smoking actually comes to mind, as does alcohol, but the government taxes them significantly…
I am one who is of the opinion that fees based on usage of things make sense. Likewise, taxes on things that cost society money ought to also be a good thing. Otherwise, there’s little relation between use of something and the bearers of the cost, which will result in overuse and overpayment (overtaxing) every time.
Luke 8:22-25
quote:
Originally posted by Phinquote:
Originally posted by skinneejBut how does me choosing not to wear a seat belt affect your freedom?
Maybe not my freedom…
but my tax bill.
Society has chosen to pay for EMS, health care and even the light bill at the morgue for folks, and seatbelts have some affect on those things they say…
I know I have had three friends die in single car accidents where there was a crash at under 45mph. There are a half dozen others that were part of my personal or work circles at times who have also died when they would have lived if they’d worn a seat belt.
Society bears the cost sometimes for bad personal choices. On a personal level, I think it’s a selfish choice to make when your family and loved ones lose you all because you may have wanted to feel more free. Similar issue with motorcycle and four wheeler helmets.
The motorcycle guys use the personal liberty argument successfully to block any laws, but I guess kids who might operate ATV’s in SC weren’t so “fortunate” in their fight. They’ve got to wear helmets now…
We wouldn’t need any of these laws if our choices didn’t affect others so much.
When someone dies on the hwy, they close it down to take 1000 pictures and measure everything as part of investigation. It could have instead been as simple as an EMT or fireman asking someone if they wished to decline medical treatment, and the tow truck comes and everyone’s back on their way to where they were going. Somebody’s insurance premiums go up, and lawyers don’t get to fight as much.
http://www.sustainablefishing.org/
www.joinrfa.com
Luke 8:22-25
<hr height="1" noshade id="quot
quote:TRUTH!!!! When will the Oreo cookie tax be upon us?!?!?
Originally posted by Mac509Preface: I always wear a seatbelt, and anyone who doesn’t is being stupid.
However, the majority of this argument could be replaced with “eating poorly and not exercising”, except for there are no laws against being unhealthy. I’d bet heart disease is more of a burden to your insurance premiums than sudden death due to lack of a seatbelt.
I’ve never agreed with that law, little too much big brother action there.
quote:There was a war started on a "Tea Tax"...
Originally posted by Phinsmoking actually comes to mind, as does alcohol, but the government taxes them significantly…
I am one who is of the opinion that fees based on usage of things make sense. Likewise, taxes on things that cost society money ought to also be a good thing. Otherwise, there’s little relation between use of something and the bearers of the cost, which will result in overuse and overpayment (overtaxing) every time.
http://www.sustainablefishing.org/
www.joinrfa.com
Luke 8:22-25
There are plenty of true “use taxes”… Admission into a museum, national park, etc. Use of a toll bridge or toll road, etc. I think those are all fair.
Tax on gasoline is probably the most fair tax there is…
Not sure about “sin tax” like alcohol or smoking. If the tax that was collected was earmarked towards something like cancer research, then I would think its arguably fair. Doubt that is the case. The money collected probably goes into the general treasury and is spent on something unrelated.
I guess you could use the argument that we need more cops to deal with unruly drunks, but isn’t that what fines are for?
quote:
Originally posted by PhinPZ,
legal advice would have been to keep quiet when stopped, but you may have already admitted violation of laws out loud to some folks here. I am not sure- only you know. That makes defense pretty difficult.
If you had said nothing, then you could go into court and silently allow the cop to make his case against you. Many times, cops are not used to doing this, and they fail to prove essential elements before the judge. At that point you ask for the judge to dismiss the charges and explain why.
There has to be proof beyond a reasonable doubt. There’s a law that requires motorists to give an audible signal when passing another vehicle when heading in the same direction. There’s case law where this was used by a plaintiff’s attorney in an argument that a driver who hit a bicycle as it was being past was guilty of violation of that law and therefore negligent per se.
Was there a bicycle or moped being passed by you as you blew the horn? Does the officer know why you blew the horn? He was busy writing someone else a ticket you say.
Next, there is the issue of him not being the guy who pulled you. Is the cop who pulled you going to show up to court? How did he know to pull you? Radio? Objection to hearsay, your honor. Does either cop understand the rules of evidence enough to get around this?
How does either cop know you were who blew the horn? One wasn’t present at all, and the other was preoccupied.
Reasonable doubt.
Is there any other reasonable explanation for what happened besides “YOU BLEW THAT HORN FOR NO GOOD REASON?”
That’s the standard that has to be met.
Now, none of that works if you have admitted to one or both of the cops that you blew the horn for no good reason. Well, it will at least be difficult for it to work then.
Legal counsel here, though,
it seems as though you encounter this LEO d
Skint knee,
Public hospitals and emergency rooms are supported by tax money. Medicaid and medicare are tax money. Society most certainly does pay those costs for healthcare as well as the new mandatory costs of health insurance on employers thanks to Obama.
I thought Dr. Skinnee spent some time in a trauma hospital for a bit in her training. Did she not wonder how much “free” medical and dental care is demanded by folks?
Small community hospitals across this state are plagued with this, and staffs and management don’t even think about how they’re going deeper into the hole as people come in who need healthcare. Why be more careful if you don’t have to pay for medical costs? In fact, word on the street is that you need to get those bills up as high as possible so you can slap a lawsuit on whoever was nearby who might have a fat liability insurance policy.
Then, society is paying higher costs indirectly again.
And the tea party was not about whether it was a good idea to raise revenue off tea going into Boston. It was about whether the taxation without representation was something we wished to no longer tolerate.
The tax was going right to the British, and our merchants had a financial interest in helping finance a rebellion and helping stir the masses into rallies around flags of liberty and freedom. Meanwhile, southern folks had an interest in helping the French by picking a fight with the British. A lot of these guys didn’t think we’d actually win I’ll bet. The British didn’t like being picked on I guess, and we ended up having to follow through on what we started.
You know this.
It was all just economics.
Luke 8:22-25
quote:
Originally posted by skinneejquote:There was a war started on a "Tea Tax"...
Originally posted by Phinsmoking actually comes to mind, as does alcohol, but the government taxes them significantly…
I am one who is of the opinion that fees based on usage of things make sense. Likewise, taxes on things that cost society money ought to also be a good thing. Otherwise, there’s little relation between use of something and the bearers of the cost, which will result in overuse and overpayment (overtaxing) every time.
http://www.sustainablefishing.org/
www.joinrfa.com
Luke 8:22-25
There are plenty of true “use taxes”… Admission into a museum, national park, etc. Use of a toll bridge or toll road, etc. I think those are all fair.
Tax on gasoline is probably the most fair tax there is…
Not sure about “sin tax” like alcohol or smoking. If the tax that was collected was earmarked towards something like cancer research, then I would think its arguably fair. Doubt that is the case. The money collected probably goes into the general treasury and is spent on something unrelated.
I guess you could use the argument that we need more cops to deal with unruly drunks, but isn’t that what fines are for?
Or more officers to control the unruly horn blowers! True story…As we were leaving the side street; two cars drove in front of us and blew the horn at some pedestrians. The officer was still behind me; I looked back at him and motioned for him to go get em’. He was not amused…
“Endeavor to Persevere.
Give,Give… Never Take.”
EC
quote:
Originally posted by pescazorroquote:
Originally posted by PhinPZ,
legal advice would have been to keep quiet when stopped, but you may have already admitted violation of laws out loud to some folks here. I am not sure- only you know. That makes defense pretty difficult.
If you had said nothing, then you could go into court and silently allow the cop to make his case against you. Many times, cops are not used to doing this, and they fail to prove essential elements before the judge. At that point you ask for the judge to dismiss the charges and explain why.
There has to be proof beyond a reasonable doubt. There’s a law that requires motorists to give an audible signal when passing another vehicle when heading in the same direction. There’s case law where this was used by a plaintiff’s attorney in an argument that a driver who hit a bicycle as it was being past was guilty of violation of that law and therefore negligent per se.
Was there a bicycle or moped being passed by you as you blew the horn? Does the officer know why you blew the horn? He was busy writing someone else a ticket you say.
Next, there is the issue of him not being the guy who pulled you. Is the cop who pulled you going to show up to court? How did he know to pull you? Radio? Objection to hearsay, your honor. Does either cop understand the rules of evidence enough to get around this?
How does either cop know you were who blew the horn? One wasn’t present at all, and the other was preoccupied.
Reasonable doubt.
Is there any other reasonable explanation for what happened besides “YOU BLEW THAT HORN FOR NO GOOD REASON?”
That’s the standard that has to be met.
Now, none of that works if you have admitted to one or both of the cops that you blew the
quote:
Originally posted by Phinquote:
Originally posted by pescazorroquote:
Originally posted by PhinPZ,
legal advice would have been to keep quiet when stopped, but you may have already admitted violation of laws out loud to some folks here. I am not sure- only you know. That makes defense pretty difficult.
If you had said nothing, then you could go into court and silently allow the cop to make his case against you. Many times, cops are not used to doing this, and they fail to prove essential elements before the judge. At that point you ask for the judge to dismiss the charges and explain why.
