I-95 is already a national embarassment with it’s 2-lanes being completely out-dated and inadequate for today’s traffic volume. Now this redneck want people to start slamming on their brakes for what reason? MONEY>
Red light cameras cause rear end collisions, just as ultra-law-abiding citizens do. They simply are afraid of getting a ticket. Increase that fear and you increase the accident potential.
Pseudo intellectuals and nanny-staters will tell you that the law is the law, which is obvious to the casual observer. People who live in fear of some tiny infraction whereby they have additional money extracted from them and “points” against their drivers license, which causes them to pay higher insurance premiums and cause accidents.
For example, those who fear red lights cause rear-end collisions. Those who fear going over the speed limit cause “parades” and multi-car pile ups. I suspect that much in the way of road rage can be traced to fearful drivers.
Those who lock their cruise control at the speed limit in the left lane are an example of the result that the learned reader commenting about the fastest sperm winning implies. There obviously cannot be a “smart” sperm since it is well documented that body parts have no separate intelligence in spite of clever comments to the contrary.
Drivers, laws, and the results are fodder for humorous discussions. Like teenagers, there are many who think they know everything and either try to control or tax (or both) everyone else. They are called nanny-staters. Everyone else just wants to be left alone. Automated taxing in the form of red-light and speed-limit cameras are not part of being left alone.
If the cost of collecting the extra tax is too high, they leave people alone. When it becomes profitable through automation, the public becomes the victim. The usual song and dance is “it is about safety”. The rest of the logic is left for the reader to decide based on their own intelligence.
I agree completely with TN – How are your rights being violated if you’re obeying the law to start with? You just don’t want to get caught, and you know you have a better chance of getting caught by a camera than by a police officer because the officer can’t stop everybody. Revenue generator? Yes, they’re making money – off the lawbreakers! Don’t break the law, and they won’t get your money. Simple as that. And you’d have to pay a fine if it was a cop pulling you over and giving you a ticket, but nobody complains about the cops being “revenue generators,” only the cameras. Interesting. And I’ve heard the argument about rear-end collisions ad nauseum, but I haven’t seen any real evidence of that. That’s a straw man argument. Invasion of privacy? You break the law, they take your picture. You don’t break the law, they don’t take your picture. They aren’t controlling you – you have total control of that accelerator. Don’t press down on it so hard, and you’re the one that’s in control, not them.
Essentially you’re saying that traffic laws and the resulting fines from breaking them are “Extra Taxes”.
More like penalties. If it takes a couple of minutes longer to get where you’re going, then leave earlier. If you don’t like the traffic laws because you feel they’re too controlling? Don’t drive. I hate to use the cliche that driving is not a right but a privledge, but it’s true.
However standing there and stating that you want the “right” to break the law doesn’t quite click with me. Whether it’s there as a deterrent or a method of generating revenue, the fact remains that it is the law. If you talked to a group of people, every one of them would tell you that there’s a traffic law or two that they don’t agree with. Me personally? I think red light cameras are a bit on the dangerous side, especially since they’re right there where you can see them and react to them. HOWEVER I’d rather have a bunch of fender benders because some people stop unexpectedly because of them,(you shouldn’t be going that fast approaching a stale yellow anyway, that’s just common sense) then burying just one person because someone didn’t feel that stopping for a red light applied to them. As for the I-95 camera. I think it’s a much better idea. Of course people might tap their brakes and or slow down as a result, which suprisingly is the DESIRED result.
People want to be safe, and are all for safety rules and laws that ensure that, unless of course those laws prevent them from having the “right” of putting other people at risk. The same argument applied when seat belt laws started becoming the norm, and of course this will too. If people are too stubborn to use common sense when driving, then deterrents have to be put in place.
Well, TN, it appears that we do agree on a point or two, and disagree on others. Normal life is like that, and I like your style.
I don’t feel that I have a “right” to break the law, only a “need” to spread out traffic (slight extra speed) to avoid multi car pile ups. When is is really bad, I just pull off the road to get out of the parade. I avoided one that way a few years ago about 10 PM on I95 in Florida. I think there were about 25 vehicles involved, many on fire, not sure how many died.
I never run a stale yellow, but if I am across the stop bar, I do clear the intersection. Many do not know that, and it is dangerous (although humerous) to watch someone sit in an intersection and observe people weaving around them. In their own mind, they are obeying the law.
The common alternative is to slam on their brakes and cause a fender bender. In town traffic you cannot leave 50 feet between cars since people behind you get hung at lights and hate you for living. Many drivers approach a mid-life green and slow down to wait for the yellow-red sequence. Others see the stale green and slam on their brakes when the light turns yellow when they are on or near the stop bar.
Now to address seat belt laws. I have never driven a car without wearing a seat belt. Period. When the law was passed, it was a $10 fine and they would not stop you for it, but only add the extra on if they stopped you for something else. Now it is “Click It or Ticket” and the fine is $100 or $125 (not certain, since I have never paid one). They will stop you for that, no other violation required. Tell me with a straight face that that law is for safety alone. I enjoy a good laugh, but at least there are no points. Why not make it $500 and give the driver 12 points so he cannot hurt himself for a year because he loses his license? Ridiculous, yes, indeed, but think of the safety improvement and that scofflaw would be deterred.
You’re right on with the fines getting out of control things like seat belt laws, and I do not agree with the police being able to pull people over JUST because they’re not wearing the seatbelt, however it does kinda circle back to my pay the price for your transgressions argument. I would imagine that the fines keep climbing for:
1. Revenue need
2. Decrease in actual violations due to vigilance by law enforcement (ok that ones a little weak but I can’t leave it out as a possibility)
3. People just not getting the point.
Any of these would be valid arguments, and I’m sure there not the only ones available.
I do remember however reading recently that the click it or ticket campaign was recently brought back into force because it was noted that seat belt use had decreased dramatically. Do I believe this, cant say for sure. Is it possible? In a society where people go out and get a “dummy” or mannequin so they can use the HOV lane, (try googling “HOV lane dummy” while keeping a straight face, I dare you) I have to say that it just might be.
TN, I believe that the point of this whole thread is the revenue need (greed?). Most people long ago outgrew their need for speed, the others drive for NASCAR or Indy. Paying for your transgressions is not a bad idea, if you were really getting to transgress. I would think that they could sell “speeders licenses” for $1000 a year and make a ton of money. Not only that, but there would probably be fewer accidents because the speeder license would have rules attached that said that you cannot do something stupid while you are speeding.
In driving as with other things, common sense should prevail. There is a marked lack of common sense, however.
The mannequin (blow up doll) is a fact. I have seen the busts on TV where the cops get a HOV driver for some infraction and notice that the passenger is not real. Tinted windows help on that one.
Fortunately, I am not in cities that have HOV lanes that often and when I am, I have a car full of people. The mannequin trick is used for people that want out of the parade but cannot speed up or slow down a little to do that. They do pay to transgress for that inflatable passenger, I think it is $250 – $500 a pop (pun intended).
The speeder license isn’t a bad idea, however we’d probably have to isolate them from the other drivers because you know the old saying “it’s not me I worry about when I’m driving, it’s all the other amateurs out there.”
Me? I commute using good old fashioned buses and trains, although they take a little longer sometimes, they do cost less in the long run, and I’m definitely “out of the parade” (by the way I like that one, and fully intend on using it when the chance arises” I encourage my children that mass transit and good old fashioned footwork are good alternatives to being stuck in traffic and frustrated and surrounded by people who are just as frustrated if not more than you are. It’s not easy, South Florida’s transit system is not as seamless as some of the other major metropolitan areas out there such as New York or Chicago, but with planning and a little patience, it can be done.
Well, I guess that we could isolate the speeders in an HV lane, which could be made by simply painting over the O in the HOV lane. The advantage would be that the $1000 license fee would be more profitable for the states.
Feel free to use the parade line. I figured that one out years ago when I saw a bunch of cars in a row as I watched from an overpass.
Mass transit is only good on the east and west coasts, tossing in Chicago, perhaps. I don’t much care for mass transit because I was mugged in New York on the subway, but I was with my Italian girlfriend. She had an Italian friend by the name of P. Beretta so everything turned out ok.
I like Florida, and they have busses if your life fits the schedule. I do like the Underground in London, and Eurostar in Europe although things are getting pretty rough over there, too. Russia’s subway is beautiful in places and pretty safe, but there are soldiers carrying AK-47s to keep troubles to a minimum. So I think Florida and its transit will suffice.
