he passed them after pacing them in his unmarked police car while they were racing.

definitely a kill.

oh, and if any of you complain about "following the rules" in a "free" society

then you don't understand the basic concept of freedom, or why something called 'social responsibility' is necessary to maintain that freedom

Badge998 sounds like a cool-ass dude:)

:rlaugh:

988, you sound like a good guy imo... I've dealt with great cops, and I've dealt with shitty cops. At the very end of March (time to meet the quotas) I was pulled over in MD on my way home with my 88 vert I just bought and my girlfriend behind me in my 86 GXL.

I was tired (had been on the road about 9 hours by this point) and was using the lines of the road as a concentration point to keep oncoming traffic light out of my eyes (puts me to sleep and give me a migraine). Cop said I was "swerving" because sometimes I was following the yellow in the middle, sometimes the white on the sides. I was following the white on the sides, and anyone coming up 15 from MD into PA would know what I'm talking about. As you get near PA border, they have exits but no signs for them, they are just turn offs for roads that are really far up. I was following my white line and it took me on an exit. I noticed it and quickly went back to where I belonged.

They pulled both of us over for suspicion of drunk driving. Gave me a ticket for uninsured vehicle (I thought my insurance company covered a newly purchased vehicle for 24-72 hours, most do), no registration (umm duh i just bought the damn thing in another state), and tags that didn't belong to the vehicle (again, duh). The tags were in my name but belonged to another car I had owned not long before. The GXL was insured and had correct tags. Both cars were overflowing with RX-7 parts (seats hanging out my vert trunk).

Cop tells me the one ticket (no insurance) is a must appear. He failed to tell me it meant up to a year in prison, which i didn't find out till the day of my trial when I went in with no hoping to pay some fines and go home. Luckily, no one gave me my rights and I got an extension, court date is coming up here on 7/12.

Long story shortened. I really didn't deserve those tickets. I was 5 miles from my home state, I just purchased the vehicle, I wasn't breaking any readily apparent laws. I was doing the speed limit and just taking the car home. This was a shitty day and now I have to travel to MD, AGAIN, to stand trial for this crap, and the cop told me "maybe the judge will throw one or two of them out."

Thanks for serving a good citizen with a ticket that could cost some jail time.

Quotas. :rofl: :rlaugh:


One of the biggest fallacies about Law Enforcement.

get it?
 

dumb but true

low pay=low quality

even a moron can understand that. :rlaugh:


thats why we have so many low quality cops, as i said not all:) but the majority


thats not even up for discussion
just fact

and by the way i have owned 3 zr1 corvettes, 2lt4s, numerous trans ams,bmws etc.. .I could of sold one of my zr1 and paid for two fds thats not it

some people on the forum are oblivious to what their car is worth.

good point

but you know what i meant.
low salaries attract low quality people.

no one wants a low salary, but some have no other choice a.k.a most cops

funny... around here the cops don't come out till the end of the month... maybe someone could enlighten us as to why they're always dormant until around that time... screw the fallacies, plain and simple, this was a simple case in where they could have given a break. The other two tickets alone added up to around $350.

Funny, the Articles of Confederation (which our US Constitution is based on) said that travel upon the public roads by any means is a RIGHT, and by the time our Constitution was formed, it was so commonly understood as a right that they didn't even bother to put it into the Constitution, it would have been just like saying "you have the right to eat a cheeseburger that you own". And since then, with the advent of the automobile, the Supreme Court has affirmed that RIGHT.

CASE #1: "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

CASE #2: "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

CASE #3: "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

CASE #4: "The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.

The only regulation that government can do with the roads is to regulate the rights of corporations to use the roads. Private individuals can use them in their individual capacity all they want.

Unfortunately, with the help of "useful idiots" like myself for a long time (I was one for a long time, believe me), government and law enforcement have snowed us into believing we all need some sort of magical permission slip to use the roads we all own.

And also unfortunately, I don't see that changing anytime soon, unless by MASSIVE civil disobedience (aka everybody cutting up their "drivers" license and removing the license plates from their cars. Not to mention perhaps driving "not government approved" cars like a non-converted 1999 R34 Nissan Skyline GT-R)

Nobody's suggesting that we have no laws, but only constitutionally legitimate laws which don't crap on our inherent rights and treat us like criminals when NO crime has been committed.

If you hit someone, or drive recklessly, that's a crime. (that leaves the burden of proof on the police officer, and you to disprove his claims). By recklessly I mean weaving in & out of traffic at high rates of speed, cutting over multiple lanes in under a second, closing in on dense traffic at 30+ mph closure rate (DENSE traffic going 70 and you're doing 100, not one or two guys on the road doing 70 and you're doing 100).

If you're doing 135+ mph over a series of blind hills (if it was flat for a mile before you hit that hill, you'd have seen Grandma and her car), then you were driving recklessely.

Have YOU ever driven up and down a series of hills where the speed limit is 55 mph? I have, and know what? When I come up towards the top of the hill, I slow down about 10 mph below the speed limit, like any sane person would do, because that is the safe thing to do. If I rear ended someone doing 55 in a 55 zone after cresting a blind hill, it would be MY fault still.

See paragraph 6 of the Declaration of Independence, when speaking of the "repeated injuries and ursupations" brought forth upon the colonies by King George:

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

Think about it. The judge is getting paid to be there. The officer is getting paid to be there. The prosecutor is getting paid to be there. The court clerks are getting paid to be there... YOU on the other hand had to take leave without pay or vacation/sick time from work, and go appear because they are accusing you of breaking a law.

Sounds similar to the crap King George was pulling back then.

Damn, I didn't know living in upper-middle class to lower-upper class equals "low pay". :scratch: I better change professions.


By the way, you should take some of that "money" that you claim you have and take some English 101 classes. :crackup:

I honestly love these conversations! Intelligent, well informed and of course opinionated ;) I don't necessarily like everything everyone believes, but I do enjoy finding out why they believe that way. I don't like it when people make rash generalizations without supporting their way of thinking. I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I respect it. I respect it even more (even if I dont like it) if you support it intelligently! Unlike people who posted in this thread earlier who shall not be named. In closing and before making my next post. I respect everyone's opinions, and I have read every post in this thread with an open mind. I hope everyone will reciprocate the sentiments. So, no hard feelings? :bigthumb:

I love egging the noobs on. It's my entertainment when Dancing With The Stars isn't on. :bigthumb:

Good point :bigthumb: ,but the fact remains that everyone has a different "comfort zone" Even if it is on an almost deserted road, there will be other drivers who will be driving in their comfort zones. In some situatiions, you may be able to avoid the slower traffic, but life always has it's surprises. When I was in an accident, I was doing the speed limit, the speed limit was 55 mph, the road was clear. I noticed a car on a road to my right waiting to turn onto my road when For absolutely no reason, she decided to pull out in front of me. I nailed the front end of her car. Fortunately, nobody was injured, but both vehicles were totalled ( my '89 nissan 4X4 - lift kit, big tires etc. and her 2003 Buick). I am glad that I was not in my "comfort zone" ( I would estimate at approximately 75 - 80 mph) when I hit her, it would have been much worse. Everyone's comfort zone is different. That is why I think it is a bad idea.

It's all good! :bigthumb:

Jesus Christ Barwick, your debating skills are making me green with envy :)

Edit: Speaking of police vehicles... http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?...icleId=2353201
This is in addition to the Ferrari F50 they recieved a year ago.

What's with all the kiddies on this forum?

You're seeing the point here though, aren't you? She's the one that screwed up royally by pulling out in front of you. Regardless of your speed, the accident was going to happen (unless you were doing an unreasonably slow speed that allows you to stop, but we're not exactly going to make everyone drive 25 mph on every road that has an intersection)

wtf do they need an F50 for? That's ridiculous.

Oh, donated... nice.

whatever man
again you have nothing real to say so you pick apart an online post for grammar?

get the hell out of here

ok............I retract my statement.

you are just bitter cuz you can't find a cheap FD. :rlaugh:

low quality cops comes from having to deal with idiots day in and day out......eventually people will get fed up of bullshit and harassment so they will just do the bare minimum to get by.......like any other job, if you do it and no one bitches at you or yells at you or BS's you ALL THE TIME you will be happy at work and happy wporkers are good, efficient workers.
CHP here makes 3300 as a cadet and 5200 once they are out..........where are you getting the "low salary" thing from?

Last time I checked 60k a year starting out isn't bad. Even for California. Many CHP officers find themselves making close to 100k a year after only being on the force for 5-10 years. Not to mention 100% retirement in 30 years and free medical insurance. Yup, sure is a "low-paying" job. :rofl:


It's funny how lookingforrx7 was run out of the 3rd Gen Section for his antics, so now he has to troll it up in here. :bigthumb: