spimp

You people can flame all you want, but i have my own opinion! They tell people in Cali and everywhere else that gangs are bad but what are they? No i've never been to prison but don't like how cops operate. I seem to think that everyone is riding badge988 because they're afraid as most other poeple of the police. I will take back saying all police but most of the cops who I know and have come in contact with have attitude problems. Think, how many cops actually do their job? not many! Most have problems with control and wanting to be in control of others in the name of upholding the law. So they say that but some tell you what kind of criminal you are but go home smoke dope and beat their kids and wife. Just because they have a badge it doesn't change who they were to begin with it just gives them right to do it with "The Law" to back them. And as far as a man calling himself SWEETAGE you can't say anything about someones name. This society only has one rule: YOU'RE ONLY FREE AS LONG AS YOU DO AS YOU'RE TOLD! MY STATEMENT STILL STANDS! FU-- THE POLICE!

Barwick

Dude, I'm not even going to get too much into this one. You can't go bashing on cops "as a whole" like that. Believe me, I'm no fan of the majority of cops, but they do put up with an awful lot of crap and idiots out there, and DO put their lives on the line every day. Perfectly good (and cool) cops have been shot at a routine traffic stop, it happens more and more these days. It's sad, but it happens. Know why?

Because people are fed up. You've got a growing number of people who are absolutely sick of government butting in on their lives. You've got Johnny citizen whose last few months look like this (most of this has happened to me, so I know what it's like... except for the last part, I've got enough respect for people no matter how pissed off at the "system" I get):

Johnny files for his taxes and realizes that between state, federal, city, county, sales tax, property tax, and other miscellaneous taxes, he has paid HALF of his income to the government, and for what? He sighs and says "whatever, I guess that's the way it is..."

Two weeks later, Johnny wants to re-do a bathroom in his house. He calls his buddy to do the work, they go to Home Depot and start to buy the materials. The guy helping them mentions "You're doing an awful lot of work, did you have any problem getting the permit?" Johnny replies "what permit?" To which the guy goes "oh yeah, you need a permit to do any work on your house over X dollars..." Johnny mentions how that's a load of BS, but figures "whatever..."

Since it's Saturday, and the city hall isn't open, Johnny and his buddy sit at home and watch the baseball game and drink some beers. On Monday he goes into the city hall and finds out it's going to be $45 for the permit. "WHAT!?!?" Johnny says... the kind person behind the counter says "yeah I know, but it's the rules..." Johnny reluctantly pays the money, and says "whatever, just give me the stupid permit..." and thinks to himself "freaking government crap, I'm getting tired of this B.S...". He then goes home and does the work that weekend.

A month later, Johnny and his wife go out of town for a week with the kids. They come back and check their mail, and in it is a letter from the city saying "Your grass is too high, if you do not cut your grass within X days, we will send a private company onto your private property and mow it, and charge you for the work". At this point Johnny is seriously getting fed up with all their B.S. but figures he can't do anything about it.

A month later, Johnny gets a letter from the city saying that his sidewalk is dangerous and needs to be replaced. He can either replace the whole square of sidewalk himself, have a company do it, or the city will send someone out to do it themselves and charge him. He says "wtf? I could care less, if the city wants it fixed, they can pay for it themselves... and if I own it and have to pay for it, then I'm going to tear it up because I don't want to pay for it"... he calls the city and tells them that, and they say "well, city ordinance so and so says you are responsible for it..." He replies "so if the city ordinance says that every year on the first Thursday in June, you have to get on your roof in red underwear and dance like a chicken, would I have to do that too?"... the city employee on the other side of the phone was not amused. He tells the city to shove it, that he doesn't want the work done and he's not doing it and won't pay for it. They tell him they'll put it on his tax bill and if it isn't paid, they'll put a lien on the house. Johnny says "whatever, screw you, it's not worth it..." and waits for them to complete the work. NOW Johnny is EXTREMELY pissed off, but just doesn't know what to do, he feels powerless to do anything about it. After all, he's just ONE person, and they're the big government.

Next week, Johnny is driving down the road on a 3-lane (each way) highway with very light traffic at 2:00 in the afternoon on the way to a meeting at work. He's going to be late for his meeting, and there's no cars around, so he speeds up to 85 (the "speed limit" is 65). He comes over a hill and there's a police officer clocking people. He slows down, but it's too late, the officer sees him, pulls out and turns on his lights. He immediately pulls over, and is thinking "WHAT THE F***!?!?!?!? THIS IS ABSOLUTE BULL****!!!!!!!!!!!" He's ranting and raving, realizes he's going to be even MORE late for his meeting now, and he's going to have a ticket to add to his trouble. As the cop comes up to his door, Johnny thinks about all the crap he's put up with from the government, and is getting fed up.