I see that Belle thinks we shouldn’t be getting along. We have a term for people like that. We call them “dingers” which you might find in some dictionary.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
I-95 is already a national embarassment with it’s 2-lanes being completely out-dated and inadequate for today’s traffic volume. Now this redneck want people to start slamming on their brakes for what reason? MONEY>
Red light cameras cause rear end collisions, just as ultra-law-abiding citizens do. They simply are afraid of getting a ticket. Increase that fear and you increase the accident potential.
Pseudo intellectuals and nanny-staters will tell you that the law is the law, which is obvious to the casual observer. People who live in fear of some tiny infraction whereby they have additional money extracted from them and “points” against their drivers license, which causes them to pay higher insurance premiums and cause accidents.
For example, those who fear red lights cause rear-end collisions. Those who fear going over the speed limit cause “parades” and multi-car pile ups. I suspect that much in the way of road rage can be traced to fearful drivers.
Those who lock their cruise control at the speed limit in the left lane are an example of the result that the learned reader commenting about the fastest sperm winning implies. There obviously cannot be a “smart” sperm since it is well documented that body parts have no separate intelligence in spite of clever comments to the contrary.
Drivers, laws, and the results are fodder for humorous discussions. Like teenagers, there are many who think they know everything and either try to control or tax (or both) everyone else. They are called nanny-staters. Everyone else just wants to be left alone. Automated taxing in the form of red-light and speed-limit cameras are not part of being left alone.
If the cost of collecting the extra tax is too high, they leave people alone. When it becomes profitable through automation, the public becomes the victim. The usual song and dance is “it is about safety”. The rest of the logic is left for the reader to decide based on their own intelligence.
I agree completely with TN – How are your rights being violated if you’re obeying the law to start with? You just don’t want to get caught, and you know you have a better chance of getting caught by a camera than by a police officer because the officer can’t stop everybody. Revenue generator? Yes, they’re making money – off the lawbreakers! Don’t break the law, and they won’t get your money. Simple as that. And you’d have to pay a fine if it was a cop pulling you over and giving you a ticket, but nobody complains about the cops being “revenue generators,” only the cameras. Interesting. And I’ve heard the argument about rear-end collisions ad nauseum, but I haven’t seen any real evidence of that. That’s a straw man argument. Invasion of privacy? You break the law, they take your picture. You don’t break the law, they don’t take your picture. They aren’t controlling you – you have total control of that accelerator. Don’t press down on it so hard, and you’re the one that’s in control, not them.
Nicely put, I disagree, but nicely put.
Essentially you’re saying that traffic laws and the resulting fines from breaking them are “Extra Taxes”.
More like penalties. If it takes a couple of minutes longer to get where you’re going, then leave earlier. If you don’t like the traffic laws because you feel they’re too controlling? Don’t drive. I hate to use the cliche that driving is not a right but a privledge, but it’s true.
However standing there and stating that you want the “right” to break the law doesn’t quite click with me. Whether it’s there as a deterrent or a method of generating revenue, the fact remains that it is the law. If you talked to a group of people, every one of them would tell you that there’s a traffic law or two that they don’t agree with. Me personally? I think red light cameras are a bit on the dangerous side, especially since they’re right there where you can see them and react to them. HOWEVER I’d rather have a bunch of fender benders because some people stop unexpectedly because of them,(you shouldn’t be going that fast approaching a stale yellow anyway, that’s just common sense) then burying just one person because someone didn’t feel that stopping for a red light applied to them. As for the I-95 camera. I think it’s a much better idea. Of course people might tap their brakes and or slow down as a result, which suprisingly is the DESIRED result.
People want to be safe, and are all for safety rules and laws that ensure that, unless of course those laws prevent them from having the “right” of putting other people at risk. The same argument applied when seat belt laws started becoming the norm, and of course this will too. If people are too stubborn to use common sense when driving, then deterrents have to be put in place.
Well, TN, it appears that we do agree on a point or two, and disagree on others. Normal life is like that, and I like your style.
I don’t feel that I have a “right” to break the law, only a “need” to spread out traffic (slight extra speed) to avoid multi car pile ups. When is is really bad, I just pull off the road to get out of the parade. I avoided one that way a few years ago about 10 PM on I95 in Florida. I think there were about 25 vehicles involved, many on fire, not sure how many died.
I never run a stale yellow, but if I am across the stop bar, I do clear the intersection. Many do not know that, and it is dangerous (although humerous) to watch someone sit in an intersection and observe people weaving around them. In their own mind, they are obeying the law.
