Woman Tassered

[JB]

My only guess is: Eveyrone around you is speeding. If you go the speed limit, someone's gonna ride your bumper untill you stop, then plow through it.

[xar256]

I personally think the speed limits are set at x amount under what the actual roadway is rated at, partially to safely account for those that feel driving 10 or 15 over the limit is ok. <Yes roadways have rated limits>.

If you're stupid enough to try to play up being a big brute with attitude with a cop in hopes he'll let you off because he's scared of a confrontation like this woman did...You reap what you sew...

And she deserved every juicy volt.   

I've got no sympathy at all for this kind of stupidity.  I'm beginning to think this non-lethal force is a bad idea...We seem to be actually trying to save the weak links in the gene pool with this technology...

Xar256

[jbox]

My only guess is: Eveyrone around you is speeding. If you go the speed limit, someone's gonna ride your bumper untill you stop, then plow through it.

Yes, I can see the title of the report now: "Reduced rear-end collisions found when drivers go faster than the cars behind them." Anyone got a contact number for the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution?

Personally I've never been a fan of the peer pressure excuse, but p = mv^2 and canBeStupid(x) == isHuman(x) seem like two fairly constant laws around where I live (especially when x is the identity function).

[btoddkelley]

Study after study shows that is safer to drive 10 miles over the speed limit than the speed limit. (check to DOT data)

My understanding of physics, minute amount of common sense, and personal driving experiences would suggest otherwise.

[ChadTower]

The study is inherently skewed (aren't they all).  These are stats related to an individual driving 5-10mph over the speed limit, given that everyone is driving 5-10mph over the speed limit.  If you were to change the average speed of the average driver to the speed limit, and then repeat the study, you would find THAT to be safer.

All this study proves is that it is safer to drive at the average speed of those around you than it is to drive below it.  Get everyone to drive the speed limit, and that becomes the safest speed.

[btoddkelley]

I agree with your conclusion, it is SAFER to drive the average speed. If you read a little further you see that increasiing or decreasing speed limits do not cause drivers to change speed. Speed limits should be set to the average, not attempt to set one. this is why it is such a csh cow for government. Limits are set below the average making >50% of drivers subject to the speed limit tax.


Todd

[ChadTower]

I agree with your conclusion, it is SAFER to drive the average speed. If you read a little further you see that increasiing or decreasing speed limits do not cause drivers to change speed. Speed limits should be set to the average, not attempt to set one. this is why it is such a csh cow for government. Limits are set below the average making >50% of drivers subject to the speed limit tax.

The problem with that theory is that people do drive according to the speed limit.  They drive within the range for whatever they consider an acceptable fine if they get pulled over.  If someone is willing to pay a $150 fine, they are driving 80.  If they are willing to pay a $300 fine, they are driving 95.  If you raise the speed limit, the average speeds will go up accordingly.  The only thing stopping most people from going 85 on average is that they don't want to get hit with that $250 fine.  Raise the speed limit to 75 and reduce the fine, and they're going 85 all day long.

[RayB]

The problem with that theory is that people do drive according to the speed limit.

[btoddkelley]

I agree with your conclusion, it is SAFER to drive the average speed. If you read a little further you see that increasiing or decreasing speed limits do not cause drivers to change speed. Speed limits should be set to the average, not attempt to set one. this is why it is such a csh cow for government. Limits are set below the average making >50% of drivers subject to the speed limit tax.

The problem with that theory is that people do drive according to the speed limit.

[ChadTower]

The autobahn has no speed limit, making it unsuitable for comparison here.

[patrickl]

Actually the autobahn has a "soft" speed limit. If you drive over 130 you are to blame for any damage resulting from a crash you are involved in (even when it's not your fault) and I think the insurance companies give you grief if you drive over 130 (because of the higher bill of course). So you may not get a fine from the police, but you will be in financial trouble when you are in an accident.

I think it's more that speed limits will cap the higher speeds driven, but it has little effect on the average speed. People who drive fast will drive up to the speed they are willing to pay the fine for, but there is a much larger percentage of people who just drive at the "speed they feel safe at" and this is largely determined by the road itself (width, surface, visibility and such) and the perceived skill level of the driver. The much larger group of "safe drivers" will have a much bigger weight determining the average speed.

You see this on the autobahn too. There are only a few "low flyers" driving around at 200km/h (125mph) or faster. The majority drives at speeds somewhere around 130km/h (80mph).

[ChadTower]

So you may not get a fine from the police, but you will be in financial trouble when you are in an accident.

Uhm, if you get into an accident at 130mph, you won't care about fines.  You'll be dead.

[shmokes]

I'm not going to read that.

[patrickl]

So you may not get a fine from the police, but you will be in financial trouble when you are in an accident.

Uhm, if you get into an accident at 130mph, you won't care about fines.

[shmokes]

Chad, he's using the metric system.

[Zakk]

I actually got into an accident many years ago doing 120MPH in a VW bug!!  Nice souped up show bug.  We went off the road and hit a tree, flipped 4 times and left the ground 3 times.  We were pretty badly smashed up, but we sure didn't die (if we had hit the tree a bit differently we would have though).  The pictures I have are pretty cool, all the blood splattered around the interior, and the big lengthwise impression the tree made.  I learned a lot of things about driving 120mph that night (like find out first if the road turns into gravel at any point! 

Still, always wear your seltbelts kids, and DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE!

[DrewKaree]

Todd,

Why does the speed limit have anything to do with the fact that this woman was willfully violating motor vehicle laws by driving after her priveledge to operate a motor vehicle was suspended?

You've taken this from "too much force was used" to a study of how speed limits do or don't affect us.

Do you feel she was correct in operating a motor vehicle after her priveledge to do so was suspended?  She could drive anywhere from 1mph to 200mph, but she would have been doing so on a suspended license - breaking the law, in addition to the rest of the violations she was originally pulled over for.  The speed limit has nothing to do with her being tasered.

Sum ones been usin' der scattergun!

[jbox]

Why does the speed limit have anything to do with the fact that this woman was willfully violating motor vehicle laws by driving after her priveledge to operate a motor vehicle was suspended?

No, I'll be fair and say that I was goading him on in that regard. At the very least he was right to post the study he was referring to, though you are correct that us dissecting that study is probably OT for this particular thread. 

As for me, anyone who has to help cut these:

Out of this:

And then have to tell them:

About this:

Can pretty much use one of these:

On me anytime I refuse to respond to a reasonable request to perform any particular action which does not require me to risk breaking any laws, risk anyone else, risk property, etc...

I can't watch the video, but based on the other comments on this thread it sounds as though this woman was stupid. Cops don't let you off if you're being a jerk, so knowing full well she was breaking the law it would have been in her best interests to bat her eyelids and be sweet as pie, in the hopes that they would let her go before finding out more about her. 

Even in this tiny little rat-hole we call a city people still stab each other over the stupidest things. As a cop in a country with wide spread gun ownership and gun use I would very much not consider *anyone* to be "safe" when enclosed in a ready-made escape vehicle filled with who-knows-what.

EDIT: Sorry, 'disect' has two esses.

[btoddkelley]

Excellent question Drew. i will admit that the topic changed as we progress. Like i said before, i am as tuff on crime as you can get. i think being shot should be the hazzard of commiting a felony a felony. (Kansas use to have a fleeting felons law, if you committed a felony you could be LEGALLY shot!) .

[Tailgunner]

     i dont view traffic as something law enforcement should put very much emphasis on. In most cities it is always at the top of the priority list in the form of "reduce traffic accidents" which translates to "write more tickets". it is heavely enforced for no other reason than it generates revenue. The police  (mayor, city council depending on your form of governement) take advantage of the law abiding citizen rather than use policing resources to catch real criminals.

I don't quite agree with your premise here. Okay, traffic enforcement doesn't rate up there with catching serial killers, but that doesn't mean it's not worth bothering with. Without it you'd be surprised how quickly the transportation system breaks down into complete anarchy when people know the cops have better things to do.

Now if you want to argue about government using traffic enforcement to generate revenue, I'd mention my pet peeve, @#$^ red light cameras. Not that I've ever been ticketed by one, but the concept irks me to no end.

[ChadTower]

Chad, he's using the metric system.

mph is not metric, and he even did translate it to 200kmh.  How many Canadians have you ever met who don't know how to do that?

[fredster]

"...And for what it's worth Shmokes, I always have thought your comments were short-sighted and simplistic.  So I agree with you yet again!"

- Fredster

[RayB]

mph is not metric, and he even did translate it to 200kmh.

[Shape D.]

     i dont view traffic as something law enforcement should put very much emphasis on.

     There are a lot of useful purposes for trafic enforcement though. Many people die in the U.S. every year in traffic accidents. Typically because someone wasn't driving the way they should be, Intoxicated, speeding, or flat out not paying attention. reducing the ammount of officers watching for traffic violations would result in more people breaking those laws, and in turn create more accidents.

     Not to mention they use it as a way to catch other criminals. a bank robber would most likley trying to get away from the bank as fast as possible. catching someone speeding may help out in catching a burglar, murderer, drug traffiker, or some wacked out drunk guy who shouldn't be on the road.

   The reason this lady was confronted quickly is because she had a habit of "acting like she's above the law".  She had to commit at least a few offenses to originally get her liscense revoked, step one of non-compliance of the law. she drove her car agian with a revoked liscence, step two of non compliance. she then refused to get out of the car for the police officer and put down her phone, third step of non compliance. she deserved what she got.

  Now if she were a law abiding citisen, she:

A) Wouldn't have had her liscence suspended in the first place.
B) Wouldn't have been drivin on a suspended liscence.
C) She wouldn't have ben speeding and woulldn't have pulled over.
D) Would have complied with the officers request to get out of the vehicle and put her phone down.

She had many oportunities to avoid this sort of a confrontation. And didn't care enough to follow the guidlines set for everyone that are in place for her and our saftey.
 
  ~~~~~*

[ChadTower]

Read Patrick's post again, or stop playing dumb.

From patrick's post:

You see this on the autobahn too. There are only a few "low flyers" driving around at 200km/h (125mph) or faster.

That is what I was responding to, the 130 amount was just coincedental.

[patrickl]

I thought my point would be obvious, but I guess I need to explain.

Even at 130mph it's not a certainty that you will die from an accident. The speed difference during impact is what matters most. Hit a wall straight on at 130mph and yes you will die. But there are in general no stationary objects on highways. Even if there is a wall there then diving into a wall at 80mph is just as lethal. The autobahn is probably the safest type of highway in the world. It's actually engineered make it possible to safely drive at those high speeds. Other drivers are more alert too. I feel safer driving there at 130mph than on dutch roads at 130km/h (80mph) or on US roads at 60mph.

Maybe even more off topic, but this is something that always bothers me at those oval races too. The commentators will say "Wow he survived a crash into the wall at 200mph and he hasn't even gotten a headache". Usually that's complete bollocks. In fact it's more like the car skidded along the wall at 200mph. That's not the same as a 200mph impact straight into a wall.

But chad, seriously. I mentioned 130kmh and financial consequences in one sentence. This sentence you reply to (the 130 is sure death so you won't care about the financial consequences). It's clear you made a mistake with km/h and mph. No problem, but it's very tiring to see you try to get out from under a mistake like that. Admit it or just don't respond and it will die out.

[Dartful Dodger]

The woman was on one of those gossip shows last night.  I saw the preview, but I didn't get the name of the show, it was going to air at midnight. 

Did anyone see it?

Did she deserve to get tased?

[Tailgunner]

Maybe even more off topic, but this is something that always bothers me at those oval races too. The commentators will say "Wow he survived a crash into the wall at 200mph and he hasn't even gotten a headache". Usually that's complete bollocks. In fact it's more like the car skidded along the wall at 200mph. That's not the same as a 200mph impact straight into a wall.

Angle of impact is everything. It wasn't that long ago that NASCAR lost 4 drivers in a couple of years. As far as drivers walking away from wicked crashes without a headache, that's an illusion based apon the drivers being interviewed as their walking out of the infield care center and are still amped on adrenalin. You want to see reality, interview them the next morning as they're struggling to get out of bed.

[Bones]

I would like to be tassered at high speed.

[DrewKaree]

I would like to be tassered at high speed.

I would like to volunteer for the applicator position

[DrewKaree]

Upon careful consideration, I would like to pay for the priveledge of applying the "treatment" to ya, Bones!

[Daniel270]

and odds were she was on the cell phone the whole time...

one of my biggest pet peeves happens to be people driving while using the phone.......  and NO, driving slower does NOT make it ok.....

[jbox]

Yeah, I bet her license was suspended because she ran over a puppy! 
Or a little girl maybe?   
Or a little girl who was *walking* a puppy!     

(obviously not a pit bull puppy though) 

[ChadTower]

You're all assuming a multicar accident.  A lot of high speed accidents are single car.  Driver loses control, driver hits the dirty shoulder/curb, driver flips over 4 times, driver is thrown from the car or killed inside it.  Passengers die a lot of times too.

[missioncontrol]

^

bumped so I can remember to watch it at work tonight

[ChadTower]

Oh, this one!  Yeah, this was a great one.

[DrewKaree]

He's got a few....didn't check any of 'em out, but he's a BIG fan of the taser and the ass hats it's used on.

http://www.czabe.com/mediaclips/index.shtml?a=showclip&id=405

http://www.czabe.com/mediaclips/index.shtml?a=showclip&id=390

and then he's got the "unofficial" way cops would like to take all runners down

http://www.czabe.com/mediaclips/index.shtml?a=showclip&id=399

[ChadTower]

That last one is brutal.

[Dartful Dodger]

They claim the "Texan Take Down" was an accident.  Sort of like how people in hand cuffs "accidentally" fall down the stairs in Chicago police stations.

[ChadTower]

I bet you are constipated a lot, Dartful.