OT: Sens Lounge -The four seasons edition

[Micklebot]

define within reason.

180km/h, am I doing it right?

 

[jbeck5]

And people against speed cameras are insufferable whinners that think they're more important than everyone else. Speed cameras are a non issue for everyone except people that make them an issue through their own actions.

The only reason I have to dislike speed cameras is the incessant whining they cause from people incapable of slowing down to the posted limit, aside from that they have next to no impact on me whatsoever.

90% of people seem to think negatively about them.

Only the people who clutch the steering wheel with a death grip, and block the passing lane going the speed limit like them.

Or the people that think you have to count to 3 at a stop sign.

 

[Micklebot]

90% of people seem to think negatively about them.

Only the people who clutch the steering wheel with a death grip, and block the passing lane going the speed limit like them.

Or the people that think you have to count to 3 at a stop sign.

I don't think anybody likes them, most people just aren't affected by them so they don't give a damn, and that's the way it should be

 

[jbeck5]

Or a ring road. Hunt Club could have been that to direct traffic off of the queensway.

I've wanted a ring road before I was old enough to drive. Look at any other major city in north America and they have multiple highways including one that goes around the city. We have one that goes through it...and it doesn't even go downtown, so you need to clog a bunch of roads to get to downtown from the highway.

 

[Stylizer1]

180km/h, am I doing it right?

you don't want to look like a hypocrite do you? It's okay, your word salads are amusing at this point. Within reason for you is not within reason for us. Got it. lol

 

[Micklebot]

you don't want to look like a hypocrite do you? It's okay, your word salads are amusing at this point. Within reason for you is not within reason for us. Got it. lol

Reasonable to me and reasonable to you are obviously going to be different, that seems pretty obvious, no? So what does it matter. And in the case of driving down a highway will vary depending on the conditions. It's a pointless question, if I say going the speed limit is the only thing that is reasonable, or going up to 120 and no further, doesn't change anything, it's just an attempt by you to change to focus away from your weak positions to a new target.

Here's my position, if you are willing to exceed the posted limit , you should also be willing to pay the fine associated with it. I am for being accountable for my own actions, if I get a ticket, I have nobody to blame but myself.

 

[Alex1234]

Just install a bike rack
No more camera speed ticket

 

[jbeck5]

Money grab implies the stated reason (road safety) are a false pretense. Otherwise anything involving money is just a money grab, which frankly is a wildly dishonest characterization.

And yes, I made the distinction about a cop pulling you over vs a speed camera because that was the context of the discussion the argument was speed camera are a money grab, not speeding tickets writ large, speed cameras replace one means of enforcement with an automated one. We could place a maned speed trap at all these locations instead of cameras and it changes nothing but the mechanism by which a person is caught.

It can be both. It can be a money grab solution to solve a road safety issue.

I'm not making distinctions... All monetary fines are by definition a money grab. It's fine. Just don't pretend it isn't that. Fine options are cool. Just shouldn't be the only option. It should be a fine or that number divided by 20(or whatever number...could be minimum wage) in community service hours. So you can pay your fine off in time instead of money if you choose so. That option isn't available because the city would rather money grab. That's my point.

 

[Stylizer1]

Reasonable to me and reasonable to you are obviously going to be different, that seems pretty obvious, no? So what does it matter. And in the case of driving down a highway will vary depending on the conditions. It's a pointless question, if I say going the speed limit is the only thing that is reasonable, or going up to 120 and no further, doesn't change anything, it's just an attempt by you to change to focus away from your weak positions to a new target.

Here's my position, if you are willing to exceed the posted limit , you should also be willing to pay the fine associated with it. I am for being accountable for my own actions, if I get a ticket, I have nobody to blame but myself.

 

[Micklebot]

It can be both. It can be a money grab solution to solve a road safety issue.

I'm not making distinctions... All monetary fines are by definition a money grab. It's fine. Just don't pretend it isn't that. Fine options are cool. Just shouldn't be the only option. It should be a fine or that number divided by 20(or whatever number...could be minimum wage) in community service hours. So you can pay your fine off in time instead of money if you choose so. That option isn't available because the city would rather money grab. That's my point.

Money grab has a meaning, you can't just redefine it to suit your purpose. That's not how language works....

I'd be all for an option to do community service in place of a fine, nothing wrong with having another option that also brings value to the community, though it may not be efficient as you'd then have to set up a means to enforce people who choose that option and means to ensure they follow through.

 

[jbeck5]

Money grab has a meaning, you can't just redefine it to suit your purpose. That's not how language works....

I'd be all for an option to do community service in place of a fine, nothing wrong with having another option that also brings value to the community, though it may not be efficient as you'd then have to set up a means to enforce people who choose that option and means to ensure they follow through.

I followed the simple definition you can find on Google. I think you might be adding qualifiers that aren't in the definitions. It's an easy way to make lots of money without really solving the issue. Speeders are still speeding.

In fact, don't we keep seeing articles about how the cameras are catching more and more speeders? That's the opposite of it working. It's not curbing numbers if the numbers keep skyrocketing. And it's easy money in their coffers.. in my opinion, fits the definition of cash grab pretty well.

Just have a couple officers that hang out at the local Tim Hortons monitor and take attendance. Have designated days where they clean specific parks...then if you have like 2 months to fulfill your time, you can pick and choose the place that you feel helps your local community the best...whether it's working at a local community center, or shoveling school walkways in the winter, or picking up garbages at parks.

OR, since the city is so into cameras, use cameras and facial recognition to track attendance lol.

 

[Micklebot]

I followed the simple definition you can find on Google. I think you might be adding qualifiers that aren't in the definitions. It's an easy way to make lots of money without really solving the issue. Speeders are still speeding.

Bullshit, here's what Google says,
"an undignified or unprincipled acquisition of a large sum of money with little effort"

Alternatively, google has this to say about cash grab,
"Noun. cash grab (plural cash grabs) (derogatory) A product designed primarily or solely with the intent of generating profits or money. (politics) Legislation that serves primarily the purpose of generating revenue. An activity engaged in with the intention of making money quickly."

In both cases, it has a derogatory implication and suggest the purpose is not about enforcement of the speed limits and thus an improvement in road safety, but rather solely or primarily about revenue.


You are also assuming it isn't addressing the issue, (you stated solving as if any action could completely eliminate speeding which is intellectual dishonest, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant reducing speeding) but the data supports a reduction in speeding where the cameras are installed.

In fact, don't we keep seeing articles about how the cameras are catching more and more speeders? That's the opposite of it working. It's not curbing numbers if the numbers keep skyrocketing. And it's easy money in their coffers.. in my opinion, fits the definition of cash grab pretty well.

No, we have data that shows a reduction in speeding where they are installed, more people caught speeding is not indicative of more speeding, its indicative of more enforcement of the existing speeding.

Just have a couple officers that hang out at the local Tim Hortons monitor and take attendance. Have designated days where they clean specific parks...then if you have like 2 months to fulfill your time, you can pick and choose the place that you feel helps your local community the best...whether it's working at a local community center, or shoveling school walkways in the winter, or picking up garbages at parks.

OR, since the city is so into cameras, use cameras and facial recognition to track attendance lol.

And when people don't show up, we give them fines?

 

[Golden_Jet]

by 1921, the world is digging out of WWI and the great Pandemic. Europe still has another World war ahead of it and will recede into right wing governments. All the while Communism is budding in Russia and growing. Africa is still in the 1800's and to date shows little sign of moving forward. As is Asia minor. South America is still being dominated by the Monroe Doctrine and Western Imperialism.

One beast stand alone. One King of the Hill.. North America. The USA and Canada. Untouched by war. Its massive landscape meant the pandemic was less pronounced. The land was large and relatively new and harvestable. Resources were aplenty.

So from 1921 until today, we have been King Kong.. Rulers of the universe. And no difficulty in our lives. No wars on our lands, no shortages, no limitations.

Hello Mr. Ford, Mr. Dodge, and so on. Hello massive "make work" projects in the 1930 and moving outwards. Build roads, highways...

Hello cars, and mobility... Hello taking my car from my front door to my back door.

And so hello to damning anything that gets in that way.. cost of fuel goes up, bomb the Arabs. Conservationists asking for "one less car'... condemn them as radicals.

Cyclist and bike lanes.. Damn, these people interfering with my right to speed and get to where I want to get to, and wanting to arrive before I left.

I mean, it is well within my God given right, earned from 103 years of being King Kong, to put on make up as I drive. To be on my cellphone, to light up a joint, to use bus lanes, to speed, to go through stop signs and lights, to have my dog in my lap..

I mean, how dare anyone put a bike lane on my street. Don't you know, 102 year old King Kong?

Lawn chairs at music festivals is the silly indulgences of the bourgeoise.

Me and my car! that is different, It is religious! You know how Moses came down with the 10 commandments in his hands (allegedly), God gave me the car. .. what was Charlton Hesston's line about guns? "I'll give you my gun when you pry (or take) it from my cold, dead hands".. well my friend, you can take my car from my dead, cold, voting hand. And those damn cycling lanes better disappear with them... I need all the space I can get to weave as I apply my morning make-up.


It has been brought to my attention that mockery is not always recognized on HFboards. So, YES, I am making fun. YES, I am taking a shot at people..

Too bad so many bike riders ignore the rules of the road, red lights, don’t shoulder check, drive in front of cars, ride their bikes across intersections that have an advance green, ride through stop signs.

Lots of responsible bike riders, just too many dumb ones.

 

[jbeck5]

Bullshit, here's what Google says,
"an undignified or unprincipled acquisition of a large sum of money with little effort"

Alternatively, google has this to say about cash grab,
"Noun. cash grab (plural cash grabs) (derogatory) A product designed primarily or solely with the intent of generating profits or money. (politics) Legislation that serves primarily the purpose of generating revenue. An activity engaged in with the intention of making money quickly."

In both cases, it has a derogatory implication and suggest the purpose is not about enforcement of the speed limits and thus an improvement in road safety, but rather solely or primarily about revenue.


You are also assuming it isn't addressing the issue, (you stated solving as if any action could completely eliminate speeding which is intellectual dishonest, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant reducing speeding) but the data supports a reduction in speeding where the cameras are installed.


No, we have data that shows a reduction in speeding where they are installed, more people caught speeding is not indicative of more speeding, its indicative of more enforcement of the existing speeding.


And when people don't show up, we give them fines?

More time with interest, and once it grows to a certain number it equals jail time. Not everything needs to include money. That's why it's a cash grab. Them punishing someone isn't a cash grab. Then choosing to make that punishment cash related is the cash grab.

 

[Micklebot]

More time with interest, and once it grows to a certain number it equals jail time. Not everything needs to include money. That's why it's a cash grab. Them punishing someone isn't a cash grab. Then choosing to make that punishment cash related is the cash grab.

If you're definition of cash grab is any cash related transaction then we aren't going going to agree and I'm just going to move on, the term cash grab clearly has a negative implication that goes well beyond just involving cash.

 

[jbeck5]

If you're definition of cash grab is any cash related transaction then we aren't going going to agree and I'm just going to move on, the term cash grab clearly has a negative implication that goes well beyond just involving cash.

It's not anything involving cash.

It's the fact they prioritize receiving cash over solving the issue.

 

[Stylizer1]

I followed the simple definition you can find on Google. I think you might be adding qualifiers that aren't in the definitions. It's an easy way to make lots of money without really solving the issue. Speeders are still speeding.

In fact, don't we keep seeing articles about how the cameras are catching more and more speeders? That's the opposite of it working. It's not curbing numbers if the numbers keep skyrocketing. And it's easy money in their coffers.. in my opinion, fits the definition of cash grab pretty well.

Just have a couple officers that hang out at the local Tim Hortons monitor and take attendance. Have designated days where they clean specific parks...then if you have like 2 months to fulfill your time, you can pick and choose the place that you feel helps your local community the best...whether it's working at a local community center, or shoveling school walkways in the winter, or picking up garbages at parks.

OR, since the city is so into cameras, use cameras and facial recognition to track attendance lol.

Make the speed limit just low enough to frustrate drivers so they will "speed" and pay an inconvenient fine. Speeding is not the issue revenue streams are. It's so simple.

 

[Micklebot]

It's the fact they prioritize receiving cash over solving the issue.

Says who? You? If all they want is cash, they have more direct means of getting it.

Make the speed limit just low enough to frustrate drivers so they will "speed" and pay an inconvenient fine. Speeding is not the issue revenue streams are. It's so simple.

Yes, speed limits are all just a global conspiracy.

 

[jbeck5]

Make the speed limit just low enough to frustrate drivers so they will "speed" and pay an inconvenient fine. Speeding is not the issue revenue streams are. It's so simple.

Pretty much. Has anyone explained why they expect you to go 30 coming off the MacDonald Cartier bridge? Try doing under 30 in light traffic. It's so stupid. Even 40 feels ridiculously slow. Should be atleast a 60 with a recommended speed of 50 around the bend.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Kind of a wacky thought, but.....do you think speeding and reckless driving might drop if we had a better society and people had a bit more time to play with? And by that, I mean a 4 day work week instead of 5? Don't lose any pay, just work one day a week less. Every weekend is a three day weekend where you have that extra time to do your groceries, relax in the backyard or just live life. Maybe then folks wouldn't be in such a rush everywhere all the time.

Or is it just a pipe dream?

 

[Golden_Jet]

Kind of a wacky thought, but.....do you think speeding and reckless driving might drop if we had a better society and people had a bit more time to play with? And by that, I mean a 4 day work week instead of 5? Don't lose any pay, just work one day a week less. Every weekend is a three day weekend where you have that extra time to do your groceries, relax in the backyard or just live life. Maybe then folks wouldn't be in such a rush everywhere all the time.

Or is it just a pipe dream?

It’s a pipe dream giving every a 25% raise.

 

[milkbag]

It’s a pipe dream giving every a 25% raise.

Wouldn't necessarily need a raise, just switch to 4 10s

 

[Micklebot]

Kind of a wacky thought, but.....do you think speeding and reckless driving might drop if we had a better society and people had a bit more time to play with? And by that, I mean a 4 day work week instead of 5? Don't lose any pay, just work one day a week less. Every weekend is a three day weekend where you have that extra time to do your groceries, relax in the backyard or just live life. Maybe then folks wouldn't be in such a rush everywhere all the time.

Or is it just a pipe dream?

Did it go down with the shift towards more work from home? I mean beyond the expected amount from less commutes to and from work.

I don't really think driving habits are linked to work life balance, but a general reduction in driving would have similar benefits, more walkable communities, better mass transit, spread out where job opportunities are, but that type of change doesn't happen overnight

 

[FunkySeeFunkyDoo]

Kind of a wacky thought, but.....do you think speeding and reckless driving might drop if we had a better society and people had a bit more time to play with? And by that, I mean a 4 day work week instead of 5? Don't lose any pay, just work one day a week less. Every weekend is a three day weekend where you have that extra time to do your groceries, relax in the backyard or just live life. Maybe then folks wouldn't be in such a rush everywhere all the time.

Or is it just a pipe dream?

I don’t really believe that speeding is a result of everyone being busy. It’s because a) cars have improved quite a bit, so people feel more comfortable driving faster and b) people are just generally more impatient (which I attribute to our “always connected” lifestyle)

I mean, if everyone was “so busy” today then streaming services would all be going bankrupt because no one would have time to watch TV.

 

[Qward]

Why interview someone before you go on a 3 week vacation?