Police want your $$

[Aphrodite]

Doesn't matter how clear you think it's visible, it has to be visible at 100 ft. and if it's not then you will get stopped...BTW if it really was the dead middle of the back window (i think that's a little exaggeration though) it would be another violation (obstructing your view). Either violation will get you stopped.

It is a 3 gen Firebird so the slant of the window I felt it necessary to put it truly realistically in the middle.....

Actually rear view obstruction is avoided having both outside mirrors and it is visible at 200 feet. Officer admitted he missed the tag. Point being he could have just been a prick and found any number of other violation and wrote that or could have wrote other stuff but my insurance is current and my license is current so he felt I did nothing to deem it necessary

back on point...
Main subject is secondary in my case, thinking, is the fact I was shaken by being pulled over when I shouldn't be in fear of the police dept. Especially when I am doing what I am supposed to be doing i.e. doing nothing illegal speeding or otherwise. I shouldn't have to be an attorney or have to hire an attorney to understand every little law that has been slipped in to affect just because of a money crunch.

[D Berns R6]

No violation in having a rear window obstructed. You don't ever have to HAVE a rear window, as long as you have a right side rear view mirror. MOST commercial vehicles do not have a rear window (think box truck).

You are correct on vehicles/trucks that are not equipped with a rear window, rear side windows or when such windows are treated with a material or component that obstructs the rear view. This goes for towing, and cargo loads as well.

It is a 3 gen Firebird so the slant of the window I felt it necessary to put it truly realistically in the middle.....

Actually rear view obstruction is avoided having both outside mirrors and it is visible at 200 feet. Officer admitted he missed the tag. Point being he could have just been a prick and found any number of other violation and wrote that or could have wrote other stuff but my insurance is current and my license is current so he felt I did nothing to deem it necessary

Yes, when what I stated above is present and you can see at least 200ft behind you. Good, as he should...

[csmith]

I am sorry but this is a ridiculous statement, you are going to elect your local representation on their stand on traffic enforcement? Pressure from their constituency would be the only way to deal with this but that would take a lot more work and perseverance than sitting here bitching about it on the internet.

I wasn't so much going the route of questioning new candidates on what they feel about traffic enforcement as much as just not reelecting people that act in ways you don't agree with. I concede you're not going to know much about these issues as it pertains to those that don't have much previous political experience (i.e. most city/county political candidates), but once you see how they intend to do these things it's pretty straight forward in not allowing them to stick around.

I agree with the pressure from the constituency part, but you have to get people to give a damn about making changes before those changes can be made.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Eating dougnuts, drinking coffee, beating people for no good reason. You know, the usual cop stuff.

They get up early to BEAT the crowds!

[csmith]

It's understandable, don't speed, don't get a ticket. That's fine, the problem is the discrimination. Everybody speeds. But just read up a few posts and you see "I got stopped because the cop 'couldn't see my temp tag.'" It's stuff like that that people are complaining about.

I see your point and understand, but as she says he did let her go with nothing. Police officers are just as fallible as anyone else, hence he admitted he made a mistake.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Hey Cane, I agree with you. Here's a novel idea though, how about realistic speed limits and MANDATORY enhanced driver training (including knowing how to look for motorcycles)? We can raise the limits to a safe level, and people will be MORE safe because the driving tests will be a LOT tougher and the use of cell phones will be banned with huge fines for that or other "inattentive" driving habits. With today's cars, we should be able to go faster in almost every scenario (except residential, school, and hospital zones). Oh wait, that would make too much sense....

[CaneZach]

Hey Cane, I agree with you. Here's a novel idea though, how about realistic speed limits and MANDATORY enhanced driver training (including knowing how to look for motorcycles)? We can raise the limits to a safe level, and people will be MORE safe because the driving tests will be a LOT tougher and the use of cell phones will be banned with huge fines for that or other "inattentive" driving habits. With today's cars, we should be able to go faster in almost every scenario (except residential, school, and hospital zones). Oh wait, that would make too much sense....

Frank, to be honest with you, if they made the sped limit on the interstate "reasonable and prudent", or whatever Montana had, I'd be just fine with that. The problem in Colorado is we have too many assclowns who think the left lane is their personal lane, so they cruise from Pueblo to Fort Collins in the left lane and never move. Obviously slow traffic down through cities, where vehicular traffic tends to pick up.

I would also LOVE to see people receive more driver's training. There are too many people on the road who have ZERO idea what they're doing and inevitably screw it up for everyone else. These are typically the fucktards who cause a crash because they did something stupid, then say, "Oh... I didn't know I couldn't make a right turn from the far left lane.." or something equally asinine. With the stupidity level in this State, I'm really surprised more people don't get themselves killed everyday.

[Bashed]

I personally think that I am a safer rider/driver going 20 over the limit than most of the drivers Zach is refering to, due to my awarness. Speed, in my opinion, does not equal being unsafe. Inattention to surroundings and conditions probably causes more accidents than speeders, but that is my guess, not fact. I play the game Zach refered to earlier, sometimes I win, sometimes not.

[Sarge]

I personally think that I am a safer rider/driver going 20 over the limit than most of the drivers Zach is refering to, due to my awarness. Speed, in my opinion, does not equal being unsafe. Inattention to surroundings and conditions probably causes more accidents than speeders, but that is my guess, not fact. I play the game Zach refered to earlier, sometimes I win, sometimes not.

I have to agree with you, at least most of the time here. Speed isn't unsafe, it's just that if something happens at speed the outcome is usually worse. The problem is though, that most people can't handle the speed, and it does become a real problem, especially when people are travelling at very different speeds. For example, if some bozo comes around a corner at 75 Mph in a 65 Mph zone, and some other bozo is texting on his phone, trying to take a picture of an accident or something at 25 mph, the first bozo may as well have rear-ended him at 50 mph from a standstill, because he didn't have the experience to realize that you might want to slow down around blind curves, because people are idiots.

[Aphrodite]

Speed, much like on a bike is not the problem, it how to handle that speed and when NOT to speed, and when to slow way down.

[csmith]

I personally think that I am a safer rider/driver going 20 over the limit than most of the drivers Zach is refering to, due to my awarness. Speed, in my opinion, does not equal being unsafe. Inattention to surroundings and conditions probably causes more accidents than speeders, but that is my guess, not fact. I play the game Zach refered to earlier, sometimes I win, sometimes not.

I have to agree with you, at least most of the time here. Speed isn't unsafe, it's just that if something happens at speed the outcome is usually worse. The problem is though, that most people can't handle the speed, and it does become a real problem, especially when people are travelling at very different speeds. For example, if some bozo comes around a corner at 75 Mph in a 65 Mph zone, and some other bozo is texting on his phone, trying to take a picture of an accident or something at 25 mph, the first bozo may as well have rear-ended him at 50 mph from a standstill, because he didn't have the experience to realize that you might want to slow down around blind curves, because people are idiots.

You guys also have a higher level of training than most. This is only my assumption, but I'd think trackdays/racing/dirt riding (Sgt, I'm only guessing you're a part of one of those scenes) all give you a leg up as far as composure at elevated speed mixed with adverse situations. Paraphrasing what CaneZach and (I think) Bueller said, If the general populace had advanced and/or recurring training there'd probably be a little more pride taken in the ability to drive.

I doubt Mayhem does track days. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Sjld5yy3Q