Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 93
  1. #51
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
    Now, this is a very simplified overview of a complicated matter, and it can vary from state to state or even court to court, but in general video evidence doesn't stand on its own -- somebody has to testify about who took it, what it recorded, etc. A cop might do that for you for a traffic violation -- but they probably won't. And even if they did, they're just testifying about what you told him.

    Here's a page that talks specifically about video evidence, how it's often considered hearsay, if the digital files part confuses you -- the rules are very similar.
    Now you are going to extremes to support your unfounded claims. Really, going to "day in the life" videos and claiming they are in any way similar to unstaged video such as surveillance videos, continuous videos taken as a crime occurs, such as running videos by cyclist. "Day in the life" videos are staged for the purpose of pumping up damage claims in civil suits.

    Surveillance videos might get tossed if there is evidence that the video has been tampered with or edited in a manner to give a false impression/time line. But that is not the hearsay toss you are claiming.

    And even with these staged videos, your link even notes:
    While courts have been unwilling to exclude movies or videos as a matter of law, a number have been willing to construct a variety of safeguards to protect against abuse.
    The courts do not have similar concerns of abuse with an unedited, un-tampered surveillance video?
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  2. #52
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
    Present it as you see fit, but the reality is ... the police will rarely issue minor traffic citations based solely on video evidence -- they generally have to have seen the violation themselves, or have had the violator confess their crime to them. Call the reason laziness if you want, but there is more to it than that, with some bonafide legal reasons for it -- but laziness is certainly a factor. Whatever the reason -- it doesn't happen often. (Now, cases involving felonies are a different matter ...)
    Ever hear of red light cameras and speed cameras.

    Police willing to do their job go on youtube and use those videos as evidence in court without the video man being present. We have had examples in BFs of videos being used to ticket and even arrest motorist. Digital photos I have presented in court did not require me to testify when, where, how and true representation by me. Video of a shop lifter in case for which I was jury foreman did not require when, where, how and true representation testimony and the defense made no such objections to the video.
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  3. #53
    Senior Member dougmc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    My Bikes
    Giant OCR2, Bridgestone RB-T, Bike-E, Vision R-40, Novara Safari
    Posts
    3,005
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    Ever hear of red light cameras and speed cameras.
    Funny that you should mention them -- they're a perfect example of what I was referring to.

    I don't know how they work over there, but here in Texas, a red light camera citation is a civil thing -- like a parking ticket. It is not charged as a moving violation (which are generally Class C misdemeanors here), and it does not go on your driving record.

    And you know why? It's for all the reasons I gave -- no police officer personally witnessed the offense, so they won't write a ticket for it -- and one more, that the picture does identify the car (and therefore its owner) but doesn't always identify the driver, and traffic tickets for moving violations generally go to the driver, not the owner.

    In any event, the folks handling the cameras (who are generally *not* the police, though they might pay an officer to review the evidence they've collected) will mail you a bill, and if you pay it, they're happy. And if not, they might send collections after you, but it's still a civil issue and so they don't come and arrest you like they would for if you didn't pay a real red-light ticket.

    Police willing to do their job go on youtube and use those videos as evidence in court without the video man being present.
    I didn't say it never happens, and I made that quite clear. But it *is* rare, and I've explained why.
    Last edited by dougmc; 12-03-13 at 12:05 AM.

  4. #54
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
    Funny that you should mention them -- they're a perfect example of what I was referring to.

    I don't know how they work over there, but here in Texas, a red light camera citation is a civil thing -- like a parking ticket. It is not charged as a moving violation (which are generally Class C misdemeanors here), and it does not go on your driving record.

    And you know why? It's for all the reasons I gave -- no police officer personally witnessed the offense, so they won't write a ticket for it -- and one more, that the picture does identify the car (and therefore its owner) but doesn't always identify the driver, and traffic tickets for moving violations generally go to the driver, not the owner.

    In any event, the folks handling the cameras (who are generally *not* the police, though they might pay an officer to review the evidence they've collected) will mail you a bill, and if you pay it, they're happy. And if not, they might send collections after you, but it's still a civil issue and so they don't come and arrest you like they would for if you didn't pay a real red-light ticket.

    I didn't say it never happens, and I made that quite clear. But it *is* rare, and I've explained why.
    In California and Colorado, traffic violations are criminal charges and the offenders are presented with citations. In Hawaii, for the short time we have speeding cameras, citations were issued and a court appearance required to fight them. That is why they set up cameras that include the drivers face and charge the driver vice the owner of the car. No traffic cameras have ever appeared in court to testify about the photos they automatically took. They are treated the same as surveillance photos. True in most states such a TX, the sole purpose of red light cameras is revenue generation, thus the altered rules in those states to allow greater cash collection.

    Use of surveillance video is common, contrary to your claims. Traffic citations and criminal charges often result from surveillance video being the evidence. Shop lifting charges are almost always from surveillance video, even with cops treating such charges about the same as traffic citations.

    Your biggest confusion seems to be your mixing of surveillance video of a crime occurring , with staged videos after the crime or "Day in the life" videos for civil cases. They are not even close to the same and the courts treat them differently.
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  5. #55
    Senior Member dougmc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    My Bikes
    Giant OCR2, Bridgestone RB-T, Bike-E, Vision R-40, Novara Safari
    Posts
    3,005
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    Use of surveillance video is common, contrary to your claims. Traffic citations and criminal charges often result from surveillance video being the evidence. Shop lifting charges are almost always from surveillance video, even with cops treating such charges about the same as traffic citations..
    Use of surveillance video *is* common -- but the writing of traffic citations by police officers who did not see the violation personally and instead were given the video by a citizen who did see (and video it) is not. Part of that *is* often just because they're lazy, but there's more to it than that.

    I'm talking about traffic violations, not shoplifting. Or murders.

    Your biggest confusion seems to be your mixing of surveillance video of a crime occurring , with staged videos after the crime or "Day in the life" videos for civil cases. They are not even close to the same and the courts treat them differently.
    It was an example of how video evidence could be seen as hearsay, provided for your benefit. Don't read more into it than that -- in particular, don't think I'm confusing "day in the life" videos with "I saw this guy run a red light, here's a video tape of it, give him a ticket".

  6. #56
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
    in particular, don't think I'm confusing "day in the life" videos with "I saw this guy run a red light, here's a video tape of it, give him a ticket".
    So you do not understand that cyclist videos are not of motorist running red lights, even though those are not hearsay videos as you have repeatedly been implying. Cyclist videos, as discussed in BFs, where we are having this discussion, are of motorist harassment and reckless endangerment of cyclist in addition to traffic violations. Look through BFs and you can find many motorist charged with harassment, reckless endangerment and related traffic violations. There is a cyclist video from Colorado on which the motorist was charge with reckless driving and the passenger charged with disorderly conduct.

    http://denver.cbslocal.com/2011/05/0...ra-by-cyclist/

    Disorderly conduct is considered lower than most traffic citations in many courts.

    Even more motorist get charges stemming from youtube videos and some cop assaults on cyclist as well.
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  7. #57
    Member johnnymoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    44
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris516 View Post
    I beg to differ. I have been yelled at with 'GET OFF THE ROAD!, GET ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD!!!, and ROADS ARE MADE FOR CARS, NOT BIKES!!!!! Despite going 25-30MPH on roads that have a 30-40MPH speed limit. So you still want to say that cyclists' are treated no differently?
    Perhaps what the poster meant to say is "not being treated on our roads any differently than pedestrians (100 point moving targets) or other cars (of which are impeding their progress and causing them frustration)"?

  8. #58
    Member johnnymoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    44
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
    The cops don't get to decide which minor issues (moving violations are generally minor issues if there's no collision) they decide to investigate?

    If you can't get the cops to file charges, (and the DA isn't going to do it for you for a minor moving violation) it doesn't matter how good your evidence is.

    Now, if somebody dies, they're much more likely to take it all seriously, but that's not really the case I was covering.

    It's pretty clear you didn't really care what basis I had for my "claims", you had already made up your mind and that was that.

    It was to explain the "hearsay" bit. What basis do you have for your claims?
    If somebody dies, yes, unless they are a cyclist.....

  9. #59
    Member johnnymoses's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    44
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    You are still blowing tons of smoke. Each court system has one set of rules of evidence. Those are the set of rules the courts and cops have to play by. The cops do not get to just make up their own variable rules.

    And your wiki link shows how what you have said is so much smoke.
    When I used to live in Newport Beach and Balboa, the cops there were overzealous in making up their own rules....

  10. #60
    Senior Member dougmc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    My Bikes
    Giant OCR2, Bridgestone RB-T, Bike-E, Vision R-40, Novara Safari
    Posts
    3,005
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    Look through BFs and you can find many motorist charged with harassment, reckless endangerment and related traffic violations.
    Note that harassment and reckless endangerment are not moving violations, even if the offense involved a vehicle. Also, reckless driving is generally more serious than most moving violations -- people can go to jail for that. The more serious a violation is, the more likely that police will accept video of it when they didn't personally witness it.

    (That said, given your video from Colorado, I don't see where they're likely to get a conviction for reckless driving based on what's in the video. Disorderly conduct, sure, but reckless driving, from a jury (the woman seems smart enough to request a jury trial) that's likely 100% drivers and 0% cyclists? No. But we'll see ...)

    Disorderly conduct is considered lower than most traffic citations in many courts.
    [Citation needed]

    Here in Texas, it's the same -- Class C misdemeanor. I do agree that its usually given for BS reasons, however (usually "contempt of cop".)

    Also note that in Texas, "disorderly conduct" is fairly easy to argue to be a "breach of the peace", which would allow a officer to arrest or cite for a misdemeanor even if they didn't personally witness the violation or have a warrant (going back to Art. 14.03. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICERS). Maybe it's lower than traffic citations over there, but here it isn't, and in fact gives the police more authority in some cases.

    Even more motorist get charges stemming from youtube videos and some cop assaults on cyclist as well.
    You seem to be getting carried away with your strawman here. Let me remind you, yet again ...

    1) I was explaining the likely reasoning behind "They also won't accept bike camera footage, because they don't trust it." (where they = police in Maryland.) If you don't like what the police will or won't accept there -- take it up with them, not me. Also note that I did not make that statement. so If you want to argue with the accuracy of that statement, I'm not your guy there either.

    2) I never said that cops never write traffic tickets based solely on citizen-provided video evidence. Instead, I repeatedly said it does happen, but it's rare. And I explained why it's rare. Also note that I'm talking nation-wide -- some jurisdictions may be more likely to do it, and other jurisdictions may almost never do it.

    Showing me examples where they did do it does not disprove my point -- if my point was that it *never* happened, then yes it would, but I have not said that.

    Also note that what you see online has a very strong self-selection bias. The news isn't likely to report on a recorded moving violation unless it's somehow noteworthy -- and if the police don't cite somebody for it, that makes it less noteworthy. And it's also possible that if they report on it anyways (and in such cases, one purpose of the report is to usually to show that the police did nothing), the report itself will prompt the police to do something about it even though they didn't before.

    Same goes for youtube videos. If you can get somebody cited for your video, that makes you far more likely to post your video to youtube than if they did not. But even so, if you were to go to youtube and find all the videos posted of people making moving violations -- only a small fraction will say that the police gave a ticket based solely on that video (and yet if the police did so -- most people would edit the description of their video to say so.)
    Last edited by dougmc; 12-03-13 at 11:37 AM.

  11. #61
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
    Note that harassment and reckless endangerment are not moving violations, even if the offense involved a vehicle. Also, reckless driving is generally more serious than most moving violations -- people can go to jail for that. The more serious a violation is, the more likely that police will accept video of it when they didn't personally witness it.
    You are correct that the charge for the woman is reckless driving vice reckless endangerment. My typo as Hawaii uses reckless endangerment as the charge for reckless driving. Hawaii does that type of thing on a few, maybe several laws. (example - in Hawaii assault means battery and terroristic threatening means assault).

    But now you want to parse reckless driving with other traffic citations to now claim you are right. So why don't you tell us at what level of traffic laws do cops stop writing citations when they have video evidence. First you went with murder vs traffic citations and now you are down to some traffic citations vs other traffic citations.

    Quote Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
    [Citation needed]
    Real life, not letter of the law. Cops use "disorderly conduct" often to arrest someone they have nothing else on. The DA almost always drop the charge before it goes anywhere, because the DA generally knows that it is a BS charge. On the other hand, DAs do not routinely drop traffic citations in the same manner.

    Quote Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
    You seem to be getting carried away with your strawman here.
    No straw man here. I responded to your claim that cyclist video of a crime in progress is nothing more than hearsay. You went to great lengths to equate that type of surveillance videos of a crime in progress to "day in the life" videos in an effort to imply the two types of videos are the same and both are hearsay. That was the straw man you put forward.
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  12. #62
    Senior Member Brian Ratliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Near Portland, OR
    My Bikes
    Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
    Posts
    9,612
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yup, everyone's out to kill us. An eye for an eye, that's what we demand. Old Testament biblical justice is the only way to go. Throw her in jail. Lock her up, throw away the key. Better yet, how's about a good show of capital punishment! That'll show all them motorists not to mess with us cyclists.

    Seriously people. Seems like a mistake in judgement along with a hundred unrelated factors combined to result in a very bad outcome. How many near misses have any one of us had which were set up in exactly the same way? Do all these near misses warrant a criminal trial? Is anyone better off by throwing this person in prison?
    Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
    "If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter

  13. #63
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff View Post
    Yup, everyone's out to kill us. An eye for an eye, that's what we demand. Old Testament biblical justice is the only way to go. Throw her in jail. Lock her up, throw away the key. Better yet, how's about a good show of capital punishment! That'll show all them motorists not to mess with us cyclists.

    Seriously people. Seems like a mistake in judgement along with a hundred unrelated factors combined to result in a very bad outcome. How many near misses have any one of us had which were set up in exactly the same way? Do all these near misses warrant a criminal trial? Is anyone better off by throwing this person in prison?
    Since she shows NO remorse for this death, is only concerned with her life, she is unlikely to change her ways. If she is in jail, at least for that time she cannot make another victim out of some other road user.

    She broke 4 laws and basic drivers safety, and you call all of that unrelated?
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  14. #64
    Senior Member dougmc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    My Bikes
    Giant OCR2, Bridgestone RB-T, Bike-E, Vision R-40, Novara Safari
    Posts
    3,005
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    You are correct that the charge for the woman is reckless driving vice reckless endangerment. My typo as Hawaii uses reckless endangerment as the charge for reckless driving. Hawaii does that type of thing on a few, maybe several laws. (example - in Hawaii assault means battery and terroristic threatening means assault).
    The typo was minor. I wasn't making a big deal out of it, it happens.

    But now you want to parse reckless driving with other traffic citations to now claim you are right.
    Reckless driving is certainly a violation that involves driving, but it's more serious than running a red light and most other moving violations. It can involve jail time here -- here's the Texas law for comparison --

    545.401. RECKLESS DRIVING; OFFENSE. (a) A person commits an offense if the person drives a vehicle in wilful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.
    (b) An offense under this section is a misdemeanor punishable by:
    (1) a fine not to exceed $200;
    (2) confinement in county jail for not more than 30 days; or
    (3) both the fine and the confinement.

    So why don't you tell us at what level of traffic laws do cops stop writing citations when they have video evidence.
    I've not been speaking in such absolutes. Every time, I've said that the more serious a violation is, the more likely it is that they'll accept video of the violation from a citizen and use that as the sole basis of a their arrest/citation.

    First you went with murder vs traffic citations and now you are down to some traffic citations vs other traffic citations.
    You brought up murder first -- not me. You seemed to think I was saying that the cops would not use video of a murder, which I was not.

    Real life, not letter of the law. Cops use "disorderly conduct" often to arrest someone they have nothing else on. The DA almost always drop the charge before it goes anywhere, because the DA generally knows that it is a BS charge.
    The DA might drop the charge depending on the situation, but that's true of any charge.

