|
|
| Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes (308448) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||
|
| (308670) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Mon Nov 30 08:27:41 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by Kriston Lewis on Mon Nov 30 00:15:57 2015. Construction workers are typically in an environment with lots of heavy machinery. Because of that, there's an elevated risk of injury or death.Pedestrians are typically in an environment with lots of heavy machinery (motor vehicles). Because of that, there's an elevated risk of injury or death. A bad professional construction worker has a high chance of being sent home so he doesn't endanger himself or others. A bad professional driver doesn't have a supervisor watching over him, he just has to be unlucky enough to do something stupid within eyeshot of a police officer.Agreed. That said, I didn't say that it would be unhelpful to wear reflective clothing, but it would only help that pedestrian be seen by a good (or at least a marginal) attentive driver. A professional bad driver is just that, a bad driver who would likely be behaving in a manner where it wouldn't matter if someone had reflective clothes.I disagree. Even bad drivers don't WANT to hit a pedestrian. If they see something reflective, they are less likely to hit the ped than if the ped didn't have reflective material on him, IMO. BTW, aren't you one of the people here without a drivers license? If so, how are you arriving at your conclusions about what a driver can see while driving? My point is that we should focus on getting unsafe people off the road.I couldn't agree more. I hate bad drivers. I'm one of the biggest ranters on this forum about bad drivers. I've even been known to disparage our own members here who openly admit to not "keeping right except to pass" or not "fully stopping at stop signs" or not maintaining a minimum speed of say 40 mph on Interstate Highways. But fat chance of overhauling the licensing system in our lifetimes. That's why wearing reflective material is a far more effective short term solution. The block that I live on has poor street lighting. Based on my unscientific observations, people compensate for this by crossing carefully and driving as if someone could dart out at any moment. Maybe both pedestrians and drivers should account for each other's stupidity for lack of a better word. Assume the other guy is going to f'up something.I agree. But it's still a recipe for disaster. You should plan for the worst case scenario if it's not too much trouble. And wearing something reflective is not too much trouble. |
|
|
| (308675) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Mon Nov 30 10:06:48 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by terRAPIN station on Mon Nov 30 08:27:41 2015. I disagree. Even bad drivers don't WANT to hit a pedestrian. If they see something reflective, they are less likely to hit the ped than if the ped didn't have reflective material on him, IMO.What I'm saying is a bad driver is a bad driver because they're behaving in a manner that raises the chances of a collision. My intended point isn't whether or not people want to run over pedestrians. BTW, aren't you one of the people here without a drivers license? If so, how are you arriving at your conclusions about what a driver can see while driving? Yes. But I think you've misread my arguments. My original statement was about someone's eyesight (which affects things beyond driving) or their overall ability to operate a vehicle (which extends beyond eyesight). Could you explain what you drew out of my original statement? |
|
|
| (308678) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Nov 30 11:05:45 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BusMgr on Sun Nov 29 23:45:22 2015. But if these rights are inherent to humanity, the interpretation as to what these rights are may change as or understanding of them improves. |
|
|
| (308682) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Mon Nov 30 11:14:17 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BusMgr on Sun Nov 29 23:45:22 2015. The Declaration of Independence enumerated reasons why rebelling against the established government was acceptable, but we rejected that premise in the 1860s, and continue to reject it today, not because it was wrong originally, but because ultimately under either theory, man still decides what those rights are. |
|
|
| (308686) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Mon Nov 30 13:50:53 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Nov 30 11:05:45 2015. Possibly, as technology changes and the principles are applied to circumstances not previously envisioned. But when new "understandings" are found by our Supreme Court, those changes engender great controversy (consider, e.g., the found "rights" for abortion and same-sex marriage). And for the right we're talking about here--the right to travel freely by oneself--I think has been expanded to include travel by wheelchair as being no different than travel by foot. But the underlying principles remain the same, even when those rights are applied differently. |
|
|
| (308687) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Mon Nov 30 14:35:43 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BusMgr on Mon Nov 30 13:50:53 2015. That is precisely what makes the topic ripe for very interesting debate and discussion. Some see rights as found, others as always being there, just not understood as such. The expansion to disability rights came more through Congressional action (the ADA) than anything else, the right of Congress to impose those rules was the Constitutional question. I think this has been a great discussion, but I think it may be a bit "heavy" for Bus Chat. |
|
|
| (308698) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by murray1575 on Mon Nov 30 21:33:28 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Nov 28 22:19:48 2015. I don't trust the NYPD. My cousin got a ticket from an officer for going through a red light or so he said while riding on her bicycle. He also said that he needed to give her a ticket so he could make his quota. It's not reassuring to know that in the dangerous world we live in the police have to be used by the city as revenue generators instead of for their primary purpose of protecting the public. |
|
|
| (308699) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Mon Nov 30 21:44:14 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by pragmatist on Mon Nov 30 14:35:43 2015. It may be "heavy" for BusChat, but it is the foundation upon which we base our reasoning for supporting one thing or another . . . in this case, the intersection of motorized traffic and the pedestrian, something to be account for whenever "priority" is given to bus or other transportation services.I believe that a properly found natural right has always been there. Sort of like America always being here, even before it was "found." But the ADA is an interesting case. Traveling by oneself with a wheelchair, or with a service animal, I think was probably a right that was always there, and the ADA simply protects that right against abridgement by the government (which, I believe, Congress was authorized to legislate under the Commerce Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment). I view the "expansion" of rights under the ADA to its application beyond government action and interference with the rights of individuals to do business with the people that they desire to do business with (much as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v. United States did for private discrimination on other bases) . . . something that remains in the news to this day as some business owners get fined big time for refusing to bake cakes to celebrate same-sex marriages. |
|
|
| (308703) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Tue Dec 1 08:51:30 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BusMgr on Mon Nov 30 21:44:14 2015. A question arises for corporations though. If a corporation is its own "person" for some rights (think Citizens United) and it shields owners from most liability, why do those owners then get to apply their standards or beliefs to a separate "living" entity? Should they not surrender something in exchange for what is received? Just food for thought. |
|
|
| (308705) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Dec 1 09:09:15 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by murray1575 on Mon Nov 30 21:33:28 2015. This past weekend they were everywhere! Is it just because it's the end of the month or something extra due to Thanksgiving? |
|
|
| (308706) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Tue Dec 1 09:30:15 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by New Flyer #857 on Tue Dec 1 09:09:15 2015. A few weeks ago they announced a special "high enforcement" project. It has been mentioned on the overhead signs, and some of the roadside portables. |
|
|
| (308710) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 11:41:14 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by Terrapin Station on Sat Nov 28 22:02:43 2015. No that doesn't work either.When I was interviewed last April by Greg Mocker, a man came up to him to tell him he received a summons for driving in a bus lane by a camera. He stated that photo was snapped just after he pulled out of a parking space and crossed the bus lane into general traffic. He asked if he was supposed to just fly over the bus lane. Now he has to take off a day from work if he wants to fight it. How many other cases are there like that where people just pay because they don't want the bother of going to court? |
|
|
| (308712) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Tue Dec 1 13:15:09 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 11:41:14 2015. And it isn't even real court, you don't get a presumption of innocence, and the "judges" are rated by their volume. |
|
|
| (308714) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Dec 1 13:38:05 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 11:41:14 2015. Now he has to take off a day from work if he wants to fight it.No he doesn't. |
|
|
| (308715) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Tue Dec 1 13:43:39 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by pragmatist on Tue Dec 1 08:51:30 2015. I had used the general case of doing business, which can be done individually or in some other form, such a corporation. Proprietors certainly have individual beliefs that can express and practice under the protection of the First Amendment, and thus the conflict is greatest for them when individuals are compelled to do business with others that they do not want to do business with (think of freedom of association). Corporations, of course, are fictitious persons, existing at the pleasure of the state in its granting of a franchise or charter. Even though most all come into existence in a pro forma fashion, the state does have the right to specify the conditions of its existence, and in the worst case scenario, extinguish its existence. As a creature of the state, I think there is greater legitimacy to claims of government control, and indeed when looking at early corporate franchises--especially those of railroad and other transportation companies--the public interest was strongly protected and the rights and powers of corporations were tightly circumscribed. Should one of the costs of doing business in corporate form be the surrendering of freedom of expression, and anyone who desires to retain such right do business as a partnership or unincorporated association? It is not merely Citizens United but also Hobby Lobby that says that corporations do have the right to express themselves.This is, I think, a bit off the point of this discussion, though, since the right to travel, and the interference with that right by motorists, is not really a corporate entity matter. |
|
|
| (308717) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Tue Dec 1 14:11:05 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BusMgr on Tue Dec 1 13:43:39 2015. The right to travel, is not the right to travel unfettered with any restrictions or rules imposed by government. Up till now at least, reasonable restrictions have usually been upheld. So the challenge is not just right versus privilege, it operates on many levels. Driving on a limited access highway is a privilege not a right, but no court will tell you have a right to walk on it. So if you get run over doing that, you may find a constitutional lawyer who on some level supports your cause, but don't expect to find a tort lawyer to take your case on a contingent fee basis. The theoretical and practical do not always reconcile. |
|
|
| (308718) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Dec 1 14:16:24 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 11:41:14 2015. No that doesn't work either.Yes it does work. If "you and everyone" spend as little time on local NYC roads as possible, then that leaves the roads and streets and avenues emptier for me to have fun driving on. That would rock. He stated that photo was snapped just after he pulled out of a parking space and crossed the bus lane into general traffic.SMH |
|
|
| (308721) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Dec 1 15:32:55 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Dec 1 13:38:05 2015. Right. You can present your evidence by mail or online, I believe. |
|
|
| (308723) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by sloth on Tue Dec 1 17:25:24 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by italianstallion on Tue Dec 1 15:32:55 2015. I used the online method once. Couldn't afford to miss a day of work. I did my best, but I don't have any legal training, and I lost and had to pay anyway. Seems if you show up in person your chances are better. |
|
|
| (308724) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Dec 1 18:15:50 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 11:41:14 2015. After you take the day off from work to fight it and are acquitted of the charge, sue the city for the loss of pay. Although I am not exhaustively familiar with all vagaries of the law, I believe there is machinery available for such a suit. |
|
|
| (308725) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Dec 1 18:32:47 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by randyo on Tue Dec 1 18:15:50 2015. After you take the day off from work to fight it and are acquitted of the charge, sue the city for the loss of pay. Although I am not exhaustively familiar with all vagaries of the law, I believe there is machinery available for such a suit.I'd wager the machinery involves taking additional days off from work. |
|
|
| (308726) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Dec 1 18:56:50 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by sloth on Tue Dec 1 17:25:24 2015. I've beaten tickets by mail. You don't have to be a lawyer. You just have to explain clearly, and back it up with evidence, why you shouldn't be found guilty.It helps if you actually have a true explanation. |
|
|
| (308727) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by sloth on Tue Dec 1 19:18:19 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by AlM on Tue Dec 1 18:56:50 2015. Explaining isn't the problem, evidence is. In my instance, a camera claimed I was doing 54 mph in a school zone. They sent me a grainy video clip that I couldn't download, and a couple of stills-- what am I supposed to do with that? It's easier to just let the city stick its fingers into my wallet.If you've successfully beaten things like this, more power to you. |
|
|
| (308728) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Dec 1 19:26:00 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by sloth on Tue Dec 1 19:18:19 2015. I suppose in a case where you have no evidence but your own word, you might have a better chance in person because the ALJ might make a snap judgment that you sound honest. |
|
|
| (308729) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Dec 1 19:53:57 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by AlM on Tue Dec 1 18:56:50 2015. I explained clearly and backed it up anyway, and the stupid ALJ claimed that the pictures were unconvincing, so I had to appeal. I won on appeal. I'm never submitting by mail again. This was a parking ticket. |
