just kidnapped and dragged his
ailing 80-year-old father through the streets. They also beat his
brothers until they collapsed. Forty of his men were killed and
several were beheaded.
It's tough being the police chief of Najaf, the Iraqi city that is
sacred to millions of Shi'ites around the world and a battleground
between Shi'ite militia, U.S. marines and Iraqi police and National
Guard.
"They told me that I could go in the place of my father," said Ghalib
al-Jezairy, a move that would have had dire consequences for a man
high on the militant hit list. As the police chief spoke his father
was still being held.
The stress and exhaustion shows on the face of the man who is trying
to keep morale high in a police force facing thousands of supporters
of firebrand cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.
Many are holed up inside the sacred Imam Ali shrine in anticipation of
a major U.S. offensive.
But they still have time to roam the streets, some hoping to fire
AK-47 assault rifles or rocket-propelled grenades at Iraqi police
officers, who say they are in dire need of more flak jackets and
heavier weapons.
"What they did to my father was inhuman. He is a dying old man. They
beat my brothers until they fainted," he told reporters late on Monday
night, as the sound of mortars being fired could be heard in a nearby
cemetery turned battle zone.
BEHEADINGS AND KIDNAPPINGS
They beheaded one of his relatives and Sadr's Mehdi Army militants
have gouged out the eyes of some of his officers and boiled them in
hot water, he said.
"Do Iraqi police behead people?," he asked. This is barbaric. They
enter people's homes and they kill the relatives of policemen."
"Thirty minutes ago someone else was slaughtered," he said at the
bland, cement Najaf police station where a fresh batch of detained men
were being processed.
The police lot was occupied by impounded buses used by the Mehdi Army,
a militia bent on removing U.S. forces from Najaf and the rest of Iraq
and ousting their Iraqi allies.
High barricades of earth-filled bags attached to wire mesh are used to
try and keep the Mehdi Army and suicide bombers out of the station.
The smell of cordite was still fresh in the air hours after a nearby
attack.
Hundreds from the police force have been killed across Iraq in
bombings, shootings and beheadings. The police force has been
struggling with security along with other Iraqis forces since the
Americans handed sovereignty to Iraq on June 28.
Few police cars are seen far away from the station.
"Many police have been beheaded and burned," he said of a force that
is on the receiving end of every size of mortar bomb and
armour-piercing grenades, as well as machine gun fire.
A few days ago the police captured about 300 militants. But more and
more Iraqis are signing up to the Mehdi Army hoping to become martyrs
in a country where young men facing high unemployment have few
options.
The Iraqi police won't be handing out parking tickets anytime soon in
Najaf.
DonQuijote1954
> So run for office if you don't like your choices.
I think the financial backers got to screen him first. In order to
qualify, he must look "middle-of-the-road" and offer no challenge to
the status quo.
Matthew Russotto
Alan Moore <alan.s...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>I seem to get a ticket of this nature about once every 5 or 10 years.
>Usually, I know in advance that I'll probably be ticketed, so I don't
>bother to gripe. I do wish they'd ticket more of the bozos that park
>blocking fire lanes and hydrants. I used to think they should tow
>them, but that was before I saw what happened when the fire department
>actually needed access to a hydrant with a car parked in front of it.
Did they go through it, as in _Backflash_, or just shove the thing out
of the way with the engine?
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
>
> The citation-appeal process is a penalty unto itself because so much
> time and frustration is spent correcting an error too often not of
> your own making. Yet the parking citation rip-off generates millions
> of dollars. Where does it all go, and who benefits? If the city wanted
> to suspend registrations and issue tickets for a legitimate reason,
> they could concentrate on the speeders who pass on the right, those
> who ignore red lights and stop signs, or the inattentive and reckless
> cell-phone-using drivers.
>
I agree with that much, roy. Speeders and RLRs and CPDs are killers
and maimers and deserve more attention than parking violators. But
what are you saying? That people should be allowed to park whenever
and wherever they want without penalty?. As long as parking penalties
are in the nature of small fines, i have no problem with it.
Albert Nurick
> Albert Nurick <alb...@nurick.com> wrote in message
The way you do it is to pick your party, get involved, and build a power
base. Either that, or find someone who's interested in doing so, and work
for him. Politics isn't rocket science; it's a popularity contest with a
big payoff. ;-)
Albert Nurick
> Albert Nurick <alb...@nurick.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns954892EEF254...@24.93.43.119>...
>> nolionn...@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote in
>> news:4e4a3f58.04081...@posting.google.com:
>>
>> > Parking tickets (overnight and meter) are a
>> > draconian method of "taxation without representation" that
>>
>> IIRC, ticket policy is set by our elected officials, who we vote for
>> in our municipalities. Thus the "without representation" part is
>> simply incorrect, and I'm not encouraged to read farther, because the
>> author of the cited article isn't terribly intelligent.
>
> Well, he's a lawyer. As good as the other lawyers who made the laws to
> catch you. So I better listen to this one...
Sounds like he's a lawyer who plays fast and loose with facts in order to
achieve his goals. Who'd have ever imagined that happening?
Albert Nurick
news:4e4a3f58.0408...@posting.google.com:
Last time I checked, the citizens pay the taxes which become the
government's operating funds. They work for us.
DonQuijote1954
> "Dallas Gal 27" <Dalla...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:OpzUc.12244$M8....@fe2.texas.rr.com...
> >
> >> On a further note, why is it that 60% of the criminal cases currently
> >> being handled in Milwaukee County--Operating After Revocation
> >> (OAR)--affect an unusually high number of already disenfranchised
> >> African-American males who are trying to find work or get to work in
> >> order to feed their families
> >
> >
> > What a joke. If the niggers would obey the traffic laws they would not
> > get tickets. They are not looking for work, they are checking out their
> > next target for crime. Feed their families, bull shit. Most nigger males
> > abandon their families so that they will have more time to commit crimes
> > and more money to buy illegal drugs.
> >
> > Niggers bring nothing positive to society, they just tear it down.
It's easy to explain: You are white, but not trash. ;)
Larry Scholnick
> I do wish they'd ticket more of the bozos that park
> blocking fire lanes and hydrants. I used to think they should tow
> them, but that was before I saw what happened when the fire department
> actually needed access to a hydrant with a car parked in front of it.
>
ran the hoses through the car.
BenD...@mailcity.com
as you call it, is a still a 'voluntary' tax. Obey the traffic
laws and you will never need to pay the 'tax.'
Actually excessive speed in the slower designated speed zones IS
the most dangerous. Doing 90 on an interstate highway, that was
designed to accommodate the average driver at 70 MPH, is not
nearly as dangerous as driving
50 MPH in a posted 25 MPH area.
mike hunt
Alan Moore
They couldn't get around it to shove it sideways away from the
hydrant, so they went through it. It didn't seem to slow them down
much, either. I got the impression they'd done it before, or at least
had thought about how to set about it.
Al Moore
DoD 734
Alan Moore
They shredded doors on both sides. Made big enough holes for a man to
carry the hose through.
Al Moore
DoD 734
Hank
> Politics isn't rocket science;
Especially true in your case, where it's not
unlike bottle feeding an infant. Main difference
being that you're fed a bottle of shit by your
government, and you feverishly slurp it down anyway.
Then you burp it back up, proudly displaying brown
streaks of drool on your chin and bib with a big,
toothless grin.
You really need to take a closer look at what your
lying, thieving, mass murdering, AWOL hero, bu$h has
been feeding you, Albert. Refraining from burping it
back up in public would be a bonus for the rest of us.
The stench is offensive... < chuckle >
Here, admire your work again. I know your so proud....
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm
--
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so
are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to
harm our country and our people, and neither do we,"
- George W. (shit for brains) Bush, 8-6-04
"I think this is the worst government the US has ever
had in its more than 200 years of history. It has
engaged in extraordinarily irresponsible policies not
only in foreign policy and economics but also in social
and environmental policy.....This is not normal government
policy. Now is the time for people to engage in civil
disobedience. I think it's time to protest - as much as
possible....What we have here is a form of looting."
- George A. Akerlof, 2001 Nobel prize laureate economist
"One of the things we don't want to do is destroy the
infrastructure in Iraq because in a few days we're going
to own that country," - Tom Brokaw
Cost of probing Bill Clinton's sex life: $65 million.
Cost of probing the Columbia shuttle disaster: $50 million.
Funds assigned to independent Sept. 11 panel: $3 million.
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.truthout.org/
http://counterpunch.org/
http://responsiblewealth.org/
"After all, it is the leaders of the country who determine
the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the
people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist
dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to
do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the
peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country
to danger. It works the same in any country."
-- Hermann Goering, President of the Reichstag, Nazi Party, and
Luftwaffe Commander in Chief
DonQuijote1954
> > What good can representation be if it gets paid by the government? I
> > mean you respond to whoever pays you, right?
>
> Last time I checked, the citizens pay the taxes which become the
> government's operating funds. They work for us.
Do you know what's going on in the real world? I believe powerful
interests buy political campaigns, and thus control politics...
***
Welfare for Politicians Could Help the Welfare of the Rest of Us
My dear fellow Americans,
A recent New York Times/CBS poll says that 89 percent of us think our
political campaign system should be fundamentally changed. Just eight
percent of us think it needs only minor tinkering. (The option "no
change, our campaigns work splendidly" was not even offered as a
choice.)
We're not dummies.
According to the poll 68 percent of us do not believe Congress has any
intention of changing the campaign finance laws -- and 53 percent of
us don't think President Clinton does either.
They haven't fooled us.
There are a few items in the poll that bother me, though. That's what
I want to discuss with you here.
First, the poll says we are convinced that campaign money corrupts the
government, but we do not list this problem as a high priority
compared to crime, schools, and the economy.
