|
anthonypants posted:No, thank you. Dude, it's totally fine to say something like, "my bad, I confused you for a different poster".
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 05:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Dude, it's totally fine to say something like, "my bad, I confused you for a different poster". I don't think I have ever seen anthonypants say he was wrong in any capacity. Take that as you will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:24
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:I don't think I have ever seen anthonypants say he was wrong in any capacity. Take that as you will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Uh, then why the gently caress did I previously respond to you directly, agreeing that people suck at merging? Why the hell are you yelling at me about this poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
marxismftw posted:They do public enforcement campaigns on all sorts of stuff, from HOV violations, late merging, drunk driving, speeding, and now this. They get complaints, State Patrol doesn't have the resources/manpower/willpower to ticket it on a regular basis, so they do public awareness campaigns to remind everyone, that yes, it is still against the law. I disagree, I think all police publicity campaigns are not meant to raise awareness but rather to make fragile whites feel like the police aren't a bunch of racist murderers. If enough people wear their seat belts I guess we can't fault the police for executing a minority every once in a while, they just want the best for us! As long as police look like noble warriors to the right people they'll never be held accountable for their crimes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Hot take: the fact that we are discussing left lane driving instead of the fact that Seattle police brutally murdered a black mother might be the purest form of PNW white privelege.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Yesterday evening, a vigil at which members of the family spoke became a march of about a thousand people. Near the end there was kind of a tense confrontation between police and the crowd around the UW Light Rail Station, but thankfully it dispersed without incident at that point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
There's also going to be a march on Thursday by the "Black Freedom Front", which is mostly this mushmouthed rear end in a top hat who calls himself "Mohawk" who has no real ties to any other organizing bodies, and in fact took over the facebook page he currently holds by kicking off other legitimate activists when he got admin privileges. Just by virtue of controlling that facebook page, which had a lot of credibility up to that point, he was able to basically make himself a 1 man initiator of a lot of different Black Lives Matter marches in Seattle. Among those very active on these scenes, he is known for his poor ability to express anything and his lack of coherent politics. He... is not good at what he does, even putting aside the self-aggrandizing way in which he conducts himself as an "organizer". It's a very 21st century problem, that he only wields any authority because of his control... of a facebook page.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
Here, enjoy an Oregon Rolling Roadblock.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Here, enjoy an Oregon Rolling Roadblock. If any post ever needed a trigger warning, it's this one. I just felt my blood pressure spike looking at this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:I disagree, I think all police publicity campaigns are not meant to raise awareness but rather to make fragile whites feel like the police aren't a bunch of racist murderers. If enough people wear their seat belts I guess we can't fault the police for executing a minority every once in a while, they just want the best for us! Road safety and traffic law enforcement publicity campaigns (the most effective being seatbelt and drunk driving enforcement) save lives. The only nefarious purpose they serve is keeping morons from killing themselves and others.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Officer Sandvich posted:Road safety and traffic law enforcement publicity campaigns (the most effective being seatbelt and drunk driving enforcement) save lives. The only nefarious purpose they serve is keeping morons from killing themselves and others. I agree that seatbelts save lives and also not drunk driving saves lives, but where is the data that shows police enforcement of these laws is significantly helpful vs the publicly funded campaigns against things like drunk driving and no seat belts. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration pays for these public campaigns, police didn't do jack poo poo. It's like claiming police did such a great job of reducing smoking in this country because they enforced the non-smoking area laws so well, it's just not true, the police didn't do jack poo poo. Show me that police enforcement helps do anything except harm minorities and the poor and I'll praise them but so far I haven't seen that to be the case. Back in I think the 80s or 90s there was a study (done by the FBI maybe?) that quantified what police do day to day and the vast majority of their job is paperwork and traffic enforcement, reports since that time are now filled with confusing jargon and complex statistical data that a layman would have a hard time understanding. I don't think they did that on accident. If police were portrayed and exposed as what they really are they would get the level of respect they deserve and I think that's why there's this narrative that police are "heroes", because otherwise people would be in favor of doing things like taking guns away from average police officers. edit: increased enforcement doesn't reduce crimes, prevent accidents, improve traffic, make people safer, none of this poo poo is improved by increased police enforcement. It makes fragile white pearl clutchers feel safe and all it's doing is harming minorities. ElCondemn fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Jun 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:I agree that seatbelts save lives and also not drunk driving saves lives, but where is the data that shows police enforcement of these laws is significantly helpful vs the publicly funded campaigns against things like drunk driving and no seat belts. quote:Primary seat belt laws allow police officers to stop and ticket someone for not buckling up. On average, primary laws result in higher rates of seat belt use than secondary seat belt laws, which allow officers to give tickets only if they have pulled the driver over for another reason.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
twodot posted:Like almost the first sentence in the first link? Where is the data? I clicked all over that loving page and didn't find the data. Unless your point is "well they said it was true so it must be". Edit: As an example of how these laws do nothing except give more excuses for cops to go after minorities, New Hampshire has no seat belt laws and not-surprisingly (at least to me) the percentage of adults who wear seat belts is just as high as states with primary laws. Their traffic fatality rate is also lower than the national average. My point isn't that publicity campaigns don't work, it's that police enforcement doesn't work. Increasing police enforcement will always lead to harm, usually towards minorities. Treat these pigs like the scum they are, maybe then people won't defend these murderers and let them get away with all the harm that they do. If we want cops to do a good job we need to be realistic about what they can and cant do, police enforcement doesn't solve poo poo, put money towards anything else and it will have greater and more positive impact. ElCondemn fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Jun 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:Where is the data? I clicked all over that loving page and didn't find the data. Here's the data from the seatbelt link (located under the large-font "*Sources" at the bottom of list of measures) and here's the data from the drunk driving page. They're the 7th and 8th editions of the same government report titled "Countermeasures That Work: A Highway Safety Countermeasure Guide For State Highway Safety Offices".
