Yours truly. The slope turned out to be 33 degrees rather than 45. Sue me.


This is false. Our little talk was shorter than him calling in my ID would be, and I was able to get back to my workout sooner. And, you know, there's this little thing of I have the right not to furnish him with my ID and see no point in doing so. Keep relinquishing your rights and soon you'll have none.

I'm not sure why you pointlessly keep nitting up the "gun" thing - me saying that (which was almost 6 years ago and I'm not even 100% sure I used that exact wording) had nothing to do with why he pulled me over, nothing to do with him wanting to search my car, and nothing to do with anything whatsoever other than this imaginary point you've concocted in your head.

I did exactly in that scenario what you admonished me for not doing in the first scenario - I refused a search. I'm not really sure what you're still doing here other than continuing to look like a moron.

Haha, that's funny. I see nothing wrong with that. He's got you legit busted, so cracking that joke does no harm and there's a non-zero chance that if he did catch you the next night that he may cut you a break.

I'll continue to relinquish certain rights and run the risk of losing them all, and you can continue to be a dick to cops. I wonder which of us is more likely to run into problems.

jmakin yourself look like a fool. Let's see... your gun speech led to the question, "You going to fight me?" I think that's a clear indicator you said the wrong thing.

I refused the search, which is exactly what you admonished me for not doing in my first post. What exactly is your point? Okay, you win, in LoL land I should not have said gun to a cop.

Okay. When are you going to start an AMA about how to speak to police? You're clearly an authority.

Lol, I'm not a dick to cops. Do tell, though, what problems will I run into by not allowing police to have more authority? I'm genuinely curious.

What are you smoking? You said you were pulled over and the cop told you to get out of your car and searched you, and you said zip. I'm not talking about the other incident where you gave him your life story as to why you'd not like for him to search your vehicle. That's fine, despite the superfluous information.

You've spent half a dozen posts criticizing me about me saying gun to the cop in the scenario I refused a search. Nice goalpost shift though.

Not sure what your point is? You refused a search (good job) but said something boneheaded in one stop; in another, you allowed the officer to search you without saying a word. Where's the goalpost shift again? Two different stops, and two different mistakes. Big deal.

Lol. You're goalpost shifting your goalpost shift. I conceded the ******ed point you've been making for half a page and then you're like "but that's not what I'm talking about."

Maybe you should stick to slopes, seems more of your thing.

If every driver was always perfectly aware of where all of the other cars were, and where they were going, there would only be a fraction of the collisions that there actually are. There have been several times that I've been in a car traveling straight down a straight road in broad daylight and been hit or nearly hit by a car turning into or through my lane. When you're executing a left turn, you're already crossing multiple lanes of traffic which travel in multiple directions, requiring you to quickly check for cars in completely different areas. It's always possible that you will miss the presence of another car on the road. By crossing more lanes of traffic than necessary, you needlessly increase the chances of a collision.

Just like all these damn brown people are violent drug dealers right ?

That move is boneheaded. They're called "accidents" because people don't intend to run into each other, but they do anyway. One thing that leads to this is driving into the wrong lane just like this.

It should be no surprise to learn that this is perfectly legal in California. Maybe part of why 99%+ of Californians can't drive worth ****.

This threads make me feel lucky that I:

1. am white
2. can't drive (yay epilepsy...I guess)
3. live in a country where the cops are too lazy to pull people over for petty infractions

Doing so at 5:15a is almost certainly much safer than broad daylight. It's much easier to pick out moving cars at night than it is during the day. If the car's lights are off, then obviously that's not true -- but most modern cars have photoelectric autolights that eliminate stupid driver error on this point.

It's much more dangerous during dusk or dawn hours when it's bright enough to see but not fully bright. I once pulled out of a driveway on my motorcycle to make a left turn on to a busy street in Los Angeles and almost killed myself: I visually checked left, right, left but it was twilight and I did not see a car with his lights off to my left. We missed one another by maybe a foot . . . he wasn't going that fast, maybe 35, but if he'd hit me, I'd have had a very serious problem.

Life (and driving is a part of that) isn't as black and white as you seem to think. Some moves are perfectly fine in one situation but suicidal in others. OP seems perfectly able to make a distinction between the two.

You know i was making fun of his post when i said that, right?

In their defense, it's still illegal. It's just not as unsafe, boneheaded, or HOLY **** RECKLESS as some people in this thread would leave you to believe.

I just thought the hypocrisy wrt generalization was worth noting. Not all brown people are violent drug dealers. Not all cops are psychopaths.

The OP indicated that he didn't even know what the law was and thought, at the time, that what he was doing was actually correct.

I don't have any information on the difficulty of spotting cars at night vs at day, but I do know that people's driving becomes severely impaired when they are tired, even approaching drunk driving levels of impairment. And whether the illegal turn is relatively less dangerous at night or at day doesn't speak to the fact that it is still more dangerous than the legal turn.

As I understand it, he didn't even need to make a right turn soon thereafter, so there really is no reason not to make the standard, legal, and safer turn. Most of the time nothing will happen and it won't make any difference, but people spend an ungodly amount of their life in cars, and all of those little tiny risks result in thousands of needless deaths each year.

What the hell are cops doing when they take your license and registration and go back to their car and sit in it for 15 minutes? It can't take that long to run your information through the system.

This thread also reminds me about a guy I worked with who drove a crotch rocket bike. I know nothing about motorcycles, it was some super fast Honda or something. Anyway he said he had gotten it up to like 160 before and I asked him if he wasn't worried about getting caught doing that. He said people who ride motorcycles fast often speed by cops going the other way and when the cops turn around to chase them down they just take off as fast as they can and usually get away. Doesn't seem like an action of an exemplary citizen.

I like how you you won't 'make assumptions' about the ease of spotting traffic on an empty road at 5:15am but you'll make assumptions about how tired I am even though I work nights and was pretty wide awake. I know this isn't a perfect translation but you get my point. You don't want to use critical thinking if a point might hurt your stance but you're more than willing to take liberties on what is more or less likely if it can help.

As for why I needed to be in the right lane, most states have a 'keep right, pass left' law. I didn't include my needs for a right turn ahead because it was irrelevant. Like I've said numerous times, I understand the law and why it's there. I will do it from now on even on completely empty roads and agree with it.

The following happened on Boulder Hwy in Henderson, about 4 AM: I am driving a rent-a-car with Calif. plates. I am doing exactly 45 MPH in a 45 MPH zone. This Hendo-bus (marked Ford Expedition) pulls me over.

"Do you know why I stopped you?"

"No, sir."

"I clocked you at 65 in a 45 zone." Bull****, but I didn't say anything. He is really interested in whether I'm drunk, which I wasn't. He takes my license and