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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
On Dec 21, 9:26*pm, Harry K > wrote:
> > *It is hardly news but it does prove the point. *Follow any driver > long enough any a cop can find a legal reason to pull him over. Define "long enough". > Even > if not there is the old, *reliable > 'wandering in lane'. *"I saw him over the centerline/fogline twice in > a 1/2 mile". *Just try to prove you didn't. You don't have to "prove" it, only create reasonable doubt. I don't weave in my lane. I can explain the techniques I use to maintain the center of my lane, and I have video as evidence it works. That was the unstated point of the first video I posted here, and not a single r.a.d. expert noticed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q1WTgKD4gE Of course cops don't operate any better than the average idiot (I'd say the "driving" in this video is worse than average). They don't have any more education or training, and they're pretty ****ing unlikely to get a ticket. The average motorist seems likewise to have substantial difficulty maintaining their lane, which has -got- to be the most frequent violation after following too closely, which are the main criteria I use to argue they shouldn't be allowed to motor at all, and it would be unwise to provide them higher speed limits. ----- - gpsman |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 21:14:26 -0800 (PST), gpsman wrote:
> On Dec 21, 9:26*pm, Harry K > wrote: >> >> *It is hardly news but it does prove the point. *Follow any driver >> long enough any a cop can find a legal reason to pull him over. > > Define "long enough". > >> Even >> if not there is the old, *reliable >> 'wandering in lane'. *"I saw him over the centerline/fogline twice in >> a 1/2 mile". *Just try to prove you didn't. > > You don't have to "prove" it, only create reasonable doubt. > > I don't weave in my lane. > > I can explain the techniques I use to maintain the center of my lane, > and I have video as evidence it works. That was the unstated point of > the first video I posted here, and not a single r.a.d. expert noticed. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q1WTgKD4gE > > Of course cops don't operate any better than the average idiot (I'd > say the "driving" in this video is worse than average). They don't > have any more education or training, and they're pretty ****ing > unlikely to get a ticket. > > The average motorist seems likewise to have substantial difficulty > maintaining their lane, which has -got- to be the most frequent > violation after following too closely, which are the main criteria I > use to argue they shouldn't be allowed to motor at all, and it would > be unwise to provide them higher speed limits. > ----- > > - gpsman There was a county cop in one of the southern states that liked to stop travellers and he had all kinds of excuses for the stop. From speeding, to weaving, to what ever he felt like. Until a news camera crew caught the ******* on video. He didn't know he was doing his song and dance routine in front of video cameras. The evidence was shown to the sheriff. The cop was fired. A month later the same cop had on a new uniform in a neighboring county. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
On Dec 21, 10:26*pm, Nate Nagel > wrote:
> > The investigator who created the video of officers, Nancy Smith, told > the judge that it was more difficult than she expected to get video, > since officers often exceeded the speed limit or sat idle for long > periods of time. > > No ****....! *she actually expected cops to not speed? *Where the hell > has she been living? Maybe she's an average motorist, who only notices the vehicle to her front, and then only then when it is within 50-100' /crash imminent, or she's a good motorist who has no need to make note of cops/cop driving. Maybe she lives in the city and doesn't drive. ----- - gpsman |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
On Dec 22, 9:14*pm, gpsman > wrote:
> On Dec 21, 9:26*pm, Harry K > wrote: > > > > > *It is hardly news but it does prove the point. *Follow any driver > > long enough any a cop can find a legal reason to pull him over. > > Define "long enough". > As long as he wants? Did you have a point? > > Even > > if not there is the old, *reliable > > 'wandering in lane'. *"I saw him over the centerline/fogline twice in > > a 1/2 mile". *Just try to prove you didn't. > > You don't have to "prove" it, only create reasonable doubt. > LOL and you think the judge will take _your_ word over the cop's. You must be living in a fantasy world. <snip OT> Harry K |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
