HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: Fighting Tickets (Was: Speeding Tickets)
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 15:43:18 GMT
Keywords: Ticket, fighting, speeding

pvmason@cco.caltech.edu (Peter V. Mason) writes:

....
>     The book is "Fight Your Ticket" by Atty. David Brown.  it's
>published by Nolo Press in Berkeley, which touts itself as a
...
Another book I found interesting is:
	The Ticket Book by Rod Dornsife ISBN 0-9601950-1-7
Published by:
	The Ticket Book, Inc.
	PO Box 1087
	La Jolla, Ca 92038

I don't know whether this is still available.  I got mine when it
was handed out to all the participants in the 1979 Cannonball
Baker Sea-to-Shining-Sea Memorial Trophy Dash (the last real
Cannonball).  We finished first in auto-driveaway class with no
speeding tickets.

Bill
-- 
INTERNET:  bill@Celestial.COM   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591
SPEED COSTS MONEY -- HOW FAST DO YOU WANT TO GO?
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: rjwade@rainbow.ecn.purdue.edu (Robert J. Wade)
Subject: Re: SPEECH ON SPEEDING W/IMPUNITY
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:19:09 GMT

In article <Sep.30.12.19.38.1992.26301@aramis.rutgers.edu> rinehart@aramis.rutgers.edu (Mark J. Rinehart) writes:
>In article <92268.193819DJS148@psuvm.psu.edu> DJS148@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>
>> I would greatly appreciate any ideas concerning how to avoid
>> receiving a speeding ticket.  I have a speech comm. class
>> presentation due on Oct. 5.  I need enough practical methods to
>> speak about for ten minutes. 
>
>Probably the most effective way to avoid receiving a speeding ticket
>to become a cop. No cop will ever issue a speeding ticket to another
>cop. As a cop, you are free to break just about any traffic law you
>wish, with complete impunity. 
>
>Mark

gee....seems something is not quite right here.  certain people being ABOVE
the law....sorta like congress exempting themselves from the laws the rest 
of american has to live by....oh well...i'm sure no one would ABUSE those
special privilages....

Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: kiel_jeff@macmail1.rtsg.mot.com
Subject: Re: Tailgaters abound!
Organization: Motorola,Inc
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 23:31:10 GMT

>In article <1992Sep25.144621.25214@linus.mitre.org> ptrei@bistromath.mitre.org
(Peter Trei) writes:
>
>    It would be interesting if we could profile the pro/anti late
>merge people by how much driving they do on crowded highways at rush
>hour. I still shake my head in disbelief at the claim of one poster
>that he deliberately spends 10-20 minutes, twice a day, unnecessarily
>sitting in stop-and-go, because it's "fair". I wish I had that much
>time to waste.
>

I was the one who made that post and I understand why you have such a hard time
believing my actions.  You are looking at the situation as a simple gain verses
risk decision with no ethics involved.  The "gain" is saving yourself time and
the "risk" is the very small possibility that no one will let you into the
line.  In the particular situation that I was describing, there is a solid
white line between the two lanes so there is the additional "risk" of receiving
a ticket for crossing the solid white line but we all know this too is very
slight.  So, the obvious choice is to merge at the last possible chance to save
yourself the most time possible on your trip to work.  

On a typical commute to work I would estimate that about 1 in 10 drivers choose
to merge at the last minute rather than to wait in the line which normally
takes 10-20 minutes to get through.  So why do 90% of the drivers get into the
line and wait the 10-20 minutes?  I really have a hard time believing that
these drivers can not see that it would be to their personal advantage to wait
to the last minute to merge.  Most of these people must take the same route to
work every day and see those who wait to the last minute to merge saving
themselves a lot of time.  I talked with a group of co-workers on this subject
and everyone agreed that most people believe that it is "unfair" because
everyone should wait the same amount of time.  So "ethics" gets in the way of
making the proper gain verses risk decision.  

No matter who is right or wrong, the end result is that those who wait to the
last minute to merge get to work 10-20 minutes faster.  They know that they
will always be "let" into the line one way or another.  I have observed that
most of these drivers have found that trucks are easy prey.  They can not
accelerate quickly enough to keep the distance between themselves and the next
car in line small enough to prevent other cars from merging into the lane. 
And, of course, those who wait to the last minute to merge can justify their
actions in one way or another.  For example, "everyone has the same opportunity
to wait to the last minute" (like everyone has the same opportunity to drive 55
in the left lane making it OK to do!).  So we can argue this issue to death but
the bottom line will stay the same:  those on one side of the argument will
always get to work quicker.

-Jeff

P.S.  I now set my alarm clock 15 minutes later.
From: mental@cntrol.enet.dec.com
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: Thank you at night (was Re: Signalling one's desire to pass)
Date: 5 Oct 92 14:26:00 GMT
Reply-To: mental@cntrol.enet.dec.com ()
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <1ain0nINNqll@falcon.natinst.com>, karmira@natinst.com (Apostolos Karmirantzos) writes:
|>  What do you think is the appropriate way to signal a thank you at night
|>to someone who went right to allow you to pass. If it's day, I just wave
|>my hand, but what about at night?

	I give 'em one flash of the emergency flashers. 

	/ken
		

|>	Apostolos
|>-- 
|>Karmirantzos Apostolos		e-mail: karmiran@natinst.com
|>-- 
|>Karmirantzos Apostolos		e-mail: karmiran@natinst.com
|>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Mental				
mental@cntrol.enet.dec.com		Fahrvergnugen = DriveAmusingly
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup)
Subject: Re: tips for Indiana, Ohio ?
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:43:14 GMT

In article <BvGL59.JFw@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
stresres@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Mark Vanetten) writes:

>Due to the new style, MOST new Caprices are cops!!

When I first saw the new Caprice, I thought, "hey- they ain't gonna sell even
one." Now, I realize that the "ugliness" effect means that the above is true,
and the only folks driving the new ones are cabbies, (old) folks who have
been in Caprici since unit #1 rolled off the assembly line, and, of course,
the boys in blue (when the f*ckers ain't undercover!).

GM has actually done the rest of us a favor.

	-Kenny
-- 
Kenneth R. Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA
OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142	+1 617 621 7306
kenny@osf.osf.org			OSF has nothing to do with this post.
	    "Motor oil?!?! <splut> YOU GAVE ME MOTOR OIL?!?!"
From: jmiller@afit.af.mil (Jeffrey C Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: 55:  And Then There Were (Please Help)
Date: 29 Sep 92 18:17:19 GMT
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology

In article <1992Sep25.195757.18749@cabot.balltown.cma.COM> welty@cabot.balltown.cma.COM (richard welty) writes:
>In article <1992Sep24.191804.3309@photon.com> jbn@photon.photon.com (Joe Naiman) writes:
>>The article said that New Jersey was one of EIGHT states which still
>>had a 55 mph speed limit.
>
>>I thought that nine states still had 55:  Alaska and Delaware (with
>>no eligible roads), Hawaii, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
>>Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey.  Should I eliminate one of
>>those states from the list?
>
>alaska has no highways which could qualify for 65.  i'm not sure
>that hawaii has any significant mileage that would qualify.  rhode
>island sure doesn't have much mileage of that type.
>
Hawaii has about 15 miles or so (all of I-H2, ewa end of I-H1) of road
that would qualify, but the Waihee and Fasi administrations gain too
much revenue from having HPD run radar traps on those segments, so they
stay 55...for more details, see the NMA "Driver's Handbook" listing
for Hawaii...

On a somewhat related note, there was a front page story in the Dayton
Daily News this week about the DPD's new $3500 lidar guns, so draw
your own conclusions...



-- 
Jeff Miller,  NH6ZW/N8,  AFA1HE (ex WD6CQV, AFA8JM, AFA1DO)
AFIT School of Engineering, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH
"You gotta expect some losses when you fly the heavies, man" -- Jeff Conn
"No brain, no pain" -- filched from some new movie promo
From: mike@gilligan.East.Sun.COM (Mike Roncadori)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: Stubborn Cyclists
Date: 6 Oct 1992 10:12:30 -0400
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Vienna, Va.
NNTP-Posting-Host: gilligan.east.sun.com

In article <1992Oct6.115600.23268@colorado.edu> drew@kinglear.cs.colorado.edu (Drew Eckhardt) writes:
>
>Cyclists pay the same taxes (Albeit not so much gas tax) 
>that you do, and ought to have the same rights on the road,
>provided that they follow all applicable traffic laws.  
>

I don't know about Colorado, but in Virginia, cyclists have:

	No plates, and therefore no registration fees

	No driver's license requirement, and therefore
	no licensing fees.

	No county sticker, and therefore no county regis-
	tration fees.

	No county sticker also means no personal property
	taxes assessed. (This one means hundreds, or perhaps
	thousands of dollars, depending on the car. Mine have
	been anywhere from 500 to 1100 dollars a year, dep-
	ending on assessed value of the car).

So, for each year (on a bicycle), it should be something like
this:

		2.00	($2.00 per yr for driver's license)
		20.00	($20.00 per yr for vehicle placards)
		35.00	(Minimum Personal Property tax)
		20.00	(County sticker fee)

In Virginia, your right to the road should cost $72.00, annually,
but it costs nothing. Therefore, the idea that a biker pays for
his right to the road is false, at least in Virginia. You may
pay income tax, but you definitely don't pay all the fees that
every driver does.

-- Mike

--------------------------------------------------------------
My opinion - not my employer's
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: kevinq@Ingres.COM (Kevin Quinn)
Subject: Re: Signalling one's desire to pass
Reply-To: kevinq@Ingres.COM (Kevin Quinn)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 2 Oct 92 20:54:51 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.063352.10523@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> kappa@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Glenn Capuano) writes:
[ bandwidth reduced ]
>	In Australia, it's both allowable and acceptable to pass on the
>left (the right lane being the "fast" lane), my VTA rules book just states
>that you have to be a bit more careful because you're in the other
>driver's blind spot for longer.
>

Can't speak for all the states, but in those I've had reason to study the 
regs for all agree that passing on the right is to be frowned upon.  The laws
state that everybody is to stay as far to the right as possible, with the
left lane/s reserved for passing...  And, of course, if the guy in the left
lane is doing the speed limit, you have, by definition, volunteered for 
revenue enhancement activities by passing them on the right.


kbq


--
Kevin Quinn                         | kevinq@ingres.com
                                    | {mtzinu,pacbell,ll-winken,sun}!ingres.com
My opinions are my own.  Should you think otherwise, think again.
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: tmkk@uiuc.edu (Khan)
Subject: Re: H. Ross Perot's proposed gas tax
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 20:12:00 GMT


In article <1992Oct6.163816.12733@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com> c23st@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos) writes:
>
>I do not think you understood which people I meant by 'impacted the most
>regressively'. I was not talking about the $40K/year engineer who drives
>100 miles a day; I was talking about the $10K/year technically working
>poor driving a beater that has to choose between Mr. Perot's tax or
>clothes for their backs.

Say, perhaps you can help your case by citing what happens to the
"working poor" of Europe. After all, they pay $5/gallon for gas in many
countries, the vast majority of which is tax.

Then again, reporting what happens to those people might just weaken
your case, too...

Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: tmkk@uiuc.edu (Khan)
Subject: Re: Laser Jammer Sighting?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:01:26 GMT


In article <1992Sep29.210326.25089@hubcap.clemson.edu> csroach@eng.clemson.edu (Shane Roach) writes:
>Driving along SC Highway 93 near jolly olde Clemson University one night 
>last week I saw something rather curious.  The car behind me, a newish
>Nissan 300ZX, had a strange device implanted in the nose.  It appeared
>to be a bar about a foot long and maybe two inches high, in which a dim
>red light went from side to side.  The light took about three seconds to
>make a round trip, and was just a wee bit brighter near the center of the
>bar.  The only thing I've ever seen like it was the "sensor array" in the
>nose of the "KITT" Firebird on the TV show "Knight Rider" several years
>ago, and at first I thought maybe some dork had made one of those trying
>to be cool back when the show was on the air, but that thought went south
>when I identified the car as a new-style black 300ZX Twin Turbo.  Then I 
>got to thinking "Hmmm, dim red sweeping light, probably invisible in day-
>light, relatively inconspicuous fast car, fairly bemonied owner, in a town
>with a university known for its engineering school, could it perhaps be a
>lidar jammer/scrambler/disruptor device?"

More likely, it's some dork who regularly watches reruns of Knight Rider
in syndication somewhere and thought it would be cool to have a "Cylon
Eye" (remember Battlestar Galactica?) on the nose of his car.

LIDAR works in the infrared band. This device needs to emit lots of IR,
NOT visible light, in order to drown out reflections from LIDAR guns.
Beyond that, why would it need to "scan" from side to side? Moving back
and forth like that reduces the device's effectiveness: the device might
be "looking" to the left when the LIDAR beam comes in from the right,
making it totally useless. It would be better to have the emitter run the
full width at all times, like a fluorescent light tube, therefore covering
the entire front of the vehicle at all times. There would also probably
be another one across the rear, perhaps hidden in the full-width
spoiler. Above all, such a device would best be made stealthy, so that
Officer Friendly won't pull you over and say "What's that thing? Looks
illegal - I'm going to have to haul you downtown and have it impounded."

I think it's fairly safe to say that this device was NOT a LIDAR jammer,
or, if it is, it's a very poorly designed one.

Counterarguments?

Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,rec.autos
From: mshar@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Mike Mshar)
Subject: Re: The Club
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 05:45:25 GMT

> jason@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Jason Hanson) writes:
>The school I attend offers The Club as a lease (indefinite) for $20.  This
>seems like a good deal as compared to $70-100 in mail order.  But, how well do
>they work?  Also, my car has a steering wheel lock built in (one of those that
>won't turn without the keys in the ignition)... Will this help me?

No, this will not help you. I had the great pleasure of having one of 
my cars stolen. It was a 1982 Trans Am with all options in perfect condition.
The thief that stole my car very simply gained entry, smashed the plastic
steering column, and flipped the switch that starts the car. Steering wheel
lock??? Probably laughed at it.

If my car had had the club on the steering wheel, the car would probably
not have been stolen. Why? Because my car was easy, and 90 percent of 
car thieves just wait around so they can steal an easy one. Why take the
time and risk of getting a club off of a steering wheel, especially in
a busy parking lot? Only the true professionals will take the time to 
go through anti-theft devices, and this won`t be a problem unless you 
own something really juicy (Porsche, Vette, etc.). 

So my advice?? Get a club, and use it everywhere you go, and you can 
be pretty sure that most thieves will just give your car a passing look.

BTW Word on the street has it that a 15 year old took my car. I can`t
picture a 15 year old being technologically advanced to the point of 
being able to remove a club quickly. Besides, if somebody really wants
your car that bad, he`ll just pull a gun on you.




-- 
|       Michael G. Mshar        | My Life-Long Goal: To keep common sense    |
|   mmshar@mn.ecn.purdue.edu    | alive and keep the idiots from taking over.|
|  mshar@mentor.cc.purdue.edu   |     \\President, Nice Guys Anonymous//     |
|____>>> United States Steel, Mechanical Engineer, Technical Services <<<____|
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,rec.autos
From: kucharsk@solbourne.com (William Kucharski)
Subject: Re: (Defeating) The Club
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc., Longmont, CO
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 19:37:45 GMT

While reading article <1992Oct2.212242.6033@scott.skidmore.edu>, I noticed that
jreiser@scott.skidmore.edu (jason reiser) said the following:
 >The club is a great deterent for your average joyriders, but a real
 >thief will get by it one way or another.  Of course, besides just
 >towing the car, the club has a ratcheded area that extends in front of
 >the steering wheel (to fit several vehicles) and while it is
 >supposedly difficult (or perhaps impossible?) to cut through, it can
 >be cracked.  If you spray this with freon, and then smack it with a
 >solid object like a baseball bat, it will split.  A friend had his car
 >stolen with the shattered club left in his parking spot.  Talk about
 >adding insult to injury...

Actually, isn't this quite convenient?  I thought there was some stupid clause
that the manufacturer of The Club (tm) would pay for your deductible but only
if you had proof of failure of The Club.  I would surmise that smashed bits of
Club would qualify as "proof"...
-- 
| William Kucharski, Solbourne Computer, Inc.     | Opinions expressed above
| Internet: kucharsk@solbourne.com   Ham: N0OKQ   | are MINE alone, not those
| Snail Mail: 1900 Pike Road, Longmont, CO  80501 | of Solbourne Computer, Inc.
| President, "Just the Ten of Us" Fan Club        | "Dittos from Longmont, CO"
From: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: Tailgaters abound!
Date: 1 Oct 92 19:52:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: oasys.25779
Reply-To: bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ronald Bense)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.autos.driving, un027713@wvnvms.wvnet.edu writes:
>In article <25676@oasys.dt.navy.mil>, bense@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Ron Bense) write
>s:

>We're talking about driving, so let's stick to that topic.  You read too
>much into what I posted.  I most certainly do drive on a daily basis, and
>I take care not to do things in my driving that put myself or others at

I agree wrt driving, with the qualifier "negligently", as in "negligently
puts at risk". Not leaving 100' of space at stop lights between cars
is not negligent, but the guy who slams into the line at 20 mph over
the speed limit and causes a 5 car chain reaction is negligent. If you're
only talking about 10-20', well, I don't usually get too upset about
that, but when you start talking 50-100', don't be surprised if someone
pulls into it.

>> Afterall, any of these actions could possibly harm my property, and
>> you surely don't have my consent. Your soapbox position is poorly thought
>> out and highly idealistic.

>That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it.  But if you pull up behind

You were so general in your sweeping statement, that I felt the need
to remark on it.

>someone at a light, and they pull a little forward, they're probably saying
>to you that you're too close for their comfort.  Why not just respect that?

Actually, that's my way of moving them up. The lights here in some areas
only allow for three cars, if they're bumper to bumper, to make it through
a light, and that's with the last one running a yellow. If some dope
is leaving 30+' as a hole, he probably won't even make it through the
light if he is the number 2 car, as he's such a 'conscientious driver
that he'll slow down and look before turning on a turn signal, and it'll
turn yellow on him. So he waits. 5 minute cycles discourage me from
wanting to wait through 2 cycles when it's not necessary.

>They've made their position clear.  I don't care if the other guy is at
>fault, I'm don't want my car damaged any more than it has to be in an
>accident.

I don't want to be in an accident. Then again, if I am, I want mine
totaled, if it's going to be hit hard enough to move it, as something
in the frame will be bent. The best way to ensure this is to get hit
from front and rear, as the bumpers alone on many cars, esp Hondas,
run around $1300 a piece.

Ron                          Think about this one (seen on a bumper sticker):
			     The road to hell is bumper-to-bumper
			     Make a U-turn to God.
The irony is priceless.
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: kevinq@Ingres.COM (Kevin Quinn)
Subject: Re: Signalling one's desire to pass
Reply-To: kevinq@Ingres.COM (Kevin Quinn)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 2 Oct 92 00:51:15 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.163946.1@bronco.fnal.gov> colombo@bronco.fnal.gov writes:
>Anyway, the problem in the USA is that it's generally considered
>annoying by the driver being flashed.  

Just here?  You should see all the billboards in Germany pointing out the
annoyance and discourtesy of flashing high beams... *and* the trick of
turning on your left blinker, to give the hint to the guy in front.


kbq

--
Kevin Quinn                         | kevinq@ingres.com
                                    | {mtzinu,pacbell,ll-winken,sun}!ingres.com
My opinions are my own.  Should you think otherwise, think again.
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: Brian.E.Hannon@dartmouth.edu (Brian E. Hannon)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: 55:  And Then There Were (Please Help)
Date: 27 Sep 92 19:31:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.1992Sep27.193106.27903
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Sep24.191804.3309@photon.com>
jbn@photon.photon.com (Joe Naiman) writes:

> I thought that nine states still had 55:  Alaska and Delaware (with
> no eligible roads), Hawaii, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
> Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey.  Should I eliminate one of
> those states from the list?

Hawaii and Alaska don't count since they don't have any eligible
interstates.  But you forgot Massachusetts.  Funny how they're all in
the northeast, huh?

Bri
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving