NMA Motorists Forum - Discuss NMA Issues This is the place to discuss traffic laws and other issues related to motorists. http://www.motorists.org/forums/list.php?2 Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:02:56 +0000 Phorum 5.2.7 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,328,328#msg-328 Improving Work Zone Safety http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,328,328#msg-328 Why you should consider new Traffic Control Devices for Effective Safety

A WHITE PAPER PREPARED BY THE WATER BARRIER MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

The purpose of this paper is to educate transportation departments, consulting engineers, and others on the availability of new, cost effective, and safe alternatives to temporary concrete barrier and low mass delineation devices for work zone traffic control.

Improvements in transportation infrastructure will benefit all Americans by creating safer roadways, providing jobs, alleviating congestion, and saving time and energy otherwise spent commuting. Throughout these infrastructure improvements, more attention must be given to safety and the prevention of work zone accidents, which take the lives of construction workers, motorists, and pedestrians. Our nation needs to build better roads, bridges, and transit systems without sacrificing the safety of motorists, pedestrians, and workers..

A thorough evaluation of temporary traffic control devices should place a particular emphasis on balancing the protection of construction and maintenance workers with the safety of road users traveling through work zones. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 101 fatal occupational injuries at road construction sites in 2008 alone. In 2007, 831 workers and motorists were killed in highway work zones and more than 40,000 were injured. Eighty-five percent of those killed in work zones are drivers or their passengers.

Concrete barrier and drums have become the temporary traffic control devices most commonly used in highway work zones. The primary function of these devices is to provide highway users reasonably safe and efficient movement through work zones while protecting construction workers and equipment. Traffic engineers expect these devices to improve safety when they are installed and maintained properly. However, the emphasis has been on positive protection for workers while 85% of fatalities are drivers and their passengers. Softer-impact temporary barrier devices and longitudinal delineators create more positive outcomes in the event of an accident than the use of traditional concrete barrier and drums.

In road construction work zones, easy-to-use Portable Water Filled Barrier and Longitudinal Channelizing Barricade (LCB) systems have seen great success where applied, but (as with many devices new to the transportation infrastructure environment) resistance to change slows industry-wide adoption.. There is an enduring familiarity with concrete and a tendency to rely on concrete barrier for every use, even when it is not the safest or most appropriate device for the job. In fact, a recent survey of practices confirmed that temporary concrete barrier is the option most frequently used by state transportation agencies. Because there is no requirement or incentive for change, engineers simply continue to specify temporary concrete barrier for all traffic control jobs, in spite of the innovation of safer and more effective mechanisms. Findings show that deployment of new devices face roadblocks because (a) transportation projects are complex, multifaceted, and interjurisdictional with many players having different interests; (b) multiple layers of decision making sometimes lack logic; (c) public-sector procurement is driven by competitive, multiple low-bid processes that often infringe on intellectual property rights; (d) public agencies resist change; and (e) risk-averse executives hesitate to implement new innovations. This research underlines the need for improved communication among researchers, developers, operators, and decision makers. Specific and consistent criteria for the evaluation of new innovations must be established. It is important to recognize that the deployment of more suitable traffic control devices can prevent many accidental injuries and deaths in work zones currently using temporary concrete barrier.

Temporary concrete barriers are appropriate in work zones when needed for positive protection, but can create hazards in themselves if used simply for channelization. The Roadside Design Guide calls for concrete barriers to be used:

1) To protect traffic from entering work areas such as excavations or material storage sites
2) To provide positive protection for workers
3) To separate two-way traffic
4) To protect construction such as falsework for bridges and other exposed objects
5) To separate pedestrians and vehicular traffic

Further, The Roadside Design Guide urges temporary concrete barrier be placed only parallel to traffic. Most catastrophic accidents involving vehicles moving through the work zone and temporary concrete barrier occur when the barrier is struck at a high angle.

Although no consensus on specific warrants exist, barriers are usually justified for bridge widening, shielding of roadside structures, roadway widening with edge drop off, and to separate two-lane, two-way traffic on one roadway of a normally divided roadway.

Deploying temporary concrete barrier in work zones to close roads or to act as channelizing/delineating devices exposes vehicles and occupants to the possibility of engaging a massive object that can cause substantial injury and death. Longitudinal Channelizing Devices are designed to channel traffic without the risk associated with impacting a temporary concrete barrier.

In addition to the dangerous consequences of using temporary concrete barriers for channelization, one should consider the costs (both of the product and installation). Loading, transporting, and unloading concrete barriers, both at the origin and again at the work site is an expensive process. Temporary concrete barriers also cause unnecessary work zone congestion while they are unloaded and set into position by cranes requiring the closure of a traffic lane for the installation. Manually unloading lightweight plastic barricades, positioning them by hand, and adding a very small volume of ballast is much more affordable and does not require an additional lane for a flat bed and crane.

In conjunction with the cost analysis, a risk assessment must be considered. By definition, temporary concrete barriers should only be deployed to protect traffic from entering work areas such as excavations or material storage sites, to provide positive protection for workers, to separate two-way traffic, to protect construction such as falsework for bridges and other exposed objects, and to separate pedestrians and vehicular traffic. Plastic water filled barriers are also appropriate for most of the temporary barrier applications listed above and provide a much safer environment for the motoring public when compared to temporary concrete barrier. Plastic water ballast barriers are now available and accepted for use by the FHWA at speeds up to 65 mph and with lateral deflections as low as 3.4 M.

For applications outside the specified areas, temporary concrete barrier should not be used. Alternative traffic control devices that do not pose a hazard to the motoring public should be used. Where guidance emphasis will suffice, a Longitudinal Channelizing Barricade is ideal. LCBs are lightweight, plastic, water-fillable devices that form bright, visually-compelling, continuous walls in the manner of concrete but without the lethal potential to impacting vehicles. The Federal Highway Administration recognizes the need for LCB’s and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) has been updated to reflect the useful and effective deployment of LCBs as an alternative traffic control device. See Section 6F.66. MUTCD

Insubstantial traffic control devices such as folding Type I or Type II barricades, delineator posts, reflective panels and cones can be used in these applications as well, but are regularly ignored by aggressive drivers as the size of these devices is not formidable and the spacing between devices permits intrusion by vehicles. If drivers do not respect traffic devices, they may accidentally or even intentionally enter a work zone, causing injury to their passengers and/or workers. LCBs create a large and commanding traffic control device, compelling drivers to exercise more care in avoiding impact. Without this boundary, drivers may not realize until too late that insubstantial delineator posts were actually marking the edge of a very hazardous drop-off. The posts can also be confusing to drivers who often have difficulty determining their intended travel path through the widely spaced array of markers. This risk is increased when visibility is inhibited by weather conditions of heavy rain, fog, or other precipitation. Lastly, delineator posts, panels and other lightweight safety devices are often knocked over by passing vehicles, weather and the air backwash of heavy vehicles. An unbroken, interconnected array of Longitudinal Channelizing Barricades provides a clear, unambiguous travel path, particularly where there may be directional path changes within a work-zone.

For decades, road transportation departments, consulting engineers, and others who specify safety equipment in roadway construction projects have had few choices in traffic control devices. Historically, engineers have specified either temporary concrete barriers or polymer barrels. A “one solution fits all” culture has developed leaving temporary concrete barrier as the default option for positive protection and channelizing drums as the default option for delineation. In order to reduce costs and increase effectiveness, these transportation professionals are urged to examine and consider new products offering road workers and vehicle occupants a safer environment.

The deployment of concrete barriers in locations between traffic lanes and the work site (where deflection cannot be accommodated) is, in many cases, justified as the only solution. However, deploying concrete barrier as a guidance system to simply channelize and delineate traffic is questionable and, in these situations, should be regarded as risky practice This is especially true at high angles of impact where outcomes are catastrophic. Accelerometers inside a crash test vehicle, as well as instrumented, anthropomorphic dummies reveal consistently severe neck, leg, and skull injuries upon concrete barrier impacts. When concrete barrier is used at a tangent for road closures or for delineating curves through a work zone, an errant vehicle will certainly impact at a high angle. Ample evidence points to disastrous results (including severe injuries and death) when vehicles impact concrete at very high angles at even low speeds. Unfortunately, the use of temporary concrete barrier for delineation has become ingrained and many practitioners find it difficult to accept change, evolve practices, and adapt to newer, safer technologies.

The LCB is recognized by FHWA as a device which can be substituted for barrels, cones, and delineators.
New products like the LCB continuous wall systems are designed specifically to fill the gap between concrete barrier segments used as channelizers and lightweight, spaced delineators, cones, barrels and small wooden or plastic folding barricades that are often inadequate--particularly on long-term projects.

Preventing accidents and protecting workers, pedestrians, and motorists is a national concern. The way to ensure elimination of these tragedies is to encourage and require the use of the safest product for each specific job instead of relying on the most familiar traffic control devices or those devices already on hand for the project.

Only when road transportation departments and practitioners begin to look beyond the familiar traffic control products will work zone safety be improved. The individuals most often overlooked when making traffic control decisions are the occupants of vehicles traveling through work zones. They are frequently exposed to the dangerous practice of utilizing temporary concrete barrier as a delineator or to close a road, elevating exposure to high angle impacts, and required to drive through a confusing array of delineators, risking collision.. Those vehicle drivers and occupants could be your family or mine, so we must ask ourselves if a softer impact into a lightweight system device instead of massive rigid concrete walls will save injuries and perhaps lives. Surely, it is worth consideration.

For more information on non-traditional traffic control devices, visit the water barrier manufacturers association at www.waterbarriers.org or contact us at 423 South 600 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Phone: 801-363-7740 Fax: 801-363-6372 Email : marc@otwsafety.com]]> Multib7740 Discuss NMA Issues Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:08:53 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,324,327#msg-327 Re: Different speeds on the same street http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,324,327#msg-327
Regardless, you're going to have no chance of fighting this ticket. And your approach is completely wrong.

The cop noted you were going 49 mph. If that was in the 45 zone, then you were still going 4 mph over the limit.

As for the speed limit change in the roadway, what does that have to do with anything? Speed limits change all the time. Not only is that expected, but A) you are admitting you saw the reduced speed limit sign and ignored it, and B) that you were using cruise control on a roadway with traffic lights and probably driveways, parking lots, etc. The court will interpret that as not paying attention to the roadway and signage along the road.

Your best bet is to plea bargain the case down to a no-point violation.]]> rounddollar Discuss NMA Issues Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:21:57 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,292,326#msg-326 Re: Accused Of Speeding When Cop Lies http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,292,326#msg-326 police officer said I was doing the speed limit and I just looked suspicious because I had on a Leather coat in January when the weather
was cold and we just had a big snow storm. The police officer cried and called me a felon in court so much, that the jury said I was
guilty of flee and Luding and I did not see the police and did not know they wanted me to stop, This was in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan and I was
even in jail for 3 days and beat after the handcuffs were on me and I did not even do nothing wrong, but I did not cry in court like the police man
did. so if you go to court, cry a little, the jury likes that and it will help you.

James]]> staleyjames Discuss NMA Issues Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:23:54 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,325#msg-325 Re: Bloomfield Hills Michigan Police will lie and beat you http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,325#msg-325 driver lic back, so I can get to work and then home and to the Doctors visits that I have after the plastic surgery from the
beating. The staples and stiches are out and the bleeding has not stopped and the pain comes and goes. After told that i am
guilty for something that I did not even do, it is a wonderful way to say good bye to some one that Paid 10 thousand $$ up front
before the lawyer would do any thing. It is too bad that after the Police officer said that I did not speed, or drive bad, I just looked
suspicious because I had on a leather coat. NO, the lawyer went along with the police and now tells me, I am guilty and will not
help me and feels like I got my money's worth. well, I am now found guilty, have to pay fines of over 8 thousand$$$, on probation, and now
no drivers lic. This man feels like I got my $10, 000.00 worth when the police did say, I just looked suspicious. He should of got me
off when the police said I did nothing wrong. It was like he was friends with the Bloomfield Hills Police the way he would sit and talk
to them and laugh and make jokes while I am sitting all alone in the court room. People do not feel that the Law firm that does cost
more will help you, I found out No that sure is not true. I could of got a cheap lawyer and still be in the same situation. So, remember
the best is not always who will cost the most, the best is who will help you and prove you to be NOT guilty and belive in you .]]> staleyjames Discuss NMA Issues Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:17:04 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,324,324#msg-324 Different speeds on the same street http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,324,324#msg-324 gzpmtf Discuss NMA Issues Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:26:23 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,323,323#msg-323 pulled over for out past curfew & a no turn on red... http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,323,323#msg-323 arthurbulat Discuss NMA Issues Sun, 15 Nov 2009 21:15:14 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,322,322#msg-322 Do I need to deal with an Ontario speeding ticket? http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,322,322#msg-322
Here is what the notice (from the Canadian ticket) says may happen if I fail to pay by the due date:

Quote:
Suspension of your driver's licence and the imposition of a licence reinstatement fee.
Informing the Credit Bureau of the debt, which may affect your credit rating.
Referral to a Private Collection Agency for formal collection proceedings.

I've yet to own a credit card. Should I worry about being reported to the Credit Bureau?

PS: It claimed my message was blocked because it was spam. I'm glad it got posted anyway but someone should probably look into that...]]> zakgreene Discuss NMA Issues Sun, 15 Nov 2009 01:14:11 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,321#msg-321 Re: Bloomfield Hills Michigan Police will lie and beat you http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,321#msg-321 sec of State. If, i take a Cab to work and back, it will be between $30.00 and $40.00 each way per day. It is like
they want we back in Jail, because if I do not pay the fines, I go back to jail and if I do not get to work, I can not
pay the fines.]]> staleyjames Discuss NMA Issues Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:28:22 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,320,320#msg-320 No RADAR calibration necessary in Michigan?:S http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,320,320#msg-320 www.michigan.gov]

Check out this link above in PDF format. It would appear that under the authority of Michigan Speed Measurement Task Force (MSMTF) law enforcement authorities are NOT required to periodically have speed measurement equipment (used for traffic enforcement) calibrated (see line #3).

It is understood that there is a difference between radar calibration (recertification per MSMTF?) and operator verification. Verification is assumed to be performed by the officer with calibrated tuning forks issued to that radar or other, appropriate method with LIDAR.

This raises a few questions in my mind:

How does this precedent compare to other states' radar calibration requirements?

Under what authority is the MSMTF accountable to? In other words, do they ultimately have absolute authority to designate whatever criteria for which speed measurement equipment must comply with in Michigan? This seems like a lack of true accountability to me. A conflict of interest perhaps? They get to make their own rules? Do driving citizens have any leverage to influence this? How? After all, we are funding these agencies with our tax dollars, right? We pay their paychecks.

Where am I going with all of this? It would seem to me that if tax paying motorists are held legally & financially liable based on forensic evidence presented by this equipment, doesn't it seem ethically appropriate that these devices be subject to periodic calibration (recertification) to confirm accurate operation/measurements?

Imagine if you were pulled over for a suspected DUI and the breathalyzer device used to measure your BAC was in field use for years without ever being subject to periodic calibration. The criminal implications of an inaccurate device should be apparent.

Perhaps there isn't as much legal emphasis placed on speed measurement devices because speeding infractions (in Michigan) are a Civil infraction and not criminal? Or do we just lack the political will to object to seemingly loose "rules" created to reduce the accountability of speed enforcement authorities (police)?

Sorry for the long post. I look forward to fellow NMA members' thoughts.]]> blindwhitey Discuss NMA Issues Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:12:44 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,56,319#msg-319 Re: Ignition Interlocks http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,56,319#msg-319 or you can check the tach wire yourself if he has it hooked up that way pop your hood and if you see the yellow wire coming from your firewall that is the wire that detects your tach signal now im guessing he probably has it hooked up to your fuel injector which is a no no because fuel injectors commonly cut out when rolling or not giving gas if you look up wiring diagrams for your specific vehicle it will tell you what is your tach wire is or where you can get a good signal then you can call them and make sure they hook it up right as long as these machines are properly hooked up there are minimal problems but you also have to realize most companies do not pay the installers what they should be making resulting in hiring unqualified technicians then resulting in problems for you]]> josh Discuss NMA Issues Fri, 06 Nov 2009 04:40:28 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,318#msg-318 Re: Bloomfield Hills Michigan Police will lie and beat you http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,318#msg-318 I did nothing wrong to flee from any one, they lied on the Police report. In court, they told, I just
looked suspicious to them, because I had on a leather coat that I was not speeding or driving
bad.

How can I be found guilty for doing nothing wrong, just my word against the police and they police
did win this time.

People just need to be aware of the Bloomfield Hills Police Department, they will beat you and later
lie about it in court.
Last week, I had plastic surgery from the beating results from the Bloomfield Hills, Michigan beating me.

James E. Staley
staley-james@sbcglobal.net]]> staleyjames Discuss NMA Issues Mon, 02 Nov 2009 09:44:02 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,308,317#msg-317 Re: Pulled over http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,308,317#msg-317
I agree that almost anytime a rear-ending occurs, the person in back is found guilty because they should be following at enough distance to allow them to stop should the person in front of them have to brake for any reason.

