AARoads Forum

I just stumbled across an interesting article explaining why Virginia is the only state in the nation that bans radar detectors and why previous attempts to change it failed.

https://pilotonline.com/ask/article_88328276-48ce-11e8-8328-53ae311887d4.html (https://pilotonline.com/ask/article_88328276-48ce-11e8-8328-53ae311887d4.html)

Quote from: LM117 on May 13, 2018, 07:33:35 AM
I just stumbled across an interesting article explaining why Virginia is the only state in the nation that bans radar detectors and why previous attempts to change it failed.

Article not accessible without a subscription.  Radar detectors exist for no other reason than to commit a crime.

Quote from: Beltway on May 13, 2018, 07:52:05 AM

Quote from: LM117 on May 13, 2018, 07:33:35 AM
I just stumbled across an interesting article explaining why Virginia is the only state in the nation that bans radar detectors and why previous attempts to change it failed.

https://pilotonline.com/ask/article_88328276-48ce-11e8-8328-53ae311887d4.html (https://pilotonline.com/ask/article_88328276-48ce-11e8-8328-53ae311887d4.html)

Article not accessible without a subscription.  Radar detectors exist for no other reason than to commit a crime.

I don't have a subscription and it worked fine for me, but anyway here's the article:

QuoteVirginia remains the only state where radar detectors in vehicles are illegal.

A curious reader wanted to know why. He asked The Pilot as part of its ongoing "Glad you Asked"  feature, where we invite readers to submit questions to check out. Have a question of your own? Go to pilotonline.com/ask.

Radar detectors are in-vehicle devices that essentially alert drivers that police are using radar guns to detect speed. The goal is to avoid getting speeding tickets.

But why do Virginia and the District of Columbia stand alone while the other 49 states have lifted bans?

There's no direct answer, but lawmakers and political observers say it comes down to a few things:

1. Why legalize something that essentially makes it easier to break the law?

2. Virginia can historically be slow to change its laws.

3. The detector technology, popular in the "˜80s, "˜90s and 2000s, is largely becoming obsolete.

Former state trooper and current Virginia State Sen. Bill Carrico said most people who use detectors are doing so to violate the law. Why should the state allow it?

He said law enforcement often picks up wanted criminals, drug trafficking and more through traffic stops. Legalize detectors, he says, and more would slip through cops' fingers.

"I've never supported a change to the law,"  Carrico said.

The ban on radar detectors in Virginia started in 1962. Similar laws have been enacted in other states only to be repealed over the years.

You can't sell the devices in Virginia and you can get a traffic ticket that comes with a fine of no more than $250 if the device is accessible to drivers or passengers in a vehicle — even if it's not being used at the time. Police can also confiscate the devices.

The General Assembly has proposed bills to change the laws over the years, but all have failed.

The 2010 repeal was defeated in the House 61-38. The 2015 repeal didn't even make it out of committee.

Del. David LaRock, who pitched the 2015 bill to allow radar detectors at a constituent's request, told a TV station that there's no evidence the detectors improve highway safety.

"It's never been shown that radar detectors cause accidents. It's difficult and expensive to enforce, so there are a lot of reasons to repeal it,"  LaRock said.

Google "why are radar detectors illegal in Virginia?"  and you'll get a crop of people opining about speed traps being a state cash cow. But it appears the state doesn't know how the repeal of the detector ban would affect the bottom line, according to a fiscal impact statement for the 2010 bill.

"The proposed legislation could potentially affect revenue collected from the fines paid for this traffic violation; however, it is not possible to estimate the fiscal impact as data is insufficient and contributing factors are unknown,"  the document read.

Virginia also can be slow to update or change seemingly archaic laws. It was only this year that the state increased its felony threshold for stealing goods from $250 to $500, finally joining the middle-of-the-pack of states after being in the basement for decades. It took years to eliminate the Sunday "blue laws"  for liquor sales. There are also prohibitions on cursing and extramarital sex that are still on the books.

"In Virginia, we never rush into things,"  Del. Joe May told a subcommittee hearing on his radar detector repeal bill in 2010. "This is one of those things that we haven't rushed into, and I think it's time we did."

He said the law had outlived its usefulness and created an inhospitable climate for visitors passing through the state.

As for technology, the Virginia State Police say they use a number of different types of equipment, including LIDAR, "pacing"  and VASCAR to catch speeders. The state police wrote 13,673 tickets in 10 months from 1990 to 1991, when radar detectors were more popular.

Carrico says newer police speed detectors have a "hold"  button that doesn't emit the radar until it's needed, basically making the radar detection systems useful, but only after it's too late and cops have got you clocked.

And on the consumer side, apps like Waze have used crowd-sourcing data to point out speed traps, largely making the detectors, which can cost up to $500, obsolete.

So why have other states changed it?

"Maybe they didn't have a law enforcement officer in their legislature,"  Carrico said.

Quote

Quote
So why have other states changed it?

Most states likely never had a  specific ban in the first place.

That doesn't mean that it is legal, as the laws around the country are murky --

https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2012/08/are-radar-detectors-legal.html

However, before installing a radar detector in your car or phone, you should know that it may be illegal for you to drive with a radar detector.

Generally, radar detector laws for personal vehicles are state specific.  So there is no universal answer to whether radar detectors are legal.  Some jurisdictions have flat-out prohibitions from using radar detectors like in Virginia and the District of Columbia.  While other states like California, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey have prohibitions from placing things like radar detectors on your windshield.

In many states, there are no laws that specifically prohibit the use of radar detectors.  But even when the law does not have a specific prohibition, you may want to consult with an attorney to learn all the possible exceptions and conditions for legally having a radar detector in your car.

While radar detectors laws for personal vehicles are typically left to the states, drivers of commercial vehicles should be aware that there are federal regulations that specifically prohibit radar detectors.  So even if your state allows these detectors for personal cars, it will still be illegal if you drive a commercial vehicle.

^^^ So this basically means that even if you come to a full stop before or upon crossing the state line, remove your radar detector from its mount and then place it elsewhere in a hatchback, SUV, or other vehicle without a separate trunk, you are in violation of the law because technically it would still be accessible to the driver or passengers.

What a load of crap.

I typically take mine down while in motion and stick it in the console compartment.

Yet another reason to dislike driving in Virginia.

Then please stop driving in Virginia if it gets your semicolon in a uproar.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 13, 2018, 03:27:03 PM
^^^ So this basically means that even if you come to a full stop before or upon crossing the state line, remove your radar detector from its mount and then place it elsewhere in a hatchback, SUV, or other vehicle without a separate trunk, you are in violation of the law because technically it would still be accessible to the driver or passengers.

....

The statute actually refers to it being "readily accessible" to the driver or passengers. The article quoted above says "accessible," but it's a bit more nuanced than that. If you have a hatchback and you tuck the device into a duffel bag in the back beneath other luggage, you have a fair argument that it's not "readily accessible."

The article is a little misleading when it says police can confiscate the device. That doesn't mean they can keep it for good. They can take it only if needed as evidence; once it's no longer needed, the statute requires them to mail it back to you at your expense. I believe they originally tried to confiscate and destroy them but a federal court ruled they couldn't do that because the devices are legal elsewhere.

I used to use my Valentine One in Virginia when driving at night, but nowadays I don't even take it on out-of-state trips because I just don't drive as fast as I used to for a variety of reasons.

^ Also keep in mind that the police won't know you might have a detector on board unless your detector is visible, your vehicle has visible wiring or other stuff (like a V1 remote display) to tip off the cop, the cop finds some basis for a vehicle search, or the detector has its power on (such as if it's battery-powered and not turned off) and so can be picked up by a radar detector detector (in which case the device doesn't even qualify for the "in the trunk" exemption, which requires it to be unpowered).

Virginia law focuses on use of a detector while driving, not mere possession. It presumes that a detector was in use if it was "readily accessible", but if the detector is hidden under luggage in the back compartment of a hatchback, you can overcome that presumption.

$449 on Amazon.   That takes a True Believer to want to spend that.  Seems like it would be easier to set the cruise control to 5 to 7 mph over a limit such as 70 and take advantage of that speed (and no, in over a million miles of driving I have never been ticketed for 5 to 7 mph over a limit and I do it routinely, and for that matter the vast majority of the miles in Virginia).

Quote from: Beltway on May 13, 2018, 09:10:39 PM
$449 on Amazon.

The V1 is about $50 less expensive when ordered direct from the manufacturer. And worth every penny.

That said, I'm driving slower in my old age, though even my elderly Prius is not safe from abusive small-town speed traps. When I get a new car,  I'm unsure whether I'll go through the trouble of installing the wiring needed for the optional remote display (so I can hang the detector from the passenger-side visor) I salvaged from my pickup truck before I put it out to pasture.

It would be a waste of every penny for me, as I outlined.

Mine has saved me at least twice its cost in speeding tickets.

Quote from: Beltway on May 13, 2018, 09:10:39 PM
$449 on Amazon.   That takes a True Believer to want to spend that.  Seems like it would be easier to set the cruise control to 5 to 7 mph over a limit such as 70 and take advantage of that speed (and no, in over a million miles of driving I have never been ticketed for 5 to 7 mph over a limit and I do it routinely, and for that matter the vast majority of the miles in Virginia).

To me, the issue isn't going 75 or 77 on a freeway, but places on two-lane roads where the speed limit drops from 55 to 45 or lower when there's no apparent good reason for it.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 14, 2018, 10:11:33 AM
Mine has saved me at least twice its cost in speeding tickets.

Absence of one has cost me zero in speeding tickets.  In over a million miles.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 14, 2018, 10:11:33 AM
To me, the issue isn't going 75 or 77 on a freeway, but places on two-lane roads where the speed limit drops from 55 to 45 or lower when there's no apparent good reason for it.

Normally that happens when entering a town or village area.

Quote from: Beltway on May 14, 2018, 10:52:54 AM
Normally that happens when entering a town or village area.

Sometimes it happens when the town limits are far from the populated area, and the speed limit suddenly drops from 55 to 25 at the town limit with no advance warning. The most glaring example I have in mind is in Idaho, but I've seen that in other states too.

I have never had a radar detector and will likely never spend my money on one.

The article rendered fine for me.

The bigger issue regarding radar detectors is that they are being made obsolete by Internet technology, at least where law enforcement engages in stationary speed limit enforcement with radar (the VSP seem to do less of this than  they used to, but it seems more common by municipal cops, especially at the edge of smaller cities and towns).

As stated in the article:

QuoteCarrico says newer police speed detectors have a "hold"  button that doesn't emit the radar until it's needed, basically making the radar detection systems useful, but only after it's too late and cops have got you clocked.

QuoteAnd on the consumer side, apps like Waze have used crowd-sourcing data to point out speed traps, largely making the detectors, which can cost up to $500, obsolete.

In Northern Virginia, the City of Falls Church and the Towns of Haymarket, Vienna and Leesburg seem to do a lot of speed limit enforcement, based on my own non-systematic observations.  Falls Church appears to be the place with the strictest speed limit enforcement in Northern Virginia these days - I had an unmarked Falls Church police car start to tail me on VA-338 (Hillwood Avenue).  Out of spite, I slowed from the posted 25 MPH limit down to 15, which visibly angered the cop (I  think he thought that a Maryland driver would be  an easy mark for a speeding summons in Falls Church), and after a few blocks, he turned off to look elsewhere for a speeder.

City of Fairfax used to have extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement, but much of that seems to have gone away for reasons not clear to me.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 14, 2018, 11:31:52 AM
In Northern Virginia, the City of Falls Church and the Towns of Haymarket, Vienna and Leesburg seem to do a lot of speed limit enforcement, based on my own non-systematic observations.  Falls Church appears to be the place with the strictest speed limit enforcement in Northern Virginia these days

As a resident of an adjacent county, with many of my doctors practicing in Falls Church, I can confirm that Falls Church has long been super-strict on speed enforcement. Best to treat the entire city as a speed trap. Fortunately, only a little more than two square miles within its city limits (as opposed to the much larger area with Falls Church mailing addresses), including none of I-66 or US 50. So unless you've traveling the entire length of VA 7 along the city's northwest-southeast axis, you won't be there for long.

Left unsaid in this discussion is that many houses are directly along VA-7 in the City of Falls Church. So if you want to gripe about being "forced" to go the speed limit along VA-7, consider how you would feel about people blowing by your residences 10-15 over the limit.

If you want to go fast, take I-66 or US-50. I have no beef with Falls Church enforcing rules strictly for the protection of their own residents.

Quote from: oscar on May 14, 2018, 11:52:22 AM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 14, 2018, 11:31:52 AM
In Northern Virginia, the City of Falls Church and the Towns of Haymarket, Vienna and Leesburg seem to do a lot of speed limit enforcement, based on my own non-systematic observations.  Falls Church appears to be the place with the strictest speed limit enforcement in Northern Virginia these days

As a resident of an adjacent county, with many of my doctors practicing in Falls Church, I can confirm that Falls Church has long been super-strict on speed enforcement. Best to treat the entire city as a speed trap. Fortunately, only a little more than two square miles within its city limits (as opposed to the much larger area with Falls Church mailing addresses), including none of I-66 or US 50. So unless you've traveling the entire length of VA 7 along the city's northwest-southeast axis, you won't be there for long.

i.e. obey the speed limit?

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 14, 2018, 11:31:52 AM

The bigger issue regarding radar detectors is that they are being made obsolete by Internet technology, at least where law enforcement engages in stationary speed limit enforcement with radar (the VSP seem to do less of this than  they used to, but it seems more common by municipal cops, especially at the edge of smaller cities and towns).

As stated in the article:

QuoteCarrico says newer police speed detectors have a "hold"  button that doesn't emit the radar until it's needed, basically making the radar detection systems useful, but only after it's too late and cops have got you clocked.

QuoteAnd on the consumer side, apps like Waze have used crowd-sourcing data to point out speed traps, largely making the detectors, which can cost up to $500, obsolete.

Most of my encounters have been when meeting a cop running radar, not stationary enforcement. Last weekend I saw a Tennessee state trooper parked running radar in an area where there was no cell service, making Waze useless for that purpose (it already isn't very helpful when the cop is mobile and running radar at oncoming traffic.)

"Instant-on" technology has been around for years now, but if the cop clocks someone ahead of you, the V1 will pick that up and give you ample warning to slow down to the arbitrarily-chosen number.

I lived in Falls Church.  Never got a ticket and wasn't aware of any excessive enforcement, but I travelled at times where it was impossible to speed most of the time anyway.

Quote from: AlexandriaVA on May 14, 2018, 12:04:10 PM

Quote from: oscar on May 14, 2018, 11:52:22 AM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 14, 2018, 11:31:52 AM
In Northern Virginia, the City of Falls Church and the Towns of Haymarket, Vienna and Leesburg seem to do a lot of speed limit enforcement, based on my own non-systematic observations.  Falls Church appears to be the place with the strictest speed limit enforcement in Northern Virginia these days

As a resident of an adjacent county, with many of my doctors practicing in Falls Church, I can confirm that Falls Church has long been super-strict on speed enforcement. Best to treat the entire city as a speed trap. Fortunately, only a little more than two square miles within its city limits (as opposed to the much larger area with Falls Church mailing addresses), including none of I-66 or US 50. So unless you've traveling the entire length of VA 7 along the city's northwest-southeast axis, you won't be there for long.

i.e. obey the speed limit?

Ahem, New Rome, Ohio (https://www.caranddriver.com/features/town-without-pity). Granted this now defunct Ohio village had many problems outside of its illegal speed traps.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 14, 2018, 11:31:52 AM
City of Fairfax used to have extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement, but much of that seems to have gone away for reasons not clear to me.

How do you define "extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement"?  I am a uniformed volunteer with a local PD, not a sworn officer, does not have arrest powers; but I know for a fact that if speeding is the only issue observed by an officer, that they do not issue summons at under limit+15 mph unless there is authorization from a command level officer (as in Captain or above), and that is rarely given.  Two Sergeants in the Traffic Unit told us that in a training session on traffic control, and they said that nearly all other PDs follow the same practices.  Otherwise LE and the courts would be clogged up with meaningless work.

Quote from: Beltway on May 14, 2018, 03:40:11 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 14, 2018, 11:31:52 AM
City of Fairfax used to have extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement, but much of that seems to have gone away for reasons not clear to me.

How do you define "extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement"?  I am a uniformed volunteer with a local PD, not a sworn officer, does not have arrest powers; but I know for a fact that if speeding is the only issue observed by an officer, that they do not issue summons at under limit+15 mph unless there is authorization from a command level officer (as in Captain or above), and that is rarely given.  Two Sergeants in the Traffic Unit told us that in a training session on traffic control, and they said that nearly all other PDs follow the same practices.  Otherwise LE and the courts would be clogged up with meaningless work.

Depends on jurisdiction. I had a state officer in Ohio and New York informing me that they don't ticket for anything less than 10 MPH over on interstates. But when small towns and rogue sheriffs operate revenue enhancement zones, sometimes illegally, that's where people take greater (and a more legitimate) stance. It's an issue in all states.

I see it two ways: legitimate speed enforcement through towns, and revenue traps. I don't argue that speeding through residential neighborhoods and dense urban environments is bad, but when the primary motivator is revenue for one department, then that opens up the law to interpretation. Not every town has safety as its number one interest. It may be partially because cities - especially small towns and resource-poor counties, overly rely on rogue officers (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/11/us/whereabouts-of-cast-out-police-officers-other-cities-often-hire-them.html). This is where I think community-based officers / volunteers (like what Scott does) is important.

Quote from: seicer on May 15, 2018, 12:14:34 AM
I see it two ways: legitimate speed enforcement through towns, and revenue traps. I don't argue that speeding through residential neighborhoods and dense urban environments is bad, but when the primary motivator is revenue for one department, then that opens up the law to interpretation. Not every town has safety as its number one interest. It may be partially because cities - especially small towns and resource-poor counties, overly rely on rogue officers (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/11/us/whereabouts-of-cast-out-police-officers-other-cities-often-hire-them.html). This is where I think community-based officers / volunteers (like what Scott does) is important.

Small town and county police officers and departments are subject to the same police accreditation and certification procedures and standards as are those in the big cities and state police, each state has their own board.  It is a fallacy to think that they are rubes and hicks.

There are regional police academies that provide for the scale of training needed for small departments of say 5 or 10 officers.

Quote from: seicer on May 15, 2018, 12:14:34 AMrevenue traps.

The General Assembly attempted to put a stop to it a few years ago when they passed a budget amendment that reduced the amount of ticket revenue local governments could keep. However, Hopewell (well-known for it's I-295 speed trap) apparently took a huge financial hit from it so it's delegate, Riley Ingram, helped cram a bill through the General Assembly in 2016 that repealed the amendment.

http://www.progress-index.com/news/20161001/another-chance-for-hopewells-million-dollar-mile (http://www.progress-index.com/news/20161001/another-chance-for-hopewells-million-dollar-mile)

As froggie and myself noted some time ago, if a local government has to rely on ticket revenue that much to stay afloat, then they have a big problem.

Quote from: Beltway on May 15, 2018, 06:20:41 AM

Small town and county police officers and departments are subject to the same police accreditation and certification procedures and standards as are those in the big cities and state police, each state has their own board.  It is a fallacy to think that they are rubes and hicks.

Accreditation may have helped (along with changes in command) but Blacksburg had/has its share of rubes and hicks. A favorite tactic was to run radar at the bottom of a hill knowing people would pick up speed due to gravity. The cops also tend to hide while Virginia Tech is in session, but come out with their radar guns during breaks to try to catch the townies (who pretty much pay their salaries through taxes). Biggest rube is the motorcycle cop who comes out in the summer, parks his bike under a shade tree, puts his feet up and lights up a cigarette, then occasionally points his radar gun at an oncoming car. Since he is so obvious, no one is anywhere close to the speed limit (let alone exceeding it) when they pass.

Radar has its place when there is a known problem, but using it just to harass motorists is wrong (and no, I haven't received a ticket in decades).

Bruce in Blacksburg

Quote from: LM117 on May 15, 2018, 07:41:08 AM
However, Hopewell (well-known for it's I-295 speed trap) apparently took a huge financial hit from it so it's delegate, Riley Ingram, helped cram a bill through the General Assembly in 2016 that repealed the amendment.
http://www.progress-index.com/news/20161001/another-chance-for-hopewells-million-dollar-mile (http://www.progress-index.com/news/20161001/another-chance-for-hopewells-million-dollar-mile)

The speedaholic's definition of "speed trap", apparently.  As I have pointed out before, the city of Hopewell contains a segment of I-295 and the city is positioned so that they are solely situated to provide crash related emergency services (police, fire, rescue, hazmat, hospital and towing/salvage) on a major segment of I-295.

So they have a direct public interest in driver behavior on the highway, and per the Progress-Index article the speeds enforced and the number of summonses issued are entirely reasonable. 

Excerpts [bolding mine]

In Hopewell, both Anderson and his successor, current Hopewell Sheriff Luther Sodat, have publicly called the enforcement a matter of safety.

"Apparently (AAA's) definition of a speed trap and what I know of one are two different things,"  Sodat told The Progress-Index last week.

When it comes to I-295, the stated policy of the Hopewell Sheriff's Office is not to ticket any driver going less than 80 mph on the road, which has a speed limit of 70 mph. Once the driver's speed exceeds 85 mph, the deputy can issue a ticket for reckless driving.

Figures provided by Sodat to The Progress-Index record that in 2016, deputies issued an average of 835 tickets per month to interstate drivers going between 81 and 84 mph and about 316 tickets per month to drivers going 85 mph or above. Between January and August of this year, deputies have ticketed 369 drivers traveling over 90 mph and 27 additional drivers traveling over 100 mph. In total, tickets have been issued to over 9,200 drivers on the interstate since the beginning of the year – a not unusual count for the city since the I-295 Safety Program began.

Besides issuing traffic tickets, the program has also this year led to the arrest of 12 individuals on drug violations, the issuance of many dozen warrants and 1,262 warnings to motorists. Sodat sees the latter as evidence of the initiative's basis in safety concerns, asking, "If this was a speed trap, wouldn't we have written every one?"

Since the program's creation, the city of Hopewell has consistently backed the initiative. In 2012, then-mayor Christina Luman-Bailey opened a City Council meeting with a statement on the program that declared, "Insinuations that this program is a petty "˜speed trap/money grab' demonstrate an astounding ignorance of the facts. How could anyone who supports safe driving possibly object to tickets being issued to speeders of 81+ miles an hour?"  The city's proposed 2016 General Assembly legislative priorities described the remittances as "the state seizure of local fines and fees"  and stated that the practice was "based upon a misinterpretation of the Code of Virginia."

"If allowed to exist, these funds will continue to have a major impact on the city's public safety program,"  the document concluded.

Nevertheless, Sodat told The Progress-Index that his department's funding was not linked to fluctuations in revenue related to state remittances.  "I get nothing for this program. I don't get a pay increase,"  he said. "My money would be the same whether this program were here or not."

Quote from: Beltway on May 14, 2018, 03:40:11 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 14, 2018, 11:31:52 AM
City of Fairfax used to have extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement, but much of that seems to have gone away for reasons not clear to me.

How do you define "extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement"?

Very visible enforcement with radar, plenty of traffic stops (apparently for speed), and at least one write-up in the paper (IMO Falls Church is due for the same  treatment by the news media).   I don't think the City of Fairfax is as aggressive as they once were, at least not on speeding.

I do not believe any road or street in  Falls Church has a posted limit greater than 30 MPH, and most of it is 25.  They also have an "add-on" fine (IIRC $200) for speeding in residential areas, and since most of Falls Church is residential, most tickets for speeding are expensive there. 

I know Falls Church has disciplined its patrol officers for not writing at least two speeding tickets every shift.

Quote from: Beltway on May 15, 2018, 10:21:37 AM

Quote from: LM117 on May 15, 2018, 07:41:08 AM
However, Hopewell (well-known for it's I-295 speed trap) apparently took a huge financial hit from it so it's delegate, Riley Ingram, helped cram a bill through the General Assembly in 2016 that repealed the amendment.
http://www.progress-index.com/news/20161001/another-chance-for-hopewells-million-dollar-mile (http://www.progress-index.com/news/20161001/another-chance-for-hopewells-million-dollar-mile)

The speedaholic's definition of "speed trap", apparently.  As I have pointed out before, the city of Hopewell contains a segment of I-295 and the city is positioned so that they are solely situated to provide crash related emergency services (police, fire, rescue, hazmat, hospital and towing/salvage) on a major segment of I-295.

So they have a direct public interest in driver behavior on the highway, and per the Progress-Index article the speeds enforced and the number of summonses issued are entirely reasonable. 

Excerpts [bolding mine]

In Hopewell, both Anderson and his successor, current Hopewell Sheriff Luther Sodat, have publicly called the enforcement a matter of safety.

"Apparently (AAA's) definition of a speed trap and what I know of one are two different things,"  Sodat told The Progress-Index last week.

When it comes to I-295, the stated policy of the Hopewell Sheriff's Office is not to ticket any driver going less than 80 mph on the road, which has a speed limit of 70 mph. Once the driver's speed exceeds 85 mph, the deputy can issue a ticket for reckless driving.

...

Since the program's creation, the city of Hopewell has consistently backed the initiative. In 2012, then-mayor Christina Luman-Bailey opened a City Council meeting with a statement on the program that declared, "Insinuations that this program is a petty "˜speed trap/money grab' demonstrate an astounding ignorance of the facts. How could anyone who supports safe driving possibly object to tickets being issued to speeders of 81+ miles an hour?"  The city's proposed 2016 General Assembly legislative priorities described the remittances as "the state seizure of local fines and fees"  and stated that the practice was "based upon a misinterpretation of the Code of Virginia."

Sanctimony aside, the department's stated policy and actual practise are two entirely separate items. Have seen too many people be ticketed for going just over 70 through this stretch for to believe that this is actually the case. Also, I am curious as to why that much money is required to administer a fairly short (and relatively safe) stretch of highway.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 15, 2018, 10:52:39 AM

Quote from: Beltway on May 14, 2018, 03:40:11 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 14, 2018, 11:31:52 AM
City of Fairfax used to have extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement, but much of that seems to have gone away for reasons not clear to me.

How do you define "extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement"?

Very visible enforcement with radar, plenty of traffic stops (apparently for speed), and at least one write-up in the paper (IMO Falls Church is due for the same  treatment by the news media).   I don't think the City of Fairfax is as aggressive as they once were, at least not on speeding.
I do not believe any road or street in  Falls Church has a posted limit greater than 30 MPH, and most of it is 25.  They also have an "add-on" fine (IIRC $200) for speeding in residential areas, and since most of Falls Church is residential, most tickets for speeding are expensive there. 
I know Falls Church has disciplined its patrol officers for not writing at least two speeding tickets every shift.

You creatively snipped the specific "speed-plus" parameters that I posted per my work with a PD.

What you posted above is irrelevant unless you post similar specific "speed-plus" parameters for what Falls Church does.

If they were grossly exceeding the limit then I don't care how many get stopped.

Quote from: Thing 342 on May 15, 2018, 11:05:26 AM

Quote from: Beltway on May 15, 2018, 10:21:37 AM
As I have pointed out before, the city of Hopewell contains a segment of I-295 and the city is positioned so that they are solely situated to provide crash related emergency services (police, fire, rescue, hazmat, hospital and towing/salvage) on a major segment of I-295.
So they have a direct public interest in driver behavior on the highway, and per the Progress-Index article the speeds enforced and the number of summonses issued are entirely reasonable. 

Sanctimony aside, the department's stated policy and actual practise are two entirely separate items. Have seen too many people be ticketed for going just over 70 through this stretch for to believe that this is actually the case.

Oh sure, you "watched" repeatedly at what speeds vehicles were being stopped for.  You just rode along in the traffic stream near the vehicles and verified that they were "going just over 70".   Yeah sure uh-huh.  Or else if you weren't there you accepted someone else's story.

Whenever someone claims that they got a summons for barely exceeding a speed limit, I then request they cite how many times with specifics they got stopped for 15, 20, 25 or more over the limit.  Usually they won't say anything.

I have driven over a million miles and have -never- been ticketed except one time for 16 over, and I routinely travel at 5 to 7 miles over and cruise control helps there even on low speed roads.

Quote from: Beltway on May 15, 2018, 03:19:07 PM
You creatively snipped the specific "speed-plus" parameters that I posted per my work with a PD.

Relevance?  I don't believe you have ever worked for the Falls Church Police Department.

Quote from: Beltway on May 15, 2018, 03:19:07 PM
What you posted above is irrelevant unless you post similar specific "speed-plus" parameters for what Falls Church does.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it.  I am not going to ask the Falls Church Police Department about  such things, as it is a waste of my time and theirs.

Quote from: Beltway on May 15, 2018, 03:19:07 PM
If they were grossly exceeding the limit then I don't care how many get stopped.

As I stated upthread, Falls Church officers have been disciplined for not writing two speeding tickets per shift. 

But it may be difficult for them to catch speeders, since people who live in or near Falls Church know not to speed there, and the supply of out-of-town suckers is limited (none of I-66 is within the municipal limits of Falls Church).

Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 24, 2018, 11:56:26 PM

Quote from: Beltway on May 15, 2018, 03:19:07 PM
You creatively snipped the specific "speed-plus" parameters that I posted per my work with a PD.

Relevance?  I don't believe you have ever worked for the Falls Church Police Department.

Quote from: Beltway on May 15, 2018, 03:19:07 PM
What you posted above is irrelevant unless you post similar specific "speed-plus" parameters for what Falls Church does.

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it.  I am not going to ask the Falls Church Police Department about  such things, as it is a waste of my time and theirs.

Quote from: Beltway on May 15, 2018, 03:19:07 PM
If they were grossly exceeding the limit then I don't care how many get stopped.

As I stated upthread, Falls Church officers have been disciplined for not writing two speeding tickets per shift. 
But it may be difficult for them to catch speeders, since people who live in or near Falls Church know not to speed there, and the supply of out-of-town suckers is limited (none of I-66 is within the municipal limits of Falls Church).

So you're not going to post any actual LE data on the matter, just dance and handwave around my challenge of your claim of "used to have extremely aggressive speed limit enforcement".

There is certainly nothing "aggressive" about writing two speeding tickets per shift (8 hours or more).  I can go to any locale in the country and easily see a dozen violations of +20 mph or more in an hour.

My experiences in VA - on their highways - are typical of what Beltway quoted of the Sheriff's office: Driving under 80 mph is perfectly fine. 

When people see a local cop on a highway, they instantly think it's a speed trap town.  Yet, I find that it's all talk and no actual proof.  A cop behind a car on the shoulder isn't proof of a speed trap town.  That cop could've pulled up behind a disabled vehicle, or pulled over one of those 100 mph+ speeders. 

All traffic enforcement is illegitimate.  All traffic enforcers are as far from serious, and thus respect deserving, law enforcement workers as William Shatner is from a real astronaut. 

And, since the nattering nabobs spewed their idiocy and gloomed and doomed about repealing the evil NMSL, only to be proven DEAD WRONG as higher speed = more safety, please do not talk about "safety".  You simply do not know what you are talking about.  You were proven wrong.  Yet you still spew.  How sad.

ONE of the problems we have in this country is police - community relations.  ONE cause of that problem are traffic cops and jurisdictions that treat law enforcement as a revenue positive element of their government.  If we were serious about making society better, we would illegalize no radar detectors, but radar guns.

And, if, as the framers intended, 100% of fines went to other places besides the jurisdictions and the cops, there would be ZERO traffic tickets.  Because it is all about money.

Quote from: SP Cook on May 25, 2018, 09:16:24 AM
ONE of the problems we have in this country is police - community relations.  ONE cause of that problem are traffic cops and jurisdictions that treat law enforcement as a revenue positive element of their government.

That's pretty low on the list of reasons why.  "The fact that cops literally get away with murder" is higher.

Quote from: SP Cook on May 25, 2018, 09:16:24 AM
All traffic enforcement is illegitimate.  All traffic enforcers are as far from serious, and thus respect deserving, law enforcement workers as William Shatner is from a real astronaut. 

Who's up for drag racing in front of SP's house at 3am while doped up?

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 25, 2018, 09:48:13 AM

Quote from: SP Cook on May 25, 2018, 09:16:24 AM
All traffic enforcement is illegitimate.  All traffic enforcers are as far from serious, and thus respect deserving, law enforcement workers as William Shatner is from a real astronaut. 

Who's up for drag racing in front of SP's house at 3am while doped up?

Anyone who repeatedly makes statements like "all traffic enforcement is illegitimate", -is- likely the person who would drag race in front of your house at 3am while doped up.  :pan:

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 09:57:02 AM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 25, 2018, 09:48:13 AM

Quote from: SP Cook on May 25, 2018, 09:16:24 AM
All traffic enforcement is illegitimate.  All traffic enforcers are as far from serious, and thus respect deserving, law enforcement workers as William Shatner is from a real astronaut. 

Who's up for drag racing in front of SP's house at 3am while doped up?

Anyone who repeatedly makes statements like "all traffic enforcement is illegitimate", -is- likely the person who would drag race in front of your house at 3am while doped up.  :pan:

Watching two guys (S.P. and Scott) who normally agree on most issues and are typically of the same mind ideologically is quite interesting.

Reminds me of a story that I saw in the Lexington Herald-Leader today. I would post the link, but that would be gratuitously inserting politics into this thread, and Abefroman and Webny99 would both have a fit.  :-D

Quote from: hbelkins on May 25, 2018, 10:27:44 AM

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 09:57:02 AM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 25, 2018, 09:48:13 AM

Quote from: SP Cook on May 25, 2018, 09:16:24 AM
All traffic enforcement is illegitimate.  All traffic enforcers are as far from serious, and thus respect deserving, law enforcement workers as William Shatner is from a real astronaut. 

Who's up for drag racing in front of SP's house at 3am while doped up?

Anyone who repeatedly makes statements like "all traffic enforcement is illegitimate", -is- likely the person who would drag race in front of your house at 3am while doped up.  :pan:

Watching two guys (S.P. and Scott) who normally agree on most issues and are typically of the same mind ideologically is quite interesting.

Reminds me of a story that I saw in the Lexington Herald-Leader today. I would post the link, but that would be gratuitously inserting politics into this thread, and Abefroman and Webny99 would both have a fit.  :-D

Oh, go ahead, I've already gratuitously inserted politics into an earlier post.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 25, 2018, 10:27:44 AM

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 09:57:02 AM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 25, 2018, 09:48:13 AM

Quote from: SP Cook on May 25, 2018, 09:16:24 AM
All traffic enforcement is illegitimate.  All traffic enforcers are as far from serious, and thus respect deserving, law enforcement workers as William Shatner is from a real astronaut. 

Who's up for drag racing in front of SP's house at 3am while doped up?

Anyone who repeatedly makes statements like "all traffic enforcement is illegitimate", -is- likely the person who would drag race in front of your house at 3am while doped up.  :pan:

Watching two guys (S.P. and Scott) who normally agree on most issues and are typically of the same mind ideologically is quite interesting.

Reminds me of a story that I saw in the Lexington Herald-Leader today. I would post the link, but that would be gratuitously inserting politics into this thread, and Abefroman and Webny99 would both have a fit.  :-D

Besides, as a long time member of the forum, you know gratuitous political attacks and mud slinging are generally frowned upon.   :whip:

That "generally" is doing some heavy lifting on the level of Atlas carrying the world on his shoulders.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 13, 2018, 03:27:03 PM
^^^ So this basically means that even if you come to a full stop before or upon crossing the state line, remove your radar detector from its mount and then place it elsewhere in a hatchback, SUV, or other vehicle without a separate trunk, you are in violation of the law because technically it would still be accessible to the driver or passengers.

What a load of crap.

I typically take mine down while in motion and stick it in the console compartment.

Yet another reason to dislike driving in Virginia.

You don't stop to take things down from your windshield?  Wow.

Quote from: kkt on May 25, 2018, 11:51:02 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 13, 2018, 03:27:03 PM
^^^ So this basically means that even if you come to a full stop before or upon crossing the state line, remove your radar detector from its mount and then place it elsewhere in a hatchback, SUV, or other vehicle without a separate trunk, you are in violation of the law because technically it would still be accessible to the driver or passengers.

What a load of crap.

I typically take mine down while in motion and stick it in the console compartment.

Yet another reason to dislike driving in Virginia.

You don't stop to take things down from your windshield?  Wow.

That's not what he said.  He does take it down.  The problem is that with the way the asinine law is written, if it's not in a lockable trunk, he's still in violation, even with it in the console.

How is the texting-while-driving law written in Illinois?  Would it be a violation if you just had your phone resting on your leg and were observed looking down at it, or would the cop actually need to see you looking down at the phone and performing some sort of typing-esque motion with one of your hands?

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 25, 2018, 12:03:20 PM
How is the texting-while-driving law written in Illinois?  Would it be a violation if you just had your phone resting on your leg and were observed looking down at it, or would the cop actually need to see you looking down at the phone and performing some sort of typing-esque motion with one of your hands?

"Distracted Driving" or "Careless Driving" can be used for this, regardless if you're looking at your phone, a book, or any other reason why you would be looking at your lap and not out the windshield.

Quote from: US71 on May 25, 2018, 11:00:16 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 25, 2018, 10:27:44 AM

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 09:57:02 AM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 25, 2018, 09:48:13 AM

Quote from: SP Cook on May 25, 2018, 09:16:24 AM
All traffic enforcement is illegitimate.  All traffic enforcers are as far from serious, and thus respect deserving, law enforcement workers as William Shatner is from a real astronaut. 

Who's up for drag racing in front of SP's house at 3am while doped up?

Anyone who repeatedly makes statements like "all traffic enforcement is illegitimate", -is- likely the person who would drag race in front of your house at 3am while doped up.  :pan:

Watching two guys (S.P. and Scott) who normally agree on most issues and are typically of the same mind ideologically is quite interesting.
Reminds me of a story that I saw in the Lexington Herald-Leader today. I would post the link, but that would be gratuitously inserting politics into this thread, and Abefroman and Webny99 would both have a fit.  :-D

My disagreements about certain driver behavior issues on roads forums goes back 20 years.

Certain posters, whether they realize it or not, provide a "proxy image" of the mindset of certain driver types that I encounter on the roads and highways.  Whether that "assignment" is "fair" or not, it is a reality.

Quote from: US71 on May 25, 2018, 11:00:16 AM
Besides, as a long time member of the forum, you know gratuitous political attacks and mud slinging are generally frowned upon.   :whip:

But if the thread is in "Off Topic", doesn't that mean that they are less generally frowned upon than if they were in road-related groups? :clap:

Quote from: Brandon on May 25, 2018, 11:58:19 AM

Quote from: kkt on May 25, 2018, 11:51:02 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 13, 2018, 03:27:03 PM
What a load of crap.
I typically take mine down while in motion and stick it in the console compartment.
Yet another reason to dislike driving in Virginia.

You don't stop to take things down from your windshield?  Wow.

That's not what he said.  He does take it down.  The problem is that with the way the asinine law is written, if it's not in a lockable trunk, he's still in violation, even with it in the console.

If you dislike driving in Virginia, then don't.  Problem solved.   :-]

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 02:45:34 PM

Quote from: Brandon on May 25, 2018, 11:58:19 AM

Quote from: kkt on May 25, 2018, 11:51:02 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 13, 2018, 03:27:03 PM
What a load of crap.
I typically take mine down while in motion and stick it in the console compartment.
Yet another reason to dislike driving in Virginia.

You don't stop to take things down from your windshield?  Wow.

That's not what he said.  He does take it down.  The problem is that with the way the asinine law is written, if it's not in a lockable trunk, he's still in violation, even with it in the console.

If you dislike driving in Virginia, then don't.  Problem solved.   :-]

Well thank you, John Nestor.

Quote from: US71 on May 25, 2018, 11:00:16 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 25, 2018, 10:27:44 AM

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 09:57:02 AM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 25, 2018, 09:48:13 AM

Quote from: SP Cook on May 25, 2018, 09:16:24 AM
All traffic enforcement is illegitimate.  All traffic enforcers are as far from serious, and thus respect deserving, law enforcement workers as William Shatner is from a real astronaut. 

Who's up for drag racing in front of SP's house at 3am while doped up?

Anyone who repeatedly makes statements like "all traffic enforcement is illegitimate", -is- likely the person who would drag race in front of your house at 3am while doped up.  :pan:

Watching two guys (S.P. and Scott) who normally agree on most issues and are typically of the same mind ideologically is quite interesting.

Reminds me of a story that I saw in the Lexington Herald-Leader today. I would post the link, but that would be gratuitously inserting politics into this thread, and Abefroman and Webny99 would both have a fit.  :-D

Besides, as a long time member of the forum, you know gratuitous political attacks and mud slinging are generally frowned upon.   :whip:

The story was about one of the big conservative groups (either Club For Growth or Americans For Prosperity, I can't remember which at the moment) running ads criticizing Kentucky's senior Congressman, who is a Republican of long standing. So it was basically one entity criticizing another who's generally on the same side. I saw the news story this morning and when I saw SP and Scott's exchange, it made me think of that story.

Quote from: kkt on May 25, 2018, 11:51:02 AM
You don't stop to take things down from your windshield?  Wow.

I have a permanent mirror mount for my V1. The detector itself has grooves in the side and the holder is notched to fit perfectly. All you have to is slide it in. It can be done in one fluid motion that takes about 5 seconds. No stop necessary.

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 02:45:34 PM
If you dislike driving in Virginia, then don't.  Problem solved.   :-]

Not sure what the square smiley is intended to mean (i.e. you might not have been serious), but that's a stupid statement to make.  For one thing, what about all the people who live in Virginia and disapprove of the way things are?  Then there are those who travel to or through Virginia for work or family engagements or who knows what else.

The whole idea of "if you don't like it here, move somewhere else" runs contrary to democracy.  What's the point of a democracy if all the people who don't like the way something is are told to move away?

Quote from: Brandon on May 25, 2018, 04:02:52 PM

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 02:45:34 PM

Quote from: Brandon on May 25, 2018, 11:58:19 AM

Quote from: kkt on May 25, 2018, 11:51:02 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 13, 2018, 03:27:03 PM
What a load of crap.

I typically take mine down while in motion and stick it in the console compartment.
Yet another reason to dislike driving in Virginia.

You don't stop to take things down from your windshield?  Wow.

That's not what he said.  He does take it down.  The problem is that with the way the asinine law is written, if it's not in a lockable trunk, he's still in violation, even with it in the console.

If you dislike driving in Virginia, then don't.  Problem solved.   :-]

Well thank you, John Nestor.

John Nestor is a jerk.  I would not advocate nor practice running 55 mph in the left lane of the Capital Beltway, or anything of similar sort.

Quote from: kphoger on May 25, 2018, 04:24:35 PM

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 02:45:34 PM
If you dislike driving in Virginia, then don't.  Problem solved.   :-]

Not sure what the square smiley is intended to mean (i.e. you might not have been serious), but that's a stupid statement to make.  For one thing, what about all the people who live in Virginia and disapprove of the way things are?  Then there are those who travel to or through Virginia for work or family engagements or who knows what else.
The whole idea of "if you don't like it here, move somewhere else" runs contrary to democracy.  What's the point of a democracy if all the people who don't like the way something is are told to move away?

"Democracy" or the 1st Amendment or whatever you want to call it gives me the right to speak out as well.  I don't have to ask you for permission.  I am tired of seeing certain people post the same whine over and over again, in that case it has been going on for 20 years in online forums.  :pan:

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 05:02:37 PM
"Democracy" or the 1st Amendment or whatever you want to call it gives me the right to speak out as well.  I don't have to ask you for permission.  I am tired of seeing certain people post the same whine over and over again, in that case it has been going on for 20 years in online forums.  :pan:

If you don't like me whining about you, then move to another forum.   :meh:

Quote from: kphoger on May 25, 2018, 05:28:14 PM

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 05:02:37 PM
"Democracy" or the 1st Amendment or whatever you want to call it gives me the right to speak out as well.  I don't have to ask you for permission.  I am tired of seeing certain people post the same whine over and over again, in that case it has been going on for 20 years in online forums.  :pan:

If you don't like me whining about you, then move to another forum.   :meh:

Drink a glass of Epecac.  :-]

And an interesting question is if Virginia actually has safer roads than other states due to such enforcement (and that is generally the point of enforcement - safety.. at least that is what everyone says)
And VA is definitely safer than some of adjacent states - 0.90 fatalities per 100M miles traveled -  which is better than 1.16 national number.
That can also be compared to 1.26 in NC, 1.88 in SC  and 1.29 in GA to the south
On the northern hand, Maryland has 0.86, 0.76 in DC, 0.78 in NJ and 0.66 in MA.
I am not sure why there is such a divide, and if VA actually improves road safety with strict enforcement practices. There is no drastic improvement, that's for sure..

Quote from: kalvado on May 25, 2018, 06:38:48 PM
And an interesting question is if Virginia actually has safer roads than other states due to such enforcement (and that is generally the point of enforcement - safety.. at least that is what everyone says)
And VA is definitely safer than some of adjacent states - 0.90 fatalities per 100M miles traveled -  which is better than 1.16 national number.
That can also be compared to 1.26 in NC, 1.88 in SC  and 1.29 in GA to the south
On the northern hand, Maryland has 0.86, 0.76 in DC, 0.78 in NJ and 0.66 in MA.
I am not sure why there is such a divide, and if VA actually improves road safety with strict enforcement practices. There is no drastic improvement, that's for sure..

My guess is that more congestion means fewer fatalities.

Quote from: kalvado on May 25, 2018, 06:38:48 PM
I am not sure why there is such a divide, and if VA actually improves road safety with strict enforcement practices. There is no drastic improvement, that's for sure.

Good question how much stricter Virginia is than other states. For example, speed enforcement can be pretty unpleasant in neighboring Maryland, which makes up with its infestation of speed cameras for its not prohibiting radar detectors.

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 05:38:53 PM
Drink a glass of Epecac.  :-]

I don't own any syrup of ipecac.  But I do have some castor oil tucked away in the medicine cabinet, which leads to diarrhea when ingested.  I own it because I used to make my own pre-shave oil.

Quote from: oscar on May 25, 2018, 06:51:09 PM

Quote from: kalvado on May 25, 2018, 06:38:48 PM
I am not sure why there is such a divide, and if VA actually improves road safety with strict enforcement practices. There is no drastic improvement, that's for sure.

Good question how much stricter Virginia is than other states. For example, speed enforcement can be pretty unpleasant in neighboring Maryland, which makes up with its infestation of speed cameras for its not prohibiting radar detectors.

And then there's DC, which has both speed cameras and a radar detector ban. But they have legal weed, so it balances out a bit. (At the risk of stoking the political fire again, I'm sure that sticks in Jeff Sessions' craw a bit.)

Quote from: hbelkins on May 25, 2018, 04:19:33 PM

Quote from: US71 on May 25, 2018, 11:00:16 AM
Besides, as a long time member of the forum, you know gratuitous political attacks and mud slinging are generally frowned upon.   :whip:

The story was about one of the big conservative groups (either Club For Growth or Americans For Prosperity, I can't remember which at the moment) running ads criticizing Kentucky's senior Congressman, who is a Republican of long standing. So it was basically one entity criticizing another who's generally on the same side. I saw the news story this morning and when I saw SP and Scott's exchange, it made me think of that story.

What makes you think that conservative groups don't have sharp differences of opinion?  Just look at the controversy over the never-Trumpers and the Cruzers, for example.

Quote from: Beltway on May 25, 2018, 11:04:59 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 25, 2018, 04:19:33 PM

Quote from: US71 on May 25, 2018, 11:00:16 AM
Besides, as a long time member of the forum, you know gratuitous political attacks and mud slinging are generally frowned upon.   :whip:

The story was about one of the big conservative groups (either Club For Growth or Americans For Prosperity, I can't remember which at the moment) running ads criticizing Kentucky's senior Congressman, who is a Republican of long standing. So it was basically one entity criticizing another who's generally on the same side. I saw the news story this morning and when I saw SP and Scott's exchange, it made me think of that story.

What makes you think that conservative groups don't have sharp differences of opinion?  Just look at the controversy over the never-Trumpers and the Cruzers, for example.

Or, before that, Cruz and the other Tea Partiers vs. establishment Republicans. This is barely news.

Concerning the "democracy" and "if you don't like it, move" comments, the USA was set up to be a laboratory of democracy and the states were supposed to be the experiments. Each state was supposed to have some autonomy in setting up its government and its laws, and people were free to relocate to a state whose laws and customs were more in tune with their own likings.

I've often said that the scenery and the road-related attractions of Virginia are very appealing, but I don't like the "warrantless wiretapping" speed monitoring eavesdropping that goes on.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 02:16:21 PM
I've often said that the scenery and the road-related attractions of Virginia are very appealing, but I don't like the "warrantless wiretapping" speed monitoring eavesdropping that goes on.

That's true lots of other places too, especially with speed cameras that don't always trigger your radar detector before you're snapped and put in the queue for a ticket in the mail.

Much as I disagree with Virginia's ban on radar detector use, that doesn't stop me from traveling a lot in Canada, which is (except for the three westernmost provinces) completely hopeless on that issue.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 02:16:21 PM
I've often said that the scenery and the road-related attractions of Virginia are very appealing, but I don't like the "warrantless wiretapping" speed monitoring eavesdropping that goes on.

That is as absurd statement on several levels.  Every state uses radar technology for speed law enforcement.  It is not "warrantless" and it is not "wiretapping", it is a legal and tested method of remotely determining vehicular speeds.  For you this is Virginia Whine #265.  If you don't like the laws somewhere you have several options as outlined before.

Quote from: Beltway on May 26, 2018, 05:45:21 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 02:16:21 PM
I've often said that the scenery and the road-related attractions of Virginia are very appealing, but I don't like the "warrantless wiretapping" speed monitoring eavesdropping that goes on.

That is as absurd statement on several levels.  Every state uses radar technology for speed law enforcement.  It is not "warrantless" and it is not "wiretapping", it is a legal and tested method of remotely determining vehicular speeds.  For you this is Virginia Whine #265.  If you don't like the laws somewhere you have several options as outlined before.

But every other state gives you the opportunity to know that you are being surveilled.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 06:18:06 PM

Quote from: Beltway on May 26, 2018, 05:45:21 PM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 02:16:21 PM
I've often said that the scenery and the road-related attractions of Virginia are very appealing, but I don't like the "warrantless wiretapping" speed monitoring eavesdropping that goes on.

That is as absurd statement on several levels.  Every state uses radar technology for speed law enforcement.  It is not "warrantless" and it is not "wiretapping", it is a legal and tested method of remotely determining vehicular speeds.  For you this is Virginia Whine #265.  If you don't like the laws somewhere you have several options as outlined before.

But every other state gives you the opportunity to know that you are being surveilled.

Will be corrected - e.g. with more cameras. I can envision fully passive speed control system using a camera and some marks on pavement, for example. Also helps tracking your license plate without too much warning.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 06:18:06 PM

Quote from: Beltway on May 26, 2018, 05:45:21 PM
Every state uses radar technology for speed law enforcement.  It is not "warrantless" and it is not "wiretapping", it is a legal and tested method of remotely determining vehicular speeds.  For you this is Virginia Whine #265.  If you don't like the laws somewhere you have several options as outlined before.

But every other state gives you the opportunity to know that you are being surveilled.

Not true, look back upthread at post#3, the text quoted in green.  Besides, electronics is one of my many hobby interests over the years, and "surveilence" is not an accurate term for what radar technology does.  Also, VASCAR does basically the same thing but does not utilize radio waves.

If your reference is to the portion about mounting things to your windshield, that would apply to GPS units as well. Most radar detectors come with a clip mount that attaches to your sun visor. That's what I used for years with my original version (a Fuzzbuster) until I found a windshield mount for it. The mount I have now permanently attaches to the rear view mirror, so it's not on the windshield either.

ADDENDUM: The way that the no-mounting-on-windshield laws are written in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, they would appear to ban E-ZPasses as well. Go figure.

I don't agree with the ban, but I don't live in fear about it. I just stay close to the speed limit in areas I know are frequently patrolled.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 02:16:21 PM
Concerning the "democracy" and "if you don't like it, move" comments, the USA was set up to be a laboratory of democracy and the states were supposed to be the experiments. Each state was supposed to have some autonomy in setting up its government and its laws, and people were free to relocate to a state whose laws and customs were more in tune with their own likings.

I've often said that the scenery and the road-related attractions of Virginia are very appealing, but I don't like the "warrantless wiretapping" speed monitoring eavesdropping that goes on.

If you're not breaking the law, then what do you have to fear?

Heh.  Read 1984.

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 27, 2018, 07:57:10 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 02:16:21 PM
Concerning the "democracy" and "if you don't like it, move" comments, the USA was set up to be a laboratory of democracy and the states were supposed to be the experiments. Each state was supposed to have some autonomy in setting up its government and its laws, and people were free to relocate to a state whose laws and customs were more in tune with their own likings.

I've often said that the scenery and the road-related attractions of Virginia are very appealing, but I don't like the "warrantless wiretapping" speed monitoring eavesdropping that goes on.

If you're not breaking the law, then what do you have to fear?

Speed limits are often underposted; moving with the speed of traffic is usually safer than intentionally going the speed limit.

Quote from: 1 on May 27, 2018, 08:00:44 AM

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 27, 2018, 07:57:10 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 02:16:21 PM
Concerning the "democracy" and "if you don't like it, move" comments, the USA was set up to be a laboratory of democracy and the states were supposed to be the experiments. Each state was supposed to have some autonomy in setting up its government and its laws, and people were free to relocate to a state whose laws and customs were more in tune with their own likings.

I've often said that the scenery and the road-related attractions of Virginia are very appealing, but I don't like the "warrantless wiretapping" speed monitoring eavesdropping that goes on.

If you're not breaking the law, then what do you have to fear?

Speed limits are often underposted; moving with the speed of traffic is usually safer than intentionally going the speed limit.

Often, yes, although "I was moving with the flow of traffic"  won't necessarily get you out of a ticket if you get pulled over.

Also, in situations such as, say, driving west on 316 from Athens after a UGA football game, driving the speed limit is a good way of saying "I'm driving drunk."

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 27, 2018, 08:05:24 AM
Often, yes, although "I was moving with the flow of traffic"  won't necessarily get you out of a ticket if you get pulled over.

In over a million miles of driving over 50 years, I never have been stopped for that.

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 27, 2018, 08:05:24 AM
Also, in situations such as, say, driving west on 316 from Athens after a UGA football game, driving the speed limit is a good way of saying "I'm driving drunk."

So if thousands of vehicles in a traffic stream are driving the speed limit, that means that everybody is drunk?

Quote from: Beltway on May 27, 2018, 08:18:01 AM

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 27, 2018, 08:05:24 AM
Often, yes, although "I was moving with the flow of traffic"  won't necessarily get you out of a ticket if you get pulled over.

In over a million miles of driving over 50 years, I never have been stopped for that.

I have.  Though in fairness, I was also the out-of-state plate as well as the "tail end Charlie" of that particular traffic stream.

Quote from: froggie on May 27, 2018, 10:04:06 AM

Quote from: Beltway on May 27, 2018, 08:18:01 AM

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 27, 2018, 08:05:24 AM
Often, yes, although "I was moving with the flow of traffic"  won't necessarily get you out of a ticket if you get pulled over.

In over a million miles of driving over 50 years, I never have been stopped for that.

I have.  Though in fairness, I was also the out-of-state plate as well as the "tail end Charlie" of that particular traffic stream.

Hm, I guess I need to stop referring to speeding cars in front of me as "my radar detector,"  then.

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 27, 2018, 10:43:13 AM

Quote from: froggie on May 27, 2018, 10:04:06 AM

Quote from: Beltway on May 27, 2018, 08:18:01 AM

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 27, 2018, 08:05:24 AM
Often, yes, although "I was moving with the flow of traffic"  won't necessarily get you out of a ticket if you get pulled over.

In over a million miles of driving over 50 years, I never have been stopped for that.

I have.  Though in fairness, I was also the out-of-state plate as well as the "tail end Charlie" of that particular traffic stream.

Hm, I guess I need to stop referring to speeding cars in front of me as "my radar detector,"  then.

Possible logic is that first guy may say "I accelerated as those in the back started to tailgate me" while last guy in the bunch could only drive faster than the bunch to catch up with the gang.
But then if officer has any reason to assume pulling you over may yield anything more that a speeding ticket, nothing will save you. I suspect one of the reasons for keeping speed limits what they are is an easy way to work around fourth amendment.

Quote from: hbelkins on May 26, 2018, 09:30:31 PM
ADDENDUM: The way that the no-mounting-on-windshield laws are written in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, they would appear to ban E-ZPasses as well. Go figure.

You are correct about that. That said, officers have been told don't write tickets for it, and I've never read of a case where it happened. When you get your EZ Pass you're given written instructions of where to mount it. Many people ignore such instructions though.

Quote from: Rothman on May 27, 2018, 08:00:00 AM
Heh.  Read 1984.

This reference is so tiring. No one mentions it though when they're standing out there recording something on their personal cell phone uploading it for the world....and the authorities...to see.

Ignorance of the privacy risks and possible government misbehavior does not mean that such risks do not exist.  Orwell's warning is more pertinent today than ever, not less.

Ironically, most people's privacy has been disrupted by the private sector. Countless database breaches at large stores, credit card hacks and email viruses are daily issues.  Your phone's GPS tells your phone carrier, Google, and every other company you've looked at or given permission to on your phone knows where you are within a 10 foot radius.

But people ignore all of that.

And tomorrow, they'll be hacked again. But they fear a story named 1984 more than actual reality.

Quote from: froggie on May 27, 2018, 10:04:06 AM

Quote from: Beltway on May 27, 2018, 08:18:01 AM

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 27, 2018, 08:05:24 AM
Often, yes, although "I was moving with the flow of traffic"  won't necessarily get you out of a ticket if you get pulled over.

In over a million miles of driving over 50 years, I never have been stopped for that.

I have.  Though in fairness, I was also the out-of-state plate as well as the "tail end Charlie" of that particular traffic stream.

Not saying that it can't happen, or that some individual cop might not do that, just that it is extremely rare, and is not the general policy of a PD.

If some of the stuff claimed was common, the courts would be flooded with traffic cases and would not be able to do any other cases.

Remember the poster "GPSMAN" on MTR?  He had a lot of interesting responses to the various Usenet driving "experts". 

Example post of his --

From: gpsman <gps...@driversmail.com>
Newsgroups: misc.transport.road
Subject: Re: Would YOU pay for the right to speed?
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:17:56 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <ea7d31b6-1528-4c07-b75f-ba7f164f4e86@q2g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.209.250.147
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1284139076 1434 127.0.0.1 (10 Sep 2010 17:17:56 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 17:17:56 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US)
AppleWebKit/534.3 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/6.0.472.55 Safari/534.3,gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com misc.transport.road:67765

On Sep 9, 5:49=A0pm, Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net> wrote:
> On 09/09/2010 08:40 AM, gpsman wrote:
>
> > On Sep 8, 10:16 am, ernest.p...@vernal.equinox.edu (T.J. Higgins)
> > wrote:
>
> >> How do large speed differentials work on the autobahn?
>
> > Driver education and training, additional regulations, and enforcement
> > that would cause the heads of Usenet driving "experts" to explode.
>
> Isn't that what pretty much all intelligent posters to RAD have been
> advocating all along?

Intelli... who in the hell would that be?  The poster who can't
operate a killfile?

The posters who report, ad nauseum, their every travail negotiating
traffic?  The poster who can't monitor his speedometer, citing it as a
"distraction"?  The posters who have nothing more than the most basic
of training and education, most of which they now cite as "wrong"?

The posters who unashamedly post video of their bad operational habits
and judgment, their own code infractions and temper tantrums?

The posters who will repeatedly, without embarrassment, proclaim
driving "perfectly safe", then in the same post report threatening a
motorist with their vehicle to "teach them a lesson", or freely admit
they believe cameras cause crashes?

Intelligence, I'm afraid, isn't as common as you seem to believe.

And, intelligence doesn't have much to do with it.  I've seen perfect
dolts decide to drive like they had some sense and guys with degrees
refuse and lose their jobs, after the company went to the expense of
providing them remedial training.

> Or is your idea of "Usenet driving 'experts'"
> limited to morons like yourself, "Aunt Judy," Scott Weisass, Carl
> Troller, etc.?

<yawn>

> But yes, I probably would experience some cognitive dissonance as such a
> concept is totally alien to current US practice.

You're functionally illiterate.

> Slow is safe, screw everything else.

You reported witnessing 2 rear-end crashes at highway velocities every
day.

-----
- gpsman

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 27, 2018, 12:57:47 PM
Ironically, most people's privacy has been disrupted by the private sector. Countless database breaches at large stores, credit card hacks and email viruses are daily issues.  Your phone's GPS tells your phone carrier, Google, and every other company you've looked at or given permission to on your phone knows where you are within a 10 foot radius.

But people ignore all of that.

And tomorrow, they'll be hacked again. But they fear a story named 1984 more than actual reality.

They're coming at us from all sides.  There is no hope for America.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 27, 2018, 12:57:47 PM
Ironically, most people's privacy has been disrupted by the private sector. Countless database breaches at large stores, credit card hacks and email viruses are daily issues.  Your phone's GPS tells your phone carrier, Google, and every other company you've looked at or given permission to on your phone knows where you are within a 10 foot radius.

But people ignore all of that.

And tomorrow, they'll be hacked again. But they fear a story named 1984 more than actual reality.

What most private entities are up to is your money. And preferably legal money. If someone uses my information to sell me something, I have a choice of buying thing I need or saying "no, thank you" - generally even if they become obnoxious. And if they end up knowing what I need and offering right thing - it is mostly a win-win situation.
Then there are criminal private entities who want my money in ANY way. Sometimes with a gun on a street, sometimes with a virus on site. Well, that is part of the life
And then there is government who can look for a lot more than money. They already can extract money in moral, somewhat moral and not so moral - but still legal - ways anyway; taxes,  fees, fines, taxation of fees on fines and what not. But they may want more. They may be looking for "suspicious patterns", and use that in funny ways - deny airline boarding, clearance, reporting on background check and what not. They have a lot of powers which can be abused - intentionally or by mistake. And they do not apologize for anything.
I would rather have money stolen than coming on the government radar..

Quote from: Rothman on May 27, 2018, 04:41:10 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 27, 2018, 12:57:47 PM
And tomorrow, they'll be hacked again. But they fear a story named 1984 more than actual reality.

They're coming at us from all sides.  There is no hope for America.

Are you looking at this from a Biblical worldview?  Or a humanist worldview?

Quote from: hbelkins on May 25, 2018, 10:27:44 AM
Reminds me of a story that I saw in the Lexington Herald-Leader today. I would post the link, but that would be gratuitously inserting politics into this thread, and Abefroman and Webny99 would both have a fit.  :-D

I think I'm over it  ;-)
I only had a fit, to the extent you can call it one,  because a good discussion almost got ruined.

Now abefroman has politics in his signature, too; it's only intuitive to assume that's the green light for anyone and everyone else to do the same.

Quote from: webny99 on May 28, 2018, 11:31:22 PM
Now abefroman has politics in his signature, too; it's only intuitive to assume that's the green light for anyone and everyone else to do the same.

Note that inaction does not necessarily mean that moderation is not going to take place–for larger issues affecting forum policy, a discussion needs to take place amongst the staff before a decision can be reached. This takes time.

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 29, 2018, 06:44:14 AM

Quote from: webny99 on May 28, 2018, 11:31:22 PM
Now abefroman has politics in his signature, too; it's only intuitive to assume that's the green light for anyone and everyone else to do the same.

Note that inaction does not necessarily mean that moderation is not going to take place–for larger issues affecting forum policy, a discussion needs to take place amongst the staff before a decision can be reached. This takes time.

I'm interested, naturally, in what constitutes a large issue.

Quote from: webny99 on May 29, 2018, 08:41:59 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 29, 2018, 06:44:14 AM

Quote from: webny99 on May 28, 2018, 11:31:22 PM
Now abefroman has politics in his signature, too; it's only intuitive to assume that's the green light for anyone and everyone else to do the same.

Note that inaction does not necessarily mean that moderation is not going to take place–for larger issues affecting forum policy, a discussion needs to take place amongst the staff before a decision can be reached. This takes time.

I'm interested, naturally, in what constitutes a large issue.

Single people can be dealt with individually without a change in forum policy (such as when I was asked to remove my support for candidate Doug Jones from my signature last December). Now that three users have politics-related signatures, and it was mentioned that the addition of the third one basically means that it is now de facto allowed for anyone to do it, it might require a change in forum policy.

Quote from: 1 on May 29, 2018, 08:47:21 AM

Quote from: webny99 on May 29, 2018, 08:41:59 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 29, 2018, 06:44:14 AM

Quote from: webny99 on May 28, 2018, 11:31:22 PM
Now abefroman has politics in his signature, too; it's only intuitive to assume that's the green light for anyone and everyone else to do the same.

Note that inaction does not necessarily mean that moderation is not going to take place–for larger issues affecting forum policy, a discussion needs to take place amongst the staff before a decision can be reached. This takes time.

I'm interested, naturally, in what constitutes a large issue.

Single people can be dealt with individually without a change in forum policy (such as when I was asked to remove my support for candidate Doug Jones from my signature last December). Now that three users have politics-related signatures, and it was mentioned that the addition of the third one basically means that it is now de facto allowed for anyone to do it, it might require a change in forum policy.

It's unfortunately that individuals need to try to find every loophole conceivable to do what they insist on doing.

There are tons of forums and websites where people can express their views on other topics, if they feel they must tell the world their opinions of such.

Quote from: 1 on May 29, 2018, 08:47:21 AM

Quote from: webny99 on May 29, 2018, 08:41:59 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 29, 2018, 06:44:14 AM

Quote from: webny99 on May 28, 2018, 11:31:22 PM
Now abefroman has politics in his signature, too; it's only intuitive to assume that's the green light for anyone and everyone else to do the same.

Note that inaction does not necessarily mean that moderation is not going to take place–for larger issues affecting forum policy, a discussion needs to take place amongst the staff before a decision can be reached. This takes time.

I'm interested, naturally, in what constitutes a large issue.

Single people can be dealt with individually without a change in forum policy (such as when I was asked to remove my support for candidate Doug Jones from my signature last December). Now that three users have politics-related signatures, and it was mentioned that the addition of the third one basically means that it is now de facto allowed for anyone to do it, it might require a change in forum policy.

Four - I was inspired by Beltway.

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 29, 2018, 09:20:24 AM

Quote from: 1 on May 29, 2018, 08:47:21 AM
Now that three users have politics-related signatures...

Four - I was inspired by Beltway.

Unless ""-- Borders, Language and Culture" is somehow political, I don't see anything political in Beltway's signature.

Quote from: webny99 on May 29, 2018, 09:44:25 AM

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 29, 2018, 09:20:24 AM

Quote from: 1 on May 29, 2018, 08:47:21 AM
Now that three users have politics-related signatures...

Four - I was inspired by Beltway.

Unless ""-- Borders, Language and Culture" is somehow political, I don't see anything political in Beltway's signature.

He changed his signature.

Quote from: 1 on May 29, 2018, 09:49:13 AM

Quote from: webny99 on May 29, 2018, 09:44:25 AM

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 29, 2018, 09:20:24 AM

Quote from: 1 on May 29, 2018, 08:47:21 AM
Now that three users have politics-related signatures...

Four - I was inspired by Beltway.

Unless ""-- Borders, Language and Culture" is somehow political, I don't see anything political in Beltway's signature.

He changed his signature.

... which means we're back to three.

Quote from: webny99 on May 29, 2018, 09:54:16 AM

Quote from: 1 on May 29, 2018, 09:49:13 AM

Quote from: webny99 on May 29, 2018, 09:44:25 AM

Quote from: abefroman329 on May 29, 2018, 09:20:24 AM

Quote from: 1 on May 29, 2018, 08:47:21 AM
Now that three users have politics-related signatures...

Four - I was inspired by Beltway.

Unless ""-- Borders, Language and Culture" is somehow political, I don't see anything political in Beltway's signature.

He changed his signature.

... which means we're back to three.

And now we're back to two, huzzah.

However, if there is no moderator decision to the contrary, I for one might put a political message in my signature.  I didn't come to this forum to discuss politics, but I don't want newbies to feel that everyone on the board is of a certain political view or that other views would be unwelcome.

Quote from: kkt on May 29, 2018, 12:21:43 PM
However, if there is no moderator decision to the contrary, I for one might put a political message in my signature.  I didn't come to this forum to discuss politics, but I don't want newbies to feel that everyone on the board is of a certain political view or that other views would be unwelcome.

Part of the problem is that NE2 attacks anyone who is a Republican, including name calling. Countering arguments is fine, but going completely off topic to make a personal attack is not.

Quote from: kkt on May 29, 2018, 12:21:43 PM
However, if there is no moderator decision to the contrary, I for one might put a political message in my signature.  I didn't come to this forum to discuss politics, but I don't want newbies to feel that everyone on the board is of a certain political view or that other views would be unwelcome.

I'm not sure how anyone could reach that conclusion based on the fact that two users have political messages in their signatures, one liberal, one conservative.

Quote from: kkt on May 29, 2018, 12:21:43 PM
I don't want newbies to feel that everyone on the board is of a certain political view or that other views would be unwelcome.

I for one have never thought that, not even when I was a newbie.

As a new member, the fact that political discussion is discouraged should lead you to wonder why that might be the case. And the only plausible reason is that things have the potential to get ugly (and probably have gotten ugly in the past). Which means there are forum members with vastly different political views - or why would there even be a reason to include that in the guidelines?

Quote from: webny99 on May 29, 2018, 12:43:27 PM

Quote from: kkt on May 29, 2018, 12:21:43 PM
I don't want newbies to feel that everyone on the board is of a certain political view or that other views would be unwelcome.

I for one have never thought that, not even when I was a newbie.

As a new member, the fact that political discussion is discouraged should lead you to wonder why that might be the case. And the only plausible reason is that things have the potential to get ugly (and probably have gotten ugly in the past). Which means there are forum members with vastly different political views - or why would there even be a reason to include that in the guidelines?

That's a good point.

The average political viewpoint of all the members here is probably slightly left of center. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, and it isn't even relevant. The problem, which 1 stated above, is that the vast majority of personal attacks on this forum come from one specific user, and most of them are against conservatives. New right-leaning members might take this to mean that this is a forum for liberals and that they aren't welcome, which is exactly what we don't want.

I definitely cheered for NE2 when he took a dig at a poster who said there were too many Arabs living in Detroit. Beyond that, he's white noise.

Quote from: webny99 on May 29, 2018, 08:11:25 PM
If every liberal was cheering for NE2 every time he took a dig at a conservative, I'd feel differently.
But I found out fairly quickly that NE2 was the exception than the rule... and even then, I found out about his snarky meanness before I found out about his liberal values  :eyebrow:

Jawcide - when you go to a beach known to be shark infested, go out in a raft, and start ladling chum overboard.

Some posters in online forums have a tendency to chum the waters, and then seem surprised at some of the attention that it attracts.

 We've again strayed far from the original topic. Discussion closed