new almost nation wide law:move over one lane AND drop to 20mph BELOW posted limit if cops pulled ov

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2

We have seat belt laws. To make sure those of us with less than average intellegence don't splatter their skulls on our roads.

They dont work.

We have speed limits so hot shots don't barrel into me doing 120.

They dont work.

And now we have another common sense law.

That wont work.

Not even 10% of the current offenders will cease to offend in the face of these laws.

As a fact MA, which has seatbelt laws, repeatedly records year after year a higher percentage of surveyed drivers who refuse to wear their belts than NH, a state with no adult seatbelt law.

The only thing these laws can consistently accomplish is revenue generation by ticketing followed by the criminalization of those who fail to pay.

Far more harm than good comes from these laws.

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85

 

Do they realize they will just be causing tons of traffic for no reason at all.
it's safe. I understand why...but 20 ???

Probably cause if they just said to "slow down" people would only drop a couple of miles per hour. By saying to drop 20 most people will probably only drop 10.



How often when a cop pulls someone over is there another one with a radar gun checking the passing traffic? The law has been in place for 10 years in at least one state and for several years in most, this is a simply a national campaign for awareness.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


They do work. They punish those who break the laws.

Yes people speed all the time, most of those people have gotten tickets because of it.

But to say a law isn't worth it because people still commit the crime? Come on.

What would you suggest then?

No speeding laws?

No seat belt laws?

No theft laws?

Seriously...what is your suggestion.

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

They do work. They punish those who break the laws.

So then the goal of these laws is to provide a vehicle for punishment? Not to prevent the incidents from happening? Given statistics on recidivism show it's practically a guarantee that an individual who commits a crime will continue to commit that crime until death or life imprisonment.

I made my suggestion in my second post on page 1.

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

What would you suggest then?
No speeding laws?
No seat belt laws?
No theft laws?
Seriously...what is your suggestion.

I agree and wonder what you would suggest. There are laws for murder too. Should we get rid of the law since sometimes they break the law again after "paying" their fine?

reply to post by Three_moons


I'll answer that question with a question of my own.

Should the laws regarding murder be made null and void will you go out and murder?

For those of you so behind the "law" as to insist on the imposition of law over man is the written law, some text ona piece of paper on a shelf, really the only thing keeping you from not raping, killing, stealing or even giving a guy changing a flat a bit of room on the freeway?

Originally posted by KilrathiLG
reply to post by adjensen

 

ah forgive the way i worded it i ment like getting off the freeway/highway all together and using an exit ramp and then idealy pull into a parking lot or atleast a less travled road does that make more sense?

Well, your explanation makes more sense, but the notion is still wrong -- you're just moving the problem from the highway to a city street, where there are generally no shoulders to pull over to, so they'll be blocking an active traffic lane. Find a parking lot? Seriously? Yell at a guy that you're trying to give a ticket to that he needs to meet you at the nearest Denny's?

Just don't drive like an idiot and endanger people who are trying to make your world a safer place.

It is already a state law here in Oklahoma . Signs are posted that read " Move over or slow down for stopped emergency vehicles " .

I have been doing this most all of my life anyway , it is called common sense and courtesy . So , the law doesn't affect me in any adverse way .

I watch Speeders , Cops , World's Wildest Police Videos and several others of those type shows .

I have seen numerous Officers who have been hit by people who don't move over , some have been killed . It is gut-wrenching every time I see that happen .

If this law offends you in any way then you shouldn't be driving to start with , in my opinion .

Because if you find it offensive that you should have concern for the safety of fellow humans , then you have no right being allowed to navigate a potential weapon on any public road . Anywhere .

I learned this habit of driving as a kid , watching Truck-Drivers . They ALWAYS move over if there is a vehicle on the shoulder .

It's common sense , everyone should do it without being told . If you have a problem with it , then I hope you enjoy the next time you are changing a flat tire with missiles speeding past you at 70-80 mph , two feet away .

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


You're making an old, tired point.

If there wasn't a law saying I couldn't murder I still would not murder. You wouldn't, most people posting wouldn't.

But because humans are messed up mentally, for some people, fear of the law is the only thing keeping them from doing illegal things.

On the other end, there are people who don't care what any law says and do as they please.

Your argument that natural law should supersede is correct, but does not fit here. I agree, this is a law for dummies.

Don't be a dummy, and you have no problem do you?

Don't zoom past a cop who has someone pulled over and you are all good.

Yea, these laws are supposed to keep us in fear, they are supposed to bring revenue, but what's wrong with making money off of dumb people? If they are going to speed (read break the law) then they deserve some sort of consequence.

Doesn't matter how "common sense" the law should be.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
My solution is to permit the imbeciles to die off accountable to their own gross stupidity and show the rest of the television hitched drones that real life has real consequences so perhaps you should all start living mindfully and purposefully.

So your theory is that the idiot will eventually hit a cop so hard that the cop flies through the guy's windscreen and kills him, and that's your justice? Cause it seems like he's going to hit an awful lot of cops before that karma comes around to take him out.

And "real life has real consequences" is pretty much the point of any law, including this one.

Originally posted by okbmd

I watch Speeders , Cops , World's Wildest Police Videos and several others of those type shows .

I have seen numerous Officers who have been hit by people who don't move over , some have been killed . It is gut-wrenching every time I see that happen .

Many if not most of those drivers are already violating several other 'laws'. The least of which isnt DUI and DWI laws. I'm sure telling a loaded speeder to move over will help. If two laws werent working surely a third will make all the difference.

If this law offends you in any way then you shouldn't be driving to start with , in my opinion .

Because if you find it offensive that you should have concern for the safety of fellow humans , then you have no right being allowed to navigate a potential weapon on any public road . Anywhere .

Missing the point entirely. As if offense to pointless legislation equates to habitual reckless endangerment.

reply to post by adjensen


Not to be a pain or anything, but 150 traffic related LEO deaths since 1999 isn't really a cogent argument until we know -
how many LEOs have died since 1999
how many LEOs expired due to on the job violence
how many LEOs were there in 1999 and through the present
how many LEOs died of "natural causes" in that same time period
(and so forth and so on) -
The point being that while 150 deaths may seem like a notable figure, without knowing the relevant statistical measures involved it would be difficult to assess the "mere" 150 LEO deaths over 11 years against potentially thousands of civilian casualties annually considering the number of LEO initiated traffic stops we experience every day. Unless one considers a LEO life intrinsically more valuable than the citizens they are sworn (and paid) to protect and serve.

gj

I see no conspiracy here. If you watch cop shows on TruTV, you'll often see videos of boneheads slamming into cop cars because they didn't change lanes in time.

If it protects the safety of the officer and the person he/she is ticketing, then it's more than worth following.

Cops are not giving out speeding tickets on the freeway like they used to because this endangers more lives than the speeding does. The people who slow down to 20 mph create a traffic hazard. This law must have been written by idiots and many will die because of it.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

My belief that murder is wrong prevents me from the act. I'll admit that the law are far from perfect but how would you suggest the "move over" issue to be resolved? We agree that people should already be doing this because it's simply the wise things to do. So do we suspend driving privileges indefinitely for the first offense , send them to prison for life, let them crash into a traffic stop while killing a cop, a family and themselves or something else? What's your suggestion?

Geez.

This law means that 1.) if a cop has someone pulled over to the side and 2.) it's a multiple lane highway and you CAN pull over into the next lane to allow room, you should.

This keeps everyone safe. The person being pulled over, approaching traffic, and the cop.

It's a SAFETY thing for everyone, not just the big bad cops, who do by the way risk their lives stopping to help or when they're pulling someone over on busy roads. Many do get killed and many more get injured.

This law's been around in many states for years.

[edit on 8/11/2010 by ~Lucidity]

Originally posted by adjensen
And "real life has real consequences" is pretty much the point of any law, including this one.

No they're not. These laws make morons believe the world is a safe(r) place. Nothing is quite so comforting to a sheltered mass as another layer of bureaucracy. There's a cop over there so I can't get killed. Now Steve could burn in the chair for raping me so he'll never rape me. Cops have guns so I dont need them and none of my neighbors do either. The FDA keeps me healthy. And on and on with these fallacies.

Very few people have any concept at all of real life consequences. They're all walking around in little bubbles. The tell tale sign is the "shock" they experience whenever a bad thing happens.

Originally posted by ganjoa
reply to post by adjensen

 

Not to be a pain or anything, but 150 traffic related LEO deaths since 1999 isn't really a cogent argument until we know -
how many LEOs have died since 1999
how many LEOs expired due to on the job violence
how many LEOs were there in 1999 and through the present
how many LEOs died of "natural causes" in that same time period
(and so forth and so on) -

What on Earth are you talking about? Call me a simp, but I'd say that ONE avoidable death is worth noting.

Good grief. Do you honestly say that someone's life has less value than your need to get someplace without delay? That moving over or slowing down is such a burden that lives lost in the process are justifiable?

I really do wonder about the state of the world when I see ignorance and insensitivity like this.

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

You're making an old, tired point.

If there wasn't a law saying I couldn't murder I still would not murder. You wouldn't, most people posting wouldn't.

But because humans are messed up mentally, for some people, fear of the law is the only thing keeping them from doing illegal things.

The point is not tires. It's the only point that matters. There are no such people as you describe who would only be deterred by the legality of an act. To only be so deterred or claim to only be so deterred is indicative of total disregard for your fellow man. A mental dysfunction that will eventually result in a violation of another human being despite even a temporary superficial fear of illegality.

Originally posted by ganjoa
reply to post by adjensen

 

The point being that while 150 deaths may seem like a notable figure, without knowing the relevant statistical measures involved it would be difficult to assess the "mere" 150 LEO deaths over 11 years against potentially thousands of civilian casualties annually considering the number of LEO initiated traffic stops we experience every day. Unless one considers a LEO life intrinsically more valuable than the citizens they are sworn (and paid) to protect and serve.

The article specifically states 164 officers struck by vehicles. I consider a life a life regardless. The law can also protect civilians during a traffic stop you realize.