SO who is next to you
06-05-2007, 04:29 PM
#22
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 185
RE: SO who is next to you
Probably an unpopular opinion, but if it cuts down on the street racing, speeding, and general bad driving then I am all for it. I don't speed, either on city streets or on the highway. Typically I'm the slowest person on the road and watch speeders constantly flying past me. I've never had it happen, but if someone pulled up beside me and revved their engine or honked or whatever, I'd just ignore them. I just wish they would also pull over the people who don't seem to know that when making a left turn, you do not go into a middle or far right lane, and people that run yellows / reds when they could easily stop.
What DOES drive me crazy is when Police speed without their lights or sirens on. My wife and son were crossing the street at the intersection in front of our home a couple of years ago when an officer came flying down the street at a rate of at least 75km/h if not higher on a city street (speed limit is 50km/h maximum). He had no lights on, and no siren on and came within about 2 feet of running them both over. Even though this was a crosswalk and pedestrians have the right of way, he would have been completely unable to stop. Police here have run over pedestrians on a number of occassions in the past few years, even killing a handful yet it does not seem to change anything. There just isn't anyone to complain to when the Police wrecklessly endanger citizens so blatently. It's not a danger to me if an officer is beside me trying to coerce me into racing, or hiding behind that tree up ahead trying to catch me speeding, to the contrary I think it gets people who do endanger others off the road, but it certainly is a danger when I come within 2 feet of losing my family because of an officer breaking a law they should be enforcing.
What DOES drive me crazy is when Police speed without their lights or sirens on. My wife and son were crossing the street at the intersection in front of our home a couple of years ago when an officer came flying down the street at a rate of at least 75km/h if not higher on a city street (speed limit is 50km/h maximum). He had no lights on, and no siren on and came within about 2 feet of running them both over. Even though this was a crosswalk and pedestrians have the right of way, he would have been completely unable to stop. Police here have run over pedestrians on a number of occassions in the past few years, even killing a handful yet it does not seem to change anything. There just isn't anyone to complain to when the Police wrecklessly endanger citizens so blatently. It's not a danger to me if an officer is beside me trying to coerce me into racing, or hiding behind that tree up ahead trying to catch me speeding, to the contrary I think it gets people who do endanger others off the road, but it certainly is a danger when I come within 2 feet of losing my family because of an officer breaking a law they should be enforcing.
06-05-2007, 04:41 PM
#23
5th Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,881
RE: SO who is next to you
In Florida, merely revving your engine at a light can get you a reckless driving ticket, which I believe is 4-6 pts. Break traction coming around a corner or taking off from a light and youre getting another. Tint thats too dark, thats another ticket. "Playing" on the highway trying to get someone else to race (excessive speeding, revving, etc), youre looking at possible jail time with a hefty fine. All of these things are illegal.... for citizens. But as soon as a cop does them, they are only doing a job right? Dont get me wrong, I have nothing against cops, they have a very hard job and for the most part they are an asset to the community. Personally, I know alot of POs and some are good friends of the family. I do know a few dudes that are power hungry and on a big head trip, but most of them are decent guys.. but dont even sit here and try to act like there isnt a HUGE double standard. Even the ones we know have told us how much they get away with. We know one guy who, if he wasnt a PO, would have had his license taken away long ago because of all the speeding and reckless driving he does when not in uniform. Yet every time he gets pulled over, other officers let him go because of what he is. For some reason its ok to have cop cars blacked out so that citizens cant see them, but its illegal for us. For some reason its ok for them to rev at people and try to entice them to race, but if another citizen does it he gets a huge fine and pts on his license. Almost every cop I know has all of their personal vehicles totally blacked out, and everytime they get pulled for it, they get off scott free. All Im saying is cops should have to obey the same rules citizens do. I understand they need to speed occaisionally to get to scenes and there is urgency etc... Im not stupid. But for them to be able to mess around and endanger other people, break laws and get away with it is totally ridiculous.
06-05-2007, 04:54 PM
#24
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 770
RE: SO who is next to you
it is really quite easy and justifiable to compare you to a ****. the basic ingredients are there: hate, ignorance, and no respect for rationality.
which is why i could never win an argument with you and won't try. i play by the rules of reason while you play by the rules of justification of beliefs at all cost.
case in point. a rational person that has a legitimate gripe deals with that specific situation. he might say, "that cop was a jerk, but, that was just one cop..." he doesn't cast a broad stroke and paint everyone the same "color", no pun intended.
you are the type of person that says, "i've never met a good cop; therefore all cops are bad."just as easily a nazicould say,"i've never met a good jew, therefore all jews are bad." both you and the **** are satisfied in their deductions even though they are completely illogical.
you mentioned the theft incident. i'm sorry you didn't have the cajones to call a supervisor and ask why your case was never followed up on. and if you got blown off by that supervisor to go up one level to the next supervisor. don't stop complaining until you get a satisfactory resolution. maybe if you had done that you would have found that "good cop" that cared about your investigation... heaven forbid...
i'm not sure where you got the idea that i was all about acceptance. i guess you are resorting to putting words and concepts into my argument that don't exist. i don't care if you "accept" the police, cause you don't have a choice quite honestly. i'm not even really trying to defend the police. i'm posting because i think your hate speech needs to be countered!
in fact you can think and believe whatever you like. i accept your freedom of speech aslong as it falls into the guidelines of the terms of usage of this web site. however, i don't have to accept them asfar as lettingyour hate speech go unasnwered... silence is, after all, acceptance.
which is why i could never win an argument with you and won't try. i play by the rules of reason while you play by the rules of justification of beliefs at all cost.
case in point. a rational person that has a legitimate gripe deals with that specific situation. he might say, "that cop was a jerk, but, that was just one cop..." he doesn't cast a broad stroke and paint everyone the same "color", no pun intended.
you are the type of person that says, "i've never met a good cop; therefore all cops are bad."just as easily a nazicould say,"i've never met a good jew, therefore all jews are bad." both you and the **** are satisfied in their deductions even though they are completely illogical.
you mentioned the theft incident. i'm sorry you didn't have the cajones to call a supervisor and ask why your case was never followed up on. and if you got blown off by that supervisor to go up one level to the next supervisor. don't stop complaining until you get a satisfactory resolution. maybe if you had done that you would have found that "good cop" that cared about your investigation... heaven forbid...
i'm not sure where you got the idea that i was all about acceptance. i guess you are resorting to putting words and concepts into my argument that don't exist. i don't care if you "accept" the police, cause you don't have a choice quite honestly. i'm not even really trying to defend the police. i'm posting because i think your hate speech needs to be countered!
in fact you can think and believe whatever you like. i accept your freedom of speech aslong as it falls into the guidelines of the terms of usage of this web site. however, i don't have to accept them asfar as lettingyour hate speech go unasnwered... silence is, after all, acceptance.
ORIGINAL: suoperdave84
How DARE you compare me to a **** for stating LEGITIMATE problems I have had with cops. You are a pathetic human being. Blindly accepting groups of people (like police) is NOT required by American law. I can feel any way about them I wish.
As soon as a cop proves that he is a decent person, I'll post it. Until then, accept the fact that people hate them......you ARE all about acceptance....right?
How DARE you compare me to a **** for stating LEGITIMATE problems I have had with cops. You are a pathetic human being. Blindly accepting groups of people (like police) is NOT required by American law. I can feel any way about them I wish.
As soon as a cop proves that he is a decent person, I'll post it. Until then, accept the fact that people hate them......you ARE all about acceptance....right?
06-05-2007, 05:04 PM
#27
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 344
RE: SO who is next to you
ORIGINAL: timothyrw
it is really quite easy and justifiable to compare you to a ****. the basic ingredients are there: hate, ignorance, and no respect for rationality.
it is really quite easy and justifiable to compare you to a ****. the basic ingredients are there: hate, ignorance, and no respect for rationality.
Likening someone who doesn't like police officers to anazi is quite a stretch, goes way beyond reason, and reduces any possible debate to an emotion-based, name-calling match.
And if those basic ingredients you note are the building blocks of a ****, then I would submit that virtually everyone falls into that category.
I would agree with your suggestion that suoperdave may have quite a bit of hate might have some merit.
Then again, I made a midly disparaging remark about how firefighters drive in their personal vehicle that drew the ire of a fireman, so I'll keep my opinions (good and bad) about cops to myself.
06-05-2007, 05:11 PM
#28
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 185
RE: SO who is next to you
ORIGINAL: bl1nkage
In Florida, merely revving your engine at a light can get you a reckless driving ticket, which I believe is 4-6 pts. Break traction coming around a corner or taking off from a light and youre getting another. Tint thats too dark, thats another ticket. "Playing" on the highway trying to get someone else to race (excessive speeding, revving, etc), youre looking at possible jail time with a hefty fine. All of these things are illegal.... for citizens. But as soon as a cop does them, they are only doing a job right? Dont get me wrong, I have nothing against cops, they have a very hard job and for the most part they are an asset to the community. Personally, I know alot of POs and some are good friends of the family. I do know a few dudes that are power hungry and on a big head trip, but most of them are decent guys.. but dont even sit here and try to act like there isnt a HUGE double standard. Even the ones we know have told us how much they get away with. We know one guy who, if he wasnt a PO, would have had his license taken away long ago because of all the speeding and reckless driving he does when not in uniform. Yet every time he gets pulled over, other officers let him go because of what he is. For some reason its ok to have cop cars blacked out so that citizens cant see them, but its illegal for us. For some reason its ok for them to rev at people and try to entice them to race, but if another citizen does it he gets a huge fine and pts on his license. Almost every cop I know has all of their personal vehicles totally blacked out, and everytime they get pulled for it, they get off scott free. All Im saying is cops should have to obey the same rules citizens do. I understand they need to speed occaisionally to get to scenes and there is urgency etc... Im not stupid. But for them to be able to mess around and endanger other people, break laws and get away with it is totally ridiculous.
In Florida, merely revving your engine at a light can get you a reckless driving ticket, which I believe is 4-6 pts. Break traction coming around a corner or taking off from a light and youre getting another. Tint thats too dark, thats another ticket. "Playing" on the highway trying to get someone else to race (excessive speeding, revving, etc), youre looking at possible jail time with a hefty fine. All of these things are illegal.... for citizens. But as soon as a cop does them, they are only doing a job right? Dont get me wrong, I have nothing against cops, they have a very hard job and for the most part they are an asset to the community. Personally, I know alot of POs and some are good friends of the family. I do know a few dudes that are power hungry and on a big head trip, but most of them are decent guys.. but dont even sit here and try to act like there isnt a HUGE double standard. Even the ones we know have told us how much they get away with. We know one guy who, if he wasnt a PO, would have had his license taken away long ago because of all the speeding and reckless driving he does when not in uniform. Yet every time he gets pulled over, other officers let him go because of what he is. For some reason its ok to have cop cars blacked out so that citizens cant see them, but its illegal for us. For some reason its ok for them to rev at people and try to entice them to race, but if another citizen does it he gets a huge fine and pts on his license. Almost every cop I know has all of their personal vehicles totally blacked out, and everytime they get pulled for it, they get off scott free. All Im saying is cops should have to obey the same rules citizens do. I understand they need to speed occaisionally to get to scenes and there is urgency etc... Im not stupid. But for them to be able to mess around and endanger other people, break laws and get away with it is totally ridiculous.
All in all, I guess it's just a difference in perception of right and wrong. For me, I think it's great if a cop goes out and tries to entice someone into racing, the person bites, then they (the offender) gets nailed for it. In my way of thinking, that could have been some other street racer or ricer or whomever, not a cop that came up to someone and enticed them into racing. The person didn't bite because it was a cop, they bit because they are open to breaking the laws in their vehicle and only need the opportunity to present itself.
Is it better to have nobody racing at all on the streets, or is it better to have only non-cops allowed to coerce a person into street racing? I would rather the cops get proactive in getting it off the streets. If there are 5,000 people out there who can and will race if someone pulls up beside them and revs their engine, I wouldn't mind seeing those 5,000 people taken off the road. Like I said, if a cop or anyone else for that matter pulled up beside me and revved, I'd just ignore it. I wouldn't be getting a ticket for ignoring it, only the people who actually take it as a sign to race are the ones that get penalized, and that's a-ok by me.
06-05-2007, 05:16 PM
#29
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 770
RE: SO who is next to you
you missed my earlier point. what if that group wasn't police officers but african americans, asians, or jews?
any person who hates another group of people because of a shared characteristicexhibits a key likeness to nazism.
it's neo-nazismaimed at another group.
simple as that.
any person who hates another group of people because of a shared characteristicexhibits a key likeness to nazism.
it's neo-nazismaimed at another group.
simple as that.
ORIGINAL: spuddogg
Have to disagree with you, mate.
Likening someone who doesn't like police officers to anazi is quite a stretch, goes way beyond reason, and reduces any possible debate to an emotion-based, name-calling match.
And if those basic ingredients you note are the building blocks of a ****, then I would submit that virtually everyone falls into that category.
I would agree with your suggestion that suoperdave may have quite a bit of hate might have some merit.
Then again, I made a midly disparaging remark about how firefighters drive in their personal vehicle that drew the ire of a fireman, so I'll keep my opinions (good and bad) about cops to myself.
ORIGINAL: timothyrw
it is really quite easy and justifiable to compare you to a ****. the basic ingredients are there: hate, ignorance, and no respect for rationality.
it is really quite easy and justifiable to compare you to a ****. the basic ingredients are there: hate, ignorance, and no respect for rationality.
Likening someone who doesn't like police officers to anazi is quite a stretch, goes way beyond reason, and reduces any possible debate to an emotion-based, name-calling match.
And if those basic ingredients you note are the building blocks of a ****, then I would submit that virtually everyone falls into that category.
I would agree with your suggestion that suoperdave may have quite a bit of hate might have some merit.
Then again, I made a midly disparaging remark about how firefighters drive in their personal vehicle that drew the ire of a fireman, so I'll keep my opinions (good and bad) about cops to myself.
06-05-2007, 05:29 PM
#30
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 344
RE: SO who is next to you
ORIGINAL: timothyrw
any person who hates another group of people because of a shared characteristicexhibits a key likeness to nazism.
any person who hates another group of people because of a shared characteristicexhibits a key likeness to nazism.
The ***** were an extremely virulent and muderous extention of that.
The fatal flaw in your logic presupposes that individuals who are police officers have no choice other than to be police officers, as jews have no choice other than to be jews, black folks no choice other than to be black, asians folks no other choice than to be asian, etc.
Perhaps the 'hate' isn't so much for a shared racial, ethnic, religious, etc. designation, but more for a type of mindset or personality trait that leads a person to choose to become a law enforcement officer.
I see where you're coming from and while I really don't want to derail the thread in one of those internet philosophy debates, my point was that comparing people to ***** is a form of extremism itself, and may have a tendency to even water down or lessen what the meaning of a true **** is (ask an older jewish person who's family background is from Europe and they'll tell you).