I ask you to rethink that one. The moneyed interests that buy off our
government are costing us ordinary taxpayers hundreds of billions in
higher taxes and lower benefits. They are the reason our schools have
so little while our Pentagon wastes so much. Their steady pressure to
cut government programs for everyone but the rich is a major reason
why many of us feel we're getting nowhere and some of us give up and
turn to crime. Because of money flows to politicians, our health care
system is increasingly inhumane and unaffordable. Because banking
interests bought off regulators, we had to bail out banks run into the
ground by criminals. Our mineral, forest, and grazing resources are
being given away to tycoons who leave destruction behind them on the
land.
We're being robbed. Systematically. Massively.
Every day we can see in the news some small or large example of our
government working for campaign contributors and against the people.
Last week, for example, the Senate voted down a bill that would have
slapped a hefty tax on cigarettes and used the money to pay for
medical care for 10 million children. This idea was pushed by a
Republican, Orrin Hatch, and a Democrat, Ted Kennedy. Americans are
overwhelmingly in favor of it. But tobacco companies write big checks
and children don't. So the bill was voted down 55-45, as precise a
measure as you'll ever see of the degree to which our Senators are
owned by tobacco companies. (You don't have to buy them all; you only
have to buy more than half.)
We no longer have a democracy.
We have, as one woman said, as she failed to stop a hazardous waste
incinerator next to her children's school, a "wealthocracy." A debate
over clean air standards is raging right now, the coal and auto
companies are bearing down hard and one Capitol Hill staffer told the
Washington Post, "There's no way that the final decision will be made
... solely on the basis of protecting children."
Friends, this is not a low-priority problem. If we need the government
to enforce environmental rules, to help poor people in any way, to
keep bulldozers and ads out of national parks, to defend the country
cost-effectively, to maintain highways and bridges, to enforce the law
even-handedly, to tax us fairly, or to be even minimally competent,
then campaign reform is the top priority, because it's the key to all
other priorities.
When asked how to fix the system, most of us, says the poll, favor
public disclosure of where campaign money comes from and how it is
spent. We think radio and television stations should give free time
for campaign messages. But seventy-eight percent of us oppose public
financing of campaigns.
That rejection of public financing is something else I'd like to ask
you to think about. I too used to wince at the thought of being taxed
for campaigns. "Why pay them to indoctrinate me?" I thought. "Don't
encourage them," some of my friends say. I've heard public campaign
funding called "welfare for politicians." I've heard people say it
would be too expensive.
It wouldn't be nearly as expensive as the present system is. It would
cost us millions and save us trillions. There could be no better
investment. And consider this: if we paid for their campaigns, there
could be no doubt in the politicians' minds that they work for us.
They could concentrate on that work, rather than spend half their time
trolling for funds for their next campaign. Poor folks could actually
run for office; rich folks wouldn't have an automatic advantage. And,
if we were paying for political speech, there's a chance the Supreme
Court would let us set some ground rules for it. No mud-slinging. Tell
us about your actual record, what you've voted for, what you've stuck
up for. Speak to us in full sentences for minutes at a time. We'll
give you enough money to make your case fully, but not enough to hire
PR firms to sell you like fast food.
Our founding fathers warned us that democracy can't last unless we are
willing to fight for it in every generation. Wars are not the only
kinds of fights, and foreign dictators -- or foreign campaign
contributors -- are not the only threats to government of, by, and for
the people. If we want our democracy back, our battle has to be, as
was that of our founding fathers, against the corrupt power structure
that rules us.
We can do it.
Source: The Global Citizen
Albert Nurick
@news01.cit.cornell.edu:
> Albert Nurick wrote:
>
>> Politics isn't rocket science;
>
> Especially true in your case
... because I don't buy the "bu$h is a terrorist" foolishness you spout,
Henry. Right.
Learned anything about specific output of engines yet?
Brent P
> You really need to take a closer look at what your
> lying, thieving, mass murdering, AWOL hero, bu$h has
> been feeding you, Albert. Refraining from burping it
> back up in public would be a bonus for the rest of us.
> The stench is offensive... < chuckle >
You make just one mistake, it's not just bush. It's been at least every
adminstration since november of 1963. And probably quite a few before
that.
Claude
(DonQuijote1954) wrote:
>Nothing like a hydrant there. Just empty space while we got no space
>to park whatsover. And when they give the ticket, they tow you right
>away. Last time around I screamed and threw things out my window but
>they pretended not to listen and I had to pay for the truck to lower
>my car. 40 bucks right there.
That's cheap.
I would ignore you too if I saw you hanging out of a window screaming
and throwing things.
DonQuijote1954
> That may be your opinion but the fact remains the tax,
> as you call it, is a still a 'voluntary' tax. Obey the traffic
> laws and you will never need to pay the 'tax.'
> Actually excessive speed in the slower designated speed zones IS
> the most dangerous. Doing 90 on an interstate highway, that was
> designed to accommodate the average driver at 70 MPH, is not
> nearly as dangerous as driving
> 50 MPH in a posted 25 MPH area.
My 70 year old aunt--if I had one--would be happy to hear that. Their
type never, ever get a ticket. They just hang tight to the steering
wheel of their automatic Toyota as if the car was going to escape her,
do 40MPH on the freeway and ignore everybody behind. Likewise for the
phone talkers, the kid-attending soccer moms, and the zigzaging
drivers. A faster but alert driver driving on the left would have much
less of a chance to have an accident and would make life easier on
everybody else. It's the faster driver though the only one that gets
ticketed. :(
Let me tell you, it's a jungle out there, and you better play by the
rules of the jungle. Size (SUVs), camouflage (ie. slow drivers) and
"kill or be killed" strategies sure get you a long way...
DonQuijote1954
So long as you leave the windows down is OK... ;)
DonQuijote1954
Whether it's for better or worse depends upon your point of view.>
The sole purpose of politics is to keep the "dinosaur" (ie. the old
ways) alive. Whatever changes are taking place are forced upon her
from outside (terrorism, oil prices), and are generally for the worse.
Smart policies like seeking international justice (political and
economic), promoting transportation alternatives and campaign reform
are ignored...
God Help America indeed.
DonQuijote1954
> Albert Nurick wrote:
>
> > Politics isn't rocket science;
>
> Especially true in your case, where it's not
> unlike bottle feeding an infant. Main difference
> being that you're fed a bottle of shit by your
> government, and you feverishly slurp it down anyway.
> Then you burp it back up, proudly displaying brown
> streaks of drool on your chin and bib with a big,
> toothless grin.
> You really need to take a closer look at what your
> lying, thieving, mass murdering, AWOL hero, bu$h has
> been feeding you, Albert. Refraining from burping it
> back up in public would be a bonus for the rest of us.
> The stench is offensive... < chuckle >
Him being of such a small mental age we should try children stories...
;)
(little Albert crying, shit all over the place)
Warning.
All material in these pages are suitable for mature children, but will
be found to be objectionable by immature adults (see "Hypocrisy Today"
below)
HOW POLITICS WORKS
(This little, tiny story is part of a series, in which I explain to my
little daughter how things work.)
Politics works like this: Big People of Big Country buy Big People of
Little Country, who, by the way, will be elected in "democratic
elections" thanks to big bucks; Big People of Big Country give big
loans to Little Country (of course, to buy "made in Big Country"); Big
People of Little Country pocket a big chunk and invest it in the Big
Country, without ever investing in real development (education,
health, the environment, etc); Little People of Little Country work
for ever to pay back what they never got; Big People of Little Country
thank Big People of Big Country in the name of Little Country, and
promise to repay the big debt; and Little People of Little Country get
big promises, just like Little People of Big Country. And they lived
happily ever after...
DonQuijote1954
Then I quit my job and decided to fight the monster. It's been 5 weeks
ever since. Hey, time to go work again!
DonQuijote1954
a Municipal Corporation appoints a judge instead of electing its
judge, then the "citations" are "complaints" for Civil "causes of
action for debt" (which encourages theft of unaccountable court
revenues). Including verbal warnings, that's approximately 500-MILLION
"investigations" by police every decade, or 2 for every American man,
woman and child - not counting police prosecutions for hundreds of
millions of parking tickets and forfeitures of vehicles for parking
tickets - even millions of parking tickets on private property when
parking at their own homes. This ties up 99% of all police and court
resources and takes many billions of dollars out of taxpayers'
pockets. Traffic tickets do not teach driver education, do not upgrade
highway safety design, nor do they provide extra emergency medical
treatment to crash victims.
http://www.americanautobahn.com/
Of course, you can hire A LAWYER, a let him handle the whole thing. It
should cost you "only" around $150... ;)
Alex Rodriguez
nolionn...@hotmail.com says...
>Nothing like a hydrant there. Just empty space while we got no space
>to park whatsover. And when they give the ticket, they tow you right
>away. Last time around I screamed and threw things out my window but
>they pretended not to listen and I had to pay for the truck to lower
>my car. 40 bucks right there. The officer who gave the ticket--black
>lady--was nice though and dropped the ticket.
>
>THIS AIN'T NO LAW OTHER THAN THE LAW OF THE JUNGLE. :(
If there was a fire in your building and the fire deparment was delayed
in putting it out because some idiot was blocking the fire hydrant, would
you be a happy camper? It is pretty selfish to think it is ok to block
a fire hydrant.
-------------
Alex
John David Galt
> IIRC, ticket policy is set by our elected officials, who we vote for in our
> municipalities. Thus the "without representation" part is simply
> incorrect, and I'm not encouraged to read farther, because the author of
> the cited article isn't terribly intelligent.
It's still "without representation" if most of the people affected by the
law don't live in that town, and so don't get to vote for its officials.
True democracy includes everybody.
Rusty...@mailcity.com
that the laws should only apply to the local residents? Paying
a fine has nothing to do with taxes
it is a penalty for a violation.. Do not do the crime and you
need not do the time as somebody once said.
Your position on this subject is not creditable
mike hunt
Albert Nurick
news:cg33b4$94g$1...@blue.rahul.net:
When you visit another area (be it a country or a town), you follow their
laws.
I'm not aware of *any* government that allows those who are not citizens to
vote. Are you?
