Two kinds of idiots

In article <vDcae.358$Nc.239@trnddc09>, Deputy Dog wrote:

> Well you know what the speed limit is...........it's ****ing posted........
> but yet you cry when you get hammered it's your own god damn fault! No
> accidents on that street? Well maybe the reason why is sitting in that car
> shooting fish in a barrel!

Another supporter of the police state speaks! OBEY OBEY OBEY AUTHORITY. It
doesn't matter what authority demands, you must OBEY, because it's
authority.

If cops, buracrats, and elected officals actually had to obey the laws
and regulations they create and enforce, then things would be
considerably different.

In article .net>, SVTKate wrote:

Yes, because it forces all the work on the other person. and it puts
things out out of order. Most top posters, including the one I responded
to, don't even bother to trim.

The only reason top posting occurs so much now, is because of microsoft
crapware.

> Because someone top posts that makes them disrespectful?
>
> I think it makes it easier to read the comment wiithout having to sort
> through the whole post.
>
> "Back in the day" top posting was considered a no-no, times have changed.
> You may as well get used to it.
>
> Kate
>
> "Brent P" > wrote
>| You haven't been arguing from 'authority', top posting and ignoring my
>| points that is not respect.
>|
>
> *snipped for clarity*
>
>

What an idiot. What is it you actually want? A society where there is
no authority to obey? A society where BrentP can drive the way BrentP
wants to drive no matter what?

People push the limits every day. If the speed limit is 55 they push
for 65. If it's 65, they push for 75. It's a common practice to drive
4 to 5 miles over the speed limit in the mistaken belief that you
can't get nailed for that small an infraction. The people push at
traffic lights, and rail crossings as evidenced by the number of
intersection and crossing accidents. Every day, multitudes drink and
drive when everyone knows it is both against the law and endangers the
lives of everyone on the road. They do so because it's human nature to
do so, in part because people object to authority just as you do. They
desire to be free to do things their way. Yet they realize that even
though they don't want to be the subject,authority (law enforcement,
government, whatever you want to call it is a necessary "evil" in
keeping society from turning into chaos and anarchy.

Still, you want to let people drive on the honor system. Even you have
admitted that you have no honor when it comes to obeying the traffic
laws. Your personal deity, the Autobahn, as good as it is, can not get
all the people to comply with your honor system.

To believe that society can exist without some level of controls in
every aspect of their lives is idiocy of the first order. People,
while ideally they might wish for less, should feel fortunate that
there is as little enforcement in the United States as there is.

Police State? You have never lived under a true Police State. Not even
close.



On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:39:41 -0500,
(Brent P) wrote:

>In article <vDcae.358$Nc.239@trnddc09>, Deputy Dog wrote:
>
>> Well you know what the speed limit is...........it's ****ing posted........
>> but yet you cry when you get hammered it's your own god damn fault! No
>> accidents on that street? Well maybe the reason why is sitting in that car
>> shooting fish in a barrel!
>
>Another supporter of the police state speaks! OBEY OBEY OBEY AUTHORITY. It
>doesn't matter what authority demands, you must OBEY, because it's
>authority.
>
>If cops, buracrats, and elected officals actually had to obey the laws
>and regulations they create and enforce, then things would be
>considerably different.
>
>
>

Hey! Spikey Likes IT!
1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok
Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior
Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8"
w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:54:03 GMT, "Deputy Dog"
> wrote:

>
>"RichA" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:26:37 -0700, Spike > wrote:
>>
>> >You know, I had some respect for your opinion, whether I agreed or
>> >not, I now just feel sorry for you. You don't like law enforcement
>> >officers, and that's OK. It's your right in a free society. However,
>> >if you ever get into a bind, I wonder who you will call.
>>
>> I have a friend whose house I go to a fair bit. Before getting
>> to his house, you go down a steep hill. When you enter the street
>> to go down the hill, it appears you haven't changed the speed zone.
>> In fact, just past a street at the bottom of the hill is a sign
>> indicating the speed limit has changed from 36mph to 24mph.
>> Almost everytime I go there, the is a cop, parked with radar
>> squirreled away in the side street.
>> Like shooting fish in a barrel. I have never heard of ANY accidents
>> on that street. As far as I'm concerned, this bozo, who is earning
>> $60,000 a year to sit with his radar gun is a BLIGHT on society.
>> -Rich
>
>Well you know what the speed limit is...........it's ****ing posted........
>but yet you cry when you get hammered it's your own god damn fault! No
>accidents on that street? Well maybe the reason why is sitting in that car
>shooting fish in a barrel!
>
>Dave
>

I was lucky, I was warned about it beforehand, otherwise, I'd have
gotten to the bottom of the hill, seen the sign, found out "TOO LATE"
and gotten nailed by the cop.
As for your last statement, it reminds me of a nutcase religionist
on an ep. of "Barney Miller." The guys in a cell, loudly invoking the
name of God to spare them from the end of the World which was coming
(he said) at 5:00pm. Well, 5:00pm rolls around, and Barney Miller
says to the guy, "look Mr. Smith, it's 5:00 o'clock and the world
hasn't ended."
Then the nut says, "And you didn't think prayer would help!"
-Rich

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:00:01 -0700, Spike > wrote:

>What an idiot. What is it you actually want? A society where there is
>no authority to obey? A society where BrentP can drive the way BrentP
>wants to drive no matter what?
>
>People push the limits every day. If the speed limit is 55 they push
>for 65. If it's 65, they push for 75. It's a common practice to drive
>4 to 5 miles over the speed limit in the mistaken belief that you
>can't get nailed for that small an infraction. The people push at
>traffic lights, and rail crossings as evidenced by the number of
>intersection and crossing accidents. Every day, multitudes drink and
>drive when everyone knows it is both against the law and endangers the
>lives of everyone on the road. They do so because it's human nature to
>do so, in part because people object to authority just as you do.

Why is it all supporters of an overpoliced state think that EVERYONE
who objects to certain aspects OF the police state are reckless
speeders, drunks or red-light runners?
-Rich

I tend to follow the leader. If I respond to a top post (like this
one), I'll top post. If I respond to a bottom post, I'll bottom post.
Real easy.

Joe
Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies
Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC


(Brent P) wrote in
:

> In article .net>,
> SVTKate wrote:
>
> Yes, because it forces all the work on the other person. and it puts
> things out out of order. Most top posters, including the one I
> responded to, don't even bother to trim.
>
> The only reason top posting occurs so much now, is because of
> microsoft crapware.
>
>> Because someone top posts that makes them disrespectful?
>>
>> I think it makes it easier to read the comment wiithout having to
>> sort through the whole post.
>>
>> "Back in the day" top posting was considered a no-no, times have
>> changed. You may as well get used to it.
>>
>> Kate
>>
>> "Brent P" > wrote
>>| You haven't been arguing from 'authority', top posting and
>>| ignoring my points that is not respect.
>>|
>>
>> *snipped for clarity*
>>
>>
>

In article >, Spike wrote:
> What an idiot. What is it you actually want? A society where there is
> no authority to obey? A society where BrentP can drive the way BrentP
> wants to drive no matter what?

Nice strawman. How about reasonable rules that people obey because they
are REASONABLE instead of just because someone on high says so. Or
because the man with the gun says so. Someone says the speed limit change
is wrong and unreasonable. A cop type responds 'the law is the law,
obey'. Figure it out.

Law enforcement types consistantly don't respect the concepts of liberty
and rule by the people for the people. They are consistantly in the camps
of people who think that kings and emperors and other self proclaimed
elites should decide what's best for all of us. Occasionally there is one
that believes in the tyranny of courts or tyranny of the majority.


> People push the limits every day. If the speed limit is 55 they push
> for 65. If it's 65, they push for 75. It's a common practice to drive
> 4 to 5 miles over the speed limit in the mistaken belief that you
> can't get nailed for that small an infraction.

I have provided the cite consistantly that this premise is false. You
only see it when roads are severely under posted and the new higher speed
limit is still underposted.

http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html
Federal Highway Administration. Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed
Limits. Report No. FHwA/RD-92/084. McLean, VA. June 1996.

> The people push at
> traffic lights, and rail crossings as evidenced by the number of
> intersection and crossing accidents.

And many traffic lights are set up poorly encouraging the practice.
Because in the USA, because the mentality isn't one of sound practice,
it's one of authority and obedence.

> Every day, multitudes drink and
> drive when everyone knows it is both against the law and endangers the
> lives of everyone on the road. They do so because it's human nature to
> do so, in part because people object to authority just as you do.

Drunk driving is another issue entirely. The word 'drunk' in and of
itself implies unsound thinking.

> They
> desire to be free to do things their way. Yet they realize that even
> though they don't want to be the subject,authority (law enforcement,
> government, whatever you want to call it is a necessary "evil" in
> keeping society from turning into chaos and anarchy.

So then we shouldn't have liberty, or proper ways of doing things. We
should have emperors, kings, and dictators. Parents who tell us what is
right and what is wrong. The hell with liberty and the hell with the
republic then. The fact you see no problem with definining what the
majority of the people find to be safe and reasonable as illegal shows
that you want rule by authority, obedence. You don't want a republic, you
don't want liberty. You want a police state where some overlord uses
force to demand obedence.