The common alternative is to slam on their brakes and cause a fender bender. In town traffic you cannot leave 50 feet between cars since people behind you get hung at lights and hate you for living. Many drivers approach a mid-life green and slow down to wait for the yellow-red sequence. Others see the stale green and slam on their brakes when the light turns yellow when they are on or near the stop bar.
Now to address seat belt laws. I have never driven a car without wearing a seat belt. Period. When the law was passed, it was a $10 fine and they would not stop you for it, but only add the extra on if they stopped you for something else. Now it is “Click It or Ticket” and the fine is $100 or $125 (not certain, since I have never paid one). They will stop you for that, no other violation required. Tell me with a straight face that that law is for safety alone. I enjoy a good laugh, but at least there are no points. Why not make it $500 and give the driver 12 points so he cannot hurt himself for a year because he loses his license? Ridiculous, yes, indeed, but think of the safety improvement and that scofflaw would be deterred.
You’re right on with the fines getting out of control things like seat belt laws, and I do not agree with the police being able to pull people over JUST because they’re not wearing the seatbelt, however it does kinda circle back to my pay the price for your transgressions argument. I would imagine that the fines keep climbing for:
1. Revenue need
2. Decrease in actual violations due to vigilance by law enforcement (ok that ones a little weak but I can’t leave it out as a possibility)
3. People just not getting the point.
Any of these would be valid arguments, and I’m sure there not the only ones available.
I do remember however reading recently that the click it or ticket campaign was recently brought back into force because it was noted that seat belt use had decreased dramatically. Do I believe this, cant say for sure. Is it possible? In a society where people go out and get a “dummy” or mannequin so they can use the HOV lane, (try googling “HOV lane dummy” while keeping a straight face, I dare you) I have to say that it just might be.
TN, I believe that the point of this whole thread is the revenue need (greed?). Most people long ago outgrew their need for speed, the others drive for NASCAR or Indy. Paying for your transgressions is not a bad idea, if you were really getting to transgress. I would think that they could sell “speeders licenses” for $1000 a year and make a ton of money. Not only that, but there would probably be fewer accidents because the speeder license would have rules attached that said that you cannot do something stupid while you are speeding.
In driving as with other things, common sense should prevail. There is a marked lack of common sense, however.
The mannequin (blow up doll) is a fact. I have seen the busts on TV where the cops get a HOV driver for some infraction and notice that the passenger is not real. Tinted windows help on that one.
Fortunately, I am not in cities that have HOV lanes that often and when I am, I have a car full of people. The mannequin trick is used for people that want out of the parade but cannot speed up or slow down a little to do that. They do pay to transgress for that inflatable passenger, I think it is $250 – $500 a pop (pun intended).
The speeder license isn’t a bad idea, however we’d probably have to isolate them from the other drivers because you know the old saying “it’s not me I worry about when I’m driving, it’s all the other amateurs out there.”
Me? I commute using good old fashioned buses and trains, although they take a little longer sometimes, they do cost less in the long run, and I’m definitely “out of the parade” (by the way I like that one, and fully intend on using it when the chance arises” I encourage my children that mass transit and good old fashioned footwork are good alternatives to being stuck in traffic and frustrated and surrounded by people who are just as frustrated if not more than you are. It’s not easy, South Florida’s transit system is not as seamless as some of the other major metropolitan areas out there such as New York or Chicago, but with planning and a little patience, it can be done.
Get a room.
Well, I guess that we could isolate the speeders in an HV lane, which could be made by simply painting over the O in the HOV lane. The advantage would be that the $1000 license fee would be more profitable for the states.
Feel free to use the parade line. I figured that one out years ago when I saw a bunch of cars in a row as I watched from an overpass.
Mass transit is only good on the east and west coasts, tossing in Chicago, perhaps. I don’t much care for mass transit because I was mugged in New York on the subway, but I was with my Italian girlfriend. She had an Italian friend by the name of P. Beretta so everything turned out ok.
I like Florida, and they have busses if your life fits the schedule. I do like the Underground in London, and Eurostar in Europe although things are getting pretty rough over there, too. Russia’s subway is beautiful in places and pretty safe, but there are soldiers carrying AK-47s to keep troubles to a minimum. So I think Florida and its transit will suffice.
I see that Belle thinks we shouldn’t be getting along. We have a term for people like that. We call them “dingers” which you might find in some dictionary.