Massachusetts executive order ban on motor vehicle travel

[notazombie]

All of those examples would be reduced/eliminated by better judgement on the part of the individual. Clearly, making it a crime didn't stop the action.

 

[slimmer13]

Oh B.S., the two things have nothing to do with each other. MA, CT, and NY have all declared states of emergency to free up resources for the storm. As a first responder, I find it hard to believe that you don't believe in any laws concerning public safety. I can relate to my brother in law who has repeatedly arrived at car wreck scenes and had to be the one to help extracate bodies because someone thought that they didn't like the oppressive government telling them that that couldn't drive drunk or that they didnt need to wear seat belts. I really find it hard to believe that you actually think it's ok to over and over again pull dead teenagers out of wrecked cars because they thought it was ok to do 90 down some back road.

If you really think that public safety is a bunch of BS, then you're in the wrong business.

I think that Nwcid was simply standing up for the principles of personal accountability and speaking out against the ever increasingly government intrusion into areas that should be ruled by common sense. But then again that area of the country (along with a few others) has been lacking common sense for a long time now.

 

[Nwcid]

Oh B.S., the two things have nothing to do with each other. MA, CT, and NY have all declared states of emergency to free up resources for the storm. As a first responder, I find it hard to believe that you don't believe in any laws concerning public safety. I can relate to my brother in law who has repeatedly arrived at car wreck scenes and had to be the one to help extracate bodies because someone thought that they didn't like the oppressive government telling them that that couldn't drive drunk or that they didnt need to wear seat belts. I really find it hard to believe that you actually think it's ok to over and over again pull dead teenagers out of wrecked cars because they thought it was ok to do 90 down some back road.

If you really think that public safety is a bunch of BS, then you're in the wrong business.

I FULLY believe in FREEDOM. I am not willing to have mine, yours or anyone else taken away because of the actions of a few.

In this case the Gov is worried about the actions of some people so he takes away the freedom of ALL.

In the case of gun control the Government is worried about the actions of a few so they try and take the freedom of ALL.

The cause and the action are EXACTLY the same.

People need to quit trying to take the freedom of other for the POSSIBLE actions of a few for ANY reason.

Now with that said I FULLY support increased penalties for the individuals that create bigger problems by their actions.

 

[Father of four]

Now with that said I FULLY support increased penalties for the individuals that create bigger problems by their actions.

That I do not agree with. Have you heard of the penalty they are thinking about assessing smokers with? Something like $6,250 or some astronomical amount like that.


Read more here...http://www.northwestfirearms.com/off-topic/118674-welcome-nazi-oregon.html#post778708

 

[Nwcid]

FOF not the same thing. I am not talking about putting penalties on a group that is not doing anything wrong. Now if an individual smoker causes some direct problem to someone else due to his smoking then yes they need to be held responsible. Also what that story says is that they want to make smoking prescription (schedule 2) only and getting caught smoking without one would cause the fine. I don't know where they came up with that number but I am guessing it might be the states fine for any other schedule 2 drug offense.

What I am talking about is say you go out and do something "stupid" during this storm, you should be held fully accountable for your actions. So the Gov should have said "this is a really bad storm and we strongly suggest people don't go out unless they have to". Then if someone is out just messing around and causes a problem that SINGLE person should be responsible for their action.

It is like burning. Say you are burning in the spring, with a good fire break, water on hand, no wind, a small pile and you have done everything reasonable to have a safe burn and it gets away. Yes you can still be liable for costs and damage. Now say you are burning, it is August, there is a mild wind, no fire break, and you torch off a huge pile and it gets away. You SHOULD be held fully responsible for it.

What I am saying is for people who do wrong to be held accountable for it and that in some cases for being very wrong to have increased penalties. Like double fines in work and school zones which I also FULLY agree with. My only complaint about this one is construction zones that stay up for years with no actual work going on but that is a different issue.

So if you do not agree with holding an individual responsible for there actions do you believe that the group should be responsible for individual actions?

 

[Redcap]

Oh B.S., the two things have nothing to do with each other. MA, CT, and NY have all declared states of emergency to free up resources for the storm. As a first responder, I find it hard to believe that you don't believe in any laws concerning public safety. I can relate to my brother in law who has repeatedly arrived at car wreck scenes and had to be the one to help extracate bodies because someone thought that they didn't like the oppressive government telling them that that couldn't drive drunk or that they didnt need to wear seat belts. I really find it hard to believe that you actually think it's ok to over and over again pull dead teenagers out of wrecked cars because they thought it was ok to do 90 down some back road.

If you really think that public safety is a bunch of BS, then you're in the wrong business.

Public safety is bullbubblegum.

 

[Father of four]

What I am talking about is say you go out and do something "stupid" during this storm, you should be held fully accountable for your actions. So the Gov should have said "this is a really bad storm and we strongly suggest people don't go out unless they have to". Then if someone is out just messing around and causes a problem that SINGLE person should be responsible for their action.

It is like burning. Say you are burning in the spring, with a good fire break, water on hand, no wind, a small pile and you have done everything reasonable to have a safe burn and it gets away. Yes you can still be liable for costs and damage. Now say you are burning, it is August, there is a mild wind, no fire break, and you torch off a huge pile and it gets away. You SHOULD be held fully responsible for it.

I agree with this.

 

[Father of four]

So if you do not agree with holding an individual responsible for there actions do you believe that the group should be responsible for individual actions?

I do not know where you got that from. I have always believed in personal responsibility.

 

[Nwcid]

I do not know where you got that from. I have always believed in personal responsibility.

I thought you did, but that was the whole point of my post so I was a little confused.