> Still, you want to let people drive on the honor system. Even you have
> admitted that you have no honor when it comes to obeying the traffic
> laws. Your personal deity, the Autobahn, as good as it is, can not get
> all the people to comply with your honor system.

The people have voted with their right foot. BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE.
Not by the elite for good of the people.

> To believe that society can exist without some level of controls in
> every aspect of their lives is idiocy of the first order. People,
> while ideally they might wish for less, should feel fortunate that
> there is as little enforcement in the United States as there is.

Read documents like:
The Constitution of the United States of America.
The Bill of Rights.
The Federalist Papers.

Then get back to me.

> Police State? You have never lived under a true Police State. Not even
> close.

We are headed there. We already get the checkpoints here in Chicago.
The TSA searches, the patriot act, etc and so forth. Most of the tools
are in place for one. All we need now is an event and someone to take
power.

A 3kiloton suitcase nuke in a large city and we might be crowning King
George the first.

Just keep obeying orders. Maybe you'll get to be the cop that hawls me
away to the re-education facility or gets to stuff me in the rail car in
a few years time.

In article >, RichA wrote:

> I was lucky, I was warned about it beforehand, otherwise, I'd have
> gotten to the bottom of the hill, seen the sign, found out "TOO LATE"
> and gotten nailed by the cop.

In IL, the law is actually written such that speed limit changes have to
be limited in how fast they may go down, and that enforcement cannot be
within so many feet (500 I think) of the change. Obviously put there to
stop predatory local police departments and governments.

And if we keep top posting long enough, the last post in the thread will
be a 1000 lines wrong. That's why I start top posting when someone
decides to argue with me that it's ok. If I top post long enough, they
begin to get the point. See, top posting doesn't work well when neither
party is doing the clean up work. Top posters function because others are
doing the clean up





In article >, Joe wrote:


> I tend to follow the leader. If I respond to a top post (like this
> one), I'll top post. If I respond to a bottom post, I'll bottom post.
> Real easy.
>
> Joe
> Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies
> Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC
>
>
> (Brent P) wrote in
> :
>
>> In article .net>,
>> SVTKate wrote:
>>
>> Yes, because it forces all the work on the other person. and it puts
>> things out out of order. Most top posters, including the one I
>> responded to, don't even bother to trim.
>>
>> The only reason top posting occurs so much now, is because of
>> microsoft crapware.
>>
>>> Because someone top posts that makes them disrespectful?
>>>
>>> I think it makes it easier to read the comment wiithout having to
>>> sort through the whole post.
>>>
>>> "Back in the day" top posting was considered a no-no, times have
>>> changed. You may as well get used to it.
>>>
>>> Kate
>>>
>>> "Brent P" > wrote
>>>| You haven't been arguing from 'authority', top posting and
>>>| ignoring my points that is not respect.
>>>|
>>>
>>> *snipped for clarity*
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Well it slows things down, is wasteful, hard to follow, messy. If you are
refering to pushing the work on others, well it's just plain rude.


In article >, Joe wrote:
> So what?
>
>
> (Brent P) wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> And if we keep top posting long enough, the last post in the thread
>> will be a 1000 lines wrong. That's why I start top posting when
>> someone decides to argue with me that it's ok. If I top post long
>> enough, they begin to get the point. See, top posting doesn't work
>> well when neither party is doing the clean up work. Top posters
>> function because others are doing the clean up
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> In article >, Joe
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I tend to follow the leader. If I respond to a top post (like this
>>> one), I'll top post. If I respond to a bottom post, I'll bottom
>>> post. Real easy.
>>>
>>> Joe
>>> Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies
>>> Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC
>>>
>>>
>>> (Brent P) wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> In article
>>>> .net>, SVTKate
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yes, because it forces all the work on the other person. and it
>>>> puts things out out of order. Most top posters, including the one
>>>> I responded to, don't even bother to trim.
>>>>
>>>> The only reason top posting occurs so much now, is because of
>>>> microsoft crapware.
>>>>
>>>>> Because someone top posts that makes them disrespectful?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it makes it easier to read the comment wiithout having to
>>>>> sort through the whole post.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Back in the day" top posting was considered a no-no, times have
>>>>> changed. You may as well get used to it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kate
>>>>>
>>>>> "Brent P" > wrote
>>>>>| You haven't been arguing from 'authority', top posting and
>>>>>| ignoring my points that is not respect.
>>>>>|
>>>>>
>>>>> *snipped for clarity*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>