    No straw man here. I responded to your claim that cyclist video of a crime in progress is nothing more than hearsay. You went to great lengths to equate that type of surveillance videos of a crime in progress to "day in the life" videos in an effort to imply the two types of videos are the same and both are hearsay.
    Straw man. I said video *can* be considered hearsay in court without the testimony of the person who took it or is responsible for it, not that it was always hearsay, and I provided examples of such. The "great lengths" you refer to was me giving a url that showed cases where video might or might not be considered hearsay in court -- the fact that the link I found was concerned with "day in the life" videos was immaterial.

    In any event, police are not usually lawyers. The don't always know the details of the law, but they know that if the show up in court with video but don't have the person who took the video or who is responsible for it there to testify about it that they'll have a harder time, and it may make them look bad. And no matter what you say about this matter, the reality is that cops rarely give moving violations for things they did not see or were not confessed to them, and usually the most common exception is after a collision, where the cop can personally see the damage caused. Even giving video evidence of a moving violation to a cop rarely results in a ticket -- more likely is that they do nothing, or *maybe* a talking to the offender (or the owner of the car -- often the video doesn't even make it clear who the driver was, even if the plates are very clear. Which is another reason why they don't like to write citations based solely on video evidence.)

    That was the straw man you put forward.
    You seem confused about what a straw man is. A straw man is when you argue against a position that your opponent has not made, when you misrepresent their position and then argue against that.
    Last edited by dougmc; 12-04-13 at 09:15 AM. Reason: fixed some typos.

  15. #65
    Senior Member Brian Ratliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Near Portland, OR
    My Bikes
    Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
    Posts
    9,612
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    Since she shows NO remorse for this death, is only concerned with her life, she is unlikely to change her ways. If she is in jail, at least for that time she cannot make another victim out of some other road user.

    ...
    Oh, you know this person personally, enough that she would show remorse to you?
    Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
    "If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter

  16. #66
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff View Post
    Oh, you know this person personally, enough that she would show remorse to you?
    Her statements in the OP link make it pretty clear her lack of remorse. What indication do you have of her remorse?

    None of the motorist that I managed to get into court showed any remorse, they were rather defiant in court. That includes a Hit&Run motorist, who after his probation was up, would honk his horn at me every time he passed me. He continues to ignore traffic laws by running very late red lights, speeding and cutting people off. Virtually every motorist who buzzes me or rudely honks their horns have several speeding tickets and too many have DUI convictions.
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  17. #67
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
    I said video *can* be considered hearsay in court without the testimony of the person who took it or is responsible for it, not that it was always hearsay, and I provided examples of such.
    Yes, you posted links talking about "day in the life" videos as if they had some relation to surveillance videos of a crime in progress.

    That is a false relationship to wrongly imply the that surveillance video by cyclist being discussed in BFs are hearsay.

    Are you now agreeing that surveillance video by cyclist is not hearsay?
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  18. #68
    Senior Member dougmc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    My Bikes
    Giant OCR2, Bridgestone RB-T, Bike-E, Vision R-40, Novara Safari
    Posts
    3,005
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    Are you now agreeing that surveillance video by cyclist is not hearsay?
    I've wasted enough time on you.

  19. #69
    Senior Member Brian Ratliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Near Portland, OR
    My Bikes
    Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
    Posts
    9,612
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    Her statements in the OP link make it pretty clear her lack of remorse. What indication do you have of her remorse?
    "statements" might be an overstatement. I saw a single comment, made to Facebook, a single line long.

    I assume that at best, she is privately remorseful, at worst, she is not homicidal. Would one minute of tears do it for you? Two minutes? A couple trite words? The damage is already done. Public words of contrition ain't going to help bring the dead back to life, might hurt if there is a civil case, and will be interpreted by you and your ilk in the worst possible light anyway (what words there are, already have, in fact).

    Besides, being forced to defend yourself against a criminal charge will tend to harden people. Our courts are relatively fair, but they kill our everyday, normal, emotional, human interactions in favor of a gladiatorial contest of words between hired champions.

