HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: Change in enforcement policy. (was Re: new law)
Date: 2 Jan 93 02:43:10 GMT
Organization: Green Hills and Cows

In article <13758@optilink.COM> calley@optilink.COM (Chris Calley) writes:

>1. It attempts to protect passengers, especially children, whose idiot parents
>would otherwise not use seat belts for their children.

Who is raising the children, the parents or the state?

>2. Automobile injuries and fatalities impact all of our insurance rates as well
>as health care costs.  If a seat belt saves a life, or if it reduces the level 
>of injury we might all be able to save some money.

I am so tired of this old wornout argument. If people chose not to wear
a seatbelt and injuries to those people incrementally cause insurance
rates to rise, then consider that a cost of retaining personal
liberties. How much are you willing to sell your freedom for, anyway?

Why not take this argument to natural limits? Why not pass diet laws?
Over-eating and consumption of "unhealthful" foods is contributing to
our health care costs, no? Let us just jail people for eating potato
chips. How about "dangerous" sports? I could make a list from here to
the street that would name activities and practices commonly pursued by
some that "cost" others money in premiums, use of municipal services,
rescue operations, etc., etc.

I, for one, am not interested in saving a few bucks if the cost is
personal freedom.

>The "natural selection" argument in this context is ludicrous.  Do you really
>believe that the human gene pool would be helped by non-seat belt users dying 
>off?  Somehow I don't think that you have completely thought this through.

Do you believe that an indigent person who is in intensive care for
months rather than being killed outright costs the system less? No one
has EVER produced any credible figures showing just exactly how much we
are supposed to save by requiring universal seat belt use. Law
enforcement officials have casually credited increased seat belt usage
to the lowering of the traffic death and injury figures over the past
year, but there is absolutely no scientific basis for their statements.
Many other factors are at play.

>BTW, the seat belt law has been around since approx. 1986.  The only change
>is in the CHPs (and possibly other agencies) enforcement policies.

It was a bad law then; it is a worse law now.

BTW, I would not go anywhere on my motorcycle without my helmet. But a
law requiring me to wear it is just the first step toward the state
telling me that motorcycle riding is too dangerous altogether.
-- 
 John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115     |       FAX:
 john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: markp@pro-palmtree.socal.com (Mark Panitz)
Subject: Re: Driver's License Test Question
Organization: The Palmtree BBS - 310/453-8726 - Santa Monica, CA
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 00:00:52 GMT

okay, here's another Ca driving test question:
if you are apporaching  a school bus with its red lights flashings, what do
you do? 
A. go around the bus
B. stop and wait for the red lights to stop flashing,
C. make a u-turn and go another way?
 (I know the answer- but I don't drive!)
From: tmarvan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Thomas Marvan)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Contract cooling off period
Date: 30 Dec 92 05:41:35 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego


I just bought a new car and, having signed and driven off in my new
(used) Ford Escort 1990, I went over the papers in the calm
atmosphere of the local Denny's and realised that I'm not quite
happy with the numbers.

Basically, because I agreed to pay over a two year period, it's
gonna cost me extra.  I now realise that I could almost pay the
whole thing off straight away which would save me over a thousand
bucks.

Is it easy enough to go back and change the contract without
penalty?  I know in Australia there's a ten day cooling off period
within which if the purcahser chooses, he may return the car and
cancel the contract without penalty.

Are there similar cooling off laws in California (I bought the
vehicle from a reputable dealer, BTW)?

I would appreciate an e-mail reply for the quickest response,
preferably so that I don't miss the cooling off period deadline
(assuming there is one).  BTW, if there is one, in days, is that
days of business (i.e. not holidays)?  (I bought the car Monday).


Thank you.


