A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Speed limit vigilante sent to jail



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 29th 06, 02:14 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail

A man took offense at another driver's speed and decided
to teach him a lesson by cutting him off and driving slowly.
He's going to jail for the crash he caused.

http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...mph-06-28.html

--
John Carr )
Ads
  #2  
Old June 29th 06, 03:35 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail


John F. Carr wrote:
> A man took offense at another driver's speed and decided
> to teach him a lesson by cutting him off and driving slowly.
> He's going to jail for the crash he caused.
>
> http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...mph-06-28.html


This ****er gets only 30 days for PURPOSELY cutting someone off?

Talk about criminal coddling! He should have been charged with 2nd
degree attempted murder.

  #3  
Old June 29th 06, 04:01 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail


John F. Carr wrote:
> A man took offense at another driver's speed and decided
> to teach him a lesson by cutting him off and driving slowly.
> He's going to jail for the crash he caused.
>
> http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...mph-06-28.html
>
> --
> John Carr )


Four weekends in jail and under $3K in fines? Utter and complete
horse****. Now THIS is criminal coddling, to steal a phrase from troll
being.

nate

  #4  
Old June 30th 06, 05:48 AM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail


Arif Khokar wrote:
> [follow-ups set to rec.autos.driving]
>
> wrote:
>
> > Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:

>
> > I'm all for civilians "stopping crime" but I think so called "law
> > abiding drivers" are usually just too inefficient to drive properly and
> > get angry as they get proved the poor driver that they are.
> > Inconsiderate and dumb drivers cause more accidents than they think
> > they supposedly "prevent."

>
> I'd also add "considerate" drivers to the list. These drivers are the
> ones who yield the right of way when they're not supposed to (like
> stopping to let someone take a left turn in front ot them). Drivers
> like these end up causing rear-end crashes by their unexpected stops,
> and they also create clumps of traffic that make it much more difficult
> for others to take turns.
>
> > How many times has someone refused to let you into thier lane even
> > though you ssignal, etc?

>
> Learn to drive. A signal is not a request for someone to let you into
> an adjacent lane and you don't have the right of way. It's your
> responsibility to find a suitable gap, use your signal and switch lanes.
> It's not up to everyone else to accomodate your lack of planning.


Planning? Should you send others a weeks notice in writing? Oh my.

Actually a signal IS a request, not a demand. It signals you want to
or are about to change lanes. Otherwise there would be no reason to
signal if there was always plenty of room. Therefore signals were
developed to help make changing lanes safer. They are not meant to
give inconsiderate drivers notice so they can block the car from
changing lanes. However as a matter of law you do not have to let them
in. I for one, always let those in who wish it. To do so otherwise
risks them getting frustrated and doing things they normally would not
do-this is proven.
So it sounds like you refuse to let someone in, even though you know
they want to change lanes. You actually speed up. Doesn't' t that
tell you something about yourself?

There is no law when multiple lanes merge into one while entering a
bridge that every car must let every other car from a merging lane, in.
Yet almost all drivers do in that circumstance as it is the
considerate thing to do. The exception is people like you.

  #5  
Old June 30th 06, 06:17 AM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail

In article .com>, wrote:
> Planning? Should you send others a weeks notice in writing? Oh my.


Yes, driving properly means planing ahead.

> Actually a signal IS a request, not a demand.


It's neither. It's signaling your intent. Nothing more.

> It signals you want to or are about to change lanes.


And you think others have to bow to your wishes. You're another **** poor
driver who screws things up daily as you expect others to disturb the
flow of traffic for you.

> Otherwise there would be no reason to signal if there was always
> plenty of room.


Signals exist so people know what you're doing. For instance, I'm on a
three lane road. I'm in the right lane and someone is in the left lane.
The middle lane is open. I want to change lanes to the middle lane, so
does the driver in the left lane. If we both do we will crash into each
other. I check and I see his signal is already on. So I stay put and let
him change lanes. I then put on my signal and change lanes behind him.

> So it sounds like you refuse to let someone in, even though you know
> they want to change lanes. You actually speed up. Doesn't' t that
> tell you something about yourself?


