Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 265

Thread: Received most bullshit ticket in my life on the way back from WSOP

  1. #141
    Silver David USF's Avatar
    Reputation
    46
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Covina, CA
    Posts
    554
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Mumbles, do you not realize that a temporary sign saying "Move Over or Slow Down for Stopped Emergency Vehicles" is not the same as "It's the law and you'll be ticketed for driving in the right lane if emergency vehicles are stopped on the side"?

    One reads as a safety suggestion, the other is a hard law which is being enforced.
    Your ignorance is showing again, Druff.

    https://www.topdriver.com/education-...ad-sign-means/

    Road signs come in many different shapes and colors, and keeping track of each color can be difficult. But studying your traffic signs and knowing what each type of road sign means could be the difference between reaching your destination safely or not. Here are some tips to improve your knowledge of traffic sign colors:



    Black and white: Posted regulations (i.e., speed limits) are seen on black and white road signs. Regulatory signs tell you what you can and can’t do on the road. Some signs show maximum and minimum speed limits for all types of vehicles on freeways and limited access highways. In construction and maintenance zones, posted speeds legally reduce the speed limit on that portion of the highway. Unless necessary for safety, driving slower than the minimum is illegal.



    Yellow: Yellow signifies WARNING. Yellow traffic signs stand for slowing down, driving with caution, or a general warning. It may be yellow, or yellow-green with black wording or symbols. This sign warns you about hazards or possible hazards on or near the roadway.


    Green: This color is used for guide signs. These signs tell you where you are, which way to go and the distance.



    Blue: This color is also used for guide signs. These signs tell you about services along the roadway such as rest areas, hospitals, gas stations, and lodging.



    Orange: You’ll see orange traffic signs anywhere there’s construction occurring. This color is used to alert you to possible dangers ahead due to construction and maintenance projects. Reduce your speed and scan for workers who may be directing traffic.



    Brown: This color is used for parks and recreation signs.



    Traffic signs serve an important purpose: to keep all drivers safe. Each color signifies a different action or reference, but each one is important in its own right. If you find yourself questioning what a certain colored road sign means, take some time to study. Find your state’s driver handbook online and refresh your memory about what each type of road sign means.

  2. #142
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by David USF View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    The cop told me the requirement was either 10mph or 20mph below the limit (he rattled off a lot of stuff, so it was confusing, nor did I bother to ask for clarification, because I was only 1mph below the limit).

    The real point here is that clearly not enough people are aware that this is an actual law which will result in a moving violation.

    Until the public is well enough educated, they should only be handing out warnings for it -- or at least logged warnings (where they will ticket you if caught doing it again).

    Even if this is a great law (which I don't believe it is, for reasons already explained), they shouldn't be ticketing until most people are aware of it.

    I believe it's not being publicized on purpose, so this way they can run stings on it for revenue.
    Like I previously wrote, there are many other laws that are not "well publicized". Should warnings be given for those, too? Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Simple as that.
    Yes, any traffic law which is new and not well publicized needs to be publicized much better before tickets are written for it.

    That's common sense.

    Otherwise it is impossible for the typical driver to keep up with law changes.

    What if they passed a law making it illegal to pick your nose while driving, but kept it super-secret to where almost nobody was made aware of it? Would it be fair to pull over nosepickers and give them a $200 moving violation? Clearly not.

    "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" is something simpletons say when they don't want to critically think about the situation.

    Regarding your list of traffic sign colors, all I can say is LOL. Almost nobody is memorizing that shit.

    We are talking here about what is fair to the typical driver, not what the government can get away with by issuing chickenshit tickets.

  3. #143
    Silver David USF's Avatar
    Reputation
    46
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Covina, CA
    Posts
    554
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by David USF View Post

    You don't get it. It's not because of drivers acting unsafely. It's also about the action on the shoulder.
    If one is driving safely in the right lane, they are not creating a danger for those on the shoulder. I have never once veered out of my lane on the highway and hit another car or anything else, in my 31 years of driving. NHP officers are NOT standing on the driver's side, as per department policy.

    So, yes, it is about driving safely, and I was creating no danger for anyone.



    As I was trying to emphasize, it's not just about you being a safe driver. It's also about the situation on the side of the road that may be unsafe that might be a danger to YOU.

  4. #144
    Silver David USF's Avatar
    Reputation
    46
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Covina, CA
    Posts
    554
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by David USF View Post

    Like I previously wrote, there are many other laws that are not "well publicized". Should warnings be given for those, too? Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Simple as that.
    Yes, any traffic law which is new and not well publicized needs to be publicized much better before tickets are written for it.

    That's common sense.

    Otherwise it is impossible for the typical driver to keep up with law changes.

    What if they passed a law making it illegal to pick your nose while driving, but kept it super-secret to where almost nobody was made aware of it? Would it be fair to pull over nosepickers and give them a $200 moving violation? Clearly not.

    "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" is something simpletons say when they don't want to critically think about the situation.

    Regarding your list of traffic sign colors, all I can say is LOL. Almost nobody is memorizing that shit.

    We are talking here about what is fair to the typical driver, not what the government can get away with by issuing chickenshit tickets.


    <UGH>....This is like pulling teeth with you. Lame excuse after lame excuse. Just because you don't know about certain things doesn't make it okay, and for law enforcement/judiciary to go easy on you. People ITT are educating you, and you're just brushing it off. That's YOUR problem, not society's.

  5. #145
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by David USF View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    If one is driving safely in the right lane, they are not creating a danger for those on the shoulder. I have never once veered out of my lane on the highway and hit another car or anything else, in my 31 years of driving. NHP officers are NOT standing on the driver's side, as per department policy.

    So, yes, it is about driving safely, and I was creating no danger for anyone.



    As I was trying to emphasize, it's not just about you being a safe driver. It's also about the situation on the side of the road that may be unsafe that might be a danger to YOU.
    It was 3:30pm in July. I could easily see that the side of the road was a typical traffic stop and was no danger.

    Again, we aren't debating whether moving over is a bad idea. We are debating whether it should be a ticket.

    Since the public has no way to become aware of new traffic laws after they're already licensed, it's up to the government to publicize any new laws which will be enforced. Otherwise it is not fair to the public.

    I already posted a poll from a respected polling operation which showed that 71% of drivers were NOT aware of this law.

    Again, look at the seatbelt law. Very well publicized. Public was very well aware. People who didn't wear their seatbelt were knowingly breaking the law. Here that's not the case. Nearly everyone pulled over for this has complained that they didn't know, including several in this thread.

    You can try to dance around this all you want, but that's very indicative that the public was not well informed, and they should only hand out warnings (or at least 1-time warnings) until the public is better informed.

  6. #146
    Silver David USF's Avatar
    Reputation
    46
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Covina, CA
    Posts
    554
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by ftpjesus View Post
    This is the one time Todd I have serious issues with your view on this and its strictly as a former FF/Medic.. The move over laws exist for a reason because the fact is people get stupid in the sight of lights and shit its like a moth to a flame.. Every year cops and fire/ems personnel are struck and either seriously injured or die because of drivers inattention and because move over laws exist and are still not heeded.. Its designed to create a safety margin for first responders on accidents but also to keep officers safe because again people get stupid and have side swiped cop cars and cops standing outside of a drivers car (its why many cops have resorted to going to the passenger side of a car for safety reasons nowadays because in spit of move over laws people don't heed them and at least they have an out if somebody comes towards the vehicle they might be able to jump out of the way of the idiot driver). I actually know a couple guys who were seriously injured including a broken pelvis when they were struck on the scene of an accident that was minor.. Its also why fire trucks park the way the do so if some idiot does fail to move over or isn't paying attention there's a massive multi-ton vehicle to go through before they could get hit (sadly CHP has bitched about this and was the cause of more then one incident of police vs fire bullshit on the scene of MVCs in the past).. It may seem like a bullshit ticket to you but the move over laws are pretty darn uniform nationwide now unfortunately as the saying goes ignorance of the law doesn't excuse one breaking it especially one that actually exists for a major reason which is safety of individuals doing their jobs on the roads and highways of this country..