*******************************************************************
*  Thomas (Tom) Marvan         Phone: (619) 450 3670              *
*  Dept. of Political Science, E-Mail: tmarvan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu     *
*  University of California,   Snail Mail: 9450 Gilman Dr.,       *
*  San Diego,  USA.            #92092-0644, La Jolla, CA, 92092.  *
*******************************************************************

"Two men say they're jesus, one of them must be wrong," M. Knopfler
From: georgew@hspice.portal.com (George Wu)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: Transfering a vehicle to Calif.
Date: 22 Dec 92 18:58:33 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Meta - Software

In article <1992Dec20.010917.28161@gecko.uucp> ed@Tekelec.gecko.uucp (Ed Campbell) writes:

>     The original poster was quoted a rediculous price to convert
>his minivan to meet Calif, air quality specs.
>
>     I'm not sure that it applies to vehicles brought in from other
>states, but there is an upper limit to the amount a person has to pay
>to get his vehicle to pass the smog test. It was $50, but was recently
>upped to around $200. If you ask at the DMV, make sure the person you
>talk to really knows this subject, there is so much to know about so many
>regs that not everyone there can give you the "real" answer.

     These are two entirely different things.  Bringing a late model car into
California does entail hundreds of dollars.  Compliance is not emission based,
but specification based.  A friend of mine new he might get transferred and
made sure the Maxima he bought in Washington had all the California devices and
stickers.  There's also a fee for low mileage vehicles, I think, intended for
those trying to avoid California's sales tax.

							George


-- 
----
George J Wu,  Superior Maker of Technical Snafus,  georgew@metasw.com
Meta-Software,  1300 White Oaks Road,  Campbell, CA 95008,  (408) 369-5400
Never be the first to believe.  Never be the last to deceive.  ---  Chess
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: markp@pro-palmtree.socal.com (Mark Panitz)
Subject: Re: new law
Organization: The Palmtree BBS - 310/453-8726 - Santa Monica, CA
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 03:15:11 GMT

well at least I always were my seatbelt, I remember one reminder
I love' 
'Remember to belt someone you love-yourself.
Xref: sparky ca.driving:2641 rec.autos.driving:7310 rec.autos:30451
From: aland@informix.com (Colonel Panic)
Newsgroups: ca.driving,rec.autos.driving,rec.autos
Subject: Re: Tinted windows law ??
Date: 18 Dec 92 02:30:13 GMT
Followup-To: rec.autos.driving
Distribution: usa
Organization: Helen Keller Bondurant's Performance Driving School for the Blind

In article <1992Dec14.225910.2323@julian.uwo.ca> wlsmith@valve.heart.rri.uwo.ca (Wayne Smith) writes:
>>is that you may not operate with "any object or material placed, displayed,
>>installed, affixed, or applied upon the windshield or side or rear windows."
>>Side windows to the rear of the driver are exempted (26708b4), as is the rear
>>window IF you have mirrors on both left- and right-hand sides (26708b8)...
>
>So what's the deal with these pull-down blinds that are attached via 
>suction cups?  

Never seen these used on front windows.  Most people seem to use these to
shade infants in the back seats; most anything is legal for rear side windows,
including such shades.

>Heck, the above law could even nail you for having parking stickers on your 
>windshield.

That's why the law exempts the 7" square lower corner area of the windshield 
and rear window (passenger's side) and 5" square lower corner of the 
rear window on the driver's side.  As well as the rear side windows.

Followups to rec.autos.driving; rec.autos doesn't belong.

--
Alan Denney      aland@informix.com      {pyramid|uunet}!infmx!aland

  Smith and Wesson: the Ultimate Point-and-Click User Interface.
From: tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Tony Zugates)
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 20:41:09 GMT
Subject: new law
Organization: the HP Mtn.View Resp. Cntr.
Newsgroups: ca.driving

As of Jan 1 the Police will be able to stop you for being unbuckled.

They had to stop you for something else in order to cite you before.

Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: barrey@Novell.com (Barrey Jewall)
Subject: Re: new law
Organization: Novell, Inc.
Distribution: ba
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 00:31:35 GMT

In <474@vega.iii.com> rhockins@enrico.tmc.edu (Russell Hockins) writes:

>In article <1992Dec30.192921.8193@oracle.us.oracle.com> 
devesh@bombay.oracle.com writes:

>>In article <3450056@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com 
(Tony Zugates) writes:

>>> As of Jan 1 the Police will be able to stop you for being unbuckled.
>>> They had to stop you for something else in order to cite you before.

>>A very sensible law, IMHO. Seat belts save lives, I can tell from 
>>experience. BTW does the law apply to rear seats as well?

>As far as I know it does.  So if a passenger in the back seat is not
>wearing a seatbelt, the *driver* is the one that gets the ticket. I
>personally do not think it is a good law.  It does not take an act of
>congress for me to use my seat belt.  Always have, always will.

BZZZT!!! - Thank you for playing, but that is not the right answer..

If the Driver isn't belted, he/she gets a ticket.
If any Passenger over 18 years of age isn't belted, they get a ticket.
If any Passenger under 18 isn't belted, the driver gets a ticket.

So, as Ronald Reagan said "While you're at it, why don't you belt your wife" ..

Bah
--
+ Barrey Jewall - Network  Admin.++  and yea, though I walk through the shadow 
+ barrey@novell.com	         ++ of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am
+ Novell, Inc.- San Jose, Calif. ++ the meanest sonofabitch in the valley...
From: maskiell@ugcs.caltech.edu (Andrew R. Maskiell)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: Driver's License Test Question
Date: 2 Jan 1993 07:52:57 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Distribution: ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: grate.ugcs.caltech.edu

eduardo@power.amasd.anatcp.rockwell.com (Eduardo Malamut) writes:

>Sorry if this seems naive, but I'm taking a California Driver's License
>Test, and the following question is asked:

>  You must report to DMV the sale or transfer of your vehicle within:
>     A.  5 days
>     B. 10 days
>     C. 15 days

>I have in my hot little hands the California Driver Handbook, and can't
>find any mention of sale of a vehicle in it.  Does anyone know the
>official answer to that question?

Well, I just took the exam two weeks ago, and that question appeared on it.
According to the woman grading my exam the correct answer is A. 5 days.

Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: tweek@netcom.com (Michael D. Maxfield)
Subject: Re: Driver's License Test Question
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 06:21:44 GMT

In article <1993Jan2.160052.1370@pro-palmtree.socal.com> markp@pro-palmtree.socal.com (Mark Panitz) writes:
>okay, here's another Ca driving test question:
>if you are apporaching  a school bus with its red lights flashings, what do
>you do? 
>A. go around the bus
>B. stop and wait for the red lights to stop flashing,
>C. make a u-turn and go another way?

I remember back quite a few years... about 5 years before I was old enough to
drive, there was a news item in the media somewhere, about a police or
sheriffs district that had a school bus and was parking it on the side of
the road with the `Stop When Red Lights Are Flashing' Lights flashing for
most of the afternoon.  The would then go and ticket every driver who got
a bit impatient and decided to drive around the bus after noticing that
there was absolutely no activity at all taking place on or off the bus.

B is the answer they are looking for, but I would hazard to guess that if
you made a legal U-turn 100 yards or so back, that would be fine, or if the
bus was vacant and you sat there for 10 minutes waiting... a judge might also
through out a ticket if you then decided to drive around the bus.
From: lmb@netcom.com (Larry Blair)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Change of Venue
Date: 21 Dec 92 22:03:46 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Glenwood Consulting, Scotts Valley, CA

What are the rules regarding change of venue for a traffic citation?  How,
exactly, do I go about doing it?
-- 
Larry Blair   lmb@netcom.com       Glenwood Consulting 408-438-6386
From: tmarvan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Thomas Marvan)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: Driver's License Test Question
Date: 2 Jan 93 12:10:05 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1i3hkqINNc44@gap.caltech.edu> maskiell@ugcs.caltech.edu (Andrew R. Maskiell) writes:
>eduardo@power.amasd.anatcp.rockwell.com (Eduardo Malamut) writes:
>
>>Sorry if this seems naive, but I'm taking a California Driver's License
>>Test, and the following question is asked:
>
>>  You must report to DMV the sale or transfer of your vehicle within:
>>     A.  5 days
>>     B. 10 days
>>     C. 15 days
>
>>I have in my hot little hands the California Driver Handbook, and can't
>>find any mention of sale of a vehicle in it.  Does anyone know the
>>official answer to that question?
>
>Well, I just took the exam two weeks ago, and that question appeared on it.
>According to the woman grading my exam the correct answer is A. 5 days.


Yes, I had the same question on my exam which I took about a week
ago and guessed, incorrectly, 10 days.  I then asked an more
experienced Ca. driver and she said ten days also.  I found no
mention of this law in the Ca driver's handbook when reviewing my
error.

Now, it may be true that it is somewhere there, but if not, it
surely seems unfair for them to ask a question on something that is
not in the handbook....