No, I drive normally. I don't open nor close gaps. Assholes who drive
like you will then get upset that I didn't make a gap for them. As if
they are somehow more important than everyone else. Not my problem, they
can find a gap. You're probably also one of these drivers who won't take
an existing gap behind someone but will instead demand going in front
because you decided to use your signal.

> There is no law when multiple lanes merge into one while entering a
> bridge that every car must let every other car from a merging lane, in.
> Yet almost all drivers do in that circumstance as it is the
> considerate thing to do. The exception is people like you.


No, what happens is enabling morons stop traffic in the through lane and
let 5 people in from the closing lane. Around here the closing lane moves
much faster than the through lane. The reason is the enablers.



  #6  
Old June 30th 06, 10:37 AM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail

wrote:
> Arif Khokar wrote:
>
>>[follow-ups set to rec.autos.driving]
>>
wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:

>>
>>>I'm all for civilians "stopping crime" but I think so called "law
>>>abiding drivers" are usually just too inefficient to drive properly and
>>>get angry as they get proved the poor driver that they are.
>>>Inconsiderate and dumb drivers cause more accidents than they think
>>>they supposedly "prevent."

>>
>>I'd also add "considerate" drivers to the list. These drivers are the
>>ones who yield the right of way when they're not supposed to (like
>>stopping to let someone take a left turn in front ot them). Drivers
>>like these end up causing rear-end crashes by their unexpected stops,
>>and they also create clumps of traffic that make it much more difficult
>>for others to take turns.
>>
>>
>>>How many times has someone refused to let you into thier lane even
>>>though you ssignal, etc?

>>
>>Learn to drive. A signal is not a request for someone to let you into
>>an adjacent lane and you don't have the right of way. It's your
>>responsibility to find a suitable gap, use your signal and switch lanes.
>> It's not up to everyone else to accomodate your lack of planning.

>
>
> Planning? Should you send others a weeks notice in writing? Oh my.
>
> Actually a signal IS a request, not a demand. It signals you want to
> or are about to change lanes. Otherwise there would be no reason to
> signal if there was always plenty of room. Therefore signals were
> developed to help make changing lanes safer. They are not meant to
> give inconsiderate drivers notice so they can block the car from
> changing lanes. However as a matter of law you do not have to let them
> in. I for one, always let those in who wish it. To do so otherwise
> risks them getting frustrated and doing things they normally would not
> do-this is proven.
> So it sounds like you refuse to let someone in, even though you know
> they want to change lanes. You actually speed up. Doesn't' t that
> tell you something about yourself?
>
> There is no law when multiple lanes merge into one while entering a
> bridge that every car must let every other car from a merging lane, in.
> Yet almost all drivers do in that circumstance as it is the
> considerate thing to do. The exception is people like you.
>


almost all? I think not. The average driver will ride the bumper of
the car in front of him and run you off the road, unless you drive a
bigger, more dented car than he.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
  #7  
Old June 30th 06, 01:46 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail


"John F. Carr" > wrote in message
...
>A man took offense at another driver's speed and decided
> to teach him a lesson by cutting him off and driving slowly.
> He's going to jail for the crash he caused.
>
> http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...mph-06-28.html
>


I don't get this one. I've read it carefully, twice. The speed limit was
wrongfully reduced on a stretch of road, causing traffic (which doesn't
change speed, ever, especially not in response to changing a sign on the
side of the road) to suddenly be WAY over the speed limit, as opposed to
slightly over the speed limit. Someone living on that road (coincidentally,
the idiot who successfully lobbied to have the speed limit reduced) CUTS OFF
another driver, deliberately. The driver who got cut off was probably doing
the 85th percentile speed through the area (But now the 85th is way above
the posted limit). Anyway, the driver who got cut off had his car RUN INTO
by another car, and somehow that caused his car to roll over several times,
resulting in serious injury to the driver who was cut off. An injury
requiring surgery is pretty serious. (granted, it could have been a lot
worse)

At BEST, this is a airtight case of attempted vehicular homicide. It's a
miracle that the driver in the car that was cut off survived this incident.
Rollovers are often fatal.