At this point, the police officer stops being a human being to Johnny, and starts being just another symbol of the oppressive government system. If he doesn't get control of his own mind at this point, Johnny is an EXTREMELY dangerous person. And THIS is where many perfectly good human beings, with kids sitting at home and a wife waiting for them, end up being killed by people who have just lost it and at that point have no respect for their life. All because of the ridiculous crap that ordinary citizens put up with from our government.

Fortuantely, most people out there have respect for life and would never do that, but there are a few who might just lose it, and unfortunately, officers have to watch for people like that.

Madrx7racer

been gone for a couple of days.....seems like I missed a lot..........hmmmmmmmmmmwhich image should I use next?

to the poster that said that 110 was ok and should not have been a felony. you have far less contol of a carr at 110 than at 65........if you hit a bump at 100 there is a slight chance that the driver will lose control...........I've seen it happen......

Fumanchu

This guy is too funny. He is the new laughing stock of the forum. Check his other posts.


*edit* Look at these. They are forum classics.

https://www.rx7club.com/automotive-news-lounge-22/rx7-why-426446/
https://www.rx7club.com/showthread.p...5&page=3&pp=20

He PM's numerous FD owners hassling them because of their car prices and even goes on to claim what they are worth based on Kelly Blue Book. The starts a thread bashing on FD's because he can't afford one. Maybe he should ask for a raise at Jack In The Box.

aznpoopy

congratulations

that's some of the dumbest **** i've ever heard

fixed

Madrx7racer

^^^^^^^

Skylance

One question AND one major flaw in that statement - Why would ANYBODY be attrracted to low salaries? Regardless of educational status, etc.

jhammons01

Fuman, You're right. lookingforrx7 is a real winner. That **** is entertaining as hell.

Barwick

Yeah and there's far more danger at 65 than there is at 15, what's your point?

Merely going a speed is NO indication of a crime.

Not to mention if there's nobody around, you can see all around you, and the road allows for it, going 160, 180, 200 (miles per hour), whatever, is NOT necessarily a crime, except that some idiot in government deemed it to be. Have YOU ever exceeded the speed limit safely? I bet you have.

The only legitimate crime is a crime that either harms/damages or threatens another person's life or property.

MoreCowBell

You just said it there. Do you not think that high speeds threatens another persons life, whether its a predestrian or another driver. At high speeds, yes you may be aware of your surrondings and may be an excellent driver, but for that one person to jump out for a ball or a driver to dodge something on the road, you have much more control and stability and time to react at the lower posted speeds than 30 or 40 over the posted limit. Am I wrong?

Madrx7racer

ok.......so if the posted speed LIMIT is 15MPH and you are going 65 then you WILL get stopped because it is unsafe. so my point was that the limits are there for a reason.....engineers come up with the speed limits depending on the road......they decide what the critical speed of that particular part of the road IS and then they lower it a bit more for OUR safety( example.....we have a 30 mph zone in santa cruz where I was busted doing 40 and according to my research {because i wanted to get out of this ticket} the engineeers that evaluated the road claimed that the CRITICAL speed is 39 mph so they limit is 30 for a buffer zone.).......i tought it was BS because this is an UPHILL open 2 lane road.....but according to the engineers there are several blind areas that pedestrians use to cross the road......and anything above 30 mph would endanger them.....i did not fight the ticket because I was busted doing 40 in a 30........you play the game then you must accept what you will get when caugt.....quit bitching.
160,180,200 MPH is NOT safe on public roads and it does endanger people(including yourself). Yes I have exceeded the speed limit but that's not a valid point because I am not claiming that it is safe, nor am I bitching about getting pulled over for not following the speed limit.

so like you said....going 110 mph will harm you, your car, the road and most likely whoever you hit as you come to a stop from 110 mph....any bump at 110+ or any sudden movement WILL **** you up and you will lose control. How often do YOU check your tire pressure? i'm sure you don't do it very often, I know I don't, and I'm also sure that the pressure is not to spec and that could potentially cause an accident when ou reach 120......130 mph.....so again....it's not safe.

aznpoopy

speeding is a crime

=reaction time=

do i need to say more

kontakt

No disagreement in general, but I know for a fact that some streets are limited to certain speeds to keep them from being a preferred route, or a section of identical road will have a reduced speed from the road before it without a statistical tendency towards accidents on that stretch. The latter is usually for tickets. I do however have an issue with speed limits when you get up into higher speeds. I agree with speed limits in general, but a national speed limit of 55 was imposed because it was found to be a good speed for fuel consumption. Cars today get better fuel consumption at higher speeds, and can handle them better as well. While the step up to 65 in a lot of places, and 75 on select roads (i've only seen in WV but i don't doubt they're other places) was good, I don't believe it's enough. I still think highways should slow down approaching citys and areas with more ramps, but on a well maintained toll highway between 2 exits 50+ miles apart... I see very few reasons for anything less than a limit of 85. Europe has speed-limit free roads, but we don't. It doesn't make too much sense when you think about how much more space we have, and how much longer distances we often have to travel.

rynberg

Yeah, except for all of the clueless dipshits (read 75% of drivers) that can't handle driving at 65 mph responsibly.