*******************************************************************
*  Thomas (Tom) Marvan         Phone: (619) 450 3670              *
*  Dept. of Political Science, E-Mail: tmarvan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu     *
*  University of California,   Snail Mail: 9450 Gilman Dr.,       *
*  San Diego,  USA.            #92092-0644, La Jolla, CA, 92092.  *
*******************************************************************

"Two men say they're jesus, one of them must be wrong," M. Knopfler
From: erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: new law
Date: 1 Jan 93 08:56:09 GMT
Organization: Bleeding Edge Technologies - 'Sliding Down The Razor Blade Of Life...'

In article <1i044gINNkdf@gap.caltech.edu> pvmason@cco.caltech.edu (Peter V. Mason) writes:
>BTW, a piece of news that will be irrelevant in 7 hours;  the 
>compulsary seat belt law was effective in all of 1992, according
>to the Califoria Vehicle Code for 1992.

Another point in favor of passive restraints.  Next car I get is going to have
them.  I love seatbelts, but hate putting them on.
-- 
Ed Carp, N7EKG                    erc@apple.com                   801/538-0177
"This is the final task I will ever give you, and it  goes  on  forever.   Act
happy, feel happy, be happy, without a reason in the world. Then you can love,
and do what you will."           -- Dan Millman, "Way Of The Peaceful Warrior"
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: altinbay@netcom.com (John Altinbay)
Subject: Re: Change in enforcement policy. (was Re: new law)
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 03:18:52 GMT

In article <44033@zygot.ati.com> john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes:
>In article <13758@optilink.COM> calley@optilink.COM (Chris Calley) writes:
>
>>1. It attempts to protect passengers, especially children, whose idiot parents
>>would otherwise not use seat belts for their children.
>
>Who is raising the children, the parents or the state?
>

Well, *somebody* has to, if the parents aren't!

>>2. Automobile injuries and fatalities impact all of our insurance rates as well
>>as health care costs.  If a seat belt saves a life, or if it reduces the level 
>>of injury we might all be able to save some money.
>
>I am so tired of this old wornout argument. If people chose not to wear
>a seatbelt and injuries to those people incrementally cause insurance
>rates to rise, then consider that a cost of retaining personal
>liberties. How much are you willing to sell your freedom for, anyway?
>

It also cheapens freedom when you start arguing about such trivial stuff
as being infringements on freedom.  We've gotten society to the point
where we can barely feel safe in our own homes and you worry about whether
or not you can be fined for not wearing seatbelts is an intrusion on your
personal freedom.
-- 
John Altinbay   -   altinbay@netcom.com
===============================================================
There's a spirit that guides me, a light that shines for me
My life is worth the living, I don't need to see the end.
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: jet@boxer.nas.nasa.gov (J. Eric Townsend)
Subject: Re: Contract cooling off period
Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation, NASA Ames
Date: 30 Dec 92 14:40:35

"dman" == Dallman Ross <dman@netcom.com> writes:

dman> However, consumer loans such as auto loans can always be prepaid
dman> with no interest penalty.  You don't need to cancel any

What about rule-of-78 loans?  (or is it rule-of-87?)

--
             J. Eric Townsend --  jet@nas.nasa.gov -- 415.604.4311
              '92 R100R, DoD# 0378, BMWMOA, AMA, ACLU, EFF, CPSR
From: kemasa@ghost.hac.com (Kemasa)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: new law
Date: 1 Jan 93 18:31:16 GMT
Organization: Natural Order Nature Experiments (N.O.N.E.)

In article <76041@apple.apple.COM> erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp) writes:
>...
>Another point in favor of passive restraints.  Next car I get is going to have
>them.  I love seatbelts, but hate putting them on.

This makes NO sense to me. Are you saying you prefer those stupid mechanical
contraptions or the belts that always seem to get in the way and which do
not work as well just because you are too lazy to put on the seatbelt?
Is this way all the rest of us have to be forced to have these rotten things
in new cars? Also I hope you realize that as air bags get more "popular"
the regular seatbelts make a return (now if only they would offer a 4, 5 or
6 point harness as an option!!!).

What is the world coming to? It seems that some people want to completely
passive. I want a choice. I want to be able to get out of the driver's
seat and slide over to the passenger seat. I want simple safety devices
to reduce the risk of failure. I want people to use common sense.
-- 



						 Kemasa.