On Dec 22, 9:18*pm, richard > wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 21:14:26 -0800 (PST), gpsman wrote: > > On Dec 21, 9:26 pm, Harry K > wrote: > > >> It is hardly news but it does prove the point. Follow any driver > >> long enough any a cop can find a legal reason to pull him over. > > > Define "long enough". > > >> Even > >> if not there is the old, reliable > >> 'wandering in lane'. "I saw him over the centerline/fogline twice in > >> a 1/2 mile". Just try to prove you didn't. > > > You don't have to "prove" it, only create reasonable doubt. > > > I don't weave in my lane. > > > I can explain the techniques I use to maintain the center of my lane, > > and I have video as evidence it works. *That was the unstated point of > > the first video I posted here, and not a single r.a.d. expert noticed. > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q1WTgKD4gE > > > Of course cops don't operate any better than the average idiot (I'd > > say the "driving" in this video is worse than average). *They don't > > have any more education or training, and they're pretty ****ing > > unlikely to get a ticket. > > > The average motorist seems likewise to have substantial difficulty > > maintaining their lane, which has -got- to be the most frequent > > violation after following too closely, which are the main criteria I > > use to argue they shouldn't be allowed to motor at all, and it would > > be unwise to provide them higher speed limits. > > *----- > > > - gpsman > > There was a county cop in one of the southern states that liked to stop > travellers and he had all kinds of excuses for the stop. From speeding, to > weaving, to what ever he felt like. > > Until a news camera crew caught the ******* on video. He didn't know he was > doing his song and dance routine in front of video cameras. > > The evidence was shown to the sheriff. The cop was fired. A month later the > same cop had on a new uniform in a neighboring county.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - When I was dispatching for the county we had a town cop who played the game. Made soem fantastic busts. Would spot a 'suspicious vehicle' coming through towna and follow to get PC for a stop. One while I was on duty was a great drug/theft case. He followed him and stopped him out of town "crossed center line". Oddly that was almost to a foot at the limit of his 5 mile allowance for makeing a stop out of city limits. Later he was proven to have lied on a felony case, reamed out by the judge in open court, case tossed (it was a good one). From then on, he couldn't get a case into Superior Court unless he had at least 5 witnesses and one of them had to be the Pope. He "retired" due to 'injuries suffered on the job'. Harry K |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
On Dec 23, 11:43*am, Harry K > wrote:
> On Dec 22, 9:14*pm, gpsman > wrote: > > On Dec 21, 9:26*pm, Harry K > wrote: > > > > *It is hardly news but it does prove the point. *Follow any driver > > > long enough any a cop can find a legal reason to pull him over. > > > Define "long enough". > > As long as he wants? *Did you have a point? Yeah. I don't wander in my lane, so "long enough" would be too long to maintain the interest of anyone. > > > Even > > > if not there is the old, *reliable > > > 'wandering in lane'. *"I saw him over the centerline/fogline twice in > > > a 1/2 mile". *Just try to prove you didn't. > > > You don't have to "prove" it, only create reasonable doubt. > > LOL and you think the judge will take _your_ word over the cop's. *You > must be living in a fantasy world. My chances of being cited are slim, probably not even by mistake, or by someone just being a dick. I know what to say to cops to avoid being cited for minor offenses. Plus, I have a CDL. Rumor has it cops tend to be reluctant to write truckers for minor offenses in a 4-wheeler. ----- - gpsman |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
On Dec 23, 12:14*am, gpsman > wrote:
> > I can explain the techniques I use to maintain the center of my lane, > and I have video as evidence it works. *That was the unstated point of > the first video I posted here, and not a single r.a.d. expert noticed.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q1WTgKD4gE LOL! That's because not a single person here watches your dopey, boring videos. We all just laugh that you actually spend time filming (no doubt over-and-over again until you finally manage to get everything right :-) & uploading videos that no one cares about. It's kind of sad really, but mostly just funny. :-) And then, as if your videos aren't boring enough already, they contain "unstated points"? How is anyone supposed to pick up on an "unstated point" when they're asleep? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
In article