    None of the motorist that I managed to get into court showed any remorse, they were rather defiant in court. ...
    Are you surprised? Court is adversarial by design. Say... you seem to attract more than your fair share of problems when you bike. Are you sure it's not just you?
    Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
    "If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter

  20. #70
    Senior Member Brian Ratliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Near Portland, OR
    My Bikes
    Three road bikes. Two track bikes.
    Posts
    9,612
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    ... Virtually every motorist who buzzes me or rudely honks their horns have several speeding tickets and too many have DUI convictions.
    Hawaii must be different than Oregon. People here aren't forced to list their traffic violations on the side of their car for all to see.

    Or do you take the license plate of everyone who honks or buzzes you and look up their record? Seems excessive...
    Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
    "If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter

  21. #71
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff View Post
    Hawaii must be different than Oregon. People here aren't forced to list their traffic violations on the side of their car for all to see.

    Or do you take the license plate of everyone who honks or buzzes you and look up their record? Seems excessive...
    Only the worst/repeat offenders. Pretty easy to do while watching the nightly news when it is on the internet.

    http://jimspss1.courts.state.hi.us:8...BB27625122A3F4

    If above does not work:

    http://www.courts.state.hi.us/legal_...ilability.html
    click on "Click Here to Enter eCourt Kokua"

    But for those who are not interested in the minds behind the JAMs, I guess they would say it is "excessive..."
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  22. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    Posts
    4,746
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff View Post
    Hawaii must be different than Oregon. People here aren't forced to list their traffic violations on the side of their car for all to see.
    Maybe they don't post them on their cars, but the majority of the time my local newspaper publishes information regarding a traffic fatality, the at-fault motorist has multiple DUII convictions and/or a currently suspended license or a history of license suspensions. It seems to me that a small number of dangerous motorists are causing a disproportionate percentage of the carnage.

  23. #73
    Senior Member howsteepisit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    My Bikes
    Mecian
    Posts
    2,926
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Or, in there is a disproportionate number of drivers who drive intoxicated , without current licenses, or have a history of suspensions. There are days when I am not sure this is the case, but its comforting to believe its a small number rather than a larger population of drunken, stoned, drugged up unlicensed drivers causing the "carnage".

    Just a thought
    Recycle, Reclaim, Reuse and Repair
    The 4 Rs to save the planet

    "Toes"

  24. #74
    Senior Member enigmaT120's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Falls City, OR
    My Bikes
    2012 Salsa Fargo 2, Rocky Mountain Fusion, circa '93
    Posts
    1,438
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by B. Carfree View Post
    Maybe they don't post them on their cars, but the majority of the time my local newspaper publishes information regarding a traffic fatality, the at-fault motorist has multiple DUII convictions and/or a currently suspended license or a history of license suspensions. It seems to me that a small number of dangerous motorists are causing a disproportionate percentage of the carnage.
    Polk County is different. All three bicyclists killed in 2012 were killed by sober drivers, no citations issued for the first two and I never did understand what was going on with the third. Recently an older lady pedestrian was killed trying to cross the street in front of her house. This time it was dark, so of course the woman who ran her down wasn't cited. It seems like our cops just make excuses for the killers. The deceased woman was using a walker.
    Ed Miller
    Falls City, OR
    1993 Rocky Mountain Fusion
    2012 Fargo 2

  25. #75
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    Posts
    4,746
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by enigmaT120 View Post
    Polk County is different. All three bicyclists killed in 2012 were killed by sober drivers, no citations issued for the first two and I never did understand what was going on with the third. Recently an older lady pedestrian was killed trying to cross the street in front of her house. This time it was dark, so of course the woman who ran her down wasn't cited. It seems like our cops just make excuses for the killers. The deceased woman was using a walker.
    We just had an elderly woman who was crossing the street with her walker in a marked crosswalk run down by a motorist. No citation was given; the cops said the sun might have risen in the east and been a factor, so they didn't cite the motorist. Who knew the sun rises in the east? Offhand, I can think of three violations that should have been cited here.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •