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 |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
In article >, dwight wrote:
> "Brent P" > wrote in message > . .. >> In article >, Joe wrote: >>> (Brent P) wrote in >>> : >>> >>><huge snip> >>> >>> OK, Brent, I'll play along. Exactly what is your point in 50 words or >>> less? >> >> Initially? That defining reasonable, normal, and safe behavior illegal has >> negative consquences. One of those negative consquences with regard to >> under posted speed limits is dangerous police chases that can result in >> death or injury. > > The kid was doing 73 in a 55 zone. On a dark night. My point is not specific to this case, but general. > Let's say, for argument, that the speed limit along that stretch was raised > to 70. My money says that this kid would THEN be doing 83, that the police > STILL would have attempted to pull him over, and the he STILL would have > taken off. Obviously you didn't read the cited material. *shrug* > Your argument is moot, if only the numbers are changed. I repeat, speed was > not the mitigating factor here. Reckless driving, reckless endangerment of > those around him, compounded by his idiotic choices once the police lights > went on, all of these things made him a prime target for negative attention > by the authorities. Not purely his speed. by assumption and declaration. That's nice. |
Ads |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
On Thu, 10 May 2007 02:06:16 GMT, CobraJet > wrote:
>In article >, Brent P > wrote: > >> In article >, Joe wrote: >> >> > Nah, the insult was quite appropriate. >> >> Considering your demonstrated level of intelligence, the fact that's all >> you can present is not surprising. >> >> >>> People like me? And you know me how? I called you a freakin' idiot >> >>> because of the nonsense you posted. Unless you start googling my >> >>> past posts, your only frame of reference is that I called you an >> >>> idiot. >> >> >> Nonsense? You mean law, accepted engineering practice, engineering >> >> studies, the federal manual on uniform traffic control devices? >> >> > The nonsense is your interpretation and explanation. >> >> Read it yourself and present your own then. Oh wait, that would actually >> require some brains... much easier to just fling insults instead. >> > > If everyone here has reading comprehension problems, and can do >little more than insult you, then why the hell are you here? Are you a >masochist? > > C'mon, if anyone agreed with you you'd be neutered. He who is flogged by fate... and continues to hang around begging to receive more... is a masochist. Brent met a sadist on the street and begged, "beat me... beat me....", and the sadist replied, "no!" |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
|
#94
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
In article >, Spike wrote:
> We;ve been trying to leave you to your fate but you keep coming back > for more. Coming back requires that one first leave. |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
|
#96
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
In article >, Brent P
> wrote: > In article >, Spike wrote: > > > We;ve been trying to leave you to your fate but you keep coming back > > for more. > > Coming back requires that one first leave. > > Don't you sleep? -- CobraJet |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
"Brent P" > wrote in message
... > In article >, dwight wrote: > >>> I expect none of it to be read and the usual spew to be issued in >>> response. > >> I read all of it, and I repeat - yet again - that I am not arguing >> against >> change. The ONLY point that I've ever made was that what you and I call >> reality are wildly divergent. >> >> I see the sign that says 55, I see the police pulling over seemingly >> random >> speeders, and I see that as the reality. >> >> You pull out all kinds of links to show that all of this is merely >> revenue >> enhancement or links to show how the world SHOULD be, but that is not the >> reality that I see with my own two little beady eyes. > >> I see the sign that says 55. That is my reality. > Some people like being ruled, others resign themselves to it. Slavery > isn't much different. Some slaves like being a slave, others resign > themselves to it. Those of these two mentalities often have negative > reactions to someone in the same situation but doesn't just accept his > lot in life. > > What it comes down to is you don't like someone being uppity and saying > the emperor has no clothes. Oh, boy... Here we go... > It is this basic mentality goes way beyond speed limits. It goes into the > nature of government and wether or not a people remain free. Once you > start accepting rule outside the law, the rule of force, rule by color of > law, by doomsmen, freedom's days are numbered. You just skipped over everything I wrote. > Where else do you just accept this rule by color of law? I am sure it > doesn't start or stop with driving related things. Jet's right. You're paranoid and delusional. > Would you just shrug your shoulders and go off to fight and die in an > illegal war too? At the very least, ADD. Okay. I get it. You're off somewhere in your own little world, and there really is no point in continuing. Thanks, and have a nice day. dwight |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
In article >, Spike wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2007 13:09:15 -0500, > (Brent P) wrote: > >>In article >, dwight wrote: >> > SNIP >> >>It is this basic mentality goes way beyond speed limits. It goes into the >>nature of government and wether or not a people remain free. Once you >>start accepting rule outside the law, the rule of force, rule by color of >>law, by doomsmen, freedom's days are numbered. >>Where else do you just accept this rule by color of law? I am sure it >>doesn't start or stop with driving related things. >>Would you just shrug your shoulders and go off to fight and die in an >>illegal war too? > As a member of the Armed Forces, it is/was not my decision to > determine whether or not a war is "illegal". My duty, and honor, is to > to serve my country. It is my personal ethics which compell me to hold > true to the oath I took when I joined. If that means going off to > fight, then that is my duty. > > It is the President and the Congress who determine whether a war is > legal or not. > > And if I go off to war, as I have done, in service to my country, and > die, I shall not have died in vain. I upheld my honor. What would make > my death in vain is those who cut and run before the job is done. Then > we shall all, all of us who served with honor, will have had our lives > wasted. > I have no idea whether you have ever served your country or just used > the internet to whine about your pet peaves, but, whether you agree or > disagree with armed conflict, you do not have the right to malign > those who serve simply because you believe a war is "illegal". Right > or wrong, the government decided to send the troops. The time for the > government to argue whether a war is legal or illegal is BEFORE the > troops are sent. Once they are sent, the nation should give all the > support they can in a drive for victory. To do any less is a total > diservice to those sent to fight and die. > You crossed the line on this one. Then you lack the basic understanding to even comprehend what has been said. Too bad. So sad. You want to be ruled. I want liberty. That's what it comes down to in the end. Since you won't listen to me, maybe you'll listen to a congressional medal of honor recipient, twice over. At the time of his death the most decorated Marine in US history, Major General Smedley D. Butler, USMC http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/ar...risaracket.htm http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/link...y_frazier.html "I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested." -Smedley Darlington Butler |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
More power to the police in high speed pursuit
In article >, dwight wrote:
> Okay. I get it. You're off somewhere in your own little world, and there > really is no point in continuing. Actually, it's quite the opposite. Try expanding your knowledge some day. Things aren't as they seem, Alice. > Thanks, and have a nice day. At least you are learning to solve your own problems now. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
From the Land of the Police Pursuit | Eeyore | Driving | 4 | February 4th 07 05:27 AM |
Police in pursuit of a stolen Dump Truck..................news footage | Lufthansi | Driving | 1 | July 21st 06 05:45 PM |
1972 Beetle Loses Power at Sustained High Speed / RPMs | [email protected] | VW air cooled | 11 | April 23rd 06 02:37 PM |
High speed pursuit of a BMW with an almost insane tragic ending ( Video-Clip ) | [email protected] | BMW | 1 | March 18th 06 02:12 AM |
High speed police chase in California -> where is full video ofshooting? | Some Guy | Driving | 2 | May 17th 05 08:55 AM |