i just read about a judge's dissenting decision regarding the city of san jose's use of unmarked vans which record speeders in residential zones - the judge ruled the practice of issuing tickets by anything other than a law enforcement officer is against the law, which is likely true -
but! photos and/or videos of lawbreaking made in the public domain and posted on the internet are within the bounds of the law, regardless of what any judge may decide (see: free press)
for instance; if a video taken by a civilian showing police brutality in LA can be used against the police in the court of public opinion and/or court of law, why can't a video of a speeder or anybody else breaking the law be used as evidence of impropriety? - no tickets are being issued, just evidence of laws being broken...
a good example is this; last saturday night a female friend of mine was pushed up against the wall by some freako outside the patio bar in sunnyvale, but when the SVPD showed up they let the guy go - she told me about it so i went over to the patio with her and her friends to digitally record the idiot with my MOTO KRZR, but he was gone...
now, if i could do so; do you think i shouldn't post a video of the guy who pushed her up against the wall, or you know; why can't the cops take photographic evidence of everyone they get a call about but are not going to arrest?...if that person ends up being a true freako then that photo may help later on down the line (but it could also be a negligence liability)...
you know; the cops shouldn't throw everybody in jail, but they also should do their jobs a little better than this - and while i do get really sick of the puritanical pall cast over society as of late, there are certain lines that should not be crossed...
anyway; i personally think its' worse to have a video of someones' lawbreaking exposed and archived for posterity on the internet, than it is to get a ticket or go to traffic school...and! if someone doesn't give a fuck what i think of their lawbreaking ~ then i don't give a fuck what they think of me - it's really that simple as it goes both ways -
(CALIFORNIA LAW STATES all driver's must do 15 mph through intersections regardless of the speed limit on the street they are driving; and if a pedestrian steps foot in a crosswalk all driver's are required to stop)
the general problem i have seen with government is they tend to breed an unempowered populace with its' hands tied to do anything about what goes on right in front of them; like we are all supposed to wait for their negligent asses to get up and do their jobs, when they often have no intention of ever doing so...
(the santa clara police department has repeatedly 'recommended' against speed hump installation, when this is clearly a conflict of interest on their part...whether they are consciously aware of it or not; it's really all about job security and cops wanting to keep their cushy traffic enforcement jobs, because if their jobs are made obsolete by increased traffic calming measures, then what would it be?...chasing bank robbers!? - no!)
in some conservative states with wide open spaces and hunter-dog attitudes, people are sometimes allowed to shoot anyone who steps on their property because law enforcement can often be miles away and unable to respond fast enough;
but in liberal areas where (as a general rule) people are (in theory) generally less violent than folks out in the countrified shit-kicker areas (for example) and more crammed together (like sardines), folks are expected to wait until law enforcement arrives; because if a victim responds to an attack with equal violence they can be held responsible for any injuries incurred, even if they were being attacked!?...
martial arts are supposed to be used only as a defensive measure, never as an offensive tactic, and this universal ethic should be applied to all conflicts (mister bush)...
i can see both sides of this argument, but after my own personal experiences dealing with violent wackos, i am leaning more towards the empowerment side than the hands-tied opinion (which ultimately serves organized crime more than anything else - you know; if there is a [perhaps inadvertent] collusive connection between the criminal element and government; this is surely it)
for example; what if law enforcement has it out for one particular activist and silently refuses to protect and serve them? (as i have had done to me) - there should be some sort of stop-gap measure to allow personal protection in the interim other than pepper spray, for example...
getting back to the main point; there are many traffic calming alternatives, but most cities drag their feet when it comes to actually implementing them, and traffic cops recommend against them to keep their cakewalkin' jobs (except for cupertino that is - there are speed humps in cupertino the city sort of heavy-handedly installed without telling any neighbors beforehand [which i think is good] no petitions, no bullshit; just action-action-action!)
so the question is this; why do most cities develop buildings in such a heavyhanded fashion, but not the much-needed complimentary traffic calming measures?...and if is considered a political liabilty for city council members to make that decision, then why not let some state or county agency make that decision, or better yet THE PEOPLE!?)...
driving is clearly the most dangerous thing humans do on a daily basis; as roughly 100 people die EVERY DAY through vehicular related injuries (more deaths than soldiers killed in iraq by car bombs; i heard some kid recently got hit by a car @ kiely & benton!?) so the jury has clearly spoken and the verdict is in when it comes to this subject (in south america speed humps are considered 'sleeping policemen' there to slow traffic when the police can't)...
most streets in this area were constructed back in the 1960s, and it is now the year 2007!? - the truth is; one traffic cop for every 100,000 or so people is simply not cutting it; i have been monitoring police activity in the neighborhood for over 10 years now, and not only are the current traffic calming methods drastically ineffective, but the police also seem willing to retaliate against me for merely trying to get them to do their jobs as mandated -
SO THINGS ABSOLUTELY MUST CHANGE...
in the future, if developers and government want to carry on as they do; they should be lawfully required to bolster neighborhood-mandated traffic calming measures around all new developments to control the increased traffic flows they create (and traffic calming in pre-existing neighborhoods should be bolstered as well) - not only is this a good public relations decision for all involved, but it just makes sense...
but! photos and/or videos of lawbreaking made in the public domain and posted on the internet are within the bounds of the law, regardless of what any judge may decide (see: free press)
for instance; if a video taken by a civilian showing police brutality in LA can be used against the police in the court of public opinion and/or court of law, why can't a video of a speeder or anybody else breaking the law be used as evidence of impropriety? - no tickets are being issued, just evidence of laws being broken...
a good example is this; last saturday night a female friend of mine was pushed up against the wall by some freako outside the patio bar in sunnyvale, but when the SVPD showed up they let the guy go - she told me about it so i went over to the patio with her and her friends to digitally record the idiot with my MOTO KRZR, but he was gone...
now, if i could do so; do you think i shouldn't post a video of the guy who pushed her up against the wall, or you know; why can't the cops take photographic evidence of everyone they get a call about but are not going to arrest?...if that person ends up being a true freako then that photo may help later on down the line (but it could also be a negligence liability)...
you know; the cops shouldn't throw everybody in jail, but they also should do their jobs a little better than this - and while i do get really sick of the puritanical pall cast over society as of late, there are certain lines that should not be crossed...
anyway; i personally think its' worse to have a video of someones' lawbreaking exposed and archived for posterity on the internet, than it is to get a ticket or go to traffic school...and! if someone doesn't give a fuck what i think of their lawbreaking ~ then i don't give a fuck what they think of me - it's really that simple as it goes both ways -
(CALIFORNIA LAW STATES all driver's must do 15 mph through intersections regardless of the speed limit on the street they are driving; and if a pedestrian steps foot in a crosswalk all driver's are required to stop)
the general problem i have seen with government is they tend to breed an unempowered populace with its' hands tied to do anything about what goes on right in front of them; like we are all supposed to wait for their negligent asses to get up and do their jobs, when they often have no intention of ever doing so...
(the santa clara police department has repeatedly 'recommended' against speed hump installation, when this is clearly a conflict of interest on their part...whether they are consciously aware of it or not; it's really all about job security and cops wanting to keep their cushy traffic enforcement jobs, because if their jobs are made obsolete by increased traffic calming measures, then what would it be?...chasing bank robbers!? - no!)
in some conservative states with wide open spaces and hunter-dog attitudes, people are sometimes allowed to shoot anyone who steps on their property because law enforcement can often be miles away and unable to respond fast enough;
but in liberal areas where (as a general rule) people are (in theory) generally less violent than folks out in the countrified shit-kicker areas (for example) and more crammed together (like sardines), folks are expected to wait until law enforcement arrives; because if a victim responds to an attack with equal violence they can be held responsible for any injuries incurred, even if they were being attacked!?...
martial arts are supposed to be used only as a defensive measure, never as an offensive tactic, and this universal ethic should be applied to all conflicts (mister bush)...
i can see both sides of this argument, but after my own personal experiences dealing with violent wackos, i am leaning more towards the empowerment side than the hands-tied opinion (which ultimately serves organized crime more than anything else - you know; if there is a [perhaps inadvertent] collusive connection between the criminal element and government; this is surely it)
for example; what if law enforcement has it out for one particular activist and silently refuses to protect and serve them? (as i have had done to me) - there should be some sort of stop-gap measure to allow personal protection in the interim other than pepper spray, for example...
getting back to the main point; there are many traffic calming alternatives, but most cities drag their feet when it comes to actually implementing them, and traffic cops recommend against them to keep their cakewalkin' jobs (except for cupertino that is - there are speed humps in cupertino the city sort of heavy-handedly installed without telling any neighbors beforehand [which i think is good] no petitions, no bullshit; just action-action-action!)
so the question is this; why do most cities develop buildings in such a heavyhanded fashion, but not the much-needed complimentary traffic calming measures?...and if is considered a political liabilty for city council members to make that decision, then why not let some state or county agency make that decision, or better yet THE PEOPLE!?)...
driving is clearly the most dangerous thing humans do on a daily basis; as roughly 100 people die EVERY DAY through vehicular related injuries (more deaths than soldiers killed in iraq by car bombs; i heard some kid recently got hit by a car @ kiely & benton!?) so the jury has clearly spoken and the verdict is in when it comes to this subject (in south america speed humps are considered 'sleeping policemen' there to slow traffic when the police can't)...
most streets in this area were constructed back in the 1960s, and it is now the year 2007!? - the truth is; one traffic cop for every 100,000 or so people is simply not cutting it; i have been monitoring police activity in the neighborhood for over 10 years now, and not only are the current traffic calming methods drastically ineffective, but the police also seem willing to retaliate against me for merely trying to get them to do their jobs as mandated -
SO THINGS ABSOLUTELY MUST CHANGE...
in the future, if developers and government want to carry on as they do; they should be lawfully required to bolster neighborhood-mandated traffic calming measures around all new developments to control the increased traffic flows they create (and traffic calming in pre-existing neighborhoods should be bolstered as well) - not only is this a good public relations decision for all involved, but it just makes sense...
