Ticket your gas guzzling neighbor. To get tickets

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), August 05, 2001

Answers

Cherri,

Why don't you quit wasting energy.

Get off of the computer

: )

-- J (Y2J@home.comm), August 05, 2001.

Yeah, let's get all dem Dem soccer moms.

-- (Paracelsus@Pb.Au), August 05, 2001.

I used to have some "tickets" like those to put on the cars of able bodied people who park in handicap spaces. Between my wheelchair bound brother, Father with a cane and mother with a walker, it would get pretty irritating to see some healthy looking person use the spaces. Another thing is those people who use their grandma's handicap placcard and try to get away with it. Even if grandma is in the car, if she stays there while the healthy person gets out to shop I tell them off.

Not everyone has obvious handicaps that are easy to see, such as some people with heart conditions, so I try to make sure before I say anything. What I really hate is the people who try to justify using a handicap space by saying "I was only going in for just a minute".

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), August 06, 2001.

Cherri, I used to have some of those handicapped tickets myself, and used them generously. But here's where I part company with you. Parking in a handicapped space is against the law, if you are not specifically authorized to use them. Owning and driving an SUV is not.

With that in mind, it appears that your objection to SUV owners/drivers is that they do not live their lives according to your principles.

It could be said that homosexuals do not live their lives according to conservative principles, yet you have defended them on this board in the past. Looks to me like you're engaging in something of a double standard here; advancing your own moral principles and opposing those of others. Care to comment?

I am neither a homosexual nor an SUV owner. And it doesn't matter to me what someone drives or who they like to have sex with. But it does appear to me that Cherri is pointing out the spots of others while missing her own. Anyone else agree?

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), August 06, 2001.

ADH, everybody does it. That's why this place gets interesting, we bounce ideas off of each other.

-- helen (no@sins.boring), August 06, 2001.

I once had a car that got ticketed for impersonating a motor vehicle.

On a more serious note, this trend is a direct result of the meddleing the .gov has already done in the free market. I had a chart once that compaired the top ten best selling vehicles from 1966 with the ones from 1996. Guess which list got better gas millage. Thats right, 1966. Also, did you know that a federaly mandated piece of equipment on your car generates greenhouse gasses? Thats right, the catalytic converter is now known to be a big problem and we where forced to use it. Also, its time to do a compairison between all the added weight of safty equip vs the extra gas it causes your car to use. Most all of it is, thats right, you guessed it, federaly mandated.

Whos side are they on anyway?

-- Just passin through (nobody@nowhere.com), August 06, 2001.

Don't expect Cherri to ever show a shred of logic.

-- libs are idiots (moreinterpretation@ugly.com), August 06, 2001.

All environmental issues aside, I don't recommend putting this "ticket" on anyone's vehicle. You may have to deal with an irate owner. Also, in many jurisdictions, it is actually illegal to place brochures/leaflets on people's cars.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), August 06, 2001.

it could be said that homosexuals do not live their lives according to conservative principles, yet you have defended them on this board in the past.

I don't think I have ever defended a homosexual lifestyle. As a matter of fact, I believe I have been silent on the subject. There you go placing be in a box again, with all the lables you assume go on it.

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), August 06, 2001.

What a stupid idea. Do you really think putting this "ticket" on anyone's car will accomplish anything save an annoyance. I hope you plan to cruise the parking lot and pick up all the discarded paper.

-- Remember (the@ld.forum.com), August 06, 2001.

"...this trend is a direct result of the meddleing the .gov has already done in the free market. I had a chart once that compaired the top ten best selling vehicles from 1966 with the ones from 1996. Guess which list got better gas millage..."

I'm not so sure it all falls out as pat as that. Couldn't the horrid mileage of those top-selling 1996 cars be more a "direct result" of how cheap gas was back in 1996 and how flush with money people were?

The government sure as heck didn't make all those people go out and buy gas guzzlers. They made that choice all by their lonesome.

Only difference I can see between these big old SUVs nowadays and those old 60's luxury cars like Olds and Caddies is they're boxier-shaped now instead of long drawn-out affairs like they used to be. The idea is the same. Lotsa power and luxury and status. I nearly swallowed my teeth the first time I spotted a Mercedes SUV.

-- Miserable SOB (misery@misery.com), August 06, 2001.

You want to save energy?

