New tax structure.

[AlpineK]

New structure

[billcoe]

 

False

 

Bug...[font:Arial Black]Pwned[/font]

[Hendershot]

Thanks Klenke, that was the link I was looking for.

 

How about those camera's at stop lights now? I could see those in San Francisco or Portland even some parts of Seattle where there is lots of bicycle traffic, but they are all over Lynnwood. Nobody in Lynnwood rides a bicycle unless it's stolen.

[olyclimber]

HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO FEEL INDIGNANT WITH SNOPES RUINING THE PARTY????

[TheOtter]

Seatbelt Usage - Passengers over the age of 18 not in a seat belt -

BOTH the

passenger AND driver will get tickets of $101.00.

 

False

 

Correct. The actual fine is $112. I know this from personal experience and I thought you otter know too.

 

[Bug]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAArgh.

Another prostate exam.

[tvashtarkatena]

Were you fistulated?

[Bug]

Mind your own business.

It hurts.

[archenemy]

So where is a list of the new traffic laws that did pass? For example, I hear on the radio it is illegal to text while driving. But are hands-free thingys required now? Where can I get a true list of this shit?

[ClimbingPanther]

I do know for a fact that texting became illegal on Jan 1, 2008, and a hands-free device is required as of July 1, 2008.

So talk it up while you still can!

 

from the WSP:

 

According to the WSP and Washington Courts, the correct fines for the above violations

are listed below:

• The fine for a carpool lane violation is $124.00. There is no increased fine for

repeated offenses.

• The fine for an incorrect lane change, driving on the shoulder and blocking an

intersection is $124.00 (These fines rise to $174.00 if the violation results in a

collision)

• Passengers over the age of 16 will receive a citation for failing to wear a seatbelt.

The only time a driver will receive a citation for their passenger failing to wear a

seatbelt is if the passenger is under the age of 16.

• Drivers can receive a citation for driving even 1 mile per hour above the posted

speed limit.

• Starting July 1, 2008, the fine for using a cell phone while driving without a

“hands free” device will be $124.00. (Traffic fines can be higher if the violation

occurs in a construction zone.)

Edited January 9, 2008 by ClimbingPanther

[lI1|1!]

 

i think the could have been better

 

 

 

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/346687_hovdummy10.html

[rob]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAArgh.

Another prostate exam.

 

Is the doctor supposed to have both hands on your shoulders when he does a prostate exam?

[ZimZam]

See me. Feel me. Touch me. Feel me.

[Bug]

See me. Feel me. Touch me. Feel me.

Sing it with soul man.

[chucK]

Bunch of new traffic-signal cameras in 2008 in Seattle.

 

Fine is raised from $101 to $124.

[JayB]

I am curious how people feel about the use of red-light cameras.

 

Draw the line there, or permit expansion to speed-cameras on interstates?

 

How about systems like they're installing in England, capable of recording traffic violations like speaking on a cell phone, applying mascara, etc?

 

 

[olyclimber]

 

nor do i want Gregoire's checkpoints. this country definitely has me thinking that tin foils hats might not be such a bad idea after all.

[Bug]

Monitor ALL activities closely.

Just like in the 50's.

There is a commie behind every Bush.

Or is that an arab?

[JayB]

 

nor do i want Gregoire's checkpoints. this country definitely has me thinking that tin foils hats might not be such a bad idea after all.

 

What are "Gregoire's checkpoints?"

 

 

 

 

[ClimbingPanther]

What are "Gregoire's checkpoints?"

 

An obvious affront to WA & US constitutions, and another example of why the vote was 50/50 in a heavily blue state. Rossi 2008!

[olyclimber]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/346492_dui08.html

[denalidave]

I am curious how people feel about the use of red-light cameras.

I got a photo ticket a few years ago in PDX (I just picked up a keg at Laurlewood and did not want to slam on my brakes to stop and have the keg go flying into the front seat). I did some research on it and came to the conclusion that if you contest the ticket, the city will drop it. So that's what I did and it worked. I admit, I felt guilty but I also don't like the big brother aspect. Now I am in the habit of putting my hand up to block my picture if I happen to run an "orange" light. This was a few years ago so not sure if they still have the same policy.

[tvashtarkatena]

What are "Gregoire's checkpoints?"

 

An obvious affront to WA & US constitutions, and another example of why the vote was 50/50 in a heavily blue state. Rossi 2008!

 

Where is Single Issue Man when you need him?

 

Checkpoints have already been rejected by the courts in this state. Hopefully, this will prevent Gregoire from pushing this violation of privacy further.

 

Checkpoints are a convenient way to mask overly invasive searches based on criteria that are unconstitutional, such as racial profiling. Four young black males in a car? "Step out of the vehicle, sir". Everybody gets stopped, which masks the fact that only "certain kinds" of people get searched based on criteria that do not necessarily included the smell of alcohol or erratic driving.

 

Drunk driving is a problem, no doubt. Checkpoints are not a way to address that jibes with our fundamental value against searches and seizures without probable cause.

[tvashtarkatena]

I'm also very uncomfortable with camera surveillance. What if the camera points towards your front window and the cops 'think' they see you doing something illegal inside your own home, then raid your place based on that? It's a "tool" that can too easily be manipulated by the state for less than savory purposes.

 

The State, after all, does not exist to monitor our behavior. We exist to monitor the behavior of the State.

[JayB]

Agreed on both points. I am looking forward to contributing to whoever runs against Licatta and whoever else on the council voted for camera surveillance when I return.

 

It's hard to argue against red-light cameras unless one includes the near certainty that this will:

 

-Inspire ever more invasive and dubious applications in which their effect on public safety is marginal at best.

 

-Generate a revenue stream that the government incorporates into their budget projections. This will almost certainly encourage them to expand the size of the fines, the number of cameras, and the number of offenses subject to camera enforcement.

 

 

The only thing that would convince me otherwise would be legislation stipulating that the cameras could only be used for red-light offenses, and that all revenues generated in excess of the operating expenses would have to be transferred to the citizens via a dollar-for-dollar tax or fee offset.