Problem is, it's going to be your word against the cop in court but look to the NMA to help you out. Start by pleading not guilty and request a copy of the back of his citation to see what he said about the incident.]]> RichO Discuss NMA Issues Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:32:27 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,316#msg-316 Re: Bloomfield Hills Michigan Police will lie and beat you http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,316#msg-316 as to what they did in the Bloomfield Hills, home and for what ? In court the police officer said
I looked suspicious and called me a felon. we can prove I did nothing wrong in the next court
trial and this time the Security camera recording will be there to prove what they did.]]> staleyjames Discuss NMA Issues Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:30:10 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,315#msg-315 Re: Bloomfield Hills Michigan Police will lie and beat you http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,315#msg-315 the City of Bloomfield Hills, because if I did not, the Police officers were in the court room
and they were going to push for Jail time for me. So, it looks like I can not sue, but I am sure
Winston Myint Htwe, M.D. will sue the Police Department, the officer came into his home and he
was not invited and Kicked in many doors and even handcuff the doctor for nothing and the same
officer shot up the home with a Taser Gun and in the e-mail from the Chief of Police he wrote that
the Taser gun was not used and we all saw it used, there was 3 people in the Home that saw how I
was beat up and how the home was damaged, so that is ok, I do not have to sue but the Doctor and the
owner of the Home will Sue the Police and the city of Bloomfield Hills, they lied and he can prove it in
court. The security camera's in the home will prove what the Police did to us that day, the court did not
feel it was needed during my trial, but the new trial will have the security camera's as enough proof and
it will be seen on a few TV stations soon, to prove the e-mail from the chief of police and what was done
at the home was not the same, he said the taser gun was not used, we have proof of how the police officer
shot up the home and later said the gun was not even shot. Also how the one police officer kicked my head so
many time that I had to have Plastic surgery, also he stomped on my hands after the handcuffs were on, also
that is on the security camera recording.]]> staleyjames Discuss NMA Issues Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:23:55 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,238,314#msg-314 Re: IGNITION INTERLOCK http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,238,314#msg-314 I am 150 miles from home and it just stopped working no display or anything been waiting on tech for bout four hours
he said he would bring a new unit out and that should fix the problem. In the mean time I lost $400 of work. Asked who
reimburse me my loss he tried to tell me it was probably me vehicles fault. I have a 2008 one ton dually havnt had any
problems until this was installed. Should I pay for his trip and hotel stay I think not. I also have to get a room and try and
recoop from today's loss. Thinking of having it removed and taking my chances can't afford to take to many losses like this
every month.]]> Stuck in Alexandria Discuss NMA Issues Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:23:48 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,313,313#msg-313 Ignition Interlock/REvocation Reinstated http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,313,313#msg-313 Chuck3286 Discuss NMA Issues Wed, 28 Oct 2009 04:16:28 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,176,312#msg-312 Re: Oregon Ignition interlock rules http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,176,312#msg-312 AIIOregon Discuss NMA Issues Tue, 27 Oct 2009 23:52:55 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,238,311#msg-311 Re: IGNITION INTERLOCK http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,238,311#msg-311 AIIOregon Discuss NMA Issues Tue, 27 Oct 2009 23:37:10 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,308,310#msg-310 Re: Pulled over http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,308,310#msg-310 xq28libra77 Discuss NMA Issues Sat, 24 Oct 2009 22:09:16 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,308,309#msg-309 Re: Pulled over http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,308,309#msg-309
Good luck to you.]]> blindwhitey Discuss NMA Issues Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:03:47 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,308,308#msg-308 Pulled over http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,308,308#msg-308 xq28libra77 Discuss NMA Issues Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:50:51 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,268,307#msg-307 Re: Arizona Speed Trap in Yuma, AZ http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,268,307#msg-307 porkchop Discuss NMA Issues Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:19:25 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,289,306#msg-306 Re: When the Ticket's 19 Years Old, It's Your Word Against Theirs http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,289,306#msg-306
Here, they want 10 years clean for commercial license jobs, which runs against the 5 year idea! I know some truck drivers that drive ever so conservatively, in every vehicle, for fear they get a scratch on their record. I cannot imagine keeping 100% clean without bribes.

It seems silly that there is no statue of limitaitons in each state, so old data can be discarded by all parties.]]> DGPickett Discuss NMA Issues Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:36:19 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,305#msg-305 Re: Bloomfield Hills Michigan Police will lie and beat you http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,239,305#msg-305
To be called a felon and guilty for something I did not feel I did wrong, I did not see the Police behind me and I did not know what they wanted
when they were behind me in the Drive way with a gun pointed at me, I thought a real police officer would not point a gun at me for a reason, I
asked what I did wrong and he said I am the Bloomfield Hills Police, you stop or I will shoot you. If, I would of got shot, I would of died with all my medical problems and I do not understand why the jury did not believe me.

Well, I can not say what the owner of the home will do because of having his home shot up with a taser gun, doors kicked in and he was put into hand cuffs, a Medical Doctor for doing nothing wrong, not one knock on the door, just kick in doors and the chief of Police said the is usual procedure for the Bloomfield Hills Police. Dr. Htwe, sure is not happy about this and he does not feel safe at his home now. This week, I go for plastic surgery on my head where I was kicked by the Large police officer many times after being in handcuffs on the side of my head and back and I am guility for what, not standing in the drive way and let the young police officer shoot me

This is not right, it sure is wrong...................

So, we will see if Dr. Htwe is going to sue the Police, I do not know, the way I look at this is if they would do this to me they are doing this to other residents of Bloomfield Hills, Michigan and I do hope the News will have my story on the TV soon before someone does get killed and shot by the young police officer that does shoot his taser gun first and talk later with lies]]> staleyjames Discuss NMA Issues Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:14:08 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,292,304#msg-304 Re: Accused Of Speeding When Cop Lies http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,292,304#msg-304 docachna thinks. Very good analysis here by him. :)]]> blindwhitey Discuss NMA Issues Wed, 21 Oct 2009 04:23:32 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,292,303#msg-303 Re: Accused Of Speeding When Cop Lies http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,292,303#msg-303
If you wave a RADAR gun at a grove of trees, you're likely to get all sorts of readings.