Europe has MUCH stricter driver's training and vehicle integrity inspections than we do. The average German driver is probably better than 90% of US drivers. And their cars are in much better maintenance too.

I'm all for higher speed limits in rural areas but some fundamental changes would have to occur here for that to be reasonably safe.

kontakt

I'm also for better driver's training, and tougher licence requirements, like I think most of the people on this forum are. I didn't mean to say that there wouldn't have to be changes made, just that there should be changes made.

Barwick

Man, perfectly good people like yourself have been snowed by these guys...

There are very few justifications for absolute speed limits. The only places they are justifiable are in areas like hospital zones where there's people walking across streets ALL the time and lots of crosswalks (same with residential where sight is blocked by parked cars or trees or something similar).

Driving at high speeds may or may not threaten someone else's life. That is why it is not legal (constitutionally) to enact *absolute* speed limits or traffic control devices, except when the person can NOT reasonably assure the safety of others except by going a slower speed, or observing the traffic control device.

For example. A REAL "no turn on red" sign would be there ONLY if there is a street that enters that intersection that you cannot see traffic coming from. Or a real speed LIMIT sign would be in a hospital zone in the city where there is an average of 25 pedestrians walking across the street every minute of the day (or 25 during the day, and 2 during the night, so the speed limit is no longer absolute at that point, unless something blocks your view of pedestrians, like in a residential zone).

I mean, these same arguments could have been used to make mandatory licensing and registration for horse riders back in 1790. After all, have you ever been around a spooked horse? And when a horse goes nuts, there's no "off" switch or brake pedal to push, like there is in a car.

Barwick

95% of the time, engineers don't have crap to do with these limits. For example, here in Michigan, the state legislature has deemed that nowhere (no matter what) can you exceed the speed of 70 miles per hour, for that is too dangerous. Any engineer can look at some stretches of I75 (or better yet, I696 or I96) and say "well crap, it's straight, the road is kept in good shape, when there's no traffic here, there's no danger doing 150+ mph in the day, so long as nobody else is around".

Oh, and on the "quit bitching" comment. It's called taking a responsibility for our unalienable rights here in this country that have been stripped from us by our police state. Go and try to buy a gun (something our constitution specifically guarantees us the right to do), and tell me we don't have a nanny state. Unfortunately, puppets like you do the work of the government, in making us more and more comfortable with their "good idea" laws that are "for our own benefit", like the frog in the boiling pot of water. "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." - Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged - 1957

An unconstitutional law is a law that presumes a power that was not given to the government, or that denies an unalienable right without due process of law. Nowhere did we give government the power to regulate private individuals (not acting in interstate commerce) on the public highways, ESPECIALLY the right to restrict what automobiles private individuals can or cannot operate on the public roads (in other words, a Nissan Skyline that hasn't been converted to "US specs" would be legal if our government were following the Constitution). And although I don't see the point in them, we never gave our government the power to regulate what drugs a private individual uses either. If they want to kill themselves on crack, then so be it.

The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law, and no courts are bound to enforce it. -- 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256

Oh bull****, you're telling me that when you went 66 mph in a 65 zone that you were all of a sudden magically endangering everyone else's life on the road?

And again, with the "quit bitching" part, how about YOU take some responsibility to keep our government "protectors" in check by not stripping us from our freedoms? If we don't do it now, our children WILL need to use force to regain their freedom...

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." - Declaration of Independence

Oh listen to this, apparently YOU know what's safe for everyone else on the road, that's amazing.

Actually, I'm "licensed" to drive race cars at 110+ mph with my wheels spinning two inches from the fender of the car next to me as we dive through a fast corner.

And when I'm on the street, it's much the same situation. And contrary to whatever screwed up thoughts someone planted in your head, hitting a bump at 110 mph will not "**** you up" unless your car has problems with it.

Not to mention the fact that the speed RECOMMENDATIONS would still say 70 mph on I75 here in Michigan, and during most traffic conditions, that would be the safe speed. But other times, when there's nobody on the road (how the HELL are you going to threaten someone else when there's NOBODY ON THE FREAKING ROAD?!?!), you can do 150+ or whatever other speed.

