[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
Went to room c-10 today and talked to the clerk. I got my ticket reduced to $258… Still a little high for my taste, but then again I have yet to contest it.
I got my papers for the written declaration, and will fill them out and turn them in shortly.
Thank you everyone who was helpful, and to everyone else, I sincerely hope that you are not this obnoxious in your everyday lives.[/quote]
Thank you! I really was curious as to how this would turn out. I would have hated to pay that high a fine so I am sure this was a nice way to start your weekend.
[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
Obviously no one is arguing against speed limits,
[/quote]
It seems as though you are… otherwise your point doesnt make sense.
its unjust and out of proportion to the infraction? Who is to decide that, you? What’s a “proportional” fine? $300? What if I think $300 is too high? (see how this can keep going?)
[quote]
Why stop at 712 dollars, why not make it 2000 dollars + 12 lashes. That would be ok with you, right? As long as the law was passed and it was all legal like. lol[/quote]
I have always lived by the rule, as long as mans laws don’t step over my laws, then will be fine. the moment mans laws try and supercede over MY laws, then we will have a problem. i live by my own set of rules. honestly, i don’t care what this countries laws are. I am nobodies slave. Im the boss. i do as i please. always will. if one day mans laws come in conflict with my laws, then we are going to have some problems.[/quote]
Your so HOT i love how manly you are i have a serious man crush on you and would love you to dominate me
[quote]KBCThird wrote:
A law is not just, just because it’s the law.[/quote]
so having a speed limit is not just?
Having a law that makes selling drugs is not just?[/quote]
todays speed limits are way to slow. they make cars than can go zero to 60 in under 4 seconds and can go 200mph, yet, we have to drive 55 or 65. i think not. [/quote]
Can you imagine how fast the Countess was driving when she heard the sheriff of Budapest was headed to the castle? Fuckkkkkkkk, I bet she even tossed dead virgins off in the ditch to lighten her load.[/quote]
first, it wasn’t the sherif, and she wasn’t at the castle.
[quote]roguevampire wrote:
I have always lived by the rule, as long as mans laws don’t step over my laws, then will be fine. the moment mans laws try and supercede over MY laws, then we will have a problem. i live by my own set of rules. honestly, i don’t care what this countries laws are. I am nobodies slave. Im the boss. i do as i please. always will. if one day mans laws come in conflict with my laws, then we are going to have some problems.[/quote]
You live by your own rules and laws and do as you please? LOL. Yes, I’m sure you speed and run traffic lights whenever you want. And you just take things when you want them or pay a lower price at the store if you think it’s too high. Or you punch people in the face when they make you mad. I bet you don’t pay taxes either and laugh at the IRS when they try to audit you. And when a judge makes a decision you don’t like you tell him to go to hell and you do whatever you want anyway. I’m sure you could walk right in to the White House and meet the president too if you wanted because hey, you’re the boss.
Let me guess, you comply with all of these rules and laws of society because they just happen to be your laws too right?
[quote]KBCThird wrote:
A law is not just, just because it’s the law.[/quote]
so having a speed limit is not just?
Having a law that makes selling drugs is not just?[/quote]
todays speed limits are way to slow. they make cars than can go zero to 60 in under 4 seconds and can go 200mph, yet, we have to drive 55 or 65. i think not. [/quote]
Can you imagine how fast the Countess was driving when she heard the sheriff of Budapest was headed to the castle? Fuckkkkkkkk, I bet she even tossed dead virgins off in the ditch to lighten her load.[/quote]
first, it wasn’t the sherif, and she wasn’t at the castle. [/quote]
But she did chuck the dead virgins in the ditch?[/quote]
There were about 80 bodies found. back then, many people died from disease. but, her 4 servants testified that they killed the girls. on the night of the raid in 1610, the countess herself, wasn’t at the castle.
Recently, the City of Dallas , Texas , passed an ordinance stating that if a driver is pulled over by law enforcement and is not able to provide proof of insurance, the car is towed.
To retrieve the car after being impounded, they must show proof of insurance to have the car released. This has made it easy for the City of Dallas to remove uninsured cars.
Shortly after the “No Insurance” ordinance was passed, the Dallas impound lots began to fill up and were full after only nine days. 80 + % of the impounded cars were driven by illegals.
Not only must they provide proof of insurance to have their car released, they have to pay for the cost of the tow, a $350 fine, and $20 for every day their car is kept in the lot.
Accident rates are going down and… Dallas’ solution gets uninsured drivers off the road WITHOUT making them show proof of nationality.
Wonder how the ACLU or the Justice Department will get around this one.
Just brings tears to my eyes.
GO Dallas![/quote]
Wow, I like that a lot. They should do that here in CA.
[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
Obviously no one is arguing against speed limits,
[/quote]
It seems as though you are… otherwise your point doesnt make sense.
its unjust and out of proportion to the infraction? Who is to decide that, you? What’s a “proportional” fine? $300? What if I think $300 is too high? (see how this can keep going?)
[quote]
Why stop at 712 dollars, why not make it 2000 dollars + 12 lashes. That would be ok with you, right? As long as the law was passed and it was all legal like. lol[/quote]
I have always lived by the rule, as long as mans laws don’t step over my laws, then will be fine. the moment mans laws try and supercede over MY laws, then we will have a problem. i live by my own set of rules. honestly, i don’t care what this countries laws are. I am nobodies slave. Im the boss. i do as i please. always will. if one day mans laws come in conflict with my laws, then we are going to have some problems.[/quote]
Your so HOT i love how manly you are i have a serious man crush on you and would love you to dominate me [/quote]
I have always lived by the rule, as long as mans laws don’t step over my laws, then will be fine. the moment mans laws try and supercede over MY laws, then we will have a problem. i live by my own set of rules. honestly, i don’t care what this countries laws are. I am nobodies slave. Im the boss. i do as i please. always will. if one day mans laws come in conflict with my laws, then we are going to have some problems.[/quote]
[quote]pushharder wrote:
OP, it’s unfair to all who responded on this thread to not disclose the “no proof of insurance” part of the equation until several pages into it.
That being said, it’s still an unreasonably high fine (not talking the $154 for the actual speeding) for one who can prove he actually had the auto insured but just failed to carry the paperwork.[/quote]
But it is a well known part of the vehicle code that you MUST carry proof of insurance at all times. We don’t know if his fine will be reduced upon his presenting proof at the time of the infraction. Also, we are so close to the border it is a big problem with folks from south of the border not having insurance.
The OP absolutely knew he had a duty to carry proof of insurance. If he crashes into someone without insurance it will cost everyone more than $700.00 in most cases.
[/quote]
Here in MT if you’re caught with no papers but later produce them proving you had insurance in effect at the time of the infraction you get off Scot free.
I wasn’t disputing the necessity of carrying the insurance itself, I was whining that the fine still seemed high for having the insurance but not having the paperwork on board. It is VERY EASY to forget to put your current proof of ins in your vehicle and not worthy of a several hundred dollar slap on the wrist.[/quote]
Really? And how does Montana deal with its HUGE illegal Canadian problem?