DonQuijote1954
I don't how the hydrant got into this discussion: there was NO
hydrant, NO nothing, just an idle space, while we in the building got
no parking.
DonQuijote1954
> Do you expect us to infer from that statement that you believe
> that the laws should only apply to the local residents? Paying
> a fine has nothing to do with taxes
> it is a penalty for a violation.. Do not do the crime and you
> need not do the time as somebody once said.
> Your position on this subject is not creditable
>
If there's a "crime," it's that of EXCESSIVE FORCE. People get away
with the most reckless and dangerous behavior while totally benign
behavior is punished.
As for the REPRESENTATION, there isn't any in the poor neighborhoods
because POLITICIANS DON'T LIVE THERE, but in the beautiful
neighborhoods. To all practical purposes they are preyed upon but NOT
represented... :(
DonQuijote1954
> I suppose it depends on the state in which one resides.
> In Pennsylvania and several other states it is illegal
> to drive in the left lane except to overtake other vehicles. A
> driver driving too slowly can be cited for impeding the flow of
> traffic. A driver using a telephone in the manner you describe
> can be cited for inattentive driving, or the more serious charge
> of reckless driving if their action result in an accident. In
> any event those that are cited are still paying a voluntary
> 'tax.'
I'm sure there got to be some order somewhere. I hope it spreads to
the rest of the states. But if it is as you say, voluntary or not, it
ensures the common good. The way it is for the rest of us though is
only an INDUSTRY.
Claude
<j...@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote:
>It's still "without representation" if most of the people affected by the
>law don't live in that town, and so don't get to vote for its officials.
>True democracy includes everybody.
Which is impossible. I wish people would stop calling the USA a
democracy, because it isn't and never has been.
Claude
(DonQuijote1954) wrote:
>Each ticket represents an arrest and a criminal investigation,
How do you figure that? Tickets are issued in lieu of arrest. It's not
an arrest, nor is there any investigation involved, much less a
criminal investigation. Where's the crime?
> even millions of parking tickets on private property when
>parking at their own homes.
Parking violations are not issued ON private property.
>This ties up 99% of all police and court
>resources and takes many billions of dollars out of taxpayers'
>pockets.
Where do you come up with your 99% figure? Not even close to reality.
DonQuijote1954
America: Big Bucks. Clever and fair solution this man proposes, though
unlikely to please the profiteers...
Taxation by ticket is tyranny!
LAKE FOREST, Illinois, March 24 -- On the scale of life's injustices,
speeding tickets aren't right up there with poverty, pestilence, war,
and corruption; but they're a pain in the backside. Few sights sicken
the average motorist more than blue lights in the rear-view mirror.
Particularly when you're not really doing much of anything -- the last
ticket I had, in June of '95, was incurred when I was out for a
ten-minute road test on my motorcycle, after adjusting the valves.
I got pulled over for supposedly going 53 in a 35-mph zone, by a
policeman driving in the other direction on Sheridan Road in Lake
Forest, Illinois. I'd say I was going somewhere around 40-45 -- the
exact speed really doesn't matter, because I was going faster than the
posted limit. But so was everyone else on Sheridan Road that day.
Lake Forest's finest simply decided to make some money for their
already-wealthy suburb that afternoon, and what better source of
revenue than absent-minded motorists out for a Sunday drive? I saw
several other motorists being pulled over that same afternoon, when I
drove to the Lake Forest police station to pay the fine and retrieve
my driver's license. (Out here, when a cop gives you a ticket, he
takes your license and hands you a paper saying, "The bearer is a
naughty boy." This threw me for a loop. Why do they have to take
your license -- do they think you're going to head for Mexico or
something?)
Police departments may or may not have ticket quotas for their
officers -- they always claim they don't, and this is probably true,
in the strict sense. However, the Connecticut state legislature saw
fit to enact a law banning ticket quotas a few years ago -- seems like
a lot of bother, to ban something no one's doing in the first place,
doesn't it? In any case, however, cities and towns, large and small,
use moving violations as a source of revenue first, and as a
traffic-safety measure last. For example, according to the Columbus
Dispatch, there are 27 municipalities in Ohio that have actually
collected more revenue from traffic tickets than from taxes in the
1990s!
I've got a solution to this problem. It would end taxation by
ticketing and curtail the arbitrary and capricious traffic enforcement
that is the bane of every motorist.
My scheme is simple: All traffic-ticket revenues should go into a
state-administered fund, instead of to the municipality that wrote the
ticket. At the end of the year, all revenues, less the cost of
administering the program (which would be low -- one clerk with a
decent computer could do it in his spare time) are redistributed
evenly among all motorists in the state who did not have tickets
during the year.
This solution would take away the incentive for cities and towns to
ticket motorists for the sole purpose of raising revenue. There would
be no adverse consequences for traffic safety, because cops could
still write all the tickets they wanted -- but the money would go back
to the state's safe drivers, instead of into the municipal coffers.
Obviously, this idea would go over like a lead balloon with cities and
towns, because of the money it would cost them. But for any state
legislators who might be hanging on every word of this column, think
of the political points you could score with the voters, by passing a
law ending taxation by ticket!
DonQuijote1954
hook...
Ticket Fighting Strategies
Don't give up! Fight the toll-takers every step of the way.
by Eric Peters (2001-07-02)
TCC's Speeders' Excuses Contest
Tickets from Above
Getting a traffic ticket is the easy part-it's getting out of it
that's a bit more complicated. Nonetheless, there are ways to beat the
system. Actually, a better term might be "play" the system, since what
follows amounts to using the very same arbitrary and often absurdly
complex rules that were used to nail you to work things to your own
advantage.
Payback can be sweet!
1) Ask for and get a "continuance" -i.e, a change of the court date
from the date listed on your summons to a later date. Most
jurisdictions will grant a continuance as a matter of course; all you
have to do is call or visit the court clerk's office and file a
request. So why request a continuance? Simple. The cop who issued you
the ticket is the state's witness against you. If he does not show up
to give testimony, the charge against you will likely be
dropped/dismissed by the judge, since there is no evidence against
you.
By switching court dates via the continuance, you are seeking to make
life more difficult for the cop. The idea is to get the court date set
for a day that is inconvenient for him-such as his day off-since he
will not want to waste his time sitting in a courtroom. Ideally, call
the station every day of the week from a pay phone and ask for
"Officer John Doe" (the guy who issued you the ticket). When you find
out what his day off is, shoot for that as the date of your continued
court date. This works very well as a means of wriggling out of a
ticket.
Failing that, continue to request those continuances; sometimes you
can string this process out for up to a year. The longer the delay,
the more likely it is either the cop won't show, or the paperwork will
get lost-something. Worst case, you've put off the day of reckoning
and made life a little more aggravating for the "revenue collectors."
Make them earn the money they intend to pry from your wallet!
2) Review the evidence. As an adjunct to the above, it is your right,
as a matter of law, to file a motion (indeed, many motions) for what
is called "discovery" at the clerk of the court's office to obtain
records of such things as will/may be used against you during your
trial. These include the training records of the officer, the devices
he used, their maintenance/calibration records, etc. If any of these
are not provided to you expeditiously and prior to the court date, it
is grounds for dismissal.
Many times, the records will, in fact, fail to be coughed up-or they
will reveal out-of-date calibrations (such as for radar guns). The
bureaucracy is as inept as you imagine it to be, so anything you can
find that challenges the legal basis of the ticket you were issued is
ammo for your cause. If it's a speed limit bust, demand access to the
records revealing the process by which the posted speed limit for that
stretch of road was established; if it does not accord with state law
(and there are definite legal requirements and processes governing the
setting of posted speed limits; they can't just put up a sign), you
are on your way to being home free.
The basic idea here is to let them know you plan to fight tooth and
nail-and will insist on every legal right/technicality available to
you under the law. In some jurisdictions, you even have the right to
request a jury trial to contest a traffic ticket. Don't hesitate to
make such a demand. Many courts will quickly tire of this game after a
very short while and dismiss the case.
Many people are under the impression they need the services of a
lawyer to challenge a traffic ticket. This is not so-at least as
regards to basic infractions (e.g., ordinary speeding, red light
running, etc.). Any layman can handle the above-and save a bunch of
money in the process. The typical fee for an attorney to handle a
traffic ticket is often several hundred bucks. A fine for speeding is
typically less than $100. Even if he gets you off the hook, the money
saved in terms of higher insurance premiums may be negated by what you
have to pay the consigliere.
On the other hand, if the offense is more serious and carries the
possibility of license suspension/revocation (let alone jail time),
such as DWI/DUI, or "reckless driving," etc., then you most definitely
will need the services of an experienced attorney-one who routinely
handles offenses of this type; preferably one who formerly worked on
the "other side" as an assistant district or commonwealth's attorney.
Never even think about going into court alone on a "reckless driving"
or DWI/DUI beef. In most jurisdictions, you can be sent to jail upon
conviction -- and even if you're not, the after-effects of a
conviction will be as devastating as hitting on your employer's wife.
For one thing, your insurance will either be canceled or the premiums
doubled -- and the insurance companies will use the conviction as
their basis for maintaining usurious rates for at least five years. At
$2,000 annually (the typical SR-22 "high risk" premium), that's
$10,000 over five years.
Ka-ching!
The $700-$1,500 it'll cost you to retain the services of a good lawyer
is money well spent.
Important footnote: Be aware that "reckless driving" these days has
been dumbed-down considerably. In some states, all you have to do is
exceed the posted (and often ridiculously low) speed limit by more
than 20-mph. In other words, if you are doing 76-mph on a highway with
a 55-mph limit, you can be hit with a "reckless driving" charge --
notwithstanding the fact that driving 76-mph is not necessarily
anything remotely close to "reckless" conduct. Nevertheless, if
convicted, all that will appear on your DMV record is the
awful-sounding conviction for "reckless driving" -- and six demerit
points (as in my own state of Virginia). Such a conviction can be as
unhealthy to your pocketbook as a rap for DWI or DUI. So get a lawyer
-- he knows how to deal with this nonsense effectively and should be
able to get the charge reduced to something more appropriate, such as
simple speeding.
An excellent resource for people interested in fighting traffic
tickets is the National Motorists Association. NMA (see
www.motorists.org) offers a "rentable" legal defense kit to help stack
the deck more evenly in favor of the American motorist, and works
actively to represent motorists' -- as opposed to the "safety" cartel
that's mostly a PR front for the insurance industry.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?n=163,172&sid=172&article=3827
DonQuijote1954
Surf Ticket
Story by Jason Love
Another south swell had called me away from work. I
arrived late, dusk, and had to hurry to beat the darkness (I hear Jaws
music once the sun goes down).
Parking my car, I noticed a machine in the middle of the
lot, a bloody parking meter!
First, they paved the place; now they're charging for the
"service." It's like one of those bums who washes your windshield at
the intersection and expects you to pay for it afterward. Would
surfers reduce themselves to pay a toll? No way. And neither would I.
Besides, it was practically nighttime. Who would know?
I squirmed into my wetsuit, descended the cliff, and
enjoyed 45 minutes of surf that made up for a year's worth of flat
days.
You'll never guess what I found on my windshield when I
returned to my car: a scantily dressed blonde with a thing for scrawny
surfers. No, it was a parking ticket for $104. One hundred and four
dollars. One hundred and four dollars! Let's see. At my salary, it
would take how many hours before taxes…
I had been parking in this lot since it was dirt. Who had
the right to charge me for it now? I looked for God's signature on the
ticket but did not see it. Please, before my brain catches fire, allow
me a rant.
Ahem.
What does it say to charge a man to park on public
property? Isn't it an arbitrary demand for us to empty our pockets
before the passing guards? The moment I got that ticket, I went from
surfer to serf, indebted to my lord. On the steps of city hall, an
administrator is even now overlooking the city and thinking, They are
all on my land, and it's gonna cost them...
As an underline, the toll does not protect us from theft
or vandalism or anything; it's just a hall pass to park a car in the
same space that was yesterday free. Does the government reserve the
right to charge us any time we stop? Is it not enough that I hand over
25% of everything I earn and 8% of everything I spend?
If you try to walk
they'll tax the street
If you try to sit
they'll tax your seat...
Paid parking is an underhanded way of siphoning coins from
the peasants. The capital generated by these tickets allegedly goes
toward the preservation of our coast, but recent water samples deny
it. In the Santa Monica Bay, it's easy to spot surfers at
night—they're glowing.
I've watched this pave-and-charge scam up and down the
coast for the past ten years. C-Street in Ventura used to be surfer
paradise until someone recognized its money-making potential. They
paved, and we paid. To their credit, the locals at first rebelled by
breaking the machine so that no one could pay, but over time the
revolution vanished like sand through so many fists. The nice thing
about a law is that if it sticks around long enough, people will come
to accept it without question. The right to bear arms, for instance,
comes from a time when we actually had reason to use them.
You won't find pay machines at beaches that are not
frequented by surfers, which poses a final irony: the more attractive
a beach is to surfers, the more likely it is for that beach to be
tolled by local government. Surf, then, subtly dictates which beaches
are paved and which are left in peace.
Most surfers don't think about this stuff and are content
to break things for a while, but the rest of us can't ignore the fact
that beaches are being permanently damaged to feed the machine.
Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot.
DonQuijote1954
> Albert Nurick wrote:
>
> > nolionn...@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote in
> > news:4e4a3f58.04081...@posting.google.com:
> >
> >
> >>If there's a "crime," it's that of EXCESSIVE FORCE. People get away
> >>with the most reckless and dangerous behavior while totally benign
> >>behavior is punished.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>As for the REPRESENTATION, there isn't any in the poor neighborhoods
> >>because POLITICIANS DON'T LIVE THERE, but in the beautiful
> >>neighborhoods. To all practical purposes they are preyed upon but NOT
> >>represented... :(
> >
> >
> > represented.
> >
> Often they're even courted by one party pretty heavily, bussed into
> rallies and appearances where body counts are needed, and fed free
> lunches of fried chicken and watermelon.
Yeah, and they are also given fans with the picture of the candidates,
and sometimes T-shirts. Of course, they also give you a lot of hope.
Not a bad deal, they just gotta fake the whole thing... ;)
DonQuijote1954
> nolionn...@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote in
> news:4e4a3f58.04081...@posting.google.com:
>
> > If there's a "crime," it's that of EXCESSIVE FORCE. People get away
> > with the most reckless and dangerous behavior while totally benign
> > behavior is punished.
>
> Hmmm... sounds like Mr. Quijote has a bit of a victim complex.
>
> > As for the REPRESENTATION, there isn't any in the poor neighborhoods
> > because POLITICIANS DON'T LIVE THERE, but in the beautiful
> > neighborhoods. To all practical purposes they are preyed upon but NOT
> > represented... :(
>
> Last time I checked, folks in poor neighborhoods could vote, thus they're
> represented.
This article says they are poorly represented.
"The choices that pressure people who must transfer half or more of
their pay to landlords are altogether vicious, but the worst part is
that the availability of decent housing continues to evaporate while
the cost of what remains mounts without impediment."
And this is the kind of people the Parking Authority preys upon,
towing to boot. Hunting season is up!
"In the richest country on Earth, how can the idea of children going
to bed hungry have absolutely no political resonance in election-year
discourse?"
"You'd think that would be worth a sound bite once in a while."
***
The poor are poorly represented in politics
by Gene Collier
Wednesday, December 10, 2003
Next month in the cold, white expanse of Iowa, the field of Democrats
who would be president begins to thin, and by mid-March there will be
no more of the TV debates in which nine candidates are lined up
equidistant as though staffing an invisible toll booth on a major
bridge to nowhere.
Now, the Al Sharpton and Dennis Kucinich and Carol Moseley Braun
booths get almost as much rhetorical traffic as the Howard Dean EZ
Pass lane, but when there are only two or three viable politicians
remaining, only two or three ways to go, you'll hear virtually nothing
about poverty in America.
In the current debate format, where the candidates are given a few
brief minutes at the start or finish to summarize their positions and
justify their vote-worthiness, only Joe Lieberman among the nine
devotes some of his allotment to what he calls "the scandal of poverty
in America." Kucinich touches on it in his derisive and rhythmic
"weapons of mass destruction" rant ("Poverty is a weapon of mass
destruction!"), and John Edwards mentions a plan, but essentially, the
presidential election of 2004 won't be won or lost on what anyone
plans to do about people who work two or three minimum-wage jobs and
still can't afford a decent place to live.
The hopeless don't exactly stampede to the polls for help, and the
poverty lobby is, by definition, impossibly underfunded. As Americans,
we are reflexively disdainful of countries where moneyed classes and
corrupted officials fail to provide base necessities to their people,
but we somehow find the very same thing a highly forgivable failing in
ourselves.
"The scandal of poverty, the moral outrage of poverty, must be met
with the full strength or our moral authority, our material wealth and
our creative ideas," says Lieberman, who routinely goes on to cite a
biblical duty "to raise the destitute up from the dust."
The Census Bureau estimates that 12 percent of Americans are poor, but
12 percent doesn't begin to cover the millions who work well above the
accepted poverty level but still well within its pernicious trappings.
Millard Fuller, the founder and president of Habitat for Humanity, in
his annual year-end letter to supporters, describes an "intensifying
social disaster that every American should feel pained and ashamed to
look upon." He adeptly calls American poverty "a quiet crisis whose
victims are being claimed largely in silence [amid] the hard truth
that things are becoming ever worse for these most vulnerable among
us."
Full-time minimum-wage workers in this country earn barely $21,000 and
barely more than the average rent. The choices that pressure people
who must transfer half or more of their pay to landlords are
altogether vicious, but the worst part is that the availability of
decent housing continues to evaporate while the cost of what remains
mounts without impediment.
"Even if a family of four earns twice the income the federal
government defines as poverty level, it's still only $36,800," Fuller
says. "Reports published by the National Center for Children in
Poverty, part of the Columbia University's School of Public Health,
show it still won't be enough to provide a family of four with the
basic necessities of a decent place to live, food, and health care."
In the richest country on Earth, how can the idea of children going to
bed hungry have absolutely no political resonance in election-year
discourse? Has the culture at large become so accepting of excess --
this is a culture that puts $75 a day in meal money into the pockets
of traveling millionaire baseball players -- that it no longer even
understands itself?
Most of 11 months remain before a lone Democrat faces the
hyper-financed Bush on Election Day, and most of the talk until then
will focus on Iraq and on international imperatives. But the
complexity of focusing the electorate on the implications of Bush's
economic policy can't be surrendered to.
Though they rarely miss the chance to paint Bush as the president
whose main economic theory is that the comfortable must be comforted,
the Democrats never seem to focus on the most afflicted Americans. You
don't have to be an unabashed lefty to think that no one should be
hungry in this country.
"The basic point -- it isn't fair," Fuller writes. "And more than
that, it is socially, religiously, morally and politically wrong."
You'd think that would be worth a sound bite once in a while.
DonQuijote1954
<We can thank the Electoral College and state legislatures for making
voting, that key to democracy, meaningless for millions of Americans.>
Good article, Woj. I read somewhere it was born out of mistrust by the
powerful for people's vote.
But look at this other issue: You better stay home if you are ignorant
of the issues. The first paragraph's warning about war and the
corruption of the institutions is prophetic. I know personally some of
these ignorant people who casted an ignorant vote--and we are still
paying the consequences... :(
"If you can't see beyond a media image or some catchy phrases and
emotional attitudes, then why should you take the future of America --
and the world -- into your hands in a voting booth? Stay home. At
least
you won't be doing any harm. Media pundits will undoubtedly wring
their
hands about low voter turnout, but this gives them something to do
instead of spreading misinformation."
"There are people out there whose job it is to manipulate your
emotions
for political purposes -- and they get paid big bucks for doing it.
But
the real price will be paid by millions of Americans, including
Americans yet unborn."
Terminal triviality?
Thomas Sowell September 21, 2000
Does America have a terminal case of triviality? Just weeks from now,
we will be selecting someone for the highest office in our land -- and
the most important office in the world. This is someone who can take
us
into war, or blunder us into war, someone who can restore the rule of
law or further corrupt our institutions until this is no longer
America.
Yet what are we talking about? How Gore kissed Tipper, how Bush kissed
Oprah, how Lieberman is Jewish and what Cheney's retirement package
was
from his previous employer. Is this how little we think about the
future of our country and the lives of our children?
As election day gets closer, we are going to hear more and more
repetitions of the mindless mantra that we need to "get out the vote."
But how are we better off if more people who don't even care enough to
become informed about the serious issues show up at the polls to make
choices by guess and by golly?
That is putting form over substance. It is also putting enormous power
in the hands of political demagogues who exploit the voters' ignorance
to gain power for themselves. It used to be said that an informed
citizenry was the foundation of democracy. It is still true, but it
just doesn't get said any more. "Participation" is now the magic word,
even if it is participation in self-destruction.
Truth and reality count for so little today that the cardinal sin,
according to the media, is "negative advertising." In other words,
when
some political chameleon misleads the public about the kinds of
policies he has supported and the kind of ideology he embraces -- the
classic example being Michael Dukakis in 1988 -- then it is terrible
if
someone exposes him for the phony that he is.
Far better that a politician should acquire the enormous powers of
President of the United States under false pretenses than that we
should hear "negative advertising." This is a blank check for phonies
--
including both Clintons and Gore.
The whole history of this century reeks with the tragic consequences
of
blank checks for people whose chief talent has been the emotional
manipulation of the public for political purposes. Lenin was
charismatic. So was Hitler. So was Mao. In each case, tens of millions
of people paid with their lives for this charisma and their own
emotional decisions to follow the pied piper of the moment.
Would it have been so terrible if there had been some "negative
advertising" to warn the people of what these aspirants to power were
really like? Or would that not have been sporting? Or would it have
spoiled the fun of those who looked up in glassy-eyed admiration at
their heroes, even though these were heroes who would lead them to
their doom?
If you can't be bothered to read a lot of dull stuff about Social
Security or military defense or what is really going on in our public
schools, then why should you be bothered to go down to the polls on
election day and cast an ignorant vote? And don't kid yourself that
watching TV -- even TV debates -- is going to inform you. Sound bites
are usually very unsound.
If you can't see beyond a media image or some catchy phrases and
emotional attitudes, then why should you take the future of America --
and the world -- into your hands in a voting booth? Stay home. At
least
you won't be doing any harm. Media pundits will undoubtedly wring
their
hands about low voter turnout, but this gives them something to do
instead of spreading misinformation.
In this age, when everything seems to be discussed in terms of what
you
have a "right" to do, no doubt you have a right to go vote and take
the
consequences. But the consequences don't apply just to you. They apply
to people who have no right to vote, who are babes in their cribs who
will be the people of tomorrow who will inherit the world that your
vote helps create.
You also inherited. You inherited what was created and preserved by
the
efforts of centuries and the sacrifices of lives on the beaches of
Normandy and Iwo Jima. Is it too much of a sacrifice for you to take a
little time to become informed on both sides of the issues that will
determine what kind of country our children will inherit?
There are people out there whose job it is to manipulate your emotions
for political purposes -- and they get paid big bucks for doing it.
But
the real price will be paid by millions of Americans, including
Americans yet unborn.
L2000 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
I-420
how much do lawyers get from the police state revenue generation
industry?
If we lowered the speed limit 5 miles for every wreck w/ a 55 MPH
speed limit at the beginning, six wrecks would have us either being
ripped off right and left for a 25 MPH speed limit and/or people
exceeding the arbitrary speed limit by 30-40 MPH daily :P
> Having been ticketed and nearly towed twice in *front of my house* for
> slight violations of parking regulations, and having suffered and
> still suffering daily from the lack of enforcement on our chaotic
> roads, I'm inclined to say: "Hey, nice industry you got there." ;)
>
> ***
>
> Taxation Without Representation
>
> In response to your ongoing debate about parking tickets ["Letters,"
> Oct. 16], in my opinion parking tickets are a plain and simple
> taxpayer rip-off. Parking tickets (overnight and meter) are a
> draconian method of "taxation without representation" that turns
> innocent, non-violent citizens into criminals for one reason only:
> revenue generation. Revenue generation that has no direct benefit to
> those who are fined and penalized.
>
> The laws need to be changed because non-moving parking citations are
> simply stupid and ridiculous. Why is it a penalty to park in front of
> your own home overnight? Why should you receive a ticket just because
> you were on the "wrong" side of the street, even if you have paid for
> an overnight parking permit? (They don't sweep the streets on a
> regular basis, so what is the reason?) Why do you get a $20 ticket for
> being 10 minutes over in a parking space you just rented for $2? Why
> are students fined and penalized for attending classes while being
> limited in the number of parking spaces and time to park? Why, in some
> areas, does 25 cents get you one hour of meter parking, while in other
> areas only 15 minutes? Why should you become a criminal when your
> registration is suspended for paying the fine late or for contesting
> an extortionate late fee?
>
> On a further note, why is it that 60% of the criminal cases currently
> being handled in Milwaukee County--Operating After Revocation
> (OAR)--affect an unusually high number of already disenfranchised
> African-American males who are trying to find work or get to work in
> order to feed their families (see "Criminal charges jolt traffic
> offenders," Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Oct. 19)? This in itself is
> cruel and unusual.
>
> The citation-appeal process is a penalty unto itself because so much
> time and frustration is spent correcting an error too often not of
> your own making. Yet the parking citation rip-off generates millions
> of dollars. Where does it all go, and who benefits? If the city wanted
> to suspend registrations and issue tickets for a legitimate reason,
> they could concentrate on the speeders who pass on the right, those
> who ignore red lights and stop signs, or the inattentive and reckless
> cell-phone-using drivers.
>
> Roy B. Evans
> Attorney at Law
> Milwaukee
>
> http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
DonQuijote1954
> Says a LOT that this dude signs his name as "Attorney at Law". Now
> how much do lawyers get from the police state revenue generation
> industry?
>
> If we lowered the speed limit 5 miles for every wreck w/ a 55 MPH
> speed limit at the beginning, six wrecks would have us either being
> ripped off right and left for a 25 MPH speed limit and/or people
> exceeding the arbitrary speed limit by 30-40 MPH daily :P
>
Clearly lawyers are part of the "industry" (you pay them to represent
you in court as well as you hire one to defend you in accidents) and
we can expect little solidarity from them. Actually the more tickets
and accidents the better for them. This case is rare, perhaps
motivated because he himself was stung.
DonQuijote1954
> "Claire Petersky" <cpet...@mousepotato.com> wrote in message
> news:kePVc.9052$3O3...@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "DTJ" <d...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:2g6fi05b1sn8735hg...@4ax.com...
> >
> > > Being in proximity to public transportation does not mean it is an
> > > option for you.
> >
> > Yeah, some people are too stupid to know how to read a bus schedule.
>
> Yeah, some people are too stupid and brain washed that they can't select the
> mode of transportation that works best for them because they are terrified
> that people might find out that they can't make decisions on their own.
>
> They only do what they think other people want them to do. Your bus
> schedule statement say you think there is only one correct answer.
> Politicians love gullible people like you that always follow orders without
> thinking.
Obviously this people who can't read bus schedules, can't read traffic
signs either, with much more disastrous consequences... :(
Mike Z. Helm
(Brent P)
>In article <Xns954892EEF254...@24.93.43.119>, Albert Nurick wrote:
>> nolionn...@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote in
>> news:4e4a3f58.04081...@posting.google.com:
>>
>>> Parking tickets (overnight and meter) are a
>>> draconian method of "taxation without representation" that
>>
>> IIRC, ticket policy is set by our elected officials, who we vote for in our
>> municipalities. Thus the "without representation" part is simply
>> incorrect, and I'm not encouraged to read farther, because the author of
>> the cited article isn't terribly intelligent.
>
>Well some are municipality determined, others aren't. And then for
>it to be with representation, one's vote actually has to be meaningful.
>There has to be an actual choice at election time. But when it comes
>to these sort of issues both choices have the same view. Or in some
>cases there is only one choice.
Vote, don't vote at all, run for office yourself. You may not ever get
to the White House, but you could very well ,ale coty council. Then you
could probably just tear up all your parking tickets.
--
There's no way to delay that trouble comin' everyday
Mike Z. Helm
(DonQuijote1954)
>bowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message news:<2ofq3kF...@uni-berlin.de>...
>> DonQuijote1954 wrote:
>>
>> > Having been ticketed and nearly towed twice in *front of my house* for
>> > slight violations of parking regulations,
>>
>> Slow learner?
>
>No, late sleeper... ;)
Then it's not a question of parking your car overnite. You want to park
it overnite and well into the morning.
Get a driveway.
Brent P
I've never had a parking ticket ever. But that last statement only
proves you are using the tired old arguement of 'run yourself' when
you damn well know that the system is closed to outsiders.
Mike Z. Helm
(Brent P)
I know damn well it's not, when I look at where some insiders came from.
They're not all Senator's sons, especially at the local level. You may
have to build up a base of support before you can successfully put forth
a viable candidacy.
Not everybody can do it. You could always get involved and do more than
just read the editorials, listen to the campaign commercials, and vote,
although if you're at least doing that, it's a start.
Brent P
I didn't mean closed in that regard, closed to anyone who doesn't tow
the party line of one of the two.
> Not everybody can do it. You could always get involved and do more than
> just read the editorials, listen to the campaign commercials, and vote,
> although if you're at least doing that, it's a start.
