Cops can always find a reason to pull you over. Also, they have no obligation to tell you why they did so. 1 mph over the speed limit? Valid traffic stop. You slowly drifted from the right side of the lane to the left side? Valid traffic stop in the eyes of the law.
Is it bullshit? Yes. Illegal? No.
Is the driver in the OP still required to provide his license when pulled over?
Yes.
Yes, if you are driving you’re required by law in New York state to provide your driver’s license if asked.
If you’re walking to work you don’t have to carry ID, and you only have to identify yourself if they have a reasonable suspicion that you’re committing a crime.
Edit: Holy shit y’all are insane. I knew Lemmy was an echo chamber but mass downvoting simple, factual information like this really makes me think less of you.
You are required to show your driver’s license if you’re asked for it by law enforcement while driving in New York state.
Edit: Holy shit y’all are insane. I knew Lemmy was an echo chamber but mass downvoting simple, factual information like this really makes me think less of you.
The vast majority of the 100 most common words in English are still inherited Germanic words.
English shares a common Germanic ancestor with German. German and English are sisters.
Yeah, cuz howling at the moon definitely isn’t something regular wolves are known for.
A tactic used when the person speaking has been recognized to speak according to the rules of the legislature. I don’t really see why that’s relevant here though?
No, see, it should be allowed when we agree with the people making the disruption. Otherwise absolutely not!
Kinda brilliant on the class president’s part - still give the speech and get the media coverage for it, but do it before commencement so they’re less likely to steal your diploma as a result.
OK, so we know the game in question is not Dark Souls, because the great scythe is fast, hits like a truck, has massive range, and has bleed.
An awful lot of the neckbeards from the comic in these comments.
Even just 29 all getting run over is a ways less likely than a single car causing a chain reaction and causing the same amount of damage.
This is such a ridiculous claim that it’s not even worth responding to.
Show me. I doubt that’s more likely than sending an innocent rider to jail.
From your other responses in this thread, it doesn’t surprise me at all that you think that.
You completely ignore my 108-word argument to the contrary.
You’ve been ignoring everything I’ve said this entire conversation, which I’ve already pointed out multiple times in this thread.
It’s clear that your biases aren’t going to allow you to see clearly in this situation, so I think I’m going to cut my losses here and disengage.
Have a good one, and be sure to stop at red lights.
Nobody said they couldn’t. The comment I was responding to said that studies show that it’s safer for bikes to not come to a full stop at red lights, and I correctly pointed out that that’s completely false.
Edit: you yourself wrote a comment saying basically the exact same thing I did - why the heck are you trying to nitpick me here?
The problem with your argument here is that you’re ignoring the fact that those 100 squishy cyclists running red lights can all get hit by cars, potentially resulting in way more than broken bones, and possibly sending the innocent drivers to jail for vehicular manslaughter.
For the third time, a large number of cyclists running red lights is demonstrably more dangerous than a small number of motorists running red lights, and the court summons is more than warranted.
Edit: Also, holy shit, if you’re right, and the number of cyclists who run red lights compared to motorists is actually 36:1, then YES send them all to court. Jesus!
Your source says that bikes should still come to a full stop at red lights though?
To repeat what I said in my original comment, the sheer number of cyclists running red lights poses a serious threat to motorists. It’s inevitable that some of those idiots running the lights are going to get hit, and the motorists are going to have to deal with the consequences of the cyclists’ stupidity.
Since cyclists running red lights is a widespread, deeply-ingrained problem in North America, and one that’s much more frequent than cars running red lights, the harsher punishment is completely justified.
To break it down a simply as possible for you: yes, one car running a red light poses more danger than one cyclist running a red light, but one hundred cyclists running a red light poses an order of magnitude more danger than one car running a red light.
And for that reason, I fully support sending the cyclists to court, and only giving the motorists a ticket.
They could, but if it’s anything like the sheer epidemic of bikes running red lights here, I absolutely think it makes sense to send a message to curb the dangerous behavior.
Then again, if it’s actually just an excuse to harass and possibly detain immigrants as mentioned in another comment, then as usual the cops can go fuck themselves.
My wife’s engagement ring was a simple opal design that cost like 40 or 50 bucks on Amazon.
~$200 for the actual wedding rings, ordered off Etsy.
deleted by creator
Ah, so I should divide all of the numbers in your graphic in half to get to something reasonable then.