Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Seat Belt Violators Caught By Cops Wearing Night Vision Goggles
WJLA TV (Washington, DC) ^ | Thursday June 02, 2005

Posted on 06/02/2005 8:20:41 AM PDT by tgslTakoma

Edited on 06/02/2005 8:25:19 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

Rockville, Md. (AP) - Maryland State Police are using a military tool in the battle against seat belt violators.

They're using night vision goggles to find people who don't buckle up after dark. Police say 40 percent of drivers don't use their seat belts at night, making the roads much more dangerous after sunset. Police in Maryland are among 13,000 agencies nationwide that are now using the goggles.

With the goggles, Police say they can see inside cars at a distance, allowing them to nail violators who might otherwise go undetected.

The new strategy is paying off. At a seat belt enforcement operation Wednesday night on Rockville Pike, officers issued at least 44 tickets for seat belt violations.

Mod note: Associated thread.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; US: Maryland; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: bigbrother; donutwatch; leo; nannystate; nightgoggles; nightvision; revenueenhancement; seatbelt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-198 last
To: Malsua
We used to call the folks engaged in this kind of behavior Highway Robbers.

Used to? I still do.

181 posted on 06/02/2005 12:55:29 PM PDT by mc5cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: tgslTakoma

All right you sumbitch, I seen ya not wearing that seat belt! This here is Buford T. Justice and you have been busted!

182 posted on 06/02/2005 1:02:55 PM PDT by mc5cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tgslTakoma
It's time to roll back the seatbelt laws.

There is precedent now: several states have rolled back motorcycle helmet laws.

183 posted on 06/02/2005 1:19:26 PM PDT by B Knotts (Viva il Papa!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
It's time to roll back the seatbelt laws.

I think you'll have to start with congress with this, as mandatory seatbelt laws were attached to highway graft distributed by the congresscritters after having been stolen from the taxpayers. If they don't have mandatory seatbelt laws, they'll lose some portion of highway funds. As long as that is the case, it will snow in hell before the laws are repealed. Its always all about the money folks!

184 posted on 06/02/2005 2:04:57 PM PDT by zeugma (Come to the Dark Side...... We have cookies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

Yes, we will have to start at Congress. But the time has come.


185 posted on 06/02/2005 2:05:50 PM PDT by B Knotts (Viva il Papa!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

Blackmail with our own money.


186 posted on 06/02/2005 2:21:00 PM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
I was waiting for the assertion that it was unconstitutional by someone who has no authority to adjudicate the constitutionality of an issue.
187 posted on 06/02/2005 3:59:17 PM PDT by verity (A mindset is an antidote to logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: verity
"I was waiting for the assertion that it was unconstitutional by someone who has no authority to adjudicate the constitutionality of an issue."

Your phrasing of the question implied the law is Constitutional, was crafted and passed in a Constitutional manner, was declared so by the SCOTUS, or at least appears crystal clear why the law is Constitutional. Hence, I posed my question. Also, it is the duty of each citizen, to know and understand the law to the best of their ability, the opinion and any claims by SCOTUS notwithstanding. That duty includes adjudication of facts and claims that present themselves-to the best of their ability.

For instance... A ruling by SCOTUS declaring the campaign finance laws Constitutional does not make them so. The particulars of the law and how they stand versus the proscriptions and prohibitions of the Constitution does.

The idea that one needs to be granted some sort of authority by someone, or some entity to judge these matters is ridiculous. If that were true, then the idea of "the consent of the governed," was always w/o meaning and some other entity is, and has been in operation. There is also no point to education, since folks have no authority to make decisions anyway. Even classroom discussion of such topics and ideas would be pointless. Unless of course, education simply consists of what folks can and can't do along with the corresponding lists of sanctions and punishments.

188 posted on 06/02/2005 5:20:34 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: feinswinesuksass

The "man" is oppressing me again...


189 posted on 06/02/2005 8:45:46 PM PDT by HangFire (I'm only wearing black until they come up with something darker...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: caver
I thought the title meant that the seat belt violators were wearing night vision goggles. Who writes this stuff?
My husband is making fun of me for thinking the same thing.
190 posted on 06/02/2005 8:51:58 PM PDT by HungarianGypsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: scott7278
Where I live, there is a cop on the interstate that hides behind a bridge column and catches people speeding

I remember one Saturday morning on the outer loop of the DC Baltway - immediately before Holy Cross Hospital - when a Montgomery County policeman was holding a large 4x3 foot sign saying "Smile, you're on candid camera."

He sure did get people to slow down, and without writing a single ticket.

By the way, he was laughing as we drove by, and so were we.

191 posted on 06/03/2005 2:33:53 AM PDT by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: spunkets

It seems as though you live in an intellectual universe wherein your view of reality dominates. But, do you have the fortitude to intentionally violate a law which you believe is unconstitutional and suffer the consequences? If not, why not?


192 posted on 06/03/2005 5:01:02 AM PDT by verity (A mindset is an antidote to logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: AbeKrieger

Sad but true. Probably the best way to combat this nonsense, at this time.


193 posted on 06/03/2005 5:06:00 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Official Ruling Class Oligarch Oppressor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: HungarianGypsy

Well my interpretation of English comes from scholl from way back. At least that's what it used to be. I just hate the bastardization of the English languauge. I work in a large corporation and they are the worst. They come up with new buzz words all the time.


194 posted on 06/03/2005 5:10:13 AM PDT by caver (In the words of that illustrious socialite twit Paris Hilton, "That's hot".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: tgslTakoma
Seat Belt Violators Caught By Cops Wearing Night Vision Goggles

Hmm, guess it's time to put in an order with Digikey for some IR LEDs......

195 posted on 06/03/2005 5:33:59 AM PDT by adx (Why's it called "tourist season" if you ain't allowed to shoot 'em?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: verity
"It seems as though you live in an intellectual universe wherein your view of reality dominates."

There's only one reality and it's unique. The term intellectual refers to a rational basis for observation, analysis, conclusion and decision, rather than an emotional, or reactionary response. Now reality just is, and being unique, it only has one essence. That means that one either grasps it correctly, or they don't. That means one is either right, or wrong-that what they hold is true, or false.

"But, do you have the fortitude to intentionally violate a law which you believe is unconstitutional and suffer the consequences?"

I don't wear a seatbelt. It's a Freedom thing. The Constitutionality of the law is irrelevant as far as my decision is concerned. The law is just one of many intolerable affronts to Freedom some folks have advanced for the cause of socialism and other variations of tyranny.

Since folks have made it the law in some places, they are free to charge me with violating their vile law and attempt to make me suffer, should that occur. After all, it's not out of benevolent concern that they've instituted such a tyrannical act, it's out of a mix of petty selfishness, a hate of Freedom itself and contempt for the right of their fellows to make their own decisions. As far as compliance goes, they can kiss my ass and stick their suffering up theirs.

196 posted on 06/03/2005 4:54:42 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: spunkets

I appreciate the candor of your reply.


197 posted on 06/04/2005 5:10:02 AM PDT by verity (A mindset is an antidote to logic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: MudSlide

It's all about the Golden Rule.

The Golden Rule once was - Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

The then the Golden Rule became - He who has the Gold Makes the Rules.

Now the Golden Rule is - - The Government Wants Your Gold And They Make The Rules.


198 posted on 06/04/2005 7:32:16 AM PDT by MudSlide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-198 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson