Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

It was 2/9/2008 07:42 and Brian Smith wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:pdWdnaDOO81bjzDanZ2dnUVZ_u_inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> see previous post. oh, and my grandmother has gotten multiple tickets for
>> "not keeping up with prevailing traffic". guess what speed she drives...
>
> I guess she needs to move to a place that encourages people to drive
> within the boundaries of the law.
>
>
I contributed to a woman driving in the left lane exactly at the
posted speed limit (55) get a ticket. A NY State trouper was right
behind her. Of course lots of people were building up behind her
because no one wanted to pass the trouper. I on the other hand,
think left lane blockers to be scum. So, I sped up to 62 or so and
passed the LLB and the trouper. As soon as I passed her, the
trouper pulled her over and gave her a ticket. Did my heart good.

BTW, there are very few places that actually care about reducing
speeds. There are many ways to do that other than setting stupidly
low speed limits (most roads are designed for much higher safe
speeds) and then arbitrarily handing out tickets when the city or
county coffers need a boost.

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

Lee Florack <lflorack@rochester.rr.com> wrote in
news:47af5b9e$0$1102$4c368faf@roadrunner.com:

> It was 2/9/2008 07:42 and Brian Smith wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:pdWdnaDOO81bjzDanZ2dnUVZ_u_inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> see previous post. oh, and my grandmother has gotten multiple
>>> tickets for "not keeping up with prevailing traffic". guess what
>>> speed she drives...
>>
>> I guess she needs to move to a place that encourages people to
>> drive
>> within the boundaries of the law.
>>
>>
> I contributed to a woman driving in the left lane exactly at the
> posted speed limit (55) get a ticket. A NY State trouper was right
> behind her. Of course lots of people were building up behind her
> because no one wanted to pass the trouper. I on the other hand,
> think left lane blockers to be scum. So, I sped up to 62 or so and
> passed the LLB and the trouper. As soon as I passed her, the
> trouper pulled her over and gave her a ticket. Did my heart good.
>
> BTW, there are very few places that actually care about reducing
> speeds. There are many ways to do that other than setting stupidly
> low speed limits (most roads are designed for much higher safe
> speeds) and then arbitrarily handing out tickets when the city or
> county coffers need a boost.
>

the Interstates were designed for 70 mph speeds,and that was with 1960's
autos. Today's cars are much better and safer.

Sadly,"speeding" has become a revenue source. Many states share the take
with the police department writing the ticket. (a conflict of interest)
Florida does.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 15:16:27 -0500, Lee Florack wrote:

> I contributed to a woman driving in the left lane exactly at the
> posted speed limit (55) get a ticket. A NY State trouper was right
> behind her. Of course lots of people were building up behind her
> because no one wanted to pass the trouper. I on the other hand,
> think left lane blockers to be scum. So, I sped up to 62 or so and
> passed the LLB and the trouper. As soon as I passed her, the
> trouper pulled her over and gave her a ticket. Did my heart good.

How could you possibly know that he gave her a ticket? You were already
in front, and moving further away. For all you know, she got a warning.
This is, of course, assuming your "story" has any truth to it at all.

> BTW, there are very few places that actually care about reducing
> speeds. There are many ways to do that other than setting stupidly
> low speed limits (most roads are designed for much higher safe
> speeds) and then arbitrarily handing out tickets when the city or
> county coffers need a boost.

Such as? Name a few of the "many" methods, wouldja?


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

It was 2/10/2008 17:23 and Dan C wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 15:16:27 -0500, Lee Florack wrote:
>
>> I contributed to a woman driving in the left lane exactly at the
>> posted speed limit (55) get a ticket. A NY State trouper was right
>> behind her. Of course lots of people were building up behind her
>> because no one wanted to pass the trouper. I on the other hand,
>> think left lane blockers to be scum. So, I sped up to 62 or so and
>> passed the LLB and the trouper. As soon as I passed her, the
>> trouper pulled her over and gave her a ticket. Did my heart good.
>
> How could you possibly know that he gave her a ticket? You were already
> in front, and moving further away. For all you know, she got a warning.
> This is, of course, assuming your "story" has any truth to it at all.