|
|
| (308736) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 20:47:59 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Dec 1 13:38:05 2015. I know you can fight parking tickets by mail. I don't believe you can fight ths by mail but I could be wrong. Are you sure or are you just guessing? |
|
|
| (308737) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 20:57:01 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Dec 1 19:53:57 2015. The same thing once happened to me. Unless its a broken meter that can be checked, I believe tey just take the rest of the stack and stamp "rejected". That was for a parking ticket for a sign posted on another street! It was easy enough to explain by mail. At te appeal I even received a verbal apology for ot going to go to appeal.Another time they refused to even listen to the appeal because they claimed the evidence had to be "new" and it out not be the same evidence previously presented. At one hearing the ALJ was deaf and recorded my testimony in his words into the machine which wasn't at all what I stated. I was so pissed that I cursed him out loud. If he would have heard me, most likely he would have held me in contempt. It is really pot luck. Some are very nice and others are just horrible. By the way, the ones who are reappointed are the ones with the most guilty verdicts. That alone is ridiculous. |
|
|
| (308738) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 21:05:15 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by randyo on Tue Dec 1 18:15:50 2015. I think you then have to go to Supreme Court and pay a huge filing fee like $100 which youony get back if the verdict is overturned. And i believe you also need a lawyer to donthat. That is designed to discourage you from taking te matter further. Anyway it s a big risk for the money involved and is done by rich people only to prove a principle. So you may win, but you still really lose because of all the effort involved. |
|
|
| (308739) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 21:05:40 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Dec 1 14:16:24 2015. SMH? |
|
|
| (308741) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Dec 1 23:09:05 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 20:47:59 2015. I know you can fight speed camera violations by mail and online, so you should be able to fight these the same way. |
|
|
| (308746) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Dec 2 00:29:00 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 20:47:59 2015. Why would he be guessing? His language was clear. |
|
|
| (308747) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Dec 2 00:30:21 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 21:05:40 2015. It's internet shorthand. Look it up. |
|
|
| (308751) | |
Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Wed Dec 2 02:34:38 2015, in response to Re: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by pragmatist on Tue Dec 1 14:11:05 2015. A limited access highway does not provide the sole access to places; such highways essentially take motorized traffic out of the way of pedestrians. |
|
|
| (308755) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Wed Dec 2 06:14:05 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 20:47:59 2015. I don't believe you can fight ths by mail but I could be wrong.You're wrong. |
|
|
| (308759) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Wed Dec 2 10:16:22 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Dec 1 20:47:59 2015. The NYC website has the information for online or by mail challenges, they refer to Parking Tickets/Camera Violations. They don't make it clear if that is just the new speed cameras, or includes the bus lanes. Can't imagine it wouldn't, but it is NYC we are talking about. |
|
|
| (308765) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Wed Dec 2 13:58:53 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by pragmatist on Wed Dec 2 10:16:22 2015. The NYC website has the information for online or by mail challenges, they refer to Parking Tickets/Camera Violations. They don't make it clear if that is just the new speed cameras, or includes the bus lanes.The Bus Lane Camera Violations page has a link that says "Fight a bus lane camera violation" that takes you to the Dispute a Ticket by mail/web/in person page. Then on the web hearing page, you have to enter the Violation Number on the "Parking Tickets/Camera Violations" page; there's a link to a sample Bus Lane Camera violation notice to show where the number is. I'd say it's pretty clear. |
|
|
| (308776) | |
Re: More Woodhaven Blvd bullcarp by ''CityLabs'' |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Dec 2 17:10:42 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Wed Dec 2 13:58:53 2015. But the question still remains how effective are mail in pleas. |
|
|
| (308778) | |
Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Wed Dec 2 21:07:28 2015, in response to Re: UPDATE: Main St traffic and the new Bus Only lanes, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Wed Dec 2 13:58:53 2015. sure is better your way. where I was looking would be the long way around...I started at parking tickets |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 3 |
||