  7. #147
    100% Organic MumblesBadly's Avatar
    Reputation
    94
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In the many threads of this forum
    Posts
    9,408
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Mumbles, let's get back to you.

    Who do you think this law is stopping from hitting officers on the side of the road?

    Drunks? Someone driving drunk in the first place clearly isn't going to be thinking about safety of others or following the law.

    Tired people? Someone who can barely keep his eyes open isn't going to be alert enough to remember to move over when he sees emergency vehicles on the side.

    Distracted drivers? Someone texting up a storm while driving is barely alert enough to keep his car on the road, and won't think about moving out of the right lane.

    This law is useless, hence the reason why after 12+ years of existing, they still can't show any data which shows the law has helped matters.

    Did you read the article jsearles posted? https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2015/...e-roads-safer/

    This article brings up some good points that the law may actually be creating more accidents than it prevents, as people feel the urgency to abruptly get out of the right lane, thus causing merging accidents at high speed which otherwise wouldn't have happened. It's the same reason why red light cameras do more harm than good. They don't decrease red-light-run accidents, yet they increase the number of rear-end accidents.

    In more recent years, the law has been abused by law enforcement setting traps (like the one which got me) to at least derive revenue from it.

    That's the unfortunate side effect of introducing new, well-intentioned laws which have a financial aspect to them. Eventually they get abused for revenue purposes. Look at what happened to civil forfeiture -- introduced in 1984 to thwart drug dealers, and has since evolved into legalized theft.
    I'd rather not address your first question because any answer would be too speculative. Instead, I'd like to concentrate argument presented in the linked article, in which a lawyer who specializes in defending against traffic citations is likely the primary source. Of course such a lawyer is going to raise the issue of whether the move-over laws have had any effect on reducing roadside emergency/LEO deaths due to negligent drivers. Doing so otherwise would impede his ability to fully defend potential clients in such cases.

    That being said, it was nice of him to provide some data to make his case, but I take issue with the inference that he draws from that data saying that the move-over laws have had no positive effect. Why? Because the figures are based on raw data, and not adjusted for various relevant factors. So, let me put my empirical researcher hat on to address that issue.

    First, there's likely a significant variation in total vehicle highway miles over time for the data period. Since the early 1900s, the total number of vehicle miles on highways have certainly risen. By how much, one can only speculate. Second, the number of emergency and policy stops over time. It is very possible that higher budgets for LEOs related to the War on Drugs and civil asset forfeiture has resulted in more police-initiated highway stops in recent years versus the early 1990s. Third, the varying dates for when states adopted move-over laws. In fact, per the linked article, Michigan didn't even adopt a move-over law until 2006, the year with the highest raw number of roadside worker deaths involving vehicles. Lastly (that I can think of), this article is 4 years old. It would interesting to see what the data says about such incidents since then.

    As such, the rise in time of total deaths from the early 1990s to the early 2002s could be because of increases in highway activity but few states having move-over laws until the 2000s. If that is so, the decline in total deaths from the early 2000s to now could reflect the effectiveness of the move-over laws against the trend of increased highway activity over time.

    In summary, a lot more analysis of the data, and more of it, is definitely required to reliably assess the efficacy of such laws.
    _____________________________________________
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    I actually hope this [second impeachment] succeeds, because I want Trump put down politically like a sick, 14-year-old dog. ... I don't want him complicating the 2024 primary season. I just want him done.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Were Republicans cowardly or unethical not to go along with [convicting Trump in the second impeachment Senate trial]? No. The smart move was to reject it.

  8. #148
    Silver David USF's Avatar
    Reputation
    46
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Covina, CA
    Posts
    554
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by David USF View Post




    As I was trying to emphasize, it's not just about you being a safe driver. It's also about the situation on the side of the road that may be unsafe that might be a danger to YOU.
    It was 3:30pm in July. I could easily see that the side of the road was a typical traffic stop and was no danger.

    Again, we aren't debating whether moving over is a bad idea. We are debating whether it should be a ticket.

    Since the public has no way to become aware of new traffic laws after they're already licensed, it's up to the government to publicize any new laws which will be enforced. Otherwise it is not fair to the public.