If I was the DA, I'd probably press for attempted murder second degree. But
oddly, the vigilante was only charged with various misdemeanors.
????????????????????????????????????????? -Dave


  #8  
Old June 30th 06, 01:47 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail


>>
>> http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...mph-06-28.html

>
> This ****er gets only 30 days for PURPOSELY cutting someone off?
>
> Talk about criminal coddling! He should have been charged with 2nd
> degree attempted murder.
>


No ****, if you read the article carefully, you will note that there was
contact between two vehicles before one of them rolled over several times,
and the driver of the rollover vehicle required surgery. Sure sounds like
2nd degree attempted murder to me. -Dave


  #9  
Old June 30th 06, 02:14 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail

In article >,
John F. Carr > wrote:
>A man took offense at another driver's speed and decided
>to teach him a lesson by cutting him off and driving slowly.
>He's going to jail for the crash he caused.
>
>http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...mph-06-28.html


Here is an older story with more detail:
http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...8/mknepola.htm

In New York speed limits between 30 and 55 are typically
based on engineering studies rather than arbitrary political
decisions. It is not clear whether the 40 mile per hour
speed limit in this case was justified.

--
John Carr )
  #10  
Old June 30th 06, 02:40 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Speed limit vigilante sent to jail



>
> Here is an older story with more detail:
> http://www.recordonline.com/archive/...8/mknepola.htm
>
> In New York speed limits between 30 and 55 are typically
> based on engineering studies rather than arbitrary political
> decisions. It is not clear whether the 40 mile per hour
> speed limit in this case was justified.
>
> --
> John Carr )


It's perfectly clear, the 40MPH limit is NOT justified. It was changed in
response to political pressure, with no traffic engineering study.

Unrelated quote from story you just posted:

" Here, though, is a statement to the police from March 4, 2003, from a man
from Warwick:
"(He) was traveling north on Kings Highway . and came upon a vehicle that
was traveling less than 25 mph. (He) said that this backed up traffic and a
line of at least 10 cars behind him started flashing their headlights and
beeping their horns. (He) said the driver of the vehicle going less than 25
mph then stopped his vehicle . then began to drive less than 25 mph again .
then came to a complete stop . an additional two or three more times."
This time, the report states, Officer Bobby Ferrara warned Nepola that
these sorts of "actions could lead to a motor vehicle accident.
"Thomas said that he will comply with the law and not put his safety at
risk in the future," the report says.
Four months later, the speed limit on this stretch of Kings Highway was
dropped from 55 to 40 mph - a result in part to urging from Nepola, who,
police records show, also has called in the past three or so years to
complain about speeding, racing, even the plowing habits of the town's
highway department.
Earlier this year, though, on Jan. 11, a woman from Chester called the
cops and told Officer Janice Oppmann about a car that "pulled out in front
of her and stopped . then started moving very slowly and kept on stopping."
Oppmann ran the plate.
Nepola. "

So this Nepola guy is guilty of 2nd degree attempted murder, and he's
apparently a SERIAL OFFENDER. So why was he only given a slap on the wrist?
Other information in the article you referenced clearly states that this
perp is loaded to the gills, including several multi-million dollar
mansions, one overseas. So what we have here is yet another example of how
rich people are given preferential treatment. He should be in jail. Not
for a few weekends, but for a few years. Oh, and he should clearly lose his
NY driver's license, PERMANENTLY. If not, he's GOING TO (not guessing here)
kill somebody. He damn near succeeded, after several attempts (during
which, the police warned him he was likely to kill somebody, but that didn't
stop him). -Dave


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LIDAR Trial this Week [email protected] Driving 17 April 9th 06 02:44 AM
WE MUST BRING BACK THE 55 MPH SPEED LIMIT Garth Almgren Driving 5 September 6th 05 03:49 AM
More proof that incresed speed does not equal incresed death Bernard Farquart Driving 51 July 7th 05 02:10 PM
Speeding sucks Magnulus Driving 191 April 26th 05 05:21 AM
Orange county, speed limit reduced? Trey BMW 66 December 3rd 04 11:42 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.