But in this tired old arguement anyone who isn't interested in or cut out
for politics doesn't have the right to voice an opinion. Cept for you and
others like you who use this arguement. You get to have an opinion of
keeping the status quo, anybody else, well if they aren't running, tough
shit they better shut the fuck up.
DonQuijote1954
Ah, the beauty of politics. I heard of another politician that came
out of the closet--before the last case--who had his lover work as his
chauffeur. However the lover was a little mischievious. The guy parked
where'er he pleased trusting his "mentor" would get him out of
trouble, and the politician had to run all over the place in order to
have him pardoned. Put yourself in the shoes of the politician... ;)
DonQuijote1954
> On 17 Aug 2004 22:17:43 -0700, nolionn...@hotmail.com
> (DonQuijote1954)
>
> >bowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message news:<2ofq3kF...@uni-berlin.de>...
> >> DonQuijote1954 wrote:
> >>
> >> > Having been ticketed and nearly towed twice in *front of my house* for
> >> > slight violations of parking regulations,
> >>
> >> Slow learner?
> >
> >No, late sleeper... ;)
>
> Then it's not a question of parking your car overnite. You want to park
> it overnite and well into the morning.
>
> Get a driveway.
I'm parked in front my house, and the only other choice is to pay more
to my landlord for parking space, but since I'm already paying way too
much for rent, I decided not to feed him further. There is no reason
though for having that empty space on the street either, other than
make people brake the law in order to collect some more money for
corrupt politics. It's all a circle... ;)
DonQuijote1954
Well, it ain't impossible. You just got to sell yourself. Hey, but
what's wrong with that--prostitutes do it all the time... ;)
Monique Y. Mudama
> In article <g2jli05ut7l8fd5iq...@4ax.com>, Mike Z. Helm wrote:
>>
>> I know damn well it's not, when I look at where some insiders came from.
>> They're not all Senator's sons, especially at the local level. You may
>> have to build up a base of support before you can successfully put forth a
>> viable candidacy.
>
> I didn't mean closed in that regard, closed to anyone who doesn't tow the
> party line of one of the two.
>
This is most true in the biggest ponds. In smaller settings, it's not
uncommon to see independents or smaller parties represented.
--
monique
newbie rider
'96 bmw r1100r
DonQuijote1954
> Ah, the beauty of politics. I heard of another politician that came
> out of the closet--before the last case--who had his lover work as his
> chauffeur. However the lover was a little mischievious. The guy parked
> where'er he pleased trusting his "mentor" would get him out of
> trouble, and the politician had to run all over the place in order to
> have him pardoned. Put yourself in the shoes of the politician... ;)
I found some info on it...
'Some may argue that politics is less forgiving. Let's look at Jim
McGreevey's champion, Barney Frank. Frank, an openly leftwing
congressman, has represented Massachusetts' Fourth Congressional
District since 1980. In 1989, Stephen Gobie, a prostitute and felon
whose services Frank had once purchased and whom the congressman then
hired from 1985-87 (at his own expense) as his "personal aide,"
"housekeeper," and "driver," told the Washington Times that he had
operated a gay prostitution ring out of Frank's tony apartment, with
Frank's knowledge (Frank denied having known about the ring). Frank
had also fixed dozens of parking tickets for Gobie, and written to law
enforcement officials on Gobie's behalf, on congressional stationery.'
In other words, the self-serving politicians can get themselves off
the hook while us the common citizens are preyed upon without mercy.
:(
Brent P
> In other words, the self-serving politicians can get themselves off
> the hook while us the common citizens are preyed upon without mercy.
>:(
I wish I could remember the story clearly, I believe it was one of the
democrat canidates for president. Anyway this elected offical had a fire
hydrant MOVED so he could park in front of his townhouse/house/whatever
legally. At tax payer expense I'm sure...
Brent P
Found it:
http://www.providencephoenix.com/features/other_stories/multi_2/documents/03602005.asp
-> That.s why you.re going to hear a lot about the fire hydrant. You may
-> already know that, some years ago, the Heinz-Kerrys got the city to
-> relocate a fire hydrant in front of the Louisburg Square townhouse they
-> had just bought so that they could park their SUV out front. The
-> fire-hydrant story is much beloved by WRKO Radio (AM 680) talk-show host
-> Howie Carr, who writes about it often in his Boston Herald column . and
-> who last week introduced it to readers of the New York Post, for which he
-> wrote a guest column.
And then, the article follows up with this one for Bush:
-> If you search the LexisNexis database for the past two years, you will
-> find 10 references to Kerry and the fire hydrant. (Granted, four of those
-> are Carr columns, not counting his Post piece.) What you will not find is
-> a single reference to what Bush did in Arlington, Texas, in the early
-> 1990s, when he was the part-owner of and principal glad-hander for the
-> Texas Rangers baseball team. Bush did not have a fire hydrant moved.
-> Rather, he had an entire 13-acre neighborhood moved . well, flattened .
-> so that he could build a new ballpark for the Rangers. He did this by
-> persuading the Texas legislature to create an independent authority to
-> take the land by eminent domain and use it for a stadium . a remarkable
-> piece of sports socialism that the former owners of the Red Sox
-> unsuccessfully tried to replicate a decade later. (Note: that plan,
-> apparently dead and gone, would have displaced the offices of the Boston
-> Phoenix, which opposed it strenuously.)
Albert Nurick
news:viyWc.32760$9d6.14755@attbi_s54:
> I've never had a parking ticket ever. But that last statement only
> proves you are using the tired old arguement of 'run yourself' when
> you damn well know that the system is closed to outsiders.
Hogwash. I know plenty of "plain folks" who've held city council
positions, for example.
I do believe that the system is closed to those who assume it's closed.
You've got to work hard to get elected.
--
Albert Nurick | If you "think" a reliable 1.8 horse power
alb...@nurick.com | per liter from a naturally aspirated engine
www.nurick.com | is weak, you're obviously a fool.
04 FJR1300A / EOB #3 | - Henry
DonQuijote1954
> tetraethylle...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote in
> news:viyWc.32760$9d6.14755@attbi_s54:
>
> > I've never had a parking ticket ever. But that last statement only
> > proves you are using the tired old arguement of 'run yourself' when
> > you damn well know that the system is closed to outsiders.
>
> Hogwash. I know plenty of "plain folks" who've held city council
> positions, for example.
>
> I do believe that the system is closed to those who assume it's closed.
> You've got to work hard to get elected.
And get yourself some "sponsors"... ;)
Albert Nurick
news:4e4a3f58.04082...@posting.google.com:
> Albert Nurick <alb...@nurick.com> wrote in message
> news:<Xns9550E04759FB...@24.93.43.119>...
>> Hogwash. I know plenty of "plain folks" who've held city council
>> positions, for example.
>>
>> I do believe that the system is closed to those who assume it's
>> closed. You've got to work hard to get elected.
>
> And get yourself some "sponsors"... ;)
Always a good idea in any sort of venture that requires a significant chunk
of change to execute.
Brent P
> tetraethylle...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote in
> news:viyWc.32760$9d6.14755@attbi_s54:
>
>> I've never had a parking ticket ever. But that last statement only
>> proves you are using the tired old arguement of 'run yourself' when
>> you damn well know that the system is closed to outsiders.
> Hogwash. I know plenty of "plain folks" who've held city council
> positions, for example.
> I do believe that the system is closed to those who assume it's closed.
> You've got to work hard to get elected.
I live in c(r)ook county IL. Nobody gets elected to anything of
importance without paying tribute. Sure, maybe alderman of one of the
two suburbs I have property in might be 'possible', but I would have
to become a republican.
Matthew Russotto
If you became an alderman, these people would just tell you to shut up
and if you really wanted to change something, run for higher office.
Brent P
Of course, that's the nature of the arguement. 'you're not doing enough'.
If I was president of the united states of america they would find some
reason why I wasn't doing enough when still unsuccessful at getting
85th percentile speedlimits on interstates manditory.
Matthew Russotto
Yeah, but then you could just have them shipped to Guantanamo Bay.
DonQuijote1954
'Every year, over 34 million people receive a traffic ticket from a
police officer (or possibly, a weirdo dressed up like a police
officer). And while most of us are willing to admit that there are a
few people out there who actually deserve them (tickets, that is… not
weirdoes), the pervasiveness of ticketing seems questionable,
especially in light of recent research that proves that financial
sanctions rarely deter motorist behavior. Well, while it seems that
millions of Americans are disregarding road signs, the government is
still obeying the dollar sign. Most traffic tickets charge fines
averaging around $150.00. 34 million tickets at $150.00 equals profits
of over $5 billion. Add to that number insurance costs, attorney fees,
and other associated charges, and it looks like we've bought into a
pretty effective "driving tax." The money collected from traffic
tickets supports much of our civil service industry, including police
officers, accountants, court secretaries, bailiffs, judges, district
attorneys, insurance companies, and attorneys. If we didn't get
caught, lots of people wouldn't get paid.'
http://www.soyouwanna.com/site/syws/traffictix/traffictix.html
DonQuijote1954
One of the areas that needs fixing in America--and surely in other
places as well--is the chaotic roads, which forces people into ever
larger vehicles and turns ordinary driving into a game or Russian
roulette. Yet traffic enforcement has become another "driving tax,"
while the real reckless drivers get away with everything from
zigzagging around cars to talking on the phone.
So I propose that in a better world there should be a place for an
Autobahn. Of course, you may rather choose to support your
bureaucracy: Go out and drive fast!
<No
In LA we are all pavement already.
It is always bumper to bumber.
It will get worse.>
Common sense tells me that faster cars makes for faster roads, but the
worst problem for LA is the SPRAWL, which served as the model for the
rest of the nation. The solution for it would be having more
TRANSPORTATION CHOICES, not widening roads, along with faster roads...
(This author support slower traffic, but I don't see it as necessary
if better driving practices are followed with getting the worst
drivers off the road and into alternative transportation.)
Transportation Remedies
June 2000
by Dom Nozzi
In theory, being concerned about the added traffic (the additional
number of car trips) a new development will create is helpful. It
recognizes that increasingly, the new form of pollution in our age is
not belching smokestacks and sewer pipes so much as it is the number
of car trips coming from the new development. But conventionally and
historically, our "remedy" has been to widen the nearby roads, add
huge seas of asphalt parking, and make the street intersections
enormous.
It has been only recently that we are finally starting to realize that
this "remedy" ironically makes things worse. Such a "remedy"
accelerates urban sprawl, chases away residences (which cannot
tolerate proximity to car-intensive areas), makes it more difficult to
walk, bicycle or use the bus, degrades our quality of life, moves us
closer to being an "Anywhere USA" instead of a unique town, and forces
us to make nearly all of our trips by car. (remedies that make cars
instead of people happy create the "induced traffic" problem in which
we stimulate new, additional car trips that would not have occurred
had we not tried to make cars so happy with wider roads and more
parking).
Instead, our concern about a new development and the car trips it will
potentially generate should be focused on strategies that are
effective in reducing this new form of "pollution." We need to insist
that the new project, when feasible and appropriate, is walkable, and
mixes residences with offices, retail, services, schools, and parks.
That is, we need to return to the timeless, traditional, pre-WWII way
of building our town and neighborhoods.
It is only through this approach that we can ensure that new
developments deliver a quality of life that is free from excessive car
trip "pollution" -- developments we can look forward to, instead of
dread.
Dave C.
"DonQuijote1954" <nolionn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e4a3f58.0408...@posting.google.com...
> "Would you support an Autobahn?"
>
> One of the areas that needs fixing in America--and surely in other
> places as well--is the chaotic roads, which forces people into ever
> larger vehicles and turns ordinary driving into a game or Russian
> roulette. Yet traffic enforcement has become another "driving tax,"
> while the real reckless drivers get away with everything from
> zigzagging around cars to talking on the phone.
>
Good argument. It falls apart though when you imply that zigzagging around
cars or talking on the phone makes a person a reckless driver. Chances are,
the person zigzagging is actually zigzagging AROUND the reckless drivers.
(with proper lane discipline, there would be nobody to zigzag around) And
while it's easy for a lot of people to allow themselves to be distracted by
a telephone conversation, not all drivers get distracted by talking on the
phone.
I agree that the real reckless drivers seem to be able to get away with just
about anything while the safest drivers on the road pay high insurance rates
for driving 56 in a 55. Traffic enforcement is indeed a driving tax. -Dave
DonQuijote1954
inplaced to ensure lots of people broke a rule sometime, somewhere.
Most traffic laws are money grabs, nothing else.
Most laws are money grabs, or just to ensure profits and jobs for
certain large sectors.Half your prison population would be better
served out of prison, but no profits for private prison systems that
way, and fewer costs equal fewer dollars to be skimmed off by
beaurocrats..
There should be a ban on lawyers in politics, as well as businessmen.
But then, who else can afford politics, which is set up for the rich
and controlling..Owl>
It boils down to the same thing we've said before: The lion sets up
STUPID LAWS which are bound to be broken--only to prey on you.
DonQuijote1954
<Originally posted by Adrian
How fast may you drive on your highways (that's the normal traffic
path, no?) and how fast may you drive on autobahns?
Same sppedlimits in all states, or it vary from state to state?>
It varies, but it's mostly 65mph.
Now I'd like to make my point with my case: I got a little 3 cylinder
stick-shift Geo Metro that's a pocket rocket on the road up to 75mph,
when it starts shaking. So I can get ticketed for breaking the "law,"
even though I pose relatively little threat to other drivers. What
worries me though is when the SUVs and other usually heavier vehicles
pass me at supersonic speeds--both left and right--with little concern
for me. And they don't get a ticket.
So what I say is, drop the hypocrisy over speed, enforce good traffic
laws (eg. passing on the left, etc) and encourage--say through higher
gas prices--smaller vehicles that allow you to have fun at lower
speeds--just as I do with mine.
DonQuijote1954
I wish that the law requirering slower vehicles to move to the right
lane should be enforced more.......>
Well, nowadays is not enforced at all. I don't know if it is in any
other point in America though.
There are many resources on driving here...
http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/usenet-arc/
This is the first thread...
"you people drive CRAZY!"
I spent the last week and a half in DC, having a mostly fantastic time
(your museums are easily the best in the country - I spent hours in
the
Corcoran, Hirshorn, National, Phillips, etc), but noticed that there
are
a very large number of dangerously insane drivers out there - i saw
more
people run red lights in the dupont circle area (i was staying at the
hilton on connecticut, up the hill from dupont circ) and throughout
the
NW streets... than I ever have in any other city anywhere - incl NYC!
EAch red light must have had at least 2 people run it, and yellow
seems
to mean "speed up" not slow down out there. Crazy, boss.
Joshua
DonQuijote1954
<In DK the speedlimits have just been raised from 110KM/H (65mph) to
130KM/H (75mph).
It haven't changed a lot, beside that fewer people dont break the
speedlimits anymore
What is interresting for me is the 2 things you mention
- Only passing left
- Slow vehicles @ right side
are things that I thought were universal all over the world
Those 2 things are certainly something that puts some structure into
the traffic, therefore gives a more smooth traffic, and of course also
safer.
As Mari said, higher speeds -> more killed.
If speed are VERY necesarry, well, why not....but I'd still stick to
the 2 other options first.
In German autobahns there are no speedlimits, and as fun as it can be
to go 150mph in a great car, the backside is some really really
horrible accidents they sometimes get there.>
Those 2 things that put structure into traffic are both ignored and
not enforced in America. So you may have--and you do get it all the
time--2 cars blocking the 2 lanes of traffic with no concern for the
ones behind them. Have you ever heard of expression "license to kill"?
At least in Germany you have fun before you die... ;)
Mike Z. Helm
(DonQuijote1954)
>> Get a driveway.
>
>I'm parked in front my house, and the only other choice is to pay more
>to my landlord for parking space, but since I'm already paying way too
>much for rent, I decided not to feed him further.
Buy, don't rent.
DonQuijote1954
> "DonQuijote1954" <nolionn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4e4a3f58.0408...@posting.google.com...
> > "Would you support an Autobahn?"
> >
> > One of the areas that needs fixing in America--and surely in other
> > places as well--is the chaotic roads, which forces people into ever
> > larger vehicles and turns ordinary driving into a game or Russian
> > roulette. Yet traffic enforcement has become another "driving tax,"
> > while the real reckless drivers get away with everything from
> > zigzagging around cars to talking on the phone.
> >
>
> Good argument. It falls apart though when you imply that zigzagging around
> cars or talking on the phone makes a person a reckless driver. Chances are,
> the person zigzagging is actually zigzagging AROUND the reckless drivers.
True, it may happen that way too, and I've done my own zigzagging to
get around slow reckless drivers. But you do point out that the
solution is lane discipline, which is never enforced, so we are back
to square one... :(
> (with proper lane discipline, there would be nobody to zigzag around) And
> while it's easy for a lot of people to allow themselves to be distracted by
> a telephone conversation, not all drivers get distracted by talking on the
> phone.
I do not agree on this one though. Usually you know who's on the phone
by just looking at the way they drive: slow and disconnected. I don't
think they allow that in the Autobahn.
>
> I agree that the real reckless drivers seem to be able to get away with just
> about anything while the safest drivers on the road pay high insurance rates
> for driving 56 in a 55. Traffic enforcement is indeed a driving tax. -Dave
Often enforced on fast but good drivers, while Joe Couldn't-Care-Less
or Mary Absent-Minded have a perfectly clean record. ;)
Barry L. Camp
"DonQuijote1954" <nolionn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e4a3f58.0408...@posting.google.com...
> "Dave C." <mdu...@sff.net> wrote in message
> news:<2pc35dF...@uni-berlin.de>...
>> I agree that the real reckless drivers seem to be able to get away with
>> just
>> about anything while the safest drivers on the road pay high insurance
>> rates
>> for driving 56 in a 55. Traffic enforcement is indeed a driving
>> ax. -Dave
>
> Often enforced on fast but good drivers, while Joe Couldn't-Care-Less
> or Mary Absent-Minded have a perfectly clean record. ;)
Not always.
Last winter in Grand Rapids, there was a horrible story about a 20-year-old
woman who was driving and talking on a cell phone. Paying more attention to
her phone call than to her driving, she blew through a red light, plowed
into another car, killing a kid sitting in the passenger seat.
While the poor kid is in A Much Better Place, the woman's record is not only
not clean anymore, she will have to deal with what she did all the rest of
her days.
Negligent driving doesn't always get go unpunished. Too bad someone has to
die, however, for the situation to get some correction. :(
Barry L. Camp
DonQuijote1954
(This is about our representatives banning lawsuits against junk food
corporations, not much different from the situation in the
traffic/parking ticket industry. I initiated the thread but these are
two follow ups by somebody else.)
> And parents are responsible for helping kids make these decisions and learn
> how to make them well.
>
What a dumb ass. So MILLIONS of kids must suffer because of the
millions of unfit parents in the world? FACE THE FACTS!! THERE ARE
UNFIT PARENTS!!!! That will never change! That is no excuse to let
immoral corporations prey off them!! Bombarding easily manipulated
children with their mind control. I can not even describe how moronic
your logic is. Do you even think about the absurd argument you are
making? We are talking about innocent impressionable children here
who have no control over what kind of parents they have. How about
instead forcing these corporations to pay for adds during cartoons
that explain to children the dangers of eating those foods. The fact
is children really ARE impressionable and good influence can have just
as much of an impact as bad. They could make the adds just as
entertaining as the despicable adds making children want to eat junk
that will DESTROY THEIR HEALTH. This is the moral thing to do. This
is what would save millions of lives. This is why other LESS CORRUPT
countries ban advertising to children moron. Why dont you think a
little deeper about things next time. Im sorry but when it comes to
children there really is no excuse for not protecting them with
whatever mesures are required. It is sad and disturbing that you and
many others think otherwise. Greed and Profit is the excuse of
industry. What is yours.
