Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb
-
Where does the money come from?
There are so many more variables to that...
I worry about people who think, "this law is functional in theory, therefore a good idea."
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Unnecessary slow driving prohibited
How're you going to enforce that on all those state highways and back roads? 100K new cops?
-
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@lordofduct said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
They're 10 dollar an hour kids fresh on the job site and just thrown the keys.
Lol maybe where you live they are.....
Where do you live?
If it's in the US, I bet you anything it's along those lines. New York for example most ambulances are ran by private companies that hire on primarily EMTs and a handful of paramedics.
Surprisingly, where I live, Florida... it's better. Ambulances are part of the fire department and aren't often private companies and are staffed with higher trained people.
I find this ironic since Florida is known for its privatization, corruption, and general lack of state funding. While New York is known as a liberal, well funded, nanny state.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Where I live, the speed cameras are placed in areas where speeding is very dangerous. They also only get triggered when a vehicle is going something like 25 over, which is just ridiculous.
I can see a camera working there-- long straight road with no speed changes, and catching the most egregious of offenders.
Though parking a cop car there would also work. Arrest the dumbfucks right away and impound their cars.
Yeah. They're usually pretty good about that. They also put up signs all over the place warning people, so if you get hit by the camera, you're really an idiot.
Unfortunately, the DPD is usually more busy dealing with shootings, drugs, and heroin overdoses. Hell, most of the traffic stops are from people doing really stupid shit (or people leaving drug houses or something).
-
@Dragoon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Did you not see him driving erratically in your rear view mirror? Did you not see him enter your blind spot? Did you not assume that, given that behavior, he may cut in front of you, and have been prepared?
It is like you think every road that people drive on is only 1-2 lanes and doesn't have thousands of other cars on it.
If there are thousands of other cars then someone isn't speeding up on your ass like that.
-
@FrostCat said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
How're you going to enforce that on all those state highways and back roads? 100K new cops?
Same way you enforce people not getting murdered.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
While it's a good idea to drive defensively, it's dystopian to create laws that require it, because it produces too many false positives
No, the laws of physics require defensive driving.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
If there are thousands of other cars then someone isn't speeding up on your ass like that.
Have you driven on a highway?
I've had a car accelerate in front of me, collide with the barrier, spin out from in front of me, and almost hit me, without a second for me to react.
No, you can't be held liable for the actions of other drivers... just... no...
-
@Lorne-Kates Does nobody in your world rapidly change lanes to get ahead in what is smoothly moving but below the posted speed traffic?
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Where does the money come from?
I'm not in favor of doing it, partly because it would be so expensive, so I don't have to come up with an answer.
The Federal Government's opinion is likely to be "the car owner can pay for it."
-
@lordofduct said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@lordofduct said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
They're 10 dollar an hour kids fresh on the job site and just thrown the keys.
Lol maybe where you live they are.....
Where do you live?
If it's in the US, I bet you anything it's along those lines. New York for example most ambulances are ran by private companies that hire on primarily EMTs and a handful of paramedics.
Surprisingly, where I live, Florida... it's better. Ambulances are part of the fire department and aren't often private companies and are staffed with higher trained people.
I find this ironic since Florida is known for its privatization, corruption, and general lack of state funding. While New York is no for its liberal, well funded, nanny state.
Ohio. Most of the private ambulance companies are staffed by retired public paramedics, so they've got plenty of experience. Plus they usually have both the driver and the guy in the back get the same training so they can do each others' jobs (or help in a big emergency)
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Apparently, you've never been rear ended from someone leaving a parking lot entering your lane at 60 mph while you're decelerating for a stop. There's nothing you can do in that situation. And it would be unjust to blame the person properly operating their vehicle for the wreck.
That has nothing to do with the "red light cameras cause rear ends".
You can't always know that your car was stolen immediately when it was stolen.
But you'll know by the time you get the red light ticket, given those things take weeks to show up on your door.
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
He lives in a world where the vast majority of drivers are pristine.... I can only guess.
I live in a world where the vast majority of drivers are insane, careless fucktards. Assume everyone is going to do the worst thing possible, drive defensively, and you're on the path to being a good driver.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@FrostCat said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
How're you going to enforce that on all those state highways and back roads? 100K new cops?
Same way you enforce people not getting murdered.
There should be a law about that.
-
I suppose I'm also not supposed to drive along side 18 wheelers... ever...
I've had one decide he wanted my lane and that I didn't exist.... when I was between him and the barrier...
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
I suppose I'm also not supposed to drive along side 18 wheelers... ever...
I've had one decide he wanted my lane and that I didn't exist.... when I was between him and the barrier...
Were you in his blind spot? Cause the blind spot on those things is bad.
That's why you pass them very carefully.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Assume everyone is going to do the worst thing possible, drive defensively, and you're on the path to being a good driver.
This is different from designing the law around that expectation and blaming innocent people for the bad driving of others.
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
That has nothing to do with the "red light cameras cause rear ends".
It has everything to do with it.
I've had people pull out of a gas stop, and who would have run the red light, slam on their brakes and cut me off to avoid a red-light ticket.
Fuck the cameras.
-
@xaade Large trucks are one of the few vehicles that I always pass if I can, even if they are going the speed limit. I can't see around them so I can't properly prepare for any upcoming road conditions.
-
@sloosecannon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Were you in his blind spot? Cause the blind spot on those things is bad.
That's why you pass them very carefully.We made eye contact.
18 wheelers in the area are notorious for lying about who entered who's lane.
-
@Dragoon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Large trucks are one of the few vehicles that I always pass if I can, even if they are going the speed limit. I can't see around them so I can't properly prepare for any upcoming road conditions.
He crossed two lanes to run me off the road.
And it was backed up traffic.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Dragoon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Large trucks are one of the few vehicles that I always pass if I can, even if they are going the speed limit. I can't see around them so I can't properly prepare for any upcoming road conditions.
He crossed two lanes to run me off the road.
And it was backed up traffic.
Are you sure he wasn't trying to murder you?
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Have you driven on a highway?
Yes. They don't have red lights or mall entrances.
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
I've had a car accelerate in front of me, collide with the barrier, spin out from in front of me, and almost hit me, without a second for me to react.
Bullshit. When a car blasts past you like that, assume you don't want to be anywhere near them. A very brief deceleration (like, less than a second), will put a HUGE gap between you and him by the time he passes. You shouldn't want anyone driving in your blind spot or beside you anyways. The whole point about defensive driving is preventative, not reacting. You prevent as much as possible, to give you the largest reaction window if needed.
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
No, you can't be held liable for the actions of other drivers... just... no...
From an insurance or law perspective, no you can't be.
From your own safety and the well being of your car-- yes, you absolutely MUST be more responsible than every other driver on the road.
-
@masonwheeler said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
If you truly want to improve road safety, here's two simple steps.
- Raise (not lower) the speed limit on all highways (not city traffic) by
1020-30 MPH. Most of our current speed limits were established decades ago according to the limits of contemporary technology, and car safety has improved by leaps and bounds since then. Aggressive behavior will decrease once the car in front of you is going faster.
FTFY. In the stretch of my commute that goes through Mexico, the posted speed limit is 55, while the flow of traffic is around 75-80 when not rush hour. While driving those speeds would constitute reckless endangerment, I wouldn't consider such driving reckless unless it involved weaving through traffic without allowing much space for lane changes at 90+ mph.
- Direct police and courts to treat tailgating exactly the same way as drunk driving.
That might actually be a better revenue generator than traffic cameras, and one that legitimately makes a difference. About ten years ago, when I first started commuting, I kept track of how many people were tailgating me in non-congested areas. I seem to remember the count being near 50%.
- Raise (not lower) the speed limit on all highways (not city traffic) by
-
@boomzilla said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
TDEMSYR. They retain customers who are less likely to have an accident. It makes them more competitive for those desirable (because profitable!) customers.
We have State Farm. We've considered signing up. You get an automatic 5% discount, plus possibly more if you actually drive in a way that they interpret as less likely to cost them money.
I imagine that stuff also comes in handy in accident investigations, which could help them in a lawsuit against another driver / insurance company or in raising your rates subsequently.
Yeah, when I got my current insurance provider I got one of those dongles. Over that period, I took the shortest way to work (instead of fastest) to rack up less total mileage, drove carefully, and got the full discount; made a huge difference. When I sent it back, I won't say I was still Careful Driver McGee from that point forward but I think it influenced my driving positively; recognized the benefits of less stress on the road/my defensive driving courses were reinforced.
I'm pretty sure they know that people are going to try to game them but they still have a positive effect on their claims.
-
@Dragoon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Lorne-Kates Does nobody in your world rapidly change lanes to get ahead in what is smoothly moving but below the posted speed traffic?
Yes. And you can see them doing that shit in your rear view mirror. Weaving in and out, tailgating, swerving between lanes. You know they're going to do that when they're near you. You can either accelerate to block them (boxing them in between you and the car(s) in front of you)-- or ease ever so slightly to open a gap and let them fuck off ahead.
Oh, and you'll keep seeing that car over and over, as the lane they gets into slows down, and you all get to the same red light anyways.
-
@Lathun said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Dragoon said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Large trucks are one of the few vehicles that I always pass if I can, even if they are going the speed limit. I can't see around them so I can't properly prepare for any upcoming road conditions.
He crossed two lanes to run me off the road.
And it was backed up traffic.
Are you sure he wasn't trying to murder you?
Seriously though, @xaade, your claims are hyperbolic and specious.
And while I've taken defensive driving courses and largely agree with @Lorne-Kates's premises, he's being pretty sanctimonious about it. Both of you need to calm down with the rapid-fire sniping.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
I suppose I'm also not supposed to drive along side 18 wheelers... ever...
No, you shouldn't. Ever.
I've had one decide he wanted my lane and that I didn't exist.... when I was between him and the barrier...
That's one reason why. Also because chunks of the truck will fall off. And because tires explode and decapitate people.
And also because drivers are trained to take the path of least damage in an emergency. If there choice is them plowing into a whole bunch of cars ahead, or swerving into oncoming traffic, or swerving and taking just you out-- you're dead.
Don't. Drive. Beside. 18. Wheelers. Ever.
If you can't safely pass one, stay behind it. Preferably far behind, or in a lane over so you can see around it. If you can't see the mirrors, the driver can't see you.
If you do need to pass it (this is one of the rare cases where a vehicle may be doing less than the speed limit-- legally-- so you can pass it doing the speed limit), hang out behind it. Wait until the traffic IN FRONT of the truck in your lane is far enough ahead that once you are in front of the truck, there's still a safe following distance.
Then floor it. Get past that truck as fast as possible. Do the speed limit-- but in this one case, if you happen to do 20 over just to get in front of the engine and then immediately slow down, Uncle Lorne will look the other way.
Do. Not. Drive. Beside. An. 18. Wheeler.
-
@Lorne-Kates Oh, I try and keep track of all the people shifting lanes all the time. But it isn't always easy to keep track of the guy in lane 4 when you are in lane 1. It doesn't take very long for that guy to go from lane 4 into lane 1 and if I you are not looking right in that position when it happens (remember, there are a few other cars to keep track of) you are suddenly in a very tense situation without being prepared for it.
I am a huge advocate for defense driving, I can recall two different times where I avoided being part of a pileup by predicting what was going to occur. That doesn't mean that I don't expect shit to hit the fan at any given second.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Assume everyone is going to do the worst thing possible, drive defensively, and you're on the path to being a good driver.
This is different from designing the law around that expectation and blaming innocent people for the bad driving of others.
I don't understand the point you're getting at.
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
It has everything to do with it.
I've had people pull out of a gas stop, and who would have run the red light, slam on their brakes and cut me off to avoid a red-light ticket.
Fuck the cameras.No it doesn't. The argument is:
"Red light cameras suck. People will tail gate me, then when I slam on my brakes to avoid the yellow, I get rear ended".
You've now mentioned someone coming out of a parking lot-- meaning they weren't tailgating you, they were turning into your lane-- and someone who has cut you off-- meaning they weren't tailgating you, they are in front of you.
If you're approaching a red so fast that you can't stop one car length further back-- you're driving bad.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
They're sucking up MASSIVE amounts of PII. They already have your demographics (address, age, gender, income, preferred car type, etc). Now they can correlate it GPS data-- where you like to go, for how long, etc. That's the sort of ultra-pure, high-end analytics that ad companies snort off the ass of a Japanese hooker.
Not to mention that whenever gas taxes become mileage-based, the gummint's just gonna love having the insurance companies be their proxy for collecting mileage data. Oh wait, they'd be getting all this other data, too, such as where exactly your car has been over the past several years? Huh.
-
@heterodox said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
my defensive driving courses
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
From your own safety and the well being of your car-- yes, you absolutely MUST be more responsible than every other driver on the road.
Ok, then we agree...
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
No it doesn't. The argument is:
"Red light cameras suck. People will tail gate me, then when I slam on my brakes to avoid the yellow, I get rear ended".I always framed the argument as.
Red light cameras have incentivised creating shorter yellow lights subverting the trust people have in them and causing more accidents.
-
@lordofduct said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Or is it that the EMT gets 10 dollars an hour?
We have a giant thread around somewhere where he demonstrated how much he doesn't understand labor markets.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Red light cameras have incentivised creating shorter yellow lights subverting the trust people have in them and causing more accidents.
That was my caveat. Red light cameras are great for law enforcement and public safety. Politicians using red light cameras as revenue generation are everything wrong with everything.
-
@Lorne-Kates I have seen little evidence that they do anything to improve safety.
-
@Lorne-Kates I think the thing that tipped the hand in Houston was.
"Let's vote on this, because we should be able to."
"No, we've already signed an 11 million contract without ever putting it up to vote. We know what's best for you."And subsequently losing the trust of everyone in the city, causing people to be concerned that it was rigged.
A few people measured a few yellow lights getting shorter, and that created the backlash.
The cameras were removed, but not the signs warning about the cameras.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
That was my caveat.
More agreement then.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
driver's logbook in the car
How is that evidence.
"Your logbook has fresh ink... "
I'm note sure that you know how this works - there are three options here:
a) You're falsifying the logbook. Which leads two either of two outcomes: The person named in the logbook gets punished or you have a problem on your hand because they discovered that you lied to the judge.
b) Your logbook doesn't show an entry for the time in question. You now have a problem because you didn't comply with a court order.
c) Your logbook names the actual driver which is then punished.Additionally, naming random people may get you in hot water with your insurance company - they usually don't like it when random people drive with a car not insured for random people.
Lastly, this goes only for minor stuff. If you actually ran over someone with your car then you'll be under a microscope in which case falsifying entries will only create more problems for you.
-
@Jaloopa said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
- the person in front is driving like such a lunatic that you know they're going to crash, and badly. Your survival chances are far higher if you're not behind them when that happens
That’s not a valid case for the necessity of overtaking. You could slow down, stop, or take the first turn onto another road, and the lunatic driver would also be out of your way.
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
a) You're falsifying the logbook. Which leads two either of two outcomes: The person named in the logbook gets punished or you have a problem on your hand because they discovered that you lied to the judge.
How is this discovered?
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
b) Your logbook doesn't show an entry for the time in question. You now have a problem because you didn't comply with a court order.
c) Your logbook names the actual driver which is then punished.How are you sure that someone didn't steal the car and lie in the logbook indicating the owner?
Again, thefts can happen without knowledge.
-
@xaade Dude, in either case someone gets punished. And again, this is for minor stuff.
It's fine with me if you like to throw your friends under the bus.
-
@Jaloopa said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
the person in front is driving like such a lunatic that you know they're going to crash, and badly. Your survival chances are far higher if you're not behind them when that happens
Unless they turned around and are heading your way, physics says stopping is better.
In fact, 99% of the time, being slower or stopped is the safest action to take.
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
xaade Dude, in either case someone gets punished. And again, this is for minor stuff.
Which makes it even more bizarre that you're comfortable accepting false positives...
Sounds to me more like the court is just interested in getting money out of someone, than actually convicting the real criminal.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
xaade Dude, in either case someone gets punished. And again, this is for minor stuff.
Which makes it even more bizarre that you're comfortable accepting false positives...
Sounds to me more like the court is just interested in getting money out of someone, than actually convicting the real criminal.
And what magical-mystery fairy-world solution do you propose then, Mr. I'm-Not-Interested-In-What-The-Real-World-Actually-Works-Like?
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
And what magical-mystery fairy-world solution do you propose then, Mr. I'm-Not-Interested-In-What-The-Real-World-Actually-Works-Like?
No proof, no conviction.
If a person didn't pull you over and a camera can't make out the driver, then there's no citation.
If the court really wants to spend the money to make a forensic case for a < $1000 fine, then feel free.
-
@xaade said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
And what magical-mystery fairy-world solution do you propose then, Mr. I'm-Not-Interested-In-What-The-Real-World-Actually-Works-Like?
No proof, no conviction.
If a person didn't pull you over and a camera can't make out the driver, then there's no citation.
If the court really wants to spend the money to make a forensic case for a < $1000 fine, then feel free.
Ah, the fairy-world solution then. In your land of rainbows and shits and giggle, obviously no one ever came across something like a "ski mask" - the "Get out of any fines for free" card, according to your logic.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Speed cameras are shit and any politician who votes them in should be driven out on a railway spike.
I’m not sure who decides on speed cameras here … could be politicians, could equally well not be. Trying to look it up, I get the impression their use is decided by the public prosecution service, not by politicians.
In any case I don’t care either way — I don’t have a car, and even if I did I wouldn’t be allowed to drive it on public roads :)
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
They're buggy, inefficient, and inaccurate for all the reasons discussed above
From a Dutch factsheet on this:
Er is erg veel onderzoek gedaan naar de effecten van snelheidscamera’s. Hoewel de exacte resultaten per studie verschillen, vinden bijna alle studies een vermindering van snelheid en aantal ongevallen op plaatsen met cameratoezicht. De effecten zijn echter beperkt in zowel afstand als tijd.
That’s to say: “A lot of research has been done into the effects of speed cameras. Though the precise results differ per study, nearly all studies find a reduction of speed and number of accidents in places with camera surveillance. The effects are however limited in both distance and time.”
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Ah, the fairy-world solution then. In your land of rainbows and shits and giggle, obviously no one ever came across something like a "ski mask" - the "Get out of any fines for free" card, according to your logic.
How do you catch people that rob banks with ski masks?
Do you send a fine to a random person in the teller line?
-
@anotherusername said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
and how exactly do those sensors account for different vehicle lengths or number of axles?
-
@Gurth said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
reduction of speed ... [results vary with] distance and time.”