Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Traffic law oddities...

  1. #1
    Vulture of The Western World Eric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    The Land of The Edentulites

    Traffic law oddities...

    Most states now have mandatory seat belt laws. But no state requires that a motorcyclist wear more than a helmet. So, on the one hand, you can't legally ride around unbuckled inside an air bag-equipped 4,000 lb. steel cocoon. But you can legally ride a 170 mph sport bike wearing shorts, a t-shirt, no gloves or boots ... so long as you've got a helmet on.

    This isn't an argument for mandatory "gear" laws. It's just an observation about the inconsistent weirdness of our traffic laws.

    More examples:

    The legal threshold defining "drunk" driving continues to go down - it's .08 BAC nationwide and nutty groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving have been pushing for even lower standards, down to as little as .06 or even .04 BAC - yet it's an established fact that most alcohol-related accidents involve drivers with BAC levels of .10 or higher. This has been well-known for years. Yet instead of focusing on the hard-core, problem drinkers who are responsible for almost all the booze-related accidents, the authorities spend more and more time trying to catch people with literally trace amounts of alcohol in their system who haven't actually done any harm and who are very unlikely to cause any harm, based on the facts about who actually gets into accidents.

    This is why we have "sobriety checkpoints" - because otherwise, drivers with slight amounts of alcohol in their systems would virtually never be identified by police because they don't drive erratically or cause wrecks. Their only crime is running afoul of an arbitrary BAC threshold that's as unreasonable as the old 55 mph National Maximum Speed Limit.

    While the anti-drinking (anything, ever) crusade becomes ever shriller, few states do much to weed out past-it senile citizens - who, unlike people with .04 or .06 BAC are in fact the most accident-prone group of drivers after teenagers. Or tailgaters - who do their thing with near-impunity. When was the last time you heard about a massive police campaign to go after them?

    Instead, copsw2 go after seatbelt scofflaws and people who run 5 mph faster than the speed limit.

    Then there's this business about driver's licenses - and illegal aliens.

    American citizens get put through all kinds of rigmarole related to their driving privileges. For example, most states require proof of motor vehicle insurance; in Virginia, my home state, the DMV conducts random spot checks - asking that proof be provided of coverage of all vehicles registered to the person holding a license. If they catch you running around without insurance, severe monetary and other penalties come crashing down around your head - even though you haven't caused a cent of actual damage to anyone.

    Meanwhile, Pedro and Jesus - who aren't even supposed to be in the country - are given driver's licenses, but easily escape the consequences of actions such as driving around without insurance and totaling other people's cars - because they're illegals and what can you do? When they smash into you - or the DMV wants to see some paperwork - they just disappear.

    One set of rules (and punishments) for us. Another for the illegals.

    Speed limits make no sense, either.

    You can be driving a stretch of Interstate highway, cross a state line - and even though the road and conditions are exactly the same, suddenly the speed limit drops by 10 mph. What was legal a moment ago is suddenly not. It has zip to do with "safety" - even though that's the canned speech you'll get when the trooper pulls you over.

    In 1994, the year before the 55 mph National Maximum Speed Limit was repealed by Congress, running 76 mph on the freeway in my home state of Virginia was prima facie "reckless driving" - because it was more than 20 mph faster than the posted max speed limit of 55 mph. Today, it's just a simple speeding ticket - because the highway limits returned to 65 mph.

    Of course, the tens of thousands of "reckless driving" citations issued to Virginia motorists nailed for doing 76 mph or thereabouts during the Drive 55 era were not repealed.

    Their money was not refunded, either.

    Irrationality and arbitrariness is the defining characteristic of U.S. traffic law - and American law, generally. And arbitrary, irrational laws are a big part of what defines life in "Third World" countries - the banana republics we once sneered at but which we increasingly have much in common with.

    Arbitrary laws punish Joe - but leave Jeff alone. Jeff likely has pull. So he runs under the radar. Joe hasn't got a lobbyist in the legislature - or money to stuff the pol's pockets with directly - so he gets targeted.

    This is what it's coming to. We see it all around us - from the four figure "abuser fees" that New Jersey and Virginia tried to impose that crucified motorists over relatively trivial traffic violations (while people who commit physical assault get maybe a couple days in jail - suspended - and a much smaller fine) to the current "click or ticket" harassment campaigns that henpeck unbuckled drivers - while bikers only need to put a helmet on.

    It's enough to get your back up, if you think about it too much.

  2. #2
    Senior Member J. ZIMM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Oregon has decided to raise it up a notch. We now have BUZZED DRIVING now to contend with. So that now means, as Eric was saying, just another way to harass us. Hell, why don't they reinstate pro-abition and that will solve all the drunk driving problems, right? If you believe that, then I have a back yard full of Kitty Litter I'd like to sell you. I think that there would be more drunk drivers on the road, more booze related deaths, than we have now. Just like in those 'good ol' days', back yard 'refineries' would be popping up all over the place. I could be one of them. But, we all have heard stories of bad booze being made. People were getting sick from it and some even died. But we have to keep the State Coffers in tack, don't we? So now we have buzzed driving. We also have sobriety check points to see if you are carrying any drugs. Dogs and all. I hope I don't come across any of these, and their damn dogs don't scratch my car. State could end up with a lot less revenue than they have now. They say you can't sue the Government. Bet me. It happens all the time. Maybe not the Feds, but local and State you sure can. Oh by the way, Buzzzed driving can and does include driving under the influence of prescribed medications too.

Similar Threads

  1. Traffic law oddities
    By Eric in forum Fight Traffic Tickets/Driving Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-03-2007, 10:57 PM
  2. Traffic law oddities - and injustices
    By Eric in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-05-2007, 01:50 PM
    By gail in forum Fight Traffic Tickets/Driving Issues
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 07-23-2007, 09:22 AM
  4. Traffic jam
    By misterdecibel in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-03-2007, 06:10 AM
  5. Worst traffic law?
    By Eric in forum Motor Mouth
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-10-2007, 06:34 AM

Posting Permissions

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