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Officer Sandvich posted:Here's the data from the seatbelt link (located under the large-font "*Sources" at the bottom of list of measures) and here's the data from the drunk driving page. They're the 7th and 8th editions of the same government report titled "Countermeasures That Work: A Highway Safety Countermeasure Guide For State Highway Safety Offices". Did you bother to read through any of the links you posted? For drunk driving they show a basically no change for two decades despite many enforcement campaigns and laws intended to reduce drunk driving. Including sobriety checkpoints which didn't exist before and we know they target minorities disproportionately. They start out telling you what they've done is ineffective and then switch to a "star system" to prove effectiveness to hide that fact, instead of using actual numbers to show what is effective and what isn't. For seat belt usage they make the claim that "The strategy’s three components – laws, enforcement, and publicity – cannot be separated: effectiveness decreases if any one of the components is weak or missing" but then fail to acknowledge the one state with no seat belt laws and the fact that they saw the same improvements without any enforcement. They don't go into detail about enforcement here but they cite a couple sources that agree with their initial statement and those studies don't address the issues I've brought up. Either way none of this addresses my core issue, these studies aren't showing me that enforcement is necessary or effective.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:Did you bother to read through any of the links you posted? I've skimmed the reports and have had the misfortune to have had to read many of the hundreds of reports and studies cited at the bottom of each section. I'm pretty confident at least in the case of seatbelt and drunk driving enforcement that police enforcement improves traffic safety and collision outcomes but you don't have to be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Yeah I guess we just shouldn't enforce any laws ever. Now that we all agree can we talk about that poor mentally ill pregnant lady that got shot by police, the Oregon legislative session, or literally anything else?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
therobit posted:Yeah I guess we just shouldn't enforce any laws ever. Now that we all agree can we talk about that poor mentally ill pregnant lady that got shot by police, the Oregon legislative session, or literally anything else? Other countries do just fine with less police enforcement, they use deterrent programs and have stricter licensing requirements. Feel free to talk about police murdering minorities, all I'm seeing right now is a bunch of people defending police because they're mad about people driving too slow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:Other countries do just fine with less police enforcement, they use deterrent programs and have stricter licensing requirements. People have asked the police to focus on this issue. Plus, you need to separate the WSP from the SPD.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
gently caress the police, hth
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:Other countries do just fine with less police enforcement, they use deterrent programs and have stricter licensing requirements. No, you are projecting really hard because you seem to be unable to talk about anything other than cops=bad. Don't drive like a dipshit and you won't have to worry any more than you would otherwise. It is pretty well established that the entire legal system discriminates against minorities. It has very little to do with public awareness and enforcement campaigns to get left lane grannies like Anthonypants to move the gently caress over. In other news the legislature last session directed the 15 or so high schools in the state of Oregon that had Indian mascots to either get the advice and consent of local tribes in redesigning them to be culturally appropriate and to educate staff and students or find a new mascot. It looks like 8 of them have gotten the blessing of local tribes to retain their mascots. What does the thread think? Still offensive or a tool for education?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
therobit posted:No, you are projecting really hard because you seem to be unable to talk about anything other than cops=bad. Don't drive like a dipshit and you won't have to worry any more than you would otherwise. It is pretty well established that the entire legal system discriminates against minorities. It has very little to do with public awareness and enforcement campaigns to get left lane grannies like Anthonypants to move the gently caress over.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:When I said that it was cool and good to sit in the left lane, you idiots complained that I was in gross violation of the law. When I pointed out that the law also includes a speed limit, you idiots complained that I must be going too slow in the left lane. I don't know if it's due to a lack of driving experience, or if you just got so angry that you went blind, but I used pretty unambiguous language, so if you can find an adult to draw you a diagram for you, that may help. You also got mad at other posters for agreeing with you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:When I said that it was cool and good to sit in the left lane, you idiots complained that I was in gross violation of the law. When I pointed out that the law also includes a speed limit, you idiots complained that I must be going too slow in the left lane. I don't know if it's due to a lack of driving experience, or if you just got so angry that you went blind, but I used pretty unambiguous language, so if you can find an adult to draw you a diagram for you, that may help. Yes, you do sound like 17 year old with a brand new license so it could be a lack of driving experience.