If the government cannot trust the people, the people cannot trust the
government -- Swiss Citizens (from the American Rifleman).

NRA Life Member/Certified Instructor	Sierra Club Leader
		Pro-freedom		Pro-choice

Insanity is the best defense.		e-mail: kemasa@ghost.hac.com
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: markp@pro-palmtree.socal.com (Mark Panitz)
Subject: Re: Change in enforcement policy. (was Re: new law)
Organization: The Palmtree BBS - 310/453-8726 - Santa Monica, CA
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 16:07:26 GMT

Up in Canada, the seatbelt laws have saved lives. 
Newsgroups: ca.driving
From: ehill@rose.hp.com (Eric Hill)
Subject: Re: Traffic School, OR and CA
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 20:32:33 GMT
Organization: HP - Systems Technology Division
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.8 PL6]

Are you kidding, how do you think they survive without a sales tax up there?
They give everyone with California plates a ticket (at least one).  I now
make it a point to gas up before I enter Oregon and to purchase the least
amount on my quick trip through it.  If enough people do this the 
Chamber of Commerce may get the hint.

Eric Hill
From: rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: State Roads
Date: 27 Dec 92 19:09:18 GMT
Distribution: ca.driving
Organization: Memes-R-Us
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

mandel@dms.agames.com (Glenn Mandelkern) writes:

>Does anyone know where I could get a listing of the different 
>California State Roads along with their start and endpoints
>(e.g.,  State Road 1, State Road 2, etc.)
>
>I am just curious as to how many roads are out there and where 
>they all go.  I try to stay away from interstates whenever possible
>such as when going from San Jose to L.A. by using these roads:
>	U.S. 101,
>	State Road 25,
>	State Road 198,
>	State Road 33,
>	State Road 1
>
>as opposed to using 5 or 101 all the way.	

It would be nice if they were in a computer-readable form, too, so that
folks could write software to attempt to select optimal or scenic routes.


-- richard

-- 
=====
-- richard childers		rchilder@us.oracle.com		1 415 506 2411
         oracle data center  --  unix systems & network administration
                    Klein flask for rent. Inquire within.
From: tmarvan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Thomas Marvan)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: Insurance for 1990 Ford Escort
Date: 30 Dec 92 11:02:45 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <3040@tymix.Tymnet.COM> pnelson@bullwinkle.Tymnet.COM (Phil Nelson) writes:
>In article <42924@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> tmarvan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Thomas Marvan) writes:
>
>>Can anyone suggest some reputable companies here in Sthn Ca where I
>>could get the best deals.  So far the dealer who sold me the car is
>
>In my experience, State Farm has the best rates among "reputable companies".

What about AAA?  Any recommendations for or against?



*******************************************************************
*  Thomas (Tom) Marvan         Phone: (619) 450 3670              *
*  Dept. of Political Science, E-Mail: tmarvan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu     *
*  University of California,   Snail Mail: 9450 Gilman Dr.,       *
*  San Diego,  USA.            #92092-0644, La Jolla, CA, 92092.  *
*******************************************************************

"Two men say they're jesus, one of them must be wrong," M. Knopfler
From: (Christopher J. Amow)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: new law
Followup-To: ca.driving
Date: 1 Jan 1993 00:49:52 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
Distribution: ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdr170.sdd.hp.com

In article <1992Dec31.232207.4632@netcom.com>, marv@netcom.com (Marvin
Raab) wrote:
> 
> In article <1992Dec31.070114.1351@pro-palmtree.socal.com> markp@pro-palmtree.socal.com (Mark Panitz) writes:
> >I wonder how much those 'seatbelt tickets would cost.
>    $22.00 the first time...something like $50 the second.

Au contraire (or however that's spelled),

$55.00 <------- first time!     :-(

...it will probably be up to around a C note some time in '93


"!@#$%^&*!@#$%^%^$^$#@@!@#%$#$#@$!#@!#@!#$@%$#$#@#$%$^%$^$@#"
Christopher J. Amow       (oh, and in case I forgot
chris@sdd.hp.com                          :-)   :-)   :-)          )
...........................................Sometimes it seems like I never
finish anything I star
Newsgroups: ca.driving