1)-End school bussing. Let the kiddies walk to neighborhood schools (again). Urban school busses are an extraordinary waste of time and resources.

2)-Require everyone to ride bicycles. Bicycles are the most efficient mode of transportation (BTUs/mile). Bike riding would have the synergies of fitness and low pollution.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), August 06, 2001.

Lars, everywhere is uphill from here!

-- helen (up@up.up), August 06, 2001.

My next-door neighbor drives her two children to school. Yeah...she has an SUV. I think [although I don't KNOW] that she does this in fear of one of her children being snatched on the way to school. The elementary school that her children attend is ONE block away! We can see the school yard when we look west. I've considered asking her why she doesn't simply WALK her children to school, but it's REALLY none of my business.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), August 07, 2001.

I wish you, Cherri and the other intrusive liberals really understood the concept of "it's really none of my business." My personal decisions are not the business of the State or of other citizens.

-- Remember (the@ld.forum.com), August 07, 2001.

So I can dump my Weber on the sidewalk in front of your house after a barbecue? Burn my garbage in the alley behind your house? Those would be my personal decisions also, "Remember".

-- Jesus (martinez@arizona.gov), August 07, 2001.

Cherri:

From another liberal!

I think that your approach to this matter is totally naïve.

You ,and others, [I will now switch to the broader group of comments and away from you] suggest that the population should switch from less efficient SUV’s and pickups and move to smaller fuel efficient cars. They also suggest that this should be mandated through regulation.

Could this be done? Sure, but with costs. The NAS study says that the last mandated change in fuel economy, led to a decrease in vehicle weight, and an increase in fatalities [they estimate 1500/y]. Can technology be used to make a lighter vehicle safe; Sure, but only to a certain extent. The safest 1500 lb car in the world, won’t do well when it hits a semi; or with some of the small cars I drove recently, even a cyclist would be a problem. An Excursion won’t do well with a semi, but the chances are better.

Then, we have the situation of those folks who actually need an SUV or pickup. While I normally drive a small car to work, I also have an SUV. I live in a rural area. My SUV gets low 20’s. I couldn’t get out for a month or two of the year without it. It’s biggest problem is that, to increase mileage, they have lowered it. I have stuck it three times in the snow because it is too low to the ground. I have a pickup. Use it to haul and tow things. Can you make a 30 mpg pickup. Sure. Have you ever tried to tow a trailer with cattle using one. I thought not. Penalties for low mileage trucks will just place another nail in the coffin of the family farmer.

These changes can be made, but the argument doesn’t hold much more water than the one for mass transit. We can develop mass transit, but it won’t work in decentralized cities. We will first have to redesign all of our cities to fit mass transit. We can increase fuel efficiency, but we will first have to redesign our whole transportation system. For safety reasons alone, we will have to eliminate all of those large trucks. What do you suggest; mule teams perhaps. :)

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 07, 2001.

Pssst Benjamin, teletransportation.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), August 07, 2001.

Tough to think beyond "off" and "on" for Jesus.

You ought not to dump your grill or burn your refuse because it's not nice. This is a social guideline, not (necessarily) a law. I, and the remaining members of polite society, hope you have enough sense and common courtesy to refrain from behaving badly.

Do we need laws to restrict "grill dumping" or "trash burning?" I prefer to allow each local community decide. Even without a specific law, I can defend my property and rights from miscreants.

Amazingly, Jesus, laws don't stop people from engaging in bad behavior. Laws haven't stopped the use of illegal drugs. The "War on Drugs" has only made narcotics more expensive and funneled the considerable profits to criminals. Most laws fail to observe the well known "law of unintended consequences."

Noble intentions generally make lousy laws. Nevertheless, rarely does the liberal see a problem that cannot solved by a healthy dose of laws or regulations. As a matter of philosophical principle, I believe individual liberties should be the rule, not the exception. If I can afford an SUV and the fuel, it's really no one's business but mine.

-- Remember (the@ld.forum.com), August 07, 2001.

The answer to the statement on it being peoples free choice and not having anything to do with the goverment intervention is that while there where real full sized cars with 6+ passanger capacity and reasionable upright seating, people bought them. After the .gov regs all but forced the manufacture of smaller more efficient cars people moved to vehicles that are inherently more comfortable to ride in and drive and where safer. If the .gov hadn't mandated higher gas millage, larger cars would have still been being built along with smaller cars that some of us buy and people wouldn't have moved to SUVs which get worse millage than even the big cars.

-- Just passin through (nobody@nowhere.com), August 07, 2001.

Another stray cat showed up recently..she appears healthy,except for one annoying trait..she screeches and whines all the time..I usually can manage to ignore her noise..but I would kick her if she came within reach..

-- meat be meat (trying to ignore the c@t.constantly screeching), August 07, 2001.

meat..you're so full of shit your eyes must certainly be brown

as if anyone believes your sick rantings

-- (guess@who.), August 07, 2001.

ps...

COWARD!

-- (guess@who.), August 07, 2001.

COWARD

-- (guess@who.), August 07, 2001.

COWARD

-- (guess@who.), August 07, 2001.

I can't decide on a proper name for the stray..its a toss up between Cherri or cin..I have to work on my foot speed or she needs to slow down..

-- meat be meat (a decision to t@x.my mind), August 08, 2001.

You want to save energy?

1)-End school bussing. Let the kiddies walk to neighborhood schools (again). Urban school busses are an extraordinary waste of time and resources.

2)-Require everyone to ride bicycles. Bicycles are the most efficient mode of transportation (BTUs/mile). Bike riding would have the synergies of fitness and low pollution.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), August 06, 2001.

Lars, School bussing has gone on long beyond the purpose it was intended to remady. Two generations of children have gone to school with children of other races, they consider diversity as a normal fact of life, if they think about it at all. A lot of schools developed specialized programs in order to become magnet schools, drawing in students interested in specialized areas. I think bussing should be voluntary so all students have the option to attend a school with programs they want. Remember bussing was started because schools in porr and minority neighborhoods were usually underfunded, understaffed or staffed with lower qualified personel, and the buildings themself were often falling apart. More often then not, black students were not ALLOWED to attend better, white shools, even if they lived in the neighborhood. If they did attend, they were treated vicously. We cannot sit here and pretend that society was the same 30 years a go as it is now.

Ask a white child if they think black students should not be allowed into their schools and they will be dumfounded and ask why not?

It was the social attitudes that needed to be changed 30 years ago. Bussing did not necessarily change the attitudes of the adults who had carried these attitudes with them all of their lives, but bussing and integrated schools allowed children to interact with and get to know children of other ethnic backgrounds. These children have grown up with and raised their children with different social attitudes due to their personal experiences, rather than blindly propagating bigoted beliefs of their parents. The mission has been accomplished. Not completly and not everywhere, but the purpose of bussing has been accomplished. It is important for government to keep abreast of and change rules and laws which have outlived their usefullness.

It would counterproductive to stop bussing completly, voluntary bussing would continue magnet schools to continue their advantages programs and prevent the degradation of neighborhood schools from reamerging.

As for "requiring" people to ride bicycles, this is contrary to your beliefs of government "legislating" what people do.

The idea is good, but providing the opertunity for people to ride bikes is more effective.

In Portland Oregon there is(/was?) a program where they provided bikes free of cost for people to use in the city. You could pick up a bike anywhere and ride it to where you wanted to be and leave it there. They had little problem of theft, and the program worked well. I jsut tried to find it but cannot, but did find a site that shows the city's commmitment to bicyclists. Bicycling in Portland

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), August 08, 2001.

I know of a little girl here abouts that is handicaped and lives in a group home. She works at a fast food place and is driven to a from work every day in a 15 passanger van. The driver sits outside idleing the engine and running the ac for 10-20 minutes at a time waiting for her to get out of work. What a waste.

-- Just Passin Through (nobody@nowhere.com), August 11, 2001.

Cherri--

My comments were a bit tongue in cheek, especially the biking idea. (altho it is true that bikes are a very energy efficient form of transportation, moreso than walking for example.)

School bussing? Obviously this is wasteful of energy, time and even human life. The original intent of bussing was to equalize the quality of schools for all students. But if that is the goal, then all that is needed is to spend an equal amount of money per capita and kids still go to neighborhood schools. As you point out, "diversity" is the more contemporary goal. Also, let's not forget that after 35 years of the school-bussing industry, there is now a huge vested interest in maintaining this status quo. Bus manufacturers, bus drivers, bus maintenance crews and Bored of Ed policy wonks are all threatened by an end to school bussing.

Screw the hids. They are simply pawns. Many inner city families would prefer that there kids attend school near home.

Voluntary bussing? That makes sense to me, at the HS level. Magnet scools can't be in every neighborhood. Compulsary bussing, compulsary bike riding........arggggh.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), August 11, 2001.

"I don't think I have ever defended a homosexual lifestyle. As a matter of fact, I believe I have been silent on the subject."

Yes. You are correct. I misspoke; my apologies.

"There you go placing be in a box again, with all the lables you assume go on it."

I don't believe I have ever placed you in a box or in a category. As a matter of fact, I believe I have been silent on the subject. Perhaps an apology is in order from you, as well.

In any event, you ignored my central point, which is that ticketing someone for a legal act is indefensible. I personally lump your actions in with the actions of pro-life picketers who photograph individuals who go into abortion clinics, or who publicize the names, workplaces, home addresses and phone numbers of clinic employees. The actions you (and they) oppose are perfectly legal, yet because of some supposed moral objection or another, you appear to feel that doing something like this is perfectly acceptable.

We can go even farther and take some of the items on the ticket that IMO are questionable, if not outright misleading or untrue.

Care to comment, Cherri?

And for you, "Remember," I wish that intrusive conservatives really understood the concept of "it's really none of my business." My personal decisions are not the business of the State or of other citizens.

Objecting to individual decisions is not solely a failure of the Left. The Right does it, too, with amazing alacrity and regularity.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), August 18, 2001.

Cherri -- You know, I still think of my self as a liberal and a democrat -- but Great God Above, I pay for that. It means you have to put up with a lot of self rightous, PC scum. This is the sort of BS I hate, and which gives liberals a bad name.

My significant other owns an SUV. Don't know why; I wouldn't. But mostly because I'm to cheap to spend the money. She likes it in the winter and it makes her feel safer. But, she also lives only three miles from her work place. She also travels a lot (by air) for business. Even at 15-20 miles per gallon, she only uses a gallon of gas or so a week (if that). I live two miles from work, and try to walk or bike when the weather permits. Neither of us fills up our vehicle even once a month.

How many miles do you put on your (no doubt fuel efficient) vehicle per week, Cherri?

-- E.H.Porter (just.wondering@about.it), August 18, 2001.

Since my Dad died and I don't need to go anywhere much any more, it has been parked and I walk, ride a bike or take a Bus.

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), August 18, 2001.

No, I didn't think you *would* want to comment, or to apologize.

Too busy aping Paul Milne, Cherri?

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), October 20, 2001.

Cherri:

This morning, 5 high school students, in a Honda Civic, hit a semi, head on. I was there. Do you want to see the pictures?

Best Wishes,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 20, 2001.

Gosh Z, that must have been almost as bad as if you hit a semi in your piece-of-shit Ford Focus!

LOL!

Thanks for the laughs,,,

-- (get@real.car), October 20, 2001.

"This morning, 5 high school students, in a Honda Civic, hit a semi, head on. I was there. Do you want to see the pictures?"

Is this an attempt to justify driving a gaz-guzzling SUV roadhog?

LMAO! I don't think the pictures would be any prettier if an SUV hits a semi head-on.

-- (road@hogs.suck), October 21, 2001.

I don't think Z was trying to use that tragedy to justify driving an SUV, and the jerking of your knee is audible from over here.

Rather, I think Z was trying to point out that many vehicles that are engineered to use less fuel also happen to be far less safe than other, larger vehicles.

Obviously, economy, environmental friendliness and safety must be balanced in vehicle design, but insisting that safety be sacrificed for economy or green-ness is silly. You would essentially be arguing that people should willingly place themselves in harm's way for your principles.

Makes you no different from right-wing extremists who demand that other people live by the right-wingers' principles. Further proof that both ends meet in the middle.

-- Already Done Happened (oh.yeah@it.did.com), October 21, 2001.

Cherri, if you were to place that ticket on my vehicle I would not be offended. Although if I could see where you have parked your vehicle, I would plaster it with literature from the Watchtower, Lyndon LaRouche, Operation Rescue, ISLAM for Dummies, and anything else that would make you scratch your head.

-- bogsworth (running@on.8cylinders), October 21, 2001.