States being held hostage for federal funds is a fault of the state’s not insisting on maintaining state sovereignity. This also has nothing to do with municipal or state revenue generation.
The concept that there is state sovereignity was proven false over a century ago.
How would preventing convicted felons from driving be a matter of safety?
In the USA, it is not illegal to operate a radar detector for us ordinary drivers, except in two places: I think Virginia and DC. (It is illegal in all 50 states for truckers)
Yeah, I remember hearing about “administrative hearings” between the cop and driver, where you give him a small amount of money and the ticket goes away.
First of all, it is the police that are monitoring us with their radar guns.
I agree.
You assume that’s the only purpose of a radar detector. I don’t use it for that purpose.
Correct. This is why towns and cities push the police to raise revenue. Police are a fixed cost. They need to make money off the police.
In order for them to do so, they would need a large amount of distance. This is not something they could do hidden behind a bush or billboard as they do.
I agree.
If police hide behind billboards or bushes, what are they afraid of? Why won’t they show themselves in public while doing this monitoring?
Oh wait. You know the same standards don’t apply to the government that apply to us. We ordinary folks are evil while the government is holy. We are guilty until proven innocent remember
All they need is 2 fixed points. All that they need to do is time how long it takes you to pass said points. If they know that x distance takes y seconds at maxim legal speed, they know that any faster warrants a ticket. One quick calculation will tell them exactly how fast you were travelling. Its pretty easy for anyone who has a grasp of basic algebra.
Yes, it requires two points.
Thoeretically, any distance would work. In practice, lets see, 60 mph = 1 mile/min =5280 ft/min = 88 fps. 1f the officer would find 2 points, say, 100 feet apart (not very far) would pass the 2nd point 1.14 seconds after passing the first. If the car takes less than 1.14 seconds by a significant amount, then they would be speeding. For example, if the car passed the second point in .8 seconds, that would translate to 125 fps=1.42 miles/min=85 mph. Of course this method would work best with officers working in tandem, and also only works, due to human error in the timing with people who are speeding significantly. Radar is much more effective.
apples and oranges.
They are the same. Both are methods used to stop people from breaking the law. I think what it comes down to, is that people are just refuse to submit to authority. You resent being told how fast you can drive. You can pretend that it is about “govermnet surveillance” but at the end of the day it is rebellion, pure and simple.
If you would read the past posts you would see that they were about those with multiple Driving Under the Influence convictions, not felons in general. Those who have shown the criminal want to drive while drunk/stoned/whatever can be prevented from driving for the most part. Nothing can be prevented 100% of the time.
No, they are not.
Genocide has been used as a method to stop people from breaking the law. I doubt you’d be promoting that. Governments have used lots of morally illict means to make sure people don’t break the law.
Ad hominem attack, based on no information that substantiates your claim. I don’t speed, I’ve always been the guy in the right lane doing the limit. I have no problem with reasonable speed limits. Most are.
You accuse all police of being greedy. You seem to think Catholics have no responsibility to submit to legitimite authority. The radar detector was designed for one use and one use alone: to enable people to break the law. If submission to legitimite authority is “idolatry” then you have a misunderstanding of idolatry. I do not worship the government, I give it the respect and submission it is due. There are no unjust speeding laws. Please explain how they are unjust. A police officer monitoring traffic is in no way a violation of anyones rights. I am sick of the rediculous complex people have that “freedom” means being able to do whatever you want, and no one can say anything about it. I again assert that if you do not speed, as you suggest, but I do not believe, then you have no need for a device designed to assist in circumvebting the law. Furthermore by contesting that policwe have no right to survaillance, but privat individuals do makes no sense. You are giving individuals more authority than the government to which you are to submit. Police use of radar is not a violation of probable cause. If you are driving, there is reason to believe you might be speeding, as most motorists do from time to time.
I am pretty sure that anything against the law is a crime. I mean job applications ask something like “Have you ever been convicted of a crime. other that minor traffic violations?” If minor traffic violations were not a crime, they would not need to be excluded. THe excuses for disobedience to legitimate authority boggle my mind…
Speeding is technically a crime. Something is a crime if its illegal. Since speeding is illegal, its a crime.