Not that docachna needs my affirmation, but everything he wrote is right on the money.

Good luck Deadhead!]]> bliddel Discuss NMA Issues Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:48:31 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,30,302#msg-302 Re: Speed Enforcement Vigilantes http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,30,302#msg-302
I have been doing what I can to voice my concerns over this very issue to anyone that would listen (mostly in the form of "slower traffic move right") . This includes engaging in discussions with normally clueless motorists, writing letters to the editor, and simply trying to teach via example. In fact, The NMA's Driving Freedoms recently published my humorous attempt at commenting on the issue here:

[www.motorists.org]

The large majority of those I speak to about this subject wholeheartedly agree with me and it is often mentioned as their number one pet peeve on the road. Unfortunately, it only takes a few drivers that aren't paying attention, where never educated appropriately, or worse, intentionally apply their twisted sense of vigilanteism to disrupt the traffic flow for the rest of us. The best any of us can do is take the time to educate and lead by example. What can really hurt the cause is aggressive driving (I know, this is a subjective term) and equally rude behavior back. After saying that, I admit that in my younger days I did all of the things previously mentioned by others and worse, but I have matured.

So, maybe a few more positive stories are in order for motivation. Out of the six letters to various public and private operators of vehicles I personally observed failing to honor lane courtesy, I have received five written responses back apologizing for their employee's driving behavior and reports that such drivers were being retrained in some manner. The sixth letter was replied to with a phone call by a supervisor that disagreed with me, but after a few minutes of discussion, did understand that such behavior opened up his employees to road rage and possible accidents. So, the power of the pen (or keyboard) does work often. It just takes all of our initiative to start the process of change.


Knowledge is power, but an good attention span can never be replaced,
Dr. Z.]]> Zeigh Discuss NMA Issues Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:26:42 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,56,301#msg-301 Re: Ignition Interlocks http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,56,301#msg-301
MOST OF THE PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM ARE IN SOME WAY CONNECTED DIRECTLY, (CORRUPT OFFICIAL STATE GOVERNMENT, COPS, DMV, IID COMPANIE ) OR INDIRECTLY (SPOUSES OF THOSE POLITICIANS, EMPLOYERS OF THESE COMPANIES WHO ARE GO-ALONG-TO-GET-ALONG FILTH WHO DON'T GIVE A F@$% WHOSE LIFE THEY DESTROY.

NOW, WHEN YOU SEE THE VIDEOS OF THE COPS GETTING THEIR HEAD BLOWN OFF WHILE MAKING A STOP FOR SOME INFRACTION, OR SOMETHING OF THE SORT, DON'T BE ASKING YOURSELF WHY. YOU WANT TO UPHOLD THESE LAWS THIS IS HOW YOU WILL PAY.

SOME PEOPLE HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE, DON'T MIND SPENDING TIME IN PRISON AND IF NEED BE THEY'LL DO WHAT THEY DO AS A LAST RESORT, RATHER THAN BEING IN A CONSTANT STATE OF OPPRESSION.

PEOPLE DON'T LIKE TO BE DEPRIVED OF THEIR GOD GIVEN RIGHTS. THEIR RIGHT TO TRAVEL, THEIR RIGHT TO MOVE ABOUT FREELY.

PEOPLE DON'T LIKE TO BE HUMILIATED AS IF THEY'RE HABITUAL DRUNKS AND HAVING TO BLOW INTO A F@$%NG PIECE OF SHIT MACHINE.

PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO SPEND A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THEIR MONEY ON BULLSHIT THAT IS UNJUST AND SHOULDN'T BE THE PUNISHMENT FOR NOT HURTING ANYONE.

PEOPLE DON'T LIKE HAVING TO SPEND A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THEIR LIFE DEALING WITH THE STRESS OF A VICTIMLESS CRIME AS IF THEY DID VICTIMIZE SOMEONE.

YES YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT YOU F@$%ING CORRUPT BUREAUCRAT BUT THAT WHAT IT IS.



Tags:
Bullshit, BULL-SHIT, IID, Ignition Interlock Device, outrage, trampled rights, MADD, corrupt government, corrupt laws, right to travel, suspended license]]> PissedOff&WithAMolotov Discuss NMA Issues Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:48:56 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,292,300#msg-300 Re: Accused Of Speeding When Cop Lies http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,292,300#msg-300 -------------------------------------------------------
> I was pulled over in New York State for allegedly
> travelling 56 mph in a 40 mph zone. I have a
> Valentine One Radar/Laser detector and was
> funtioning the time of the pullover, however, the
> V1 never detected a bogey. The officer was
> pointing at traffic from a side road at a 90
> degree angle. When he pulled me over, he said his
> radar unit "clocked me doing 56/40". I argued his
> accusation that my V1 never detected a bogey and
> he studdered for a second and contradicted himself
> and said he visually observed me doing 56/40. In
> his supporting deposition, he perjured himself by
> saying his radar unit R-11 indicated that I was
> travelling 56.
>
> Someone told me that radar units cannot detect
> speed when pointing at a 90 degree angle at a car
> driving by. Is there any documentation proving
> this? This goes to trial next month and it's my
> word against the cops. Any advise?


Not sure what you mean by "pointing at traffic from a side road". If he was pretty close to the road, and was in a position to clock you as you were approaching directly at him, or almost directly at him, then he was in a proper position to use radar. If he was too far off the road, he may have a big problem. (I realize this doesn't address the issue of him possibly committing perjury...).

Radar is pretty simple, really -- it just calculates the closing speed between two points - the radar transmitter and the target. If the target is moving directly at the transmitter (the patrol car), then the closing speed is the speed of the car being clocked. Think of the case of moving radar (police clocking while they're driving). If you're the first car, out in front, and coming at him, then it figures 1) your clocked speed approaching him; 2) his ground speed; 3) subtracts his speed from your speed, and comes up with your ground speed. If he's stationary, the gun just calculates your closing speed, and that's what appears in the radar.

The problem arises with what's called "cosine error" (Google it with "radar gun"). The manufacturer gives specs about how close to "straight on" the gun has to be used, in order to be accurate. Get your hands on the instruction book for that particular radar gun. It will specify how much cosine angle is acceptable in order to retain accuracy. It's not much, so if he was, say, way back off the road 30-40 feet, and got you approaching the intersection from his left or right, the cosine error may be too much for the reading to be accurate. You have to be moving almost directly at the radar gun for a reading to be accurate.

The place to start is the operating manual for the radar gun he was using. Second, get your hands on his training certificate, and the course material used in his training. Chances are, when you start asking for all this stuff, they will either dismiss or offer you a huge discount (i.e., "equipment violation", no points, etc.). Also immediately ask for his cruiser video, if he took it. That will establish where he was sitting. If they don't take video, or if it's already gone, it's a swearing match between you and him about how far off the roadway he was sitting. However, if you get video and it shows he was way, way off the road, then even if the judge believes he clocked you, you can call the accuracy into question (the video may also have audio; part of the "check list" is that he got good audio tone return from the waves hitting your car and bouncing back. If the video doesn't have any high-pitched audio tone on it that ends abruptly as you pass by him, he's lying, and the video will prove it !!!).

You can do this yourself if you work at it. Takes a good bit of Net research.]]> docachna Discuss NMA Issues Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:40:05 +0000 http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,238,299#msg-299 Re: IGNITION INTERLOCK http://www.motorists.org/forums/read.php?2,238,299#msg-299 wshirlone Discuss NMA Issues Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:06:48 +0000