Lots of interesting news today

1-tonmudder said:
selling candy bars,stale popcorn and mag subscriptions
Click to expand...
The new hotness is social
Media campaigns where the kid begs for money the donor gets nothing and the organizer keeps 10% and sells the email addresses they collect for a profit
 
Ron said:
The new hotness is social
Media campaigns where the kid begs for money the donor gets nothing and the organizer keeps 10% and sells the email addresses they collect for a profit
Click to expand...
Yeah, and a SIL who gives your nephew your email without asking first. :dumbass:
 
benXJ said:
lets all applaud

www.wral.com

NC sheriff's office no longer enforcing minor traffic violations

The Mecklenburg County Sheriff's Office announced that it will no longer be pulling over drivers for minor traffic violations, like driving with a revoked license, having a tail light out, or inspection violations.
www.wral.com www.wral.com
Click to expand...
Morgan Freeman Applause GIF by The Academy Awards
 
Futbalfantic said:
And that’s why my car has not been registered in 4 years. Not a new policy. Just official.
Click to expand...
but the process is still in place, correct? They send you a bill for registration and taxes once a year. Aren't there late fees and other back tax repercussions to face once the bill actually comes due....say if you get stopped for something else or they start enforcement?
 
benXJ said:
lets all applaud

www.wral.com

NC sheriff's office no longer enforcing minor traffic violations

The Mecklenburg County Sheriff's Office announced that it will no longer be pulling over drivers for minor traffic violations, like driving with a revoked license, having a tail light out, or inspection violations.
www.wral.com www.wral.com
Click to expand...
seems like a great idea - but personally I don't know that driving w/ a revoked license is a "minor" offense. There could be a damn good safety-for-everyone reason that person has had their license yoinked.

EDIT - @Spence beat me to it
 
benXJ said:
lets all applaud

www.wral.com

NC sheriff's office no longer enforcing minor traffic violations

The Mecklenburg County Sheriff's Office announced that it will no longer be pulling over drivers for minor traffic violations, like driving with a revoked license, having a tail light out, or inspection violations.
www.wral.com www.wral.com
Click to expand...
I'm still confused.

If you look at the ACTUAL title of the article:
"To promote racial equality, NC sheriff's office is no longer enforcing minor traffic violations"

That directly implies that black and brown (non-white, if you prefer) people have more "minor traffic violations". That in and of itself is stereotyping and inherently racist, which is directly contrary to their purpose of promoting racial equality. :shaking:
 
jeepinmatt said:
I'm still confused.

If you look at the ACTUAL title of the article:
"To promote racial equality, NC sheriff's office is no longer enforcing minor traffic violations"

That directly implies that black and brown (non-white, if you prefer) people have more "minor traffic violations". That in and of itself is stereotyping and inherently racist, which is directly contrary to their purpose of promoting racial equality. :shaking:
Click to expand...

The argument could be made that minor traffic violations carrying only a fine can be loosely translated to "legal for a small fee" if you have enough money. But that would also be racist by saying a given group (pick your poison) can't afford the fines as they are a lower social class.


But, I'm all for not enforcing laws against victimless "crimes". I'm also for raising the penalty as soon as there is a victim.
 
jeepinmatt said:
I'm still confused.

If you look at the ACTUAL title of the article:
"To promote racial equality, NC sheriff's office is no longer enforcing minor traffic violations"

That directly implies that black and brown (non-white, if you prefer) people have more "minor traffic violations". That in and of itself is stereotyping and inherently racist, which is directly contrary to their purpose of promoting racial equality. :shaking:
Click to expand...
Coming from McFadden I am not surprised.
 
A headlight or taillight or brake light out is dangerous for me and my loved one. We have rules on the books to at least try and stop dangerous activity before someone gets hurt, and yet they won't do anything unless it escalates. I for sure didn't vote for those idiotic policies and for sure don't want to pay the same amount of taxes for less benefit.
 
benXJ said:
but the process is still in place, correct? They send you a bill for registration and taxes once a year. Aren't there late fees and other back tax repercussions to face once the bill actually comes due....say if you get stopped for something else or they start enforcement?
Click to expand...

Generally no. State has no proof that say, the engine was out of the vehicle, for the past 4 years. There is the “turn in your plate” policy. But that is very unenforced. And they only send it once then drop it off the books. Not reoccurring.
 
Coming from an officer in Meck co. They avoid enforcing “minor” traffic violations due to the “high” frequency (or “high” probability) of the escalation of the stop…. Not my words.
 
JSJJ388 said:
The argument could be made that minor traffic violations carrying only a fine can be loosely translated to "legal for a small fee" if you have enough money. But that would also be racist by saying a given group (pick your poison) can't afford the fines as they are a lower social class.


But, I'm all for not enforcing laws against victimless "crimes". I'm also for raising the penalty as soon as there is a victim.
Click to expand...

Legal for a fee is pretty much any crime.

What is a “victimless crime”
 
Futbalfantic said:
What is a “victimless crime”
Click to expand...
Cases where absolutely nobody is harmed or put in danger by the action.
Example:
A Federal employee buying weed legally in a state where it is legal to grow and sell, part of a well controlled system, yet being prosecuted because it is illegal at the Federal level.
 
Futbalfantic said:
Legal for a fee is pretty much any crime.

What is a “victimless crime”
Click to expand...

Somewhat true. If you pay a good enough lawyer ect. But if the fine is a couple hundred bucks, thats pocket change to some folks.


A victimless crime is just that. Something that is illegal but has no actual victim. Laws that were put in place to generate revenue in the name of "safety". As I said though, Im all for upping the penalty if you hurt someone or cause damage but if there is no victim there is no crime. Smoking dope with a buddy and passing out hurts no one outside of the consenting parties. But if you smoke dope and go on a killing spree, once proven I have no qualms with execution.

If youre running 80 in a 65 but maintaining your lane and not running people off the road, youre not hurting anyone. If you cant maintain your lane and run grandma off in the ditch, now there is a victim and a crime.
 
JSJJ388 said:
Somewhat true. If you pay a good enough lawyer ect. But if the fine is a couple hundred bucks, thats pocket change to some folks.


A victimless crime is just that. Something that is illegal but has no actual victim. Laws that were put in place to generate revenue in the name of "safety". As I said though, Im all for upping the penalty if you hurt someone or cause damage but if there is no victim there is no crime. Smoking dope with a buddy and passing out hurts no one outside of the consenting parties. But if you smoke dope and go on a killing spree, once proven I have no qualms with execution.

If youre running 80 in a 65 but maintaining your lane and not running people off the road, youre not hurting anyone. If you cant maintain your lane and run grandma off in the ditch, now there is a victim and a crime.
Click to expand...
I disagree with this. I very much believe an ouch of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Most see speeding as a victimless crime. But it does more damage to the road, causes other drivers to have to react and back ups, significantly increases high potential for bad outcomes.

As far as dope. Depends on your definition. But all of them led to Pablo Escobar terrorizing Columbia. If it is Heroin. Overdoses are a frequent occurrence. Now your have a move over a million dollars of tax payer assists and tie them up to save this life, where it could be used somewhere else. (I don’t believe in strict punishment in the end user.)
 
Futbalfantic said:
I disagree with this. I very much believe an ouch of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Most see speeding as a victimless crime. But it does more damage to the road, causes other drivers to have to react and back ups, significantly increases high potential for bad outcomes.

As far as dope. Depends on your definition. But all of them led to Pablo Escobar terrorizing Columbia. If it is Heroin. Overdoses are a frequent occurrence. Now your have a move over a million dollars of tax payer assists and tie them up to save this life, where it could be used somewhere else. (I don’t believe in strict punishment in the end user.)
Click to expand...

You are welcome to disagree. Speeding does not cause more damage to the road. That seems entirely illogical, as its the same tire making the same track. It does indeed increase the risk of a bad outcome, if you wreck. Its on the individual to weigh those risks, and to deal with the consequences of their actions should they harm someone else.

I know first hand what is set in motion when someone ODs. I deal with it regularly. Im not saying these folks are completely innocent, but they cant reach out for the help they need either. I may not have all the answers, but I do know that punishing people for doing something that hurts no one or only hurts them is wrong.
 
Back
Top