Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory

CarSpace | Forums | Answers | Blogs | Photos | Videos | Guides | People

Photo Radar

1788 messages, Last post on Nov 14, 2009 at 3:43 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Safe Driving

Outline

Messages Page 106 of 180: 1; ...; 103; 104; 105; 106; 107; 108; 109; ...; 180; Prev; Next; Last

#1044 of 1788 Here is a survey on VMT open right now. by vcheng Feb 20, 2009 (9:00 am)
Please voice your opinion WHATEVER IT MAY BE, but please participate in this MSNBC survey: http://www.newsvine.com/_question/2009/02/20/2457315-what-do-you-think-about-tax- - ing-miles-driven-instead-of-the-current-gasoline-tax-system
#1045 of 1788 Re: Police .... [oldfarmer50] by vcheng Feb 20, 2009 (9:03 am)
Replying to: oldfarmer50 (Feb 20, 2009 8:58 am) I will proceed no matter what, but I will request all, including you, to increase their participation too. I am clear in my thoughts and firm in my beliefs, but I do know I am not the only wise person on earth (although my kids tend to remind me that I like to think that from time to time).
#1046 of 1788 by timadams Feb 20, 2009 (10:19 am)
"Won't tell the police who was driving your car? Is that "obstruction"? That in itself should get you arrested." Absolutely not. It is up to the state to PROVE guilt, not the defendants to prove innocence or rat someone else out. Like I said previously, the biggest problem with photo enforcement is that it doesn't prove who was driving. There are several other problems, as well, but that is probably the main one from a legal standpoint. Replies to this message: vcheng (Feb 20, 2009 10:26 am) xrunner2 (Feb 20, 2009 10:30 am) vcheng (Feb 20, 2009 10:35 am) kernick (Feb 20, 2009 2:04 pm)
#1047 of 1788 Re: [timadams] by vcheng Feb 20, 2009 (10:26 am)
Replying to: timadams (Feb 20, 2009 10:19 am) Well then how about VMT as part of OBD-3, coupled with a swipe card so that the driver is identified at all times, and then automatically billed for road use and any other infarctions that he/she may commit at all time while driving the vehicle? At least top speed can be governed to be below or at the speed limit for those particular GPS co-ordinates at all times.
#1048 of 1788 Re: [timadams] by xrunner2 Feb 20, 2009 (10:30 am)
Replying to: timadams (Feb 20, 2009 10:19 am) Rat someone out? Absolutely. First read them the riot act for violating the law in "your" car, and then, turn them in. Anyone violating laws in a borrowed car is undeserving of harboring/protecting or sympathy. Replies to this message: vcheng (Feb 20, 2009 10:35 am) kernick (Feb 20, 2009 2:04 pm)
#1049 of 1788 Re: [xrunner2] by vcheng Feb 20, 2009 (10:35 am)
Replying to: xrunner2 (Feb 20, 2009 10:30 am) xrunner2: Absolutely a noble sentiment. However, the Constitution places the responsibility on the law enforcement agency, not the citizen. Of course a citizen may be idealistic enough to do that anyway, and that would be perfectly acceptable. However, not everybody might be as noble, and thus we need a system that works for all shades of opinion and character, under processes defined by the Constitution. Well, at least that is my opinion only, which I am perfectly happy to let you voice your diasgreement, or otherwise, with.
#1050 of 1788 Re: Let me be more clear: [xrunner2] by fintail Feb 20, 2009 (10:41 am)
Replying to: xrunner2 (Feb 20, 2009 5:43 am) Obstruction of what? Certainly not "justice", as Orwellian surveillance cameras are not "justice" in any way shape or form. Obstruction of overpaid underworked public servants collecting taxes to benefit their poorly planned organizations and irresponsible well-connected crony capitalist camera operators, maybe? Replies to this message: vcheng (Feb 20, 2009 10:43 am) fintail (Feb 20, 2009 10:52 am) vcheng (Feb 20, 2009 10:58 am) and 7 more... xrunner2 (Feb 20, 2009 10:46 am) vcheng (Feb 20, 2009 10:49 am) fintail (Feb 20, 2009 10:54 am) xrunner2 (Feb 20, 2009 11:04 am) and 1 more... oldfarmer50 (Feb 20, 2009 12:36 pm) fintail (Feb 20, 2009 1:11 pm)
#1051 of 1788 Re: Let me be more clear: [fintail] by vcheng Feb 20, 2009 (10:43 am)
Replying to: fintail (Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am) What about obstruction of the will of the Government? Surely that is a crime under some circumstances? Replies to this message: fintail (Feb 20, 2009 10:52 am) vcheng (Feb 20, 2009 10:58 am) fintail (Feb 20, 2009 11:24 am) and 6 more...
#1052 of 1788 Re: Let me be more clear: [fintail] by xrunner2 Feb 20, 2009 (10:46 am)
Replying to: fintail (Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am) Big question is if any poster here would turn in fin if he was nabbed by photo radar in the car you borrowed to him for a day. Replies to this message: vcheng (Feb 20, 2009 10:49 am) fintail (Feb 20, 2009 10:54 am) xrunner2 (Feb 20, 2009 11:04 am) fintail (Feb 20, 2009 11:18 am) oldfarmer50 (Feb 20, 2009 12:36 pm) fintail (Feb 20, 2009 1:11 pm)
#1053 of 1788 Re: Let me be more clear: [xrunner2] by vcheng Feb 20, 2009 (10:49 am)
Replying to: xrunner2 (Feb 20, 2009 10:46 am) Nope, that is not the question at all. The discussion should remain focussed on the issue of photo radar, and not the individual making the post. And no, I am not a moderator, so please feel free to ignore me.

Messages Page 106 of 180: 1; ...; 103; 104; 105; 106; 107; 108; 109; ...; 180; Prev; Next; Last

To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Search Forums

Browse by Vehicle

Ask the Community

See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic

View All Topics

Today's Chats

Chat Schedule