There exists something called "85th percentile speed limits" (which aren't followed by the way, but are the safest way to do them). Basically, if there is no speed limit, people will go as fast as they feel comfortable, and no faster. They set it at the 85th percentile speed. There's roads around here where it's 55 and I do 45 because that's what I feel comfortable with. Try driving around New Zealand sometime, I hear they set the speed limits in the city nearly perfectly, almost to the point where you don't have to look at the signs, you'll just naturally go as fast as the speed limits are, as if they don't even need to be there. Now, they set them TERRIBLE outside the cities, they set them way low, but inside, they're spot-on, you'll only drive as fast as you feel comfortable.

Barwick

By what justification? Where does the constitution allow that? Our nation is built on the basis of "Innocent until proven Guilty". All these licenses and registration schemes we've got are a system of "Guilty until proven Innocent". Basically, they assume you're a complete idiot and don't know what you're doing, and you must prove to them that you aren't.

That's completely against the very spirit of our Constitution. Try that in court sometime, go to them and tell them to put Billy Bob in prison because you say he punched you. Doesn't work. Nobody gets punished until they're proven guilty. Unfortunately, by our being asleep in the guard tower, we've allowed these registration schemes to come in under the guise of "it's for the good of everyone, and your protection".

Here's a nice tidbit on speed limits:

In 1999, after 4 years of no numerical or posted daytime speed limit on these classifications of highways, outside of urban areas, Montana recorded its lowest fatality rate.

Fixed speed limits were reinstated on Memorial Day weekend 1999. Since then, fatal accidents have begun to rise again.

That's right, with NO speed limits on certain roads, fatalites went DOWN, to their LOWEST level ever. Part of the reason is uniform speeds. Some people will go the maximum safest speed for the road conditions regardless of traffic, which will cause weaving in/out of traffic, and concurrently, accidents. Others will go no more than 5 over, regardless of how stupid that speed limit seems for that road. And THEY will cause the person to have to weave by driving in the left lane, etc... HOWEVER, if there is no speed limit, EVERYONE will go the fastest speed they feel safe at, and there will be minimal weaving and other dangerous driving.

http://www.motorists.com/pressreleases/montana.html

kontakt

I have to agree with you, but I'd still be for better driver education. If the speed limits were removed everywhere, I think there'd be like 2 weeks of mad accidents. We would then have 1/8th the number of ricers we used to, and then people would be driving reasonably for the most part everywhere. The problem a lot of people have with these situations is the "innocent lives" factor. The people who those people hit, and I keep almost getting sucked into it, but I need to remind myself daily "I don't give a **** about innocent lives, I'm a human... I'm selfish"

Barwick

Yes, we want to avoid innocent lives lost. BUT, we cannot simply slaughter the rights of individuals to achieve a "good" end. For example, if we simply locked up every single person of middle eastern origin, we'd have much less innocent lives lost to fundamentalist muslim terrorism. But we can't do that, that would be crapping on their rights. Not to mention it's just plain wrong.

Madrx7racer

I do not think it would be smart to let some of the retards around here drive without a speed limit.........it would be guaranteed daily fatalities.


you might be licensed to drive race cars but the other morons driving mommy's car at over 100 mph doesn't........stricter license requirements would NOT take any rights away because if people are too stupid to pass they should not be behind the wheel...driving is not a right, it's a priviledge and people are abusing that. I have seen a shitload of retards driving like they know wtf they are doing....seems like all you need is a heartbeat and you are guaradamnteed a license.

Madrx7racer

In The End: Without Laws We Would Live In Chaos.

evalutionr

hahaha that first post really didn't make sense, uh ok......i don't think that qualifies as a kill cus you actually killed him with an arrest, thats why you shouldn't abuse your power

Madrx7racer

it's a kill........

Skylance

DITTO. If you think the current system is unfair, think what the vigilante(sp) justice system would be like. Is that what some of you want?!? The fact is that we need laws to keep order. Are some of them going to be "unfair" - YES. Do I like all of them - NO. Do I follow all of them - I plead the 5th ! Imagine this scenario involving the "comfortable speed" theory. You feel comfortable going 135 MPH. 77 year old Grandma feels comfortable going 35 MPH. Since there is no defined upper or lower speed limit, you both drive at your comfortable speed. You are driving on a road that you perceive to be "open". Grandma is on the other side of the hill in front of you, but you don't see her because of the hill. At your speed of 135 MPH, just imagine what would happen when you come over the top of the hill. You would most likely not be able to safely avoid that accident! This is why the speed limit was created. To keep everyone going the same speed.

Hope this helps everyone.