One thing you missed in your comment above was my 4 paragraph;

"What I am saying is for people who do wrong to be held accountable for it and that in some cases for being very wrong to have increased penalties. Like double fines in work and school zones which I also FULLY agree with. My only complaint about this one is construction zones that stay up for years with no actual work going on but that is a different issue."

Do you disagree with this or did you just miss it? If not please explain why, maybe I am wrong in my thinking.

 

[Father of four]

I do not agree with the doubled penalties or fines. And just like you said, especially when there are no workers working in the construction zone.

 

[Father of four]

As for school zones..its depends. When kids are around sure...doubled fines is fine in my book. But still fine someone or double the fines when school is out and no one is around? Nope, I think it would be all about control and revenue at that point.

 

[Nwcid]

As for school zones..its depends. When kids are around sure...doubled fines is fine in my book. But still fine someone or double the fines when school is out and no one is around? Nope, I think it would be all about control and revenue at that point.

I am not sure how it works in OR but here in WA they have signs at the very least stating times the "school zone" is valid. Most places have flashing yellow lights and only during those time are the fines doubled. I agree with this in ANY case where people are either working on the roadway or very close. The other times I agree with it are when there is ANY disabled vehicle, rescue, power truck, clean up crew ect on the side of the road. Way too often these vehicles are hit and since it is illegal to beat these people increased fines is the only way to do it. I will say I dive the normal speed limit when it is a "dead" work zone but when folks are on the road I am usually going slower then their posted speed.

Can you tell me why you do not agree with doubled fines in certain circumstances? Maybe I am wrong as I have no facts to back this up but I feel that they increase awareness and are a greater deterrent while not punishing anyone other then the offender. Is there a better way to deal with this?

 

[Father of four]

When school is let out at say 3pm and even all teachers are gone by 5pm why should a person be fined or the fine doubled up to 7pm?

Should doubled fines be imposed on someone for not going 20mph by a school playground on Sunday when no one is around?

There are more reasons that I do not FULLY believe in fines and the doubling of the fines. Just my .02 opinion.

 

[Nwcid]

When school is let out at say 3pm and even all teachers are gone by 5pm why should a person be fined or the fine doubled up to 7pm?

Should doubled fines be imposed on someone for not going 20mph by a school playground on Sunday when no one is around?

There are more reasons that I do not FULLY believe in fines and the doubling of the fines. Just my .02 opinion.

So apparently things work different in OR since I explained that is not how they work here in WA. Fines in school zones are NOT doubled 24/7, ONLY during certain times..................

 

[Father of four]

One example....School Is Never Out For Speed Cameras

"A popular way for ticket camera manufacturers to "get their foot in door" and quiet opposition of speed cameras in a city is to mention that the cameras will be installed in school zones. After all, what politician wants to be seen as being against "improving" the safety of children?

What the ticket camera companies fail to mention is that they intend to use the school zone cameras to make it easier to push them through everywhere else later. They also don't mention that many of these school zone speed cameras are in use 24/7, 365 days a year — even if school isn't.

As NBCWashington.com points out, that's what has been happening in Montgomery County, Maryland:

Some speed cameras in Montgomery County, Md., are snapping pictures and issuing tickets in school zones — even though classes have been out for more than a month.

Every time a speed camera flashes, someone gets a $40 speeding ticket in the 25 mph school zone in front of Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School.

Michele Rosen of Silver Spring received a traffic-camera ticket on a recent Saturday. She plans to appeal. [...]

Rosen believes the reduced speed zone is not well marked. She questions the need for the lower speed limit when school is not in session.

Apparently she wasn't the only one who was upset with this scheme:

There has been some grumbling about "after hours" use of school zone cameras and some changes are about to happen.

"The laws for speed cameras will change as of October 1," said Lucille Baur, a spokesperson for Montgomery County Police.

Well, at least they eventually did the right thing. But wait a minute, what's this:

Baur said the operational hours for speed cams in school zones will be reduced to Monday-Friday from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. The new hours will be put in place throughout the year, whether or not school is in session.

I guess some people never learn. "

 

[WhyteCheddar]

This conditions the population of the state to accept ever increasing travel restrictions. It is entirely possible to drive safely in the predicted weather condition as long as you are prepared and your vehicle is capable. I enjoy driving in the snow and would ost certainly be on the road taking advantage of it, and helping pull stuck vehicles out etc...
Limiting the movement of the people is a highly egregious offense against their rights.

 

[Father of four]

Me too. My Chevy Suburban just loves the snow. The deeper the better.

 

[Grunwald]

The reason they put the ban on travel is so that they can clear the roads once the weather clears up. There are too many instances where there are dimwits that get on the road and then get stuck in the snow and abandon their vehicle. These abandoned vehicles become obstcles that block emergency vehicles from getting through.
They also prevent snow plow operations from clearing the roads.
There are tons of things to get upset at the government about. This really is not one of them.

 

[notazombie]

Those abandoned vehicles are an excellent source of revenue in the form of towing and impound fees.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Oh B.S., the two things have nothing to do with each other. MA, CT, and NY have all declared states of emergency to free up resources for the storm. As a first responder, I find it hard to believe that you don't believe in any laws concerning public safety. I can relate to my brother in law who has repeatedly arrived at car wreck scenes and had to be the one to help extracate bodies because someone thought that they didn't like the oppressive government telling them that that couldn't drive drunk or that they didnt need to wear seat belts. I really find it hard to believe that you actually think it's ok to over and over again pull dead teenagers out of wrecked cars because they thought it was ok to do 90 down some back road.

If you really think that public safety is a bunch of BS, then you're in the wrong business.

Considering that the SCOTUS has ruled that police and first responders have NO OBLIGATION to protect citizens, your thesis makes no sense.
If they don't have that obligation, does their boss?

The gov's EO is clearly overreach imho.
YMMV