> I think this legislation, which only prevents the food companies from not
> being sued for making people fat, is in the best interests of the public.
> Otherwise, the food companies will have to raise prices and do other
> negative things for people not using their brains.
The only interests this legislation(like most other legislation)
serves are those of the corporate pay masters who own our supposed
representatives. This only further enhances powerlessness of the
public over the ever increasing dominance of corporate entities and
industries.
Logic316
Simply ridiculous. Just an example of an obsessed small-minded cretin
who is unable to see the big picture. The fact is, unless you have a
genetic/hormone problem, you can eat anything you want as long as you
get a decent amount of exercise. The problem is children and adults
today are spending way too much time in front of their X-Box systems and
personal computers. And since Windows is the operating system that
drives 99% of personal computers throughout the world, it therefore must
be Microsoft that's responsible for us Americans being so fat (hell,
people want to sue them for everything else, why not?)
- Logic316
Q: How many liberals does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A: One liberal and twenty eight delegates representing all the social,
economic, and ethnic communities.
A: Two-one to do it and the other to keep the first one's knee from
jerking.
A: None: They can't remove the old ones since they are already part of
the environment.
DonQuijote1954
> > The only interests this legislation(like most other legislation)
> > serves are those of the corporate pay masters who own our supposed
> > representatives. This only further enhances powerlessness of the
> > public over the ever increasing dominance of corporate entities and
> > industries.
>
>
> Simply ridiculous. Just an example of an obsessed small-minded cretin
> who is unable to see the big picture. The fact is, unless you have a
> genetic/hormone problem, you can eat anything you want as long as you
> get a decent amount of exercise. The problem is children and adults
> today are spending way too much time in front of their X-Box systems and
> personal computers. And since Windows is the operating system that
> drives 99% of personal computers throughout the world, it therefore must
> be Microsoft that's responsible for us Americans being so fat (hell,
> people want to sue them for everything else, why not?)
And how are you going to expect us to go out and "burn the calories"
if it ain't even safe? I got 3 beautiful bicycles in my closet, and I
can't even use 'em to the supermarket. It's a jungle out there, bro...
'Cities are designed for automobiles, not for healthier ways of
getting about like walking or bicycling. "In fact, we've made it
*dangerous and unattractive* to do so," says Willett, recalling a
symposium on urban environments that the School of Public Health held
with the Graduate School of Design: "For the architects, designing
spaces to encourage physical activity wasn't even on the table."'
http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/050465.html
Logic316
> 'Cities are designed for automobiles, not for healthier ways of
> getting about like walking or bicycling. "In fact, we've made it
> *dangerous and unattractive* to do so," says Willett, recalling a
> symposium on urban environments that the School of Public Health held
> with the Graduate School of Design: "For the architects, designing
> spaces to encourage physical activity wasn't even on the table."'
> http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/050465.html
Here we go again, blaming automobiles for every evil in the world.
Cities are designed to make efficient use of resources - in other words,
to allow the maximum number of people, while squeezed into the smallest
amount of space, to get to where they need to go in the shortest amount
of distance possible using the most effective means technology makes
available (which these days is by car, train, or bus). Bike lanes,
extra-wide sidewalks and buildings that give you extra room to run
around would eat up too much space and reduce the number of people and
businesses that a city can support, and would impact productivity in a
negative way. The solution for sedentary lifestyles caused by this?
Either move to the country or get an exercise machine.
- Logic316
"From the time they get up in the morning and flush the toilet, they're
taxed. Then they go and get the cup of coffee, they're taxed....This
goes on all day long. Tax, tax, tax."
-- Governor Schwarzenegger
DonQuijote1954
> DonQuijote1954 wrote:
>
> > 'Cities are designed for automobiles, not for healthier ways of
> > getting about like walking or bicycling. "In fact, we've made it
> > *dangerous and unattractive* to do so," says Willett, recalling a
> > symposium on urban environments that the School of Public Health held
> > with the Graduate School of Design: "For the architects, designing
> > spaces to encourage physical activity wasn't even on the table."'
> > http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/050465.html
>
>
> Here we go again, blaming automobiles for every evil in the world.
> Cities are designed to make efficient use of resources - in other words,
> to allow the maximum number of people, while squeezed into the smallest
> amount of space, to get to where they need to go in the shortest amount
> of distance possible using the most effective means technology makes
> available (which these days is by car, train, or bus). Bike lanes,
> extra-wide sidewalks and buildings that give you extra room to run
> around would eat up too much space and reduce the number of people and
> businesses that a city can support, and would impact productivity in a
> negative way. The solution for sedentary lifestyles caused by this?
> Either move to the country or get an exercise machine.
>
No wonder we are in bad shape, and no wonder we went into war to get
more oil, and no wonder we are polluting everything just to please us
big fat Americans. Not a chance to introduce bike lanes or even safe
sidewalks, only SUVs cut it. And if you don't like it move elsewhere.
The problem, my fried, that's a recipe for trouble: and you may be
cooking in your own juice.
Matthew Russotto
DonQuijote1954 <nolionn...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>And how are you going to expect us to go out and "burn the calories"
>if it ain't even safe? I got 3 beautiful bicycles in my closet, and I
>can't even use 'em to the supermarket. It's a jungle out there, bro...
If you're that much of a wuss, I'm sure there's plenty of people
willing to take those bicycles off your hands.
>'Cities are designed for automobiles, not for healthier ways of
>getting about like walking or bicycling. "In fact, we've made it
>*dangerous and unattractive* to do so," says Willett, recalling a
>symposium on urban environments that the School of Public Health held
>with the Graduate School of Design: "For the architects, designing
>spaces to encourage physical activity wasn't even on the table."'
>http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/050465.html
Cities are dangerous and unattractive full stop. That said, I've
gotten all around Philadelphia on inline skates and on foot without incurring
serious injury, so it's not impossible.
DonQuijote1954
If you don't die, you'll make it alright...
But it's usually scary enough to scare off most people. :(
Wayne Crannell
nolionn...@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote:
> > >symposium on urban environments that the School of Public Health held
> > >with the Graduate School of Design: "For the architects, designing
> > >spaces to encourage physical activity wasn't even on the table."'
> > >http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/050465.html
> >
In what conceivable way is it the responsibility of city designers,
architects, the government, or anyone but ME to encourage my own
physical activity?
--
Wayne Crannell
Sherman, TX
2003 Suzuki LS650
Matthew Russotto
DonQuijote1954
Easy, have politicians work to accomplish something good like this.
Then you would'n have to risk your life to save your life... ;)
COPENHAGEN'S 10-STEP PROGRAM
1. CONVERT STREETS INTO PEDESTRIAN THOROUGHFARES
The city turned its traditional main street, Stroget, into a
pedestrian thoroughfare in 1962. In succeeding decades they gradually
added more pedestrian-only streets, linking them to
pedestrian-priority streets, where walkers and cyclists have
right-of-way but cars are allowed at low speeds.
2. REDUCE TRAFFIC AND PARKING GRADUALLY
To keep traffic volume stable, the city reduced the number of cars in
the city center by eliminating parking spaces at a rate of 2-3 percent
per year. Between 1986 and 1996 the city eliminated about 600 spaces.
3. TURN PARKING LOTS INTO PUBLIC SQUARES
The act of creating pedestrian streets freed up parking lots, enabling
the city to transform them into public squares.
4. KEEP SCALE DENSE AND LOW
Low-rise, densely spaced buildings allow breezes to pass over them,
making the city center milder and less windy than the rest of
Copenhagen.
5. HONOR THE HUMAN SCALE
The city's modest scale and street grid make walking a pleasant
experience; its historic buildings, with their stoops, awnings, and
doorways, provide people with impromptu places to stand and sit.
6. POPULATE THE CORE
More than 6,800 residents now live in the city center. They've
eliminated their dependence on cars, and at night their lighted
windows give visiting pedestrians a feeling of safety.
7. ENCOURAGE STUDENT LIVING
Students who commute to school on bicycles don't add to traffic
congestion; on the contrary, their active presence, day and night,
animates the city.
8. ADAPT THE CITYSCAPE TO CHANGING SEASONS
Outdoor cafes, public squares, and street performers attract thousands
in the summer; skating rinks, heated benches, and gaslit heaters on
street corners make winters in the city center enjoyable.
9. PROMOTE CYCLING AS A MAJOR MODE OF TRANSPORTATION
The city established new bike lanes and extended existing ones. They
placed bike crossings – using space freed up by the elimination of
parking – near intersections. Currently 34 percent of Copenhageners
who work in the city bicycle to their jobs.
10. MAKE BICYCLES AVAILABLE
The city introduced the City Bike system in 1995, which allows anyone
to borrow a bike from stands around the city for a small coin deposit.
When finished, they simply leave them at any one of the 110 bike
stands located around the city center and their money is refunded.
Barry L. Camp
> COPENHAGEN'S 10-STEP PROGRAM
I had the chance to visit Copenhagen (or more correctly, "København")
several times in the mid-1990s. It's a very nice city with a lot to offer.
It's clean, it's attractive, it's vibrant, has a decent night life (although
there are livelier cities elsewhere in Europe). I like Copenhagen a lot.
But you know what? Things that work for a seaside Scandinavian capital city
will not work in these United States, where we value our automobiles, where
we really *don't want* to walk, bicycle or ride busses from one point in a
city to another.
It works in Europe. Great. Fine. More power to them. I'm happy for them.
But won't work here. Ever.
Wayne Crannell
nolionn...@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote:
I repeat....why is it the responsibility of government to have ANYTHING
to do with my physical healthiness? My safety, yes. But my health is my
own responsibility.
fbloogyudsr
> to do with my physical healthiness? My safety, yes. But my health is my
> own responsibility.
Yes, but's *nice* if the govt (society) enables you to easily excursive
to stay healthy. Or would you rather just buy a treadmill and zone
out inside your apt/house?
Floyd