You won't believe it of course, but I didn't expect you would. The
story IS true. In any case, the first point is that she was stopped
because she was doing something wrong -- even though she was driving
exactly at the speed limit. The second point is that although I
passed the LLB and the trouper and was indeed driving over the speed
limit, I wasn't stopped -- she was. This means that the trouper
obviously felt that what she was doing was more dangerous than what
I was doing. Thirdly, he stopped her because (in part) she was in
the left lane and not keeping up with the flow of traffic -- even
though that flow exceeded the posted limit.

>> BTW, there are very few places that actually care about reducing
>> speeds. There are many ways to do that other than setting stupidly
>> low speed limits (most roads are designed for much higher safe
>> speeds) and then arbitrarily handing out tickets when the city or
>> county coffers need a boost.
>
> Such as? Name a few of the "many" methods, wouldja?

First one that comes to mind is a mandatory speed governor. If the
governmental agencies can mandate all of the anti-pollution
apparatus that we have on our cars today because they're serious
about pollution, they certainly could add a speed governor -- if
they were at all serious about keeping people from speeding. They
aren't so they don't.

Don't get me wrong, I think it'd be wrong to do but they could if
they wanted to.

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:22:01 -0500, Lee Florack wrote:

>>> I contributed to a woman driving in the left lane exactly at the
>>> posted speed limit (55) get a ticket. A NY State trouper was right
>>> behind her. Of course lots of people were building up behind her
>>> because no one wanted to pass the trouper. I on the other hand,
>>> think left lane blockers to be scum. So, I sped up to 62 or so and
>>> passed the LLB and the trouper. As soon as I passed her, the
>>> trouper pulled her over and gave her a ticket. Did my heart good.

>> How could you possibly know that he gave her a ticket? You were already
>> in front, and moving further away. For all you know, she got a warning.
>> This is, of course, assuming your "story" has any truth to it at all.

> You won't believe it of course, but I didn't expect you would. The
> story IS true. In any case, the first point is that she was stopped
> because she was doing something wrong -- even though she was driving
> exactly at the speed limit. The second point is that although I
> passed the LLB and the trouper and was indeed driving over the speed
> limit, I wasn't stopped -- she was. This means that the trouper
> obviously felt that what she was doing was more dangerous than what
> I was doing. Thirdly, he stopped her because (in part) she was in
> the left lane and not keeping up with the flow of traffic -- even
> though that flow exceeded the posted limit.

Like I already said...., how do you know she got a ticket? You don't.
OK, she got pulled over. That doesn't mean she got a ticket. She may
have gotten a verbal warning. You absolutely do not *KNOW* that she got a
ticket. Being stopped does not always result in a ticket being written.
You didn't know that?

>>> BTW, there are very few places that actually care about reducing
>>> speeds. There are many ways to do that other than setting stupidly
>>> low speed limits (most roads are designed for much higher safe
>>> speeds) and then arbitrarily handing out tickets when the city or
>>> county coffers need a boost.

>> Such as? Name a few of the "many" methods, wouldja?

> First one that comes to mind is a mandatory speed governor. If the
> governmental agencies can mandate all of the anti-pollution
> apparatus that we have on our cars today because they're serious
> about pollution, they certainly could add a speed governor -- if
> they were at all serious about keeping people from speeding. They
> aren't so they don't.

Well, that's "one". I asked for a "few" of the "many". Let me ask you
this: If such a thing was done, how long do you think it would take the
mechanically-inclined to learn how to get around it?

Try again, junior.

--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

Dan C wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:22:01 -0500, Lee Florack wrote:
>
>>>> I contributed to a woman driving in the left lane exactly at the
>>>> posted speed limit (55) get a ticket. A NY State trouper was right
>>>> behind her. Of course lots of people were building up behind her
>>>> because no one wanted to pass the trouper. I on the other hand,
>>>> think left lane blockers to be scum. So, I sped up to 62 or so and
>>>> passed the LLB and the trouper. As soon as I passed her, the
>>>> trouper pulled her over and gave her a ticket. Did my heart good.
>
>>> How could you possibly know that he gave her a ticket? You were already
>>> in front, and moving further away. For all you know, she got a warning.
>>> This is, of course, assuming your "story" has any truth to it at all.
>
>> You won't believe it of course, but I didn't expect you would. The
>> story IS true. In any case, the first point is that she was stopped
>> because she was doing something wrong -- even though she was driving
>> exactly at the speed limit. The second point is that although I
>> passed the LLB and the trouper and was indeed driving over the speed
>> limit, I wasn't stopped -- she was. This means that the trouper
>> obviously felt that what she was doing was more dangerous than what
>> I was doing. Thirdly, he stopped her because (in part) she was in
>> the left lane and not keeping up with the flow of traffic -- even
>> though that flow exceeded the posted limit.
>
> Like I already said...., how do you know she got a ticket? You don't.
> OK, she got pulled over. That doesn't mean she got a ticket. She may
> have gotten a verbal warning. You absolutely do not *KNOW* that she got a
> ticket. Being stopped does not always result in a ticket being written.
> You didn't know that?
>
>>>> BTW, there are very few places that actually care about reducing
>>>> speeds. There are many ways to do that other than setting stupidly
>>>> low speed limits (most roads are designed for much higher safe
>>>> speeds) and then arbitrarily handing out tickets when the city or
>>>> county coffers need a boost.
>
>>> Such as? Name a few of the "many" methods, wouldja?
>
>> First one that comes to mind is a mandatory speed governor. If the
>> governmental agencies can mandate all of the anti-pollution
>> apparatus that we have on our cars today because they're serious
>> about pollution, they certainly could add a speed governor -- if
>> they were at all serious about keeping people from speeding. They
>> aren't so they don't.
>
> Well, that's "one". I asked for a "few" of the "many". Let me ask you
> this: If such a thing was done, how long do you think it would take the
> mechanically-inclined to learn how to get around it?
>
> Try again, junior.
>

why do you get so offended dan? people share their real life
experiences, yet you just rage against it. why?

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:06:02 -0800, jim beam wrote:

> why do you get so offended dan? people share their real life
> experiences, yet you just rage against it. why?

"Offended"? "Rage"? No, I don't think so.

What bothers me some is how some of you put so much effort into trying to
"beat" the law. Why can't you just drive the ing speed limit, and
enjoy your day? What's the big ing hurry all the time? Will driving
80 instead of 70 really get you there that much faster? What will it save
you on a short trip? 3 minutes? 7 minutes? Why bother?

Why do you feel the need to break the law at every opportunity? Can you
answer that?


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

Dan C wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:06:02 -0800, jim beam wrote:
>
>> why do you get so offended dan? people share their real life
>> experiences, yet you just rage against it. why?
>
> "Offended"? "Rage"? No, I don't think so.
>
> What bothers me some is how some of you put so much effort into trying to
> "beat" the law. Why can't you just drive the ing speed limit, and
> enjoy your day? What's the big ing hurry all the time? Will driving
> 80 instead of 70 really get you there that much faster? What will it save
> you on a short trip? 3 minutes? 7 minutes? Why bother?
>
> Why do you feel the need to break the law at every opportunity? Can you
> answer that?
>
>

excuse me, but when a guy gets bent over something with which he's not
involved and from which he has had no disadvantage, he's clearly angry
and offended about something. and that "something" is nothing to do
with speed limit enforcement.

it's internal dan. explore with professional help if necessary. don't
project onto strangers.

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

Lee Florack <lflorack@rochester.rr.com> wrote in
news:47afb14c$0$30685$4c368faf@roadrunner.com:

> It was 2/10/2008 17:23 and Dan C wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 15:16:27 -0500, Lee Florack wrote:
>>
>>> I contributed to a woman driving in the left lane exactly at the
>>> posted speed limit (55) get a ticket. A NY State trouper was right
>>> behind her. Of course lots of people were building up behind her
>>> because no one wanted to pass the trouper. I on the other hand,
>>> think left lane blockers to be scum. So, I sped up to 62 or so and
>>> passed the LLB and the trouper. As soon as I passed her, the
>>> trouper pulled her over and gave her a ticket. Did my heart good.
>>
>> How could you possibly know that he gave her a ticket? You were
>> already in front, and moving further away. For all you know, she got
>> a warning. This is, of course, assuming your "story" has any truth to
>> it at all.
>
> You won't believe it of course, but I didn't expect you would. The
> story IS true. In any case, the first point is that she was stopped
> because she was doing something wrong -- even though she was driving
> exactly at the speed limit. The second point is that although I
> passed the LLB and the trouper and was indeed driving over the speed
> limit, I wasn't stopped -- she was. This means that the trouper
> obviously felt that what she was doing was more dangerous than what
> I was doing. Thirdly, he stopped her because (in part) she was in
> the left lane and not keeping up with the flow of traffic -- even
> though that flow exceeded the posted limit.
>
>>> BTW, there are very few places that actually care about reducing
>>> speeds. There are many ways to do that other than setting stupidly
>>> low speed limits (most roads are designed for much higher safe
>>> speeds) and then arbitrarily handing out tickets when the city or
>>> county coffers need a boost.
>>
>> Such as? Name a few of the "many" methods, wouldja?
>
> First one that comes to mind is a mandatory speed governor. If the
> governmental agencies can mandate all of the anti-pollution
> apparatus that we have on our cars today because they're serious
> about pollution, they certainly could add a speed governor -- if
> they were at all serious about keeping people from speeding. They
> aren't so they don't.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I think it'd be wrong to do but they could if
> they wanted to.

I can see,after cars get mandatory speed limit sign interrogators(that read
the programmed SL from the sign,tied into the cars electronics),some hacker
spoofing the SL signal and slowing everybody down to 10 mph on the
expressway at rush hour,and having a lot of yuks over it.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:53:49 -0800, jim beam wrote:

>>> why do you get so offended dan? people share their real life
>>> experiences, yet you just rage against it. why?

>> "Offended"? "Rage"? No, I don't think so.
>>
>> What bothers me some is how some of you put so much effort into trying to
>> "beat" the law. Why can't you just drive the ing speed limit, and
>> enjoy your day? What's the big ing hurry all the time? Will driving
>> 80 instead of 70 really get you there that much faster? What will it save
>> you on a short trip? 3 minutes? 7 minutes? Why bother?
>>
>> Why do you feel the need to break the law at every opportunity? Can you
>> answer that?

> excuse me, but when a guy gets bent over something with which he's not
> involved and from which he has had no disadvantage, he's clearly angry
> and offended about something. and that "something" is nothing to do
> with speed limit enforcement.
>
> it's internal dan. explore with professional help if necessary. don't
> project onto strangers.

That's what I thought you'd do. Attack me, instead of answering the
reasonable questions that I asked above.

Why don't you answer the questions? Can you do that?



--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in
news:vfSdnbT9v9JvfzLanZ2dnUVZ_uCinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t:

> Dan C wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 20:06:02 -0800, jim beam wrote:
>>
>>> why do you get so offended dan? people share their real life
>>> experiences, yet you just rage against it. why?
>>
>> "Offended"? "Rage"? No, I don't think so.
>>
>> What bothers me some is how some of you put so much effort into
>> trying to "beat" the law.

Not "beating it",just ignoring it,and driving the speed we feel safe and
comfortable at.
No "rage" either,until some clueless,lame idiots cannot keep correct lane
discipline(STKR,KRETP,proper lane changes),causing *truly unsafe* traffic
conditions.

>> Why can't you just drive the ing speed
>> limit, and enjoy your day?

Because we are not mindless automatons.
We actually LIKE driving,and using our brains while driving.
No zombie driving for us.

>>What's the big ing hurry all the
>> time?

Who says "speeding" is being in a "hurry"?

>> Will driving 80 instead of 70 really get you there that much
>> faster? What will it save you on a short trip? 3 minutes? 7
>> minutes? Why bother?

It's usually safer.(than travelling in a big bunch-up)

>>
>> Why do you feel the need to break the law at every opportunity?

Because that particular law is irrelevant to actual road and traffic
conditions.(as demonstrated by the pre-55 NMSL 75 mph limits on many
highways,set for *1960's autos*.Today's cars are much better,much safer.
One day,75 was safe,next day;55 was the limit.(and over 50% of drivers
violated it,probably closer to 80%)


>> Can
>> you answer that?
>>
>>
>
> excuse me, but when a guy gets bent over something with which he's not
> involved and from which he has had no disadvantage, he's clearly angry
> and offended about something. and that "something" is nothing to do
> with speed limit enforcement.
>
> it's internal dan. explore with professional help if necessary.
> don't project onto strangers.
>
>



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

Dan C wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:53:49 -0800, jim beam wrote:
>
>>>> why do you get so offended dan? people share their real life
>>>> experiences, yet you just rage against it. why?
>
>>> "Offended"? "Rage"? No, I don't think so.
>>>
>>> What bothers me some is how some of you put so much effort into trying to
>>> "beat" the law. Why can't you just drive the ing speed limit, and
>>> enjoy your day? What's the big ing hurry all the time? Will driving
>>> 80 instead of 70 really get you there that much faster? What will it save
>>> you on a short trip? 3 minutes? 7 minutes? Why bother?
>>>
>>> Why do you feel the need to break the law at every opportunity? Can you
>>> answer that?
>
>> excuse me, but when a guy gets bent over something with which he's not
>> involved and from which he has had no disadvantage, he's clearly angry
>> and offended about something. and that "something" is nothing to do
>> with speed limit enforcement.
>>
>> it's internal dan. explore with professional help if necessary. don't
>> project onto strangers.
>
> That's what I thought you'd do. Attack me, instead of answering the
> reasonable questions that I asked above.

i'm not attacking you!!! you may not like being confronted with
reality, but it's not an attack!


>
> Why don't you answer the questions? Can you do that?


sorry, not going to play a game that feeds your dysfunction. get help.

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:17:32 -0800, jim beam wrote:

>> Why don't you answer the questions? Can you do that?

> sorry, not going to play a game that feeds your dysfunction. get help.

LOL. Yeah. OK, so you can't debate the issue using factual information,
and when asked to answer relevant questions, you write the above.

Got it. I'd say the "dysfunction" is yours, and I've wasted enough time
with you. Go play in traffic (pun intended).


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:01:41 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

>>> What bothers me some is how some of you put so much effort into
>>> trying to "beat" the law.

> Not "beating it",just ignoring it,and driving the speed we feel safe and
> comfortable at.

Well, that right there says a lot about your character.

You're as clueless as the other moron.


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <RbSdnUDnXeKG2jbanZ2dnUVZ_oytnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "Butch Haynes" <Butch@huntsville> wrote:
>
>> For the rest of the year, I'll be on the interstate for a weekly 500 mile
>> round trip-- and want to get a radar detector. They seem to range from $50
>> on up to$500 or more.
>>
>> I'm not interested in over working my credit card for "the very best" one.
>> Nor do I need one that gives me the cop's name and what he had for breakfast
>> when he lights me up. I just want a little advance warning of cops in the
>> area if the old needle creeps up too high-- real easy to do in my '07 Accord
>> EX-L Sedan 6 cyl.
>>
>> So where's the most bang for the buck/sweet spot to buy-- and any specific
>> recommendations?
>
> Get a Valentine One.
>
> Drive with traffic in the right lane.
>
> Don't tailgate.
>
> Don't swerve in and out of traffic.
>
> A radar detector by itself is meaningless. A radar detector against
> lidar is meaningless.
>
> A radar detector against radar, coupled with intelligent driving, will
> keep you safe.
>
But the Blinder system works well against LIDAR! I rode with a buddy
who has a radar detector and a Blinder system installed in his vehicle
and the Blinder went nuts while his radar/laser detector didn't even
show that he was being clocked by a motorcycle cop.