There has to be proof beyond a reasonable doubt. There’s a law that requires motorists to give an audible signal when passing another vehicle when heading in the same direction. There’s case law where this was used by a plaintiff’s attorney in an argument that a driver who hit a bicycle as it was being past was guilty of violation of that law and therefore negligent per se.
Was there a bicycle or moped being passed by you as you blew the horn? Does the officer know why you blew the horn? He was busy writing someone else a ticket you say.
Next, there is the issue of him not being the guy who pulled you. Is the cop who pulled you going to show up to court? How did he know to pull you? Radio? Objection to hearsay, your honor. Does either cop understand the rules of evidence enough to get around this?
How does either cop know you were who blew the horn? One wasn’t present at all, and the other was preoccupied.
Reasonable doubt.
Is there any other reasonable explanation for what happened besides "YOU BLEW THAT HORN
Are you trying to prove the length of the afternoon stop?
All this cuts both ways, Constitutional law notwithstanding.
The camera may not have been running or it could show you arguing or whatever other behavior or speech, including your admissions of anything. It’s all about perception. A judge likely won’t look at it the way you will. You were there, and you felt what was happening. The judge wasn’t.
To get the dash cam video, if it exists, you file an FOIA request with the public entity requesting the video. Your request needs to be as specific as possible, and there may be reasonable fees associated with your request. I.e.: cost of a CD and somebody’s time spent making you a copy.
The more you go into all this, the more scrutiny you and your truck are going to receive on the highway. You’ll also be ensuring that both officers will make time to show up for any court date. You’re effectively putting them on notice that you’ll be claiming they did something improper. You’ll have them speaking with their department’s attorney(s) and preparing for you as if it was the case of the year for them.
Think about it…
All this is free advice. You get what you pay for, remember. I’d recommend consulting and retaining an attorney before undertaking any challenge to the ticket. Going into court and admitting guilt, and only admitting guilt is entirely different. If you plan to go into court and tell the judge about how these cops went about all this the wrong way, although you’re sorry about it all- that’s not going and admitting guilt. You won’t prevail if you do that in front of the magistrate.
As Jimbo Fisher says, “humble pie.”
Humble pie is the only thing that could get you somewhere. If you want more than that, you need a lawyer.
Some magistrates aren’t lawyers, and they have little patience for lawyers telling them about Constitutional law. If this was something in circuit court, it would be different. In magistrate court, the first thing the judge will look at is the amo
“Medicaid and medicare are tax money”
Erroneous! Old people wear seat belts and poor people don’t have cars.
quote:
Originally posted by PhinAre you trying to prove the length of the afternoon stop?
All this cuts both ways, Constitutional law notwithstanding.
The camera may not have been running or it could show you arguing or whatever other behavior or speech, including your admissions of anything. It’s all about perception. A judge likely won’t look at it the way you will. You were there, and you felt what was happening. The judge wasn’t.
To get the dash cam video, if it exists, you file an FOIA request with the public entity requesting the video. Your request needs to be as specific as possible, and there may be reasonable fees associated with your request. I.e.: cost of a CD and somebody’s time spent making you a copy.
The more you go into all this, the more scrutiny you and your truck are going to receive on the highway. You’ll also be ensuring that both officers will make time to show up for any court date. You’re effectively putting them on notice that you’ll be claiming they did something improper. You’ll have them speaking with their department’s attorney(s) and preparing for you as if it was the case of the year for them.
Think about it…
All this is free advice. You get what you pay for, remember. I’d recommend consulting and retaining an attorney before undertaking any challenge to the ticket. Going into court and admitting guilt, and only admitting guilt is entirely different. If you plan to go into court and tell the judge about how these cops went about all this the wrong way, although you’re sorry about it all- that’s not going and admitting guilt. You won’t prevail if you do that in front of the magistrate.
As Jimbo Fisher says, “humble pie.”
Humble pie is the only thing that could get you somewhere. If you want more than that, you need a lawyer.
Some magistrates aren’t lawyers, and they have little patience for lawyers telling th
quote:
Originally posted by PhinSkint knee,
Public hospitals and emergency rooms are supported by tax money. Medicaid and medicare are tax money. Society most certainly does pay those costs for healthcare as well as the new mandatory costs of health insurance on employers thanks to Obama.
I thought I told you that I wasn’t a recipient of medicaid or medicare. Why not just make THEM (recipients) wear seatbelts? That sounds like a fair compromise. Or at least make the people who voted for Obama wear their seatbelt since it’s obvious they are too dumb to decide anything on their own. I mean after all, they voted for Obama.
quote:
I thought Dr. Skinnee spent some time in a trauma hospital for a bit in her training. Did she not wonder how much "free" medical and dental care is demanded by folks?