    I already posted a poll from a respected polling operation which showed that 71% of drivers were NOT aware of this law.

    Again, look at the seatbelt law. Very well publicized. Public was very well aware. People who didn't wear their seatbelt were knowingly breaking the law. Here that's not the case. Nearly everyone pulled over for this has complained that they didn't know, including several in this thread.

    You can try to dance around this all you want, but that's very indicative that the public was not well informed, and they should only hand out warnings (or at least 1-time warnings) until the public is better informed.
    Okay, boss. You can try and dance too, but not all laws are required to be well publicized. Deal with it, you stubborn jewish fuck. I'm a jew too, so I can say that.


     
    Comments
      
      MumblesBadly: Green for the Cruise-LOL, but I actually agree with Druff that it should only be a warning at this juncture.

  9. #149
    100% Organic MumblesBadly's Avatar
    Reputation
    94
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    In the many threads of this forum
    Posts
    9,408
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by David USF View Post




    As I was trying to emphasize, it's not just about you being a safe driver. It's also about the situation on the side of the road that may be unsafe that might be a danger to YOU.
    It was 3:30pm in July. I could easily see that the side of the road was a typical traffic stop and was no danger.

    Again, we aren't debating whether moving over is a bad idea. We are debating whether it should be a ticket.

    Since the public has no way to become aware of new traffic laws after they're already licensed, it's up to the government to publicize any new laws which will be enforced. Otherwise it is not fair to the public.

    I already posted a poll from a respected polling operation which showed that 71% of drivers were NOT aware of this law.

    Again, look at the seatbelt law. Very well publicized. Public was very well aware. People who didn't wear their seatbelt were knowingly breaking the law. Here that's not the case. Nearly everyone pulled over for this has complained that they didn't know, including several in this thread.

    You can try to dance around this all you want, but that's very indicative that the public was not well informed, and they should only hand out warnings (or at least 1-time warnings) until the public is better informed.
    Perhaps you should also blame it on the rise of the “zero tolerance” enforcement regime that has pervaded many aspects of modern American institutions.

    Many public schools have been doing it fiercely for probably a decade or more, and now the police are getting in on the act. And adults like yourself who have’t been exposed to draconian public school policies for very long (or at all if Young Ben is going to a private school) are only now starting to feel the pinch of such a regime.

    Name:  EEA0B6A4-1144-4F59-979B-22EF01356451.gif
Views: 296
Size:  2.39 MB
    _____________________________________________
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    I actually hope this [second impeachment] succeeds, because I want Trump put down politically like a sick, 14-year-old dog. ... I don't want him complicating the 2024 primary season. I just want him done.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Were Republicans cowardly or unethical not to go along with [convicting Trump in the second impeachment Senate trial]? No. The smart move was to reject it.

  10. #150
    Platinum nunbeater's Avatar
    Reputation
    522
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,692
    Load Metric
    65695198
    BUT GUYS WHAT IF THEY MADE A SUPER SECRET LAW WHERE YOU CANT PICK YOUR NOSE WHILE DRIVING

    literally arguing with a four year old

  11. #151
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by nunbeater View Post
    BUT GUYS WHAT IF THEY MADE A SUPER SECRET LAW WHERE YOU CANT PICK YOUR NOSE WHILE DRIVING

    literally arguing with a four year old
    Sorry that you lack the ability to understand the point that new traffic laws need to be adequately publicized before enforcement.

     
    Comments
      
      MumblesBadly: I hear you Druff, loud and clear! Definitely challenge that ticket!

  12. #152
    Hurricane Expert tgull's Avatar
    Reputation
    410
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Jerry Got Game
    Posts
    4,744
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nunbeater View Post
    BUT GUYS WHAT IF THEY MADE A SUPER SECRET LAW WHERE YOU CANT PICK YOUR NOSE WHILE DRIVING

    literally arguing with a four year old
    Sorry that you lack the ability to understand the point that new traffic laws need to be adequately publicized before enforcement.
    Druff, question if you got a flat tire on a busy highway with your young son in say a rain storm, and were stranded there for an hour, would you want a law that compelled people to make every effort to move over one lane? You'd be scared shitless as Semis were one foot away from your rear view mirror at 70mph.

    If you decided to protest this in court, the judge would literally laugh you out of the courtroom.

    Believe it or not, the law exists not to make a couple hundred bucks a day from selfish drivers, it's there to prevent people from getting killed.

  13. #153
    Platinum Jayjami's Avatar
    Reputation
    879
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    South Lake Tahoe
    Posts
    3,164
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nunbeater View Post
    BUT GUYS WHAT IF THEY MADE A SUPER SECRET LAW WHERE YOU CANT PICK YOUR NOSE WHILE DRIVING

    literally arguing with a four year old
    Sorry that you lack the ability to understand the point that new traffic laws need to be adequately publicized before enforcement.
    Bullshit. Driving is a privilege Druff. It is your responsibility to know the rules of the road. The laws are “adequately published” in the code of regulations. When I go hunting, it is my responsibility to keep abreast of the current bag limits, etc. It’s not an excuse that “there is some new law I didn’t know about”.

  14. #154
    Canadrunk limitles's Avatar
    Reputation
    1650
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    In Todd's head
    Posts
    17,648
    Blog Entries
    1
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by David USF View Post

    You don't get it. It's not because of drivers acting unsafely. It's also about the action on the shoulder.
    If one is driving safely in the right lane, they are not creating a danger for those on the shoulder. I have never once veered out of my lane on the highway and hit another car or anything else, in my 31 years of driving. NHP officers are NOT standing on the driver's side, as per department policy.

    So, yes, it is about driving safely, and I was creating no danger for anyone.


    Quote Originally Posted by David USF
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff
    I think it's even more bullshit to station multiple cars on the shoulder to specifically nail people for this as part of a trap.
    It's indeed BS, but that's not always the case. Good luck proving it.
    I can't prove it, and in fact that's irrelevant in court. The court does not care if a driver is ensnared in a traffic trap -- only whether or not the ticket itself should have been written. However, I stated it's a trap because this is a really nasty way to raise revenue, given that 71% of drivers don't know about this law, and that it wasn't a law when most drivers got licensed.


    Quote Originally Posted by David USF

    How well publicized do you want it to be? There are many other laws that are not "well publicized". I heard about this law when it was passed in CA. It was also publicized at the start of the next year (under the news category of "new laws") and right before it went into effect. In addition to the electronic signs, there are also signs posted periodically on the side of the road stating "Move over or slow down for workers or emergency vehicles". This law also applies to other government vehicles such as Caltrans, not just police/fire dept.

    Just pay the damn ticket and go to traffic school, and move on.
    If 71% of drivers don't know about it, then they've done a poor job publicizing it.

    Take the seatbelt law, by contrast. I bet almost every driver knows about the law to wear your seatbelt, because that has always been well publicized. Even 25+ years after the law was passed, you still see "Click It or Ticket" signs on the highway reminding you that it's actually the law.

    "Move Over for Stopped Emergency Vehicles" does not mean you'll get a ticket for not doing so, and it's not even clear what that exactly means, if you're not already aware of the law.

    I don't want to waste traffic school on this. Beyond it being extra expense and a pain in the ass, this also uses up my "one time" for traffic school until early 2021.

    As I said, the court involved is known for reductions and changing to parking violations, so that's probably what will happen.
    Name:  move.png
Views: 215
Size:  422.7 KB

    Good luck defining that as a temporary sign. I think they build that for drivers, or at least attentive, critical thinking motorists

    The Click it Campaign also appeared on electronic signs and it is hugely aided by
    a seat belt warning signal that won't quit till you get pulled over.

    You lack the ability to see the truth over anything that negatively affects you
    Last edited by limitles; 07-19-2019 at 09:31 AM.

  15. #155
    Gold Kuntmissioner's Avatar
    Reputation
    419
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Savin Hill
    Posts
    1,408
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Name:  20190720_080928.jpg
Views: 287
Size:  3.75 MB

  16. #156
    Rest In Peace
    Reputation
    142
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    930
    Load Metric
    65695198
    I shall add my 2 cents... While as a regular cross country driver, many States have signs upon entering that state you must move over...I do always as force of habit ,also if i see a semi or any vehicles I switch, i always do..my way. Alas,I did NOT know it was a LAW in NV until just now. Sound's like you might get it reduced. The Man prob saw you switch to the cleared right side and figured you a wisenheimer. When i get a ticket i always feel it was a entrapment anyways.

  17. #157
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayjami View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    Sorry that you lack the ability to understand the point that new traffic laws need to be adequately publicized before enforcement.
    Bullshit. Driving is a privilege Druff. It is your responsibility to know the rules of the road. The laws are “adequately published” in the code of regulations. When I go hunting, it is my responsibility to keep abreast of the current bag limits, etc. It’s not an excuse that “there is some new law I didn’t know about”.
    Hunting bag limits are easy to look up (I'm assuming), and that's a single issue.

    New obscure traffic laws would be impossible to keep track of unless they are publicized. Sure, they can enforce them without publicizing them, but it's a dirty thing to do.

    "Driving is a privilege" is another idiotic trite phrase people like to trot out (similar to "Ignorance of the law is no excuse"), which doesn't really answer anything.

    It's a privilege in that it's not an actual human right and you need to meet a certain set of basic requirements in order to be licensed to do it. It's not a privilege in the sense that it's something handed out to the chosen few, who need to be thankful they got it.

    It's a very basic element of adult life, and there should be a reasonable expectation of at least some level of fair treatment to drivers by the government.

    This is a bullshit law which isn't helping anything (see previous posts on this thread), and it's so poorly publicized and understood that 71% of drivers still don't know about it, even over a decade after it was passed in those states.

    And now it's being used to raise money off the backs of those who are otherwise driving safely.

    Pardon me if I think that's a bunch of crap.

  18. #158
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10110
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,627
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Kuntmissioner View Post
    Name:  20190720_080928.jpg
Views: 287
Size:  3.75 MB

    That's great. They need a campaign like that in California and Nevada.

    Instead, we sometimes get a temporary sign on the highway which says "move over or slow down for stopped emergency vehicles", which is NOT the same thing as saying, "You'll get a ticket for driving in the right lane at the speed limit if there's an emergency vehicle on the side".

    At least this sign says "It's the law".

    If this were just me somehow being ignorant to it, I might concede that perhaps I should have known, and perhaps the friends I asked were just coincidentally equally ignorant to something known by most.

    However, given that only 29% knew it was the law in a poll, obviously this hasn't been publicized well enough, and they shouldn't be handing out tickets for it.

  19. #159
    Platinum
    Reputation
    997
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    4,184
    Load Metric
    65695198
    This just in:

    An artists rendition of Druff arguing his points on PFA in the year 2119 (colorized)

    Name:  a-skeleton-at-a-keyboard-with-a-real-mouse_sobdoyhdp_thumbnail-full01.png
Views: 198
Size:  1.70 MB

  20. #160
    Mad Neg Repper 1marley1's Avatar
    Reputation
    -90
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    The Wu
    Posts
    412
    Load Metric
    65695198
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kuntmissioner View Post
    Name:  20190720_080928.jpg
Views: 287
Size:  3.75 MB

    Only 29% knew it was the law in a poll, obviously this hasn't been publicized well enough, and they shouldn't be handing out tickets for it.

    Except the stupid poll you keep citing is from 2007 regarding a law that was new at the time. The move over law has now been on the books, promoted & enforced for a decade plus since.

    Find a new poll or shut the fuck up.

     
    Comments
      
      MumblesBadly: Going for the double hat trick???

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Jared Bleznick banned for life from WSOP, then unbanned days later?
    By DonkCrusher in forum Scams, Scandals, and Shadiness
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 10-14-2021, 07:14 PM
  2. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 12-02-2017, 12:08 PM
  3. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-24-2016, 10:42 PM
  4. An email I received regarding Bitcoin fraudster attempts on 5dimes
    By BeerAndPoker in forum Scams, Scandals, and Shadiness
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-05-2015, 07:41 AM
  5. Feedback received from visitors to this site
    By Dan Druff in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-03-2014, 12:03 PM