new laws?! ... wow - Politics and War Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
new laws?! ... wow
Saturday, August 18, 2007 6:37 PM on j-body.org
ok, lately (in Maine) there have been a LOT of new laws that have been passed. Now I am only 17 and i'm sorry but i do not fully understand the american government. and i'm sure that i'm not alone here. There was just a law passed that states that your exhaust cannot be any louder than "stock" hmmmm.... ok, so if I have a duramax diesel I can have a louder exhaust than that kid with that J-body because mine was louder from the factory? WTF?! are you serious? No louder than stock? Well come on, i mean honestly... what is considered stock? Also there is a law that states that any person(s) under the age of 18 cannot talk on their cell phone while in a moving vehicle. Discrimination anyone? Why is it that that 95 year old woman can talk all she wants on her cell phone when I, the person that should have the best reflexes cannot?! I see that Younger kids have less expierence but should we really have to pay for that with all of these laws that are pointed directly at us?? Is it just me or is having that law the same as saying All caucasians are more prone to getting in accidents between 8 and 9 pm when there is a full moon out than african americans are?? (I am caucasian, no i'm not racist, i simply am stating somethin like the law that was stated above.) ok, last bit ! I JUST bought my car and it has aftermarket exhaust... obviously this is louder than stock, so who is going to refund the money that I paid for my exhaust? When I purchased it it was legal... Is it just me or did i simply pi** away my money????? Maybe i'm just being stupid, what do YOU think? P.S. WHO VOTED ON THESE? IS THIS NOT AMERICA?!

Re: new laws?! ... wow
Sunday, August 19, 2007 6:56 AM on j-body.org
Just think, when you reach the wise old age of 18 you will have both the reflexes and the experience to reduce you chances of having an accident while talking on a cell phone while driving to only 4 times the likelyhood if you were not talking on a cell phone.

You're right, the law does suck. ANYONE talking on a cell for while driving is quadrupling their chances of having an accident and therefore should be cited.

The law is technically not agism because at under 18 you are not technically a citizen. UNder 18? No rights except those guarenteed under civil rights codes for children. That will not include anything regarding driving.. Oh wait, driving is not a right is it?
Get over it, you'll only be in this position for a maximum of 2 years.

As far as the exhaust thing goes, louder is not better anyway. Next time spring the extra few bucks for a good high flow setup instead of a cheap one. You can flow just as well or better and actually come out quieter than stock if you choose to.

Buyer beware. If you just bought a used car and the seals were gone in the suspention, who would pay? You, that's right. You bought it, you own it, it's your responsibility. Owning cars can suck at times you know. Reading some threads around here ought to show you that. You'll also have to do things like oil changes and break jobs. Get over it, it comes with the territory.

PAX




PS: This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated
- Mitch Hedberg (RIP)
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Sunday, August 19, 2007 10:40 AM on j-body.org
there is nothing to "get over" i was simply stating my opinion about a few new laws and how the kids seem to always get the short end of the deal. This is simply my personal opinion. Oh, and also my exhaust IS EXPENSIVE... it's not just a pos muffler from vip or anything... just fyi. And no kidding theres oil changes and break jobs... what do you think that I am ignorant or something? Just because I am young doesn't mean that I do not know what is going on bud.
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Sunday, August 19, 2007 1:16 PM on j-body.org
Insurance is going to be more expensive for you also. Are you gonna create a thread about the unfairness of the insurance industry?

You're being targeted because your age group causes the most accidents and cell phones just add to those chances. Don't worry, they're just starting with a small group of people. Later they'll expand the laws to include everyone, because it would be much more difficult to get legislation passed that encompasses everyone than start small and expand.
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Sunday, August 19, 2007 6:44 PM on j-body.org
you think that sucks...

wait a couple years and see how much the govt is goin to rape you

you can live not talking on you cell phone while driving

and the real meaning to an after market exhaust is to improve flow not to be LOUD

you could easily quite that exhaust down



it is not that bad

just enjoy the rest of high school



Re: new laws?! ... wow
Sunday, August 19, 2007 7:12 PM on j-body.org
Basically:
Driving ain't a right.

Cell phones aren't a right.

Driving while using a cellphone: you're increasing your likelihood of having an accident 4-fold. You're an inexperienced driver (no matter what you want to think) until you're about 25. Even then, you're still multi-tasking, and cutting into your driving time.

While it sucks you can't modify a car to be over the stock volume, you can make it work, and if not, you can either pay to make it conform or not drive. If it's a problem that you have to do that, lobby your elected officials, and make it illegal for everyone to use a hand unit cellphone, and see if your state will accept a 98db limit per SEMASAN model legislation.

Instead of bitching, do something about it.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: new laws?! ... wow
Monday, August 20, 2007 7:34 AM on j-body.org
GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:

and see if your state will accept a 98db limit per SEMASAN model legislation.


From what I can tell, that IS there current law, enacted in 2003. The only article I could find relating to any recent changes talked about repealing the SEMA law, but it was dated 12-06. I can't tell if they did it or not yet.

Either way, you can still have a decent, free flowing exhaust if you install 2-3 resonators. I believe the ones from Carsound/Magnaflow have no restriction. It'll make it nice and quiet. My car is pretty quiet and I have just one, plus a glorified tip. It sounds stock but deeper.


---


Re: new laws?! ... wow
Monday, August 20, 2007 10:02 AM on j-body.org
if your muffler was like that BEFORE the law was enacted, then ex post facto laws should cover you. i would like to think so anyway.....you don't have to retrofit your cars for any other type of laws like that.

as for complaining because you cant talk on a cell phone while you drive? tough @!#$. young drivers have a tendency for more wrecks as it is. adding another distraction in the form of cellphones would just be superfluous.





Re: new laws?! ... wow
Monday, August 20, 2007 10:23 AM on j-body.org
(tabs) wrote:

if your muffler was like that BEFORE the law was enacted, then ex post facto laws should cover you. i would like to think so anyway.....you don't have to retrofit your cars for any other type of laws like that.


This law will be more enforceable on new vehicles made since the law. Vehicles made before should be grandfathered in and "aloud" to keep their after market exhausts even if they are louder.

Also burden of proof is on the accuser.


-Chris

Re: new laws?! ... wow
Tuesday, August 21, 2007 1:21 PM on j-body.org
haha, well i was a smidge pis*ed off that night so i posted exactly what i was thinking. obviously some people don't remember being a kid and some do. I mean being a kid is GREAT, don't get me wrong we don't have to pay for much at all, basically just what we WANT. Like vehicles and such. I was not trying to say oohhh poor poor me tear tear i can't talk on my little cell phone waa waa.. i was just trying to see what all of you guys opinions about all of these laws were and if anyone else thought that the kids were getting the short end of the stick. Of course it always looks worse if it is affecting you directly. Oh and the law was 96*db. atleast that is what all of the shops and such said, and it did change, about 6 days ago now? I think. It is really hurting some shops around here. But ya, thats my 2 cents and yeah I'm just a inexperienced kid but i still have an opinion!
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Tuesday, August 21, 2007 4:07 PM on j-body.org
Let me put it this way...

would you want the pilot of a jumbo jet flying with one hand holding a cellphone to his ear? Or would you rather him concentrate on his job?


Goodbye Callisto, Hello Skađi:
2008 Pontiac G6 GXP Street Edition Coupe

The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.


Re: new laws?! ... wow
Wednesday, August 22, 2007 1:07 AM on j-body.org
Keeper of the Light™ wrote:

Let me put it this way...

would you want the pilot of a jumbo jet flying with one hand holding a cellphone to his ear?
Yes. Thank you.

Seriously though - I never understood why people require the use of one hand and/or that any attention be taken off the road in order to use a cell phone while driving. I wedge the phone between my shoulder and head(lifting my shoulder blade so I don't need to tilt my head). I never divert my attention from the road to my cellular conversation. At times this means that I must ask the person on the other line to repeat themselves - since something happening on the road required enough attention that I paid no attention to the conversation. I don't see this being such a difficult concept, but apparently some people have trouble with this.

As for the exhaust - I'd say that has too be grandfathered in. But I'm no lawyer. Still, is it worth fighting in court over?





I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Wednesday, August 22, 2007 5:23 AM on j-body.org
On the cell phone thing...

Serious, even driving one handed is NOT a big deal. I never have both hands on the wheel unless I need to. When I turn or something I use the shoulder trick. Its all about your ability to multi-task. I can talk on a cell, eat a burger, shift a manual, and smoke a cigarette at the same time. Now, subtract the burger and cig, and add an auto tranny, and what do you have? Easy-ness.



Example of me talking on a cell phone properly. Some jackass ran a red light in front of me... I had my other hand back on the wheel so fast I launched my phone out the window. One swerve and several curses later, I had a smashed cell phone. *shrug* It took the hit for me I guess.



Re: new laws?! ... wow
Wednesday, August 22, 2007 7:51 AM on j-body.org
See, it's that mentality that makes me with they'd actually treat the deaths of people talking on their cells by holding it while driving, or reading, or putting make-up, or reading, or shaving, or taking down notes, or eating anything more difficult to eath than M&M's as Darwin Award Nominees. Common, yes, but still, they are helping the genepool by cleaning their faulty DNA out of it.

It doesn't matter how difficult it is--go hands free (like the aforementioned pilot) or take the bus.

Anyhow, hopefully my EMP will be completed soon, that way i could fry these assclowns' cells, and hopefully when they are trying to figure out what happened, they'll die a firey death.


Goodbye Callisto, Hello Skađi:
2008 Pontiac G6 GXP Street Edition Coupe

The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

Re: new laws?! ... wow
Wednesday, August 22, 2007 6:16 PM on j-body.org
Ace140 wrote:

On the cell phone thing...

Serious, even driving one handed is NOT a big deal. I never have both hands on the wheel unless I need to. When I turn or something I use the shoulder trick. Its all about your ability to multi-task. I can talk on a cell, eat a burger, shift a manual, and smoke a cigarette at the same time. Now, subtract the burger and cig, and add an auto tranny, and what do you have? Easy-ness.
You have more concentration ability for the TASK AT HAND.

Quote:

Example of me talking on a cell phone properly. Some jackass ran a red light in front of me... I had my other hand back on the wheel so fast I launched my phone out the window. One swerve and several curses later, I had a smashed cell phone. *shrug* It took the hit for me I guess.

Talking on a cell while driving done properly goes like this:
- Need to take/place a call
- Pull over to the side of the road
- Place call/take call.
- Complete call
- merge with traffic.

Basically, if it requires you to remove a hand off the wheel for more than a second, you should pull over. YES, THAT INCLUDES PUNCHING AROUND ON THE RADIO DIAL. If you follow those simple directions, you'd still have a phone

I'm not singling you out Ace, this is a problem that most people think they have a handle on when they clearly don't. I have an ear-piece for my phone precisely because I have a standard. If I have a call, the standard thing I say after hello if I'm in the car is "I'm driving, make it fast." Usually if it's more than a minute or two that I have to talk, I shelve it until I can stop and talk. If I go to hit something on my iPod, I do it by touch, and even then, it's only if I REALLY don't want to hear the song. If I have a passenger, they get to do that stuff. If you're in the driver's seat, you're driving... ideally, you don't do anything other than that, but if you have to multi-task, you simplify, simplify, simplify. Basically, eating is right out, Drinking is minimal (in a squeeze bottle), cell is off more often than on, no cigarettes (not a smoker anyhow). If I have to do something that involves anything more complex than putting on sunglasses, I'll wait or pull over and do it if it's that urgent.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: new laws?! ... wow
Thursday, August 23, 2007 2:22 PM on j-body.org
i dont agree with the cell phone law. i believe talking on a phone in a car you own IS your right. might not be safe but whos to decide. im sure there more non cell phone related accidents. some people with licenses are not coordinated enough to drive period, i know of a few. they keep justifying laws to protect our selves from ourselves. another step towards communism if were not there already
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Thursday, August 23, 2007 3:42 PM on j-body.org
The point should be not to cover people's asses by enacting laws against their stupidity, it should be citing those who do not have the ability, even if they think they do.

'I can drive while text messaging, smoking a ciggarette, shift gears, doing my makeup and reading my horoscope.. ..all at the same time.' Bull@!#$. No you can't. You do not have a random access memory bank you can put into full swing when doing multiple activities, your sole attention is divided. Many, many people can navigate a car through traffic and daily driving while on a cell phone. Their minds are engaged in two things: driving and talking. Go for a walk and chew gum, if you can master that, you might have a chance at talking on a cell and driving at the same time. If you can, awesome.

Some people just cant. They crash, they die, they kill others. Younger people are far more likely to screw up, period. Should they make a law? No. They should charge people who appear to be over-influenced by other activities than driving the same charges as drunk driving. The same thing happens to a car in an accident no matter the influence..



Re: new laws?! ... wow
Thursday, August 23, 2007 3:42 PM on j-body.org
Really? You don't have the right to endanger MY life thanks... if you want to do that with exclusively yours, go ahead, the second my ass is potentially on the line, I'd just as soon you pull the hell over to have your banal little conversation.

You want a step toward communism? Read the Marx Manifesto first (one of the biggest things communism brought to the people was literacy (over 99% in most communist countries) and critical thinking). You're talking about Stalinism, and even then, you have no RIGHT to talk on the phone while driving, because neither is a RIGHT. You want a detailed listing of your rights? Read the Bill of Rights, and you just get back to me when you find something that rhymes with "The rights of the individual to pilot a vehicle on public thoroughfares while conducting a conversation through wireless telecommunications devices that detract from their ability to pilot the vehicle... Shall not be infringed upon." I won't hold my breath.

Driving is a Privilege, Cellular phones are chattel, but when you use the phone while driving, you're endangering others, and that is a fact [Link]. Sorry, my right to live supersedes someone's privilege to drive and do dumb stuff like chat on the idiot box.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: new laws?! ... wow
Thursday, August 23, 2007 8:00 PM on j-body.org
no im thinking of the government having control over everything you do. which they pretty much do. so you think its right that they can just take freedoms away? they can tell you what you can do in your own car, next will be your home. like curse words on tv, change the channel if you dont like whats on. dont sensor every station, it wrecks good movies. and i think your missing the point. there should be no laws against smoking. should be a right. i dont smoke and never will, but im not gonna stop someone else who wants cancer. let em. and if you wanna bring age into then take everyones license away thats over 65. thats the majority of the accidents right there. cant see 10 ft but still driving. but you know why thats never addressed because thats 80% of the voters and they need to keep the voters happy
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Monday, August 27, 2007 6:13 AM on j-body.org
I have a swell idea, we could make a CB mic attachment for a cellphone and use that. Totally legal to chat away on a CB in a moving car.
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Monday, September 10, 2007 12:37 PM on j-body.org
within the last month or two in my area, 4 young teenagers were killed because the driver was sending a text message... case closed.




Re: new laws?! ... wow
Monday, September 10, 2007 10:36 PM on j-body.org
Shane Belanger wrote:

obviously some people don't remember being a kid and some do. I mean being a kid is GREAT, don't get me wrong we don't have to pay for much at all, basically just what we WANT. Like vehicles and such.



as it just so happens, I am 27 and I DO remeber being a teenager. mabey YOU are a good driver, but most teenagers arent. its like they have to be in a few accidents and destroy a few cars before they learn that what they have is a lisence to DRIVE and not a lisence to be RECKLESS. I do remeber the day when in order to be the "cool guy" you had to take the car that your parents just baught you brand new and neutrial drop in from redline. and in order to be the 'cool guy' you had to be racing everywhere you went and if your car had the power, burn the tires every time you got behind the wheel. I had to buy my own first car, and let it be well know that for $300 you are going to get a car that can't do @!#$ and I still got in trouble a few times.

read the cold hard facts, drivers under 25 are the most deadly. even if I diddn't remeber when I was a kid all I have to do is read the paper and find out about the latest accident involving a teenager who was AT FAULT



------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
when you beat someone in a civic people wine and make excuses
when you beat someone in a cavalier they pull over and check under thier hoods
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Tuesday, September 11, 2007 8:36 AM on j-body.org
Nick Allen wrote:

no im thinking of the government having control over everything you do. which they pretty much do.
I'm sorry, but this isn't true.

Quote:

so you think its right that they can just take freedoms away?
Your freedoms are spelled out pretty much in the constitution, most everything after that, is a priveledge.
Quote:

they can tell you what you can do in your own car, next will be your home.
Yes, they tell you not to endanger others by speeding, or driving like a moron. If you're not allowed to have a meth lab in your house, that's just fine by me.

Quote:

like curse words on tv, change the channel if you dont like whats on. dont sensor every station, it wrecks good movies. and i think your missing the point.
I don't suspect so, you're not acquainted with what is a right, and what's a priveledge. a major broadcast network has to follow what the FCC determines to be valid. If you don't like that, you do have the RIGHT to voice your opinion about it, and instruct your Federal Elected officials to recommend changes to the FCC's codes. You have the PRIVELEDGE of seeing the movies on broadcast television.

If you get it on cable, you're PURCHASING the RIGHT to see the movies unaltered. If you don't like it, you can stop paying because that's your right within the contract.

Quote:

there should be no laws against smoking. should be a right. i dont smoke and never will, but im not gonna stop someone else who wants cancer. let em.
Fine, I'll spray lead in your face and food daily... it's my right, right?

Cigarettes are a harmful product, and even though you should be allowed to wherever you want, I also have the right to not have to inhale that product's harmful fumes while in an enclosed public place.

Quote:

and if you wanna bring age into then take everyones license away thats over 65. thats the majority of the accidents right there.
okay.. We'll stop people under 25 from driving on public roads as well, that's about 95% of the accidents that occur on the road.
Quote:

cant see 10 ft but still driving. but you know why thats never addressed because thats 80% of the voters and they need to keep the voters happy
Where are you puling numbers from? 80% of voters are in the 25-65 range.

Either way: I'll restate what I've said before, DRIVING IS NOT A RIGHT.

if you want real honest to gosh freedom, you've got to be prepared for 2 things:
- Having nothing,
- Living in chaos.

otherwise, if you don't like the laws as they are, suck it up and talk to your state and federal congressmen/senators... that's your RIGHT.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Re: new laws?! ... wow
Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:44 AM on j-body.org
With the older drivers, states that require vision tests with renewal of the drivers license have 12% less driving accidents. The percentage also increased in heavily populated areas. Also the university of florida studies show and quote "Drivers age 55 and older are 25% of the driving population, yet they have only 18% of accidents. But this is because they drive fewer miles. If accidents for miles driven are considered, it is a different story. For example, people over 75 have accident rates per mile equal to or greater than rates for teenagers. And at about 85, the rate starts to skyrocket."

If you dont think they can change and bend the constitution in the ways they want then you need to open your eyes. They recently let out the info that showed records of every phone call in the us since the 80's. So your fine with them listening to you and your wife or significant others personal calls?

About the smoking, i agree with not smoking indoors, you have kids, babies that kinda of thing. but outdoors or in a bar? thats ridicules. people go to bars to hang out drink smoke whatever. If you dont like the smoke do be in a bar or walk away, its that easy.

Talking to the officials will accomplish nothing. there are no longer for the people. Its all about money greed and power. period. theres no discussion there, thats fact. people are a cash crop. why else would police have monthly quotas.


Have you ever seen the show south park? You are kyles mom to the t. You are the type of people that are ruining this once great country.

and btw where are you getting your numbers??
the age bracket you named only represents 30% of presidential voters and with local and states voters the median age for voters is 64
Re: new laws?! ... wow
Tuesday, September 11, 2007 12:01 PM on j-body.org
nick wrote:

With the older drivers, states that require vision tests with renewal of the drivers license have 12% less driving accidents. The percentage also increased in heavily populated areas. Also the university of florida studies show and quote "Drivers age 55 and older are 25% of the driving population, yet they have only 18% of accidents. But this is because they drive fewer miles. If accidents for miles driven are considered, it is a different story. For example, people over 75 have accident rates per mile equal to or greater than rates for teenagers. And at about 85, the rate starts to skyrocket."
Great, so you've proved my point. Thanks!
Quote:


If you dont think they can change and bend the constitution in the ways they want then you need to open your eyes. They recently let out the info that showed records of every phone call in the us since the 80's. So your fine with them listening to you and your wife or significant others personal calls?

Records of EVERY SINGLE CALl?!?!? OMG!!!! GASP!!!! What was released was the Local Usage Details (LUDs), Phone companies can get that at the drop of a hat all the way back to the 60's if necessary. If you meant recorded every phonecall, you're plainly mistaken. Echelon is a myth, and it also is incapable of grabbing and decrypting digital transmissions... Digital transmissions make up about 80% of traffic from your local exchange.

Quote:

About the smoking, i agree with not smoking indoors, you have kids, babies that kinda of thing. but outdoors or in a bar? thats ridicules. people go to bars to hang out drink smoke whatever. If you dont like the smoke do be in a bar or walk away, its that easy.
Bars are still indoors... am I right? Going to the outside bits is over the top, but I can see why, once you hit the out doors, you do have those damned doors and air inlets that manage to suck up the bad stuff sometimes.

Quote:

Talking to the officials will accomplish nothing. there are no longer for the people. Its all about money greed and power. period. theres no discussion there, thats fact. people are a cash crop. why else would police have monthly quotas.
Really? sh*t, I work with police and I haven't heard of any of those quotas... and if talking to officials won't help, THEN IT"S TIME TO START MAKING IT HARD TO IGNORE THEM. Have you ever talked to your Congressman/Senator? Do you have their Washington/State Capital address? Their local address? If you answer no to any of these, you need to become pro-active. There's a reason special interests have become more interesting than you: They're in the face of the people that make decisions, you oughtta push them out of the way: That's your right to be heard, and if that person doesn't want to listen to you, make it known. You can do that, you know. It's called lobbying, and you're allowed (in fact, encouraged) to do it.

Quote:

Have you ever seen the show south park? You are kyles mom to the t. You are the type of people that are ruining this once great country.
Actually, if you want to insult me, do it right. I'd be Terrence or Philip or Ike. Figure that out.

if you don't like being told your country is still one of laws, and you're being too politically lazy to effect the laws that govern your life, I can't help that.

Quote:

and btw where are you getting your numbers??
the age bracket you named only represents 30% of presidential voters and with local and states voters the median age for voters is 64

OUT OF MY ASS.

And you do realize, I'm NOT talking about those that voted, but the Eligible voting population, right? For that number, I actually consulted the CIA's Factbook on the USA, I fudged the numbers, but about 80% is right, assuming you MUST be 18 to vote, and that 20% are ineligible due to not being old enough.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.


Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search