Have them quantify it mathematically. It seems something that could easily be quantified through statistical analysis. And when they figured out how much money we saved as a society, send the taxpayers a rebate. I mean afterall, if we are going to pay for people’s healthcare, then they can refund me any “savings” we come up with as a society. Phin, this is insurance 101. If I don’t get any speeding tickets, my insurance premiums go down as a reward. I remove the risk and insurance companies reward me by giving me money back. So, if we are building a pot of “insurance” for automobile accidents with no seat belt, why didn’t I get any money back when we passed a law to remove the risk? What if progressive told you, "Hey Phin, you haven’t had any speeding tickets in 5 years, but we are not going to reduce
pescazorro
Senior Member
Phin:
That’s sound advice right there!, however my pride will not let me apologize to this guy. If you all were there, you would understand.
Guys:
I appreciate the constructive responses. I was hoping to work an angle with this being a bogus stop given the way it went down. But it sounds like they followed their protocols. One last question along those lines though, if the other officer does not show up, could that result in the case being thrown out?
I think your court scenario above would probably result in the case being dropped but it would require one of two things to happen: Either I would have to lie and compromise my own integrity which isn’t going to happen or I would have to hire a lawyer which would clearly be cost prohibitive for a non-moving violation.
In the end, I think I will tint my windows and continue my civil disobedience in relative obscurity…
“Endeavor to Persevere.
Give,Give… Never Take.”
EC
quote:
Originally posted by pescazorroThanks Phin!
I think that’s the approach I’ll take. I think I will tell the court that I regret how all of this transpired. Ask the judge for leniency on the fine as it seems awfully steep for blowing my horn. Explain I regret my closing comments to the officer at the conclusion of our encounter and that I will do my level best to remain within the confines of the law.
Tinted windows here we come baby!
“Endeavor to Persevere.
Give,Give… Never Take.”
EC
There goes any credibility.
Hows that?
“Endeavor to Persevere.
Give,Give… Never Take.”
EC
ask to see dash cam an the officer body cam!! if they were not working then it his word against your.
I always make sure my cams are working.
then it up to the judge.
quote:
Originally posted by Wando GrillThink of the fine as your tuition payment to the school of anger management.
Great line! Very, very true.
quote:
Originally posted by skinneejquote:Disagree with that statement. An adult should not be forced by law to wear a seat belt. Wearing a seat belt should be a matter of a personal choice.
Originally posted by jisuhoBelieve it or not, there are some good laws out there. This is one of them.
Personal choice would be OK for not using a seatbelt if it only involved the driver and his or her passengers, but it does not. When a driver has to make an evasive maneuver, hits a curb, gets hit by another vehicle, the driver has the very real possibility of being dislodged from behind the steering wheel and allowing the vehicle to get out of control. If I’m not involved in the initial accident, I am at risk of being hurt or injured by a vehicle without it’s driver behind the wheel or the driver stuck through the windshield.
It’s not so much about the choice the driver makes for their own personal safety, it’s about keeping the driver behind the wheel where they have a better chance of keeping the vehicle under control.
“I am constantly amazed at the stupidity of the general public.”
~my dad
Equipment:
190cc Sea Pro w/130 Johnson
1- 19 year old (boy of leisure)
1 -
Just let it go. You got caught breaking the law(on more than one occasion) and you were kind of a dick to the LEO. It’s not the cops’ fault that you weren’t wearing a seat belt or speeding, whether it was 6 mph over or 60 mph over the limit. It’s your own fault. YOU GOT CAUGHT, DEAL WITH IT! Pay the fines, wear your seat belt and try to keep it less than 5mph over the posted speed limit, then you should be good to go.
If you get your windows tinted, make sure they are within the legal limit or you’ll get popped for that, in addition to the seat belt(that you’re not wearing) violation.
One last thing. If you insist on providing the LEO with donuts, invest in a warmer bag like the pizza guys have. That way you can keep those Krispy Kreme’s nice and warm.
Bob Van Gundy
Marine Designs,Inc.
Custom Aluminum Fabrication
803-727-4069
skint knee,
don’t you get why a society who wants the government to give everyone everything they need would be the same society who wants government to dictate personal choices as well? The two kinda have to go with one another- or else we have a bunch of reckless spoiled brats running around…
oh wait…
nevermind
Luke 8:22-25
quote:
Originally posted by Phinskint knee,
don’t you get why a society who wants the government to give everyone everything they need would be the same society who wants government to dictate personal choices as well? The two kinda have to go with one another- or else we have a bunch of reckless spoiled brats running around…
oh wait…
nevermind
http://www.sustainablefishing.org/
www.joinrfa.com
Luke 8:22-25
What an unfortunate reality that is…
Grace gives us what we do not deserve… Mercy does not give us what we do deserve. -Charles Stanley