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:When I said that it was cool and good to sit in the left lane, you idiots complained that I was in gross violation of the law. When I pointed out that the law also includes a speed limit, you idiots complained that I must be going too slow in the left lane. I don't know if it's due to a lack of driving experience, or if you just got so angry that you went blind, but I used pretty unambiguous language, so if you can find an adult to draw you a diagram for you, that may help. You also said merging would be really hard if people followed the law about the passing lane. Face it: You are a bad driver. It is okay, you have a natural handicap living in the PNW where terrible habits like 'drive 60 in the left lane' and 'zipper merge? Nah, I will slam on my brakes the second merging is possible' are not only tolerated, but encouraged.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
i asked my grandma her thoughts on the matter and she started yelling at me
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:You also got mad at other posters for agreeing with you. Shifty Nipples posted:i asked my grandma her thoughts on the matter and she started yelling at me
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:You also said merging would be really hard if people followed the law about the passing lane.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
*almost cuases an accident trying to merge before coming to a complete stop halfway between the onramp and the lane* *drives at 57 on the freeway* *hogs the left lane going slower than the right lane* "Why is everyone honking? I am following the law! You shouldn't speed!*
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
Shifty Nipples posted:i asked my grandma her thoughts on the matter and she started yelling at me anthonypants posted:she's right Shifty Nipples' Grandma posted:What do you mean the guy can't merge into the road!??! What the gently caress's wrong with him?!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:Yesterday it was that the highway traffic has the right of way in all circumstances, and that everyone should come to a stop at an onramp, as if they were on a traffic circle/roundabout. Today I guess you've discovered the 'zipper merge' maneuver, which is quite the improvement. Who knows what you'll discover tomorrow! It's really sad, you don't even understand how merging works. Both items you mentioned are correct(except the stopping part???), and aren't mutually exclusive. Highway vehicles have the right of way. Vehicles merging into the highway need to find open spots between drivers and signal their intent to merge. This classically takes the form(in heavier traffic) of cars alternating between cars already on the highway and cars merging in. I.E. The zipper merge.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:While I do agree that "If you aren't moving to the right, you are breaking the law." is true in Washington state, I do not agree with the principle. I do not know why or how you could believe otherwise, unless you have mistaken me for someone else, or if you have been reading someone else's posts. You posted this: anthonypants posted:I can't seriously be the only person who's wanted to merge onto a highway, and be forced to slow way the gently caress down because some idiot in the right lane won't merge to their left, despite having ample time and space to do so. I responded with: Solkanar512 posted:I'll do you one better - I keep running into folks ahead of me who will refuse to accelerate to a normal freeway speed while using the on ramp. I'm talking speeds of around 35-40 when I-5 traffic is going 60+. See? We both agree that there are issues with merging onto a freeway at speed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:It's really sad, you don't even understand how merging works. Both items you mentioned are correct(except the stopping part???), and aren't mutually exclusive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:Like I said yesterday, my belief is that people need to merge left when they see oncoming cars in the onramp. People in here very, very strongly disagree with that, You're putting words in people's mouths. Most folks are thinking about freeways like I-5 or I-405 that have more than two lanes when they make these posts. If you want to be specific to only two lane freeways then make that clear in your posts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
therobit posted:No, you are projecting really hard because you seem to be unable to talk about anything other than cops=bad. Maybe "projecting" isn't the concept you're looking for? Are you sure you don't mean biased? I'll admit I am biased as I am a Mexican who's been pulled over for things as ridiculous as being in the left lane too long. therobit posted:Don't drive like a dipshit and you won't have to worry any more than you would otherwise. Nice, I haven't heard people tell me that before... "Just stop doing X and maybe you won't be a target", it's the mating call of the "racism isn't real" know it all. therobit posted:It is pretty well established that the entire legal system discriminates against minorities. It has very little to do with public awareness and enforcement campaigns to get left lane grannies like Anthonypants to move the gently caress over. It's well established and documented that enforcement initiatives like seat belt laws disproportionately target minorities, but in this case it's different because you hate grannies so much? Let me assure you that in your affluent white neighborhood left lane drivers won't see a change, but in the areas where police patrol often there will be an effect. I suppose you already know that and that's why you don't have a problem with it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
Honestly, there's no need to vacate the right lane to allow people to enter from an onramp. Just slow the gently caress down for 20 seconds and give one car room to pull in ahead of you. Pretend you're part of a zipper. On the subject of DUI enforcement, it seems to me that there's a pretty big issue nowadays with people who end up caught in the system and end up screwed for long period of time (if not their whole life) for moving and parking violations as a whole, and DUIs are also a big part of that... Philando Castile got pulled over 46 times, and was spending $500/month on traffic fines for a two year period (and iirc, all of his 46 stops except for 6 or 8, were for things which weren't actually noticeable as violations until the officer could look inside the cab of his car during the stop). But then my dad for instance, wrapped his GTO around a telephone pole drunk as poo poo, when he was in his early 30s. He was not cited, was not ticketed, had nothing go on his record, he was literally given a ride to the hospital and then sent home with a stern wag of the finger. He was a professional delivery driver for UPS at the time. Now imagine if a father of two driving for UPS today, got pulled over for DUI - assume he didn't get in a wreck with anotehr vehicle or an inanimate object.. He'd lose his job, he'd be unemployable and unable to apply his professional skills toward future jobs (how many non-win-wage jobs require "clean driving record" nowdays?), and what would that father's options be except for jail time, fines in the thousands of dollars or more, AND having to immediately find new employment in a different field? poo poo, I don't think you can even get a forklift license with a DUI on your record.. But a whole shitload of people who stuck MADD ribbons on their vehicles were direct beneficiaries of drunk driving not being seen as a big issue back when they were doing it - I literally can't count the number of stories I heard growing up, from the men in my family, which began "so I was wasted and driving on this back road..." But hey, Prefontaine is a loving martyr, because he pancaked his sports car into a huge boulder on a super scary and dangerous road, but nobody actually gives a poo poo how he died as much as the fact that he could've been an even bigger superstar "if he hadn't been cruelly taken from the world too young"  No Pants posted:Maybe they should make the fucks everyone had to pass on the right re-take the test!  My grandfather didn't drive for basically my entire life because his eyes and reflexes had gotten bad, but in his 90s he decided he was bored and began to drive to a local bar and close it down then drive home. Nobody ever called the cops on him, he never got pulled over, despite the bartender and patrons knowing he could barely walk while sober!
coyo7e fucked around with this message at 22:36 on Jun 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:Maybe "projecting" isn't the concept you're looking for? Are you sure you don't mean biased? I'll admit I am biased as I am a Mexican who's been pulled over for things as ridiculous as being in the left lane too long. I am saying you are projecting your suspcions of what people think onto them. Nobody is "defending cops" here. We do, however belive that some level of enforcement of traffic laws increases compliance with tjem and yes, we hate people who hog the left lane because they are assholes. I am sorry that police have mistreated you. I don't think that the solution is to end all policing. From a social change perspective, if you engage police with an "us vs them" mentality it is not likely to bode well for getting them to listen to you or change. That isn't fair and it sucks, but it is a reality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
therobit posted:I am saying you are projecting your suspcions of what people think onto them. Nobody is "defending cops" here. We do, however belive that some level of enforcement of traffic laws increases compliance with tjem and yes, we hate people who hog the left lane because they are assholes. I don't have to project anything on anyone, by asking for police enforcement you're asking for murderers and racists to act. Maybe in your mind you're saying "I want only the GOOD cops to enforce laws", but that isn't the world we live in, you can't pick which cops enforce which laws. All we know is that police action has a negative impact on minorities (and the poor) so the only actions we should be championing are those that make life safer for minorities and anyone else who is negatively impacted by police action. You're implicitly giving police a pass when you ask them to act on your behalf, you're assuming it will be a good thing because "cops are good (at least sometimes)" and you're wrong. therobit posted:I am sorry that police have mistreated you. I don't think that the solution is to end all policing. From a social change perspective, if you engage police with an "us vs them" mentality it is not likely to bode well for getting them to listen to you or change. That isn't fair and it sucks, but it is a reality. I never once said to "end all policing", though I wouldn't be opposed to it if someone could show it is effective. I don't agree that being hostile towards cops won't change anything, violence and war has changed more than peace ever has. You must be living in an ideal mind reality because actual reality doesn't care if you're friends with your oppressors. When police are murdering people like you by the thousands feel free to lecture me on the virtues of working together instead of calling out these pieces of poo poo for their crimes. As if treating them with anything but contempt is going to make anyone see the problem. All you're doing by promoting "peace" is prolonging the status quo. quote:First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season. ElCondemn fucked around with this message at 23:23 on Jun 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
Oh thank god, it had been eight whole pages since someone pulled out that MLK quote.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 23:53
|
|
