***worst Traffic Violation Thread***

[SlartyBartFast]

zoom

Wow. People *****ing about getting caught for traffic violations, I'm bright enough to question the "coolness" of speeding or confront the morons for complaining about getting caught and the only other people with their panties in a twist are the grammar police.

[Lohman446]

Not my story, but pretty much tops everything:

Hartford rocks!

Play by play:

Man gets drunk.
Man steals girlfriend's car while girlfriend is getting children out of the back seat.
Woman can't get baby out.
Man runs over girlfriend's foot, drives off.
Man drives back, gets stopped by a man and a woman who saw him drive off earlier.
Woman reaches into car window to turn off ignition.
Man rolls up window, drives off with woman.
Woman jumps onto hood of car.
Man drives down I-84 with woman attached to hood (estimated speed: 70mph)
People realize a man driving down the highway with a woman on the hood of his car is generally a bad thing, and make him pull over.
Police come, man takes off again, this time sans woman and baby.
Girlfriend blames the woman trying to save her baby for "interfering."



They attacked him. To save her baby.

You sure its not your story?

[SlartyBartFast]

reading comprehension, i said it wasnt me. considering the guy is 40-50, it could have been some time ago.

Not if it was KPH. If was long enough ago, $Can were worth more than $US too.

[sean33]

our school is split into "houses", hes like the principal/administrator for 1/4th of the school.

and their all *****es..

[SlartyBartFast]

i said 25 MPH isnt unreasonable, thats all.

Well, that's all fine and good if you want to debate the merits of various speed limts.
But is worthless when discussing actual violations given out.

[Lohman446]

Well, that's all fine and good if you want to debate the merits of various speed limts.
But is worthless when discussing actual violations given out.

Unless one wants to get into a morality argument centered around ethical hedonism rather than a discussion on legal basis.

[SlartyBartFast]

Unless one wants to get into a morality argument centered around ethical hedonism rather than a discussion on legal basis.

Alright smart guy...

http://www.utilitarianism.com/hedonism.html

Ethical hedonism is the view that our fundamental moral obligation is to maximize pleasure or happiness. Ethical hedonism is most associated with the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus (342-270 BCE.) who taught that our life's goal should be to minimize pain and maximize pleasure. In fact, all of our actions should have that aim:
We recognize pleasure as the first good innate in us, and from pleasure we begin every act of choice and avoidance, and to pleasure we return again, using the feeling as the standard by which we judge every good.
[Letter to Menoeceus]

So, where does your quest for pleasure end and the protection of others pleasure begin?

Back to the posted speed limit. While it interferes with YOUR pleasure, it protects the pleasure of others (safety of their children, their safe use use of the raod, not wanting to live on a drag strip).

[Lohman446]

Alright smart guy...

http://www.utilitarianism.com/hedonism.html

So, where does your quest for pleasure end and the protection of others pleasure begin?

Back to the posted speed limit. While it interferes with YOUR pleasure, it protects the pleasure of others (safety of their children, their safe use use of the raod, not wanting to live on a drag strip).

I know full well what ethical hedonism is, it was a favorite argument of mine in college. That said it tends to not do well for an orderly society. Would not logic demand that a vehicles stopping distance should determine that max. safe speed, and not an arbitrary number. Why is the speed limit the same for a 1978 Chevy K1500 fitted with poor tires and a 2004 AWD Porsche fitted with good high performance tires? Stopping distance arguments, well I understand the base are based on averages rather than carefully considered individual standards... Ethical hedonism demands that one considers the impact of their actions on others - it does not demand a figure arrived at in a way that does not truly reflect them.

Unfortunately, in a society, ethical hedonism arguments tend to fall apart. If I take pleasure in smoking does that trump your right to clean air? Or, if I decide to partake in whippets, does that trump your right to have an undepleted ozone layer (assuming science is right on the effect of aerosols on the ozone)? Well the arguments for any individual system (for instance stopping distance Vs speed as determining factors) can be made, they end up with an impractical solution and there are enough counterexamples that tend to only further muddy the waters.

[SlartyBartFast]

I know full well what ethical hedonism is, it was a favorite argument of mine in college. That said it tends to not do well for an orderly society.

Actually I'd argue that your describing Ethical Anarchy not Hedonism.

Would not logic demand that a vehicles stopping distance should determine that max. safe speed, and not an arbitrary number.

Actually, all vehicles stop in the same distance.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/crstp.html

And the numbers are rarely arbitrary. Generally it's stopping distance, road size, number of access points, and other variously weighted factors. Here's how the speed limit is determined/justified in Quebec. Each other jurisdiction will have a similar calculations/justifications.

http://www.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/en/securite/routiere/index.asp

Of course, "arbitrary" numbers often arise because in a particular area the local populace wants to have traffic slowed down, so 5-10 mph/kph are shaved off the general code value by local by-law.

[bofh]

...Or, if I decide to partake in whippets, does that trump your right to have an undepleted ozone layer (assuming science is right on the effect of aerosols on the ozone)?

Not to be a fact nazi, but whippets are not paint huffing, Whippets are actually N2O, and don't contain any Ozone destroying aerosols.

So, if you do partake of whippets, the ozone is not getting depleted.

And to stay on topic. 141mph (GPS) on PA turnpike. And 136mph (GPS) on I80. Yes, I was testing the top speed.

Only the second one actually passed a police officer. Which then pulled over the yellow mustang in front of me.

The worst I got pulled over for was 40 in a 25, which was bogus, since 100 yards before the street was a 40. (and not a school zone)

Now, back to complaining about school zones.

[PumpPlayer]

$100 parking ticket for being in a 7AM-4PM only spot until 4:03 PM.

Never any moving violations.

[Lohman446]

Not to be a fact nazi, but whippets are not paint huffing, Whippets are actually N2O, and don't contain any Ozone destroying aerosols.

I'm going to take it as a good thing that I am not into the finer points of mind altering chemical substance use.

[Lohman446]

Actually, all vehicles stop in the same distance.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/crstp.html.

I read the link and I simply do not buy that. Car and Driver, Road and Track, Motortrend etc. all test stopping distances (not in theory, but by actualy testing) and there are notable differences in them from vehicle to vehicle, tire to tire, and brake system to brake system

[Lohman446]

Actually I'd argue that your describing Ethical Anarchy not Hedonism.

Doesn't ethical hedonism lend itself towards anarchy?

[bofh]

Actually, all vehicles stop in the same distance.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/crstp.html.

That page is actually wrong on at least one part of their formula.

There are lots of factors that causes cars to have different stopping distances. But, for equal cars, (ie. all cars in good repair) the differences should be pretty miminal. I'd guess under 20%