>, gpsman > wrote: > On Dec 21, 9:26*pm, Harry K > wrote: > > > > *It is hardly news but it does prove the point. *Follow any driver > > long enough any a cop can find a legal reason to pull him over. > > Define "long enough". > > > Even > > if not there is the old, *reliable > > 'wandering in lane'. *"I saw him over the centerline/fogline twice in > > a 1/2 mile". *Just try to prove you didn't. > > You don't have to "prove" it, only create reasonable doubt. > > I don't weave in my lane. Of course you do from time to time, you're not a machine... > > I can explain the techniques I use to maintain the center of my lane, > and I have video as evidence it works. That was the unstated point of > the first video I posted here, and not a single r.a.d. expert noticed. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q1WTgKD4gE Sorry, but you quite clearly move from side to side in that video. All you need to do is watch where in relation to your car the white line disappears. > > Of course cops don't operate any better than the average idiot (I'd > say the "driving" in this video is worse than average). They don't > have any more education or training, and they're pretty ****ing > unlikely to get a ticket. > > The average motorist seems likewise to have substantial difficulty > maintaining their lane, which has -got- to be the most frequent > violation after following too closely, which are the main criteria I > use to argue they shouldn't be allowed to motor at all, and it would > be unwise to provide them higher speed limits. > ----- > > - gpsman -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
In article
>, gpsman > wrote: > On Dec 23, 11:43*am, Harry K > wrote: > > On Dec 22, 9:14*pm, gpsman > wrote: > > > On Dec 21, 9:26*pm, Harry K > wrote: > > > > > > *It is hardly news but it does prove the point. *Follow any driver > > > > long enough any a cop can find a legal reason to pull him over. > > > > > Define "long enough". > > > > As long as he wants? *Did you have a point? > > Yeah. I don't wander in my lane, so "long enough" would be too long > to maintain the interest of anyone. You wandered in your lane several times in the first minute of your video... > > > > > Even > > > > if not there is the old, *reliable > > > > 'wandering in lane'. *"I saw him over the centerline/fogline twice in > > > > a 1/2 mile". *Just try to prove you didn't. > > > > > You don't have to "prove" it, only create reasonable doubt. > > > > LOL and you think the judge will take _your_ word over the cop's. *You > > must be living in a fantasy world. > > My chances of being cited are slim, probably not even by mistake, or > by someone just being a dick. I know what to say to cops to avoid > being cited for minor offenses. > > Plus, I have a CDL. Rumor has it cops tend to be reluctant to write > truckers for minor offenses in a 4-wheeler. > ----- > > - gpsman -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Turned the tables on cops
On Dec 27, 4:32*pm, Alan Baker > wrote:
> > *gpsman > wrote: > > > > I don't weave in my lane. > > Of course you do from time to time, you're not a machine... He is, however, an idiot. :-) > Sorry, but you quite clearly move from side to side in that video. All > you need to do is watch where in relation to your car the white line > disappears. First of all congratulations on getting through more than 5 seconds of one of his videos without falling asleep. You've accomplished what few men dare dream of. :-) But more to the point. We all have come across morons like gpsman in our day-to-day lives. People who think they're the bestest drivers in the whole wide world. They're so convinced of this that they mention it at every conceivable opportunity, even crowbaring it into conversations out of the blue. Some of them are so convinced they're #1 that they do things that you and I know are really out there -- like, for example, spending time filming themselves driving around sidestreets at the speed limit for 8 minutes and uploading it to the Internet. You know -- truly wacky behavior. :-) The presumption behind these videos is that anyone who watches them will SURELY be impressed by the driver's skills. (After all, how could anyone not be? Such an outcome is inconceivable to the driver.) Behind this is the more broad assumption that the Internet even gives a ****. And finally, these videos also allow the driver to respond to threads like these and say "Hey look at me I can do it the bestest and I gotz the evidence right here on my Youtube channel so check this out baby I'm number 1!!!" And this last one is where gpsman really shines: Sitting back and waiting for threads on Usenet where he can swoop in, post a link to one of his dopey videos, and pretend that it's actually relevant to the issue at hand. You gotta give him credit. Clearly there isn't much else going on in his life, so let's let him have this, okay? All he's even wanted is this. :-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Councilwoman Y. Laketa Cole calls the cops on the cops | gpsman | Driving | 1 | May 25th 09 02:24 PM |