Quote:
Originally posted by sycamore
On the contrary, I'd say it's rather authoritative. You have to pass an exam based upon information in the drivers manual if you want a drivers license in the Commonwealth. Driving is a privilege, not a right.
|
I have a PA state license and I've never read the driver's manual nor taken the test. In any case, only the actual law is authoritative, not the driver's manual.
Quote:
So, let's say the gal that hit you was from PA. And let's say she had a front plate on her car. You'd rather her get away with damaging your car, rather than report her for what she did?
Red light cameras are not foolproof, nor controversy proof. The benefits of them though would far outweigh the consequences.
|
I don't think reporting her would change anything; she'd still get away with it. All that would happen is I'd spend time talking to the police, something I'd rather not do. Maybe she would too (probably the cops wouldn't even bother) but all she'd have to do is deny it and she'd be fine. (no damage to her pickup truck, naturally)
Red light cameras not only aren't foolproof, they have high potential for and a history of abuse. And since there's no defense to a red light camera ticket, _all_ errors (honest or otherwise) are charged to the victim.
Quote:
Sure...it can happen. And I could be struck by lightning tomorrow, and my car could blow up too.
If we do not fight the fears and misconceptions of organ donation, innocent people are going to die. Innocent people will always die, but it's worth it to try and save as many as possible.
|
Yeah, but who is the more innocent, the nice young girl with kidney disease through no fault of her own, or the degenerate (and yes, hospital personnel DO use that term to refer to patients) in the trauma ward who wrecked his car while speeding through a red light? You think no one would be tempted not to let one die to save the other?