|
Post by Roger (over and out) on Mar 24, 2014 21:36:00 GMT -5
Aw, that's way too long for us to read, Lily. Can you shorten it to two lines?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2014 21:43:35 GMT -5
Debit card info got hacked by way of Target. Got new card. Paid $20. Clicked on a deer with a target on it's chest. Got cyber crime vrus. Got virus tool. Problem solved. Hang 'em all high!
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on Mar 24, 2014 22:47:45 GMT -5
Well done. You could get a job at Fox.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2014 22:59:33 GMT -5
Well done. You could get a job at Fox. I'd rather eat dirt.
|
|
|
Post by Gifthorse on Mar 26, 2014 14:53:12 GMT -5
They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. ~ Benjamin Franklin Everyone needs to re-read Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World if they think being surveilled by our own government is a good thing. One example: Red light cameras actually cause an increase in accidents according to independent studies (the studies NOT paid for by the camera-making industry). People see the cameras and hit their breaks hard during a yellow light because they are afraid of getting a ticket. Then they get hit from behind. Happens all the time. And, according to a recent study the yellow light time has been drastically shortened in order to catch more red light runners. People also get tickets mistakenly because the cameras 'catch' them making legal right-hand turns on red. But Governments like these cameras, not because they prevent accidents, but because they bring in easy revenue money. And the companies which make the cameras have big lobbies to push their products as well as pressurizing television news stations into reporting positively about red light cameras or they pulling their sponsorship. STUDY FINDS RED LIGHT CAMERAS CAUSE ACCIDENTSBarbara Langland-Orban, PhD, John T. Large, PhD, Etienne E. Pracht, PhD from the University of South Florida (USF) conducted a study on red light cameras in 2008. They updated their study in 2011. Langland-Orban, et. al. found that red light cameras (RLC) increase the number of accidents at intersections by 28%.
|
|
|
Post by tricia on Mar 26, 2014 20:46:58 GMT -5
Hi Dawn!
Since you brought up those stupid Red Light Cameras let me tell you what else they do that I don't know how it could be possibly fair or allowed...
When you get a ticket for "running" one, the ticket automatically goes to the person who's name is registered to the plates. When you get pulled over by an officer they don't care who the car is registered to the person DRIVING gets the ticket. How is it fair or legal for a camera system to ticket a person when they don't even know who was driving?! This has come up for me recently as I currently have three cars registered to my name. One is mine and I "co signed" for the other two cars so my kids could get the loan. Of course the dealership/finance company put my name first instead of second so the plates were registered to me.
So as it stands now, I have two vehicles that are not mine, in my name. All I did was sign for the loan to finance them and anything done wrong that is caught on camera will go on MY record. Needless to say, I will NEVER do it again but I don't think it's right that they can ticket you without knowing who was driving.
|
|
|
Post by Gifthorse on Mar 27, 2014 4:05:38 GMT -5
That sounds like such a racket to me, Tricia. Sorry you've had to put up with that. The whole thing stinks to high heaven imho. Hopefully more communities will demand that these red light cameras be removed. That would be a great first start at least. BTW, in case you haven't seen it you might want to watch the Edward Snowdon interview on Ted Talks, Here's how we take back the Internet. Cheers!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 22:36:57 GMT -5
I've been wondering. When did it start becoming okay to run a red light? I see it alot, though. And the stupid thing is while endangering lives, the car that did that, ends up next to another car that did stop at a red light. My belief (and it is the law) is when you see a yellow light up ahead, you should slow down and stop. The only time the car behind you should rear end you is when you keep going the same speed until you have to stop suddenly because the light turned red, when a person should have been paying attention. We don't have red light cameras here, but I don't think it would be a bad idea. There is absolutely no excuse to run a red light. None, none. none!
|
|
|
Post by tricia on Mar 29, 2014 22:55:05 GMT -5
Well, here's the thing, Lily....you don't have to "run" a red light to get the ticket. I know, I received one...well, a warning. See, the camera is not a person so it can't tell what you're doing whereas a policeman could watch you do the exact same thing and you wouldn't receive a ticket.
In my case I was turning right on red. I stopped, but I stopped past the line. I stopped past the line so that I would be able to see the traffic that was coming and know when it was safe to go. All that camera knows is that I didn't stop for the red light. It can't know that I didn't stop exactly where I was supposed to because I was turning and needed to be able to see around the other cars that are sitting there. It truly is a stupid system.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 23:17:05 GMT -5
When is a cop ever around when someone runs a red light? Basically never..at least when I've witnessed it. How does a camera not see when someone stops to turn right? I agree, there's something really wrong with that. In your area, is it always okay to make a right turn on red? Here, one can only make a right turn on red, when a sign says okay to make a right turn on red after a stop. Or is that what your problem was? You inched out to make a right turn on red, and the law is you're first supposed to make a full stop? And the camera didn't catch that full stop?
Anyway, this brings up a really strident complaint of mine...when the light is green for them and they make a right turn before stopping for pedestrians who's been waiting to walk across the street at a light. One car shoots through and then the other cars follow and you can forget about crossing the street, because once the walk sign starts flashing yellow, it's against the law to start crosssing. And what makes it worse is when you're finally able to cross because a right turn car finally stopped for you or all the right turn cars are gone, the cars making a left turn are screeching into your crosswalk. It's disgusting. I've had several close calls. One time I got so mad at at a right turn driver I held out my hand and shouted for him to stop, and he got mad at me!
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on Mar 29, 2014 23:24:07 GMT -5
Those automated fines are nothing but a racket. I get several every month (they've become a scourge in Europe). I have a pile of fines sitting beside me right now, all for nonsensical "misdemeanors". Like driving (for like two seconds) in a bus lane at 5am when the streets are deserted and there are no buses running. Parking in a no parking zone on Sunday in an area that's *deserted* on Sunday. I also have one for using my cellphone while driving, when in fact I only lifted it to my ear to tell the caller I couldn't talk to them as I was driving. One for driving without a seatbelt (I always fasten my seatbelt). One for parking on the pavement outside my house (again, it was early in the morning and the streets were deserted). A couple for exceeding the speed limit on the motorway (no one obeys the speed limit on the motorway here, and if you did drive below the limit the drivers behind you would go nuts, honking their horns and almost ramming you from the rear while flashing their headlight. I tried it once.) And they're not small fines, either. They're EUR300-400 each ($450-550). Theoretically you can appeal, but in practice no one ever wins. It's just a big money-making scam. And yet another reason to oppose CCTV. In the UK they're already talking about introducing fines for minor "social offenses" like crossing the road in the wrong place, throwing litter on the street, loitering etc. They'll be able to do this when the new system of facial recognition is rolled out over the next couple of years. So basically you won't be able to spit without getting a fine in the post a week later.
|
|
|
Post by tricia on Mar 29, 2014 23:25:30 GMT -5
No, here you can always make a right turn on red unless it's posted that you can't. I didn't stop prior to the line because you can't see what's coming. I guess you could stop prior to and then scoot up but that fact is that's not what anyone does and had there been a cop sitting there or behind me I'd have done exactly what I did and he'd have done nothing because I didn't do anything wrong. The camera can't think and doesn't know anything aside from you didn't stop....but I did, just not where the camera thinks I should have.
Where I was for that is an extremely busy intersection and no one really walks there. I work in a downtown area of a city though where there are a lot of cross walks and people walking around and you're supposed to let people go before you make a right or a left turn for that matter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2014 23:41:45 GMT -5
Because of all the pedestrian deaths here, the laws that cars must follow have gotten really stricter. Before, a car making a left turn could practically skid by your nose. Not anymore. One time if I hadn't not walked out as soon as the light turned to walk, I would have been run down by a female bitch talking on her cellphone (making a left turn on a multy lane divided highway). The light for her would have been red for some time. Another time I was crossing a street without a traffic light. She was making a left turn and kept turning into me until I screamed. She stopped and I yelled at her in her open window. What made it even worse, is that a cop car was right behind me when I was crossing and he didn't stop the driver of that car. I'm sorry to have to say this, but women are the most rude, inconsiderate, bad drivers.
P.S. Just by my experience. Exempting you and me. Because I'm very careful, and I'm sure you are, too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2014 13:17:20 GMT -5
Here's to clarify what I said about right turns on red lights in Hawaii. I wasn't totally accurate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2014 13:22:26 GMT -5
Now here's something I don't agree with, which I feel is intrusive and it's not by the government, but what I consider vigilante groups. What they do is take photos of people texting while driving and then they post it on a website or even on a billboard. It's called Twit Spotting. What do you think about this? Texting while driving is admittedly illegal and very dangerous. And also talking on the cellphone. www.twitspotting.com/how-to-participate/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2014 20:04:00 GMT -5
By the way, I forgot about the third time a woman driver tried to kill me when I landed on the hood of her car. It really was partly my fault.. I was walking into a crosswalk at the traffic light. My bad that I started in when the hand was flashing yellow. Anyway, the woman in the car was going to turn right (she still had the red light) and was looking left for oncoming cars. Okay, good, but then she started her turn before looking right where I was. And thank goodness she was turning slowly so that I landed very lightly on the side of her hood. She of course looked very shocked. It was my bad that I started across on the yellow, but isn't this what cars do every day of the year? Wrong is wrong, for cars and pedestrians. We've all got to drive and walk with caution and follow the law. The law is not just to provide revenue via fines, but to keep all of us safe.
P.S. Just so I don't sound like a total dumb cluck, the car was still behind the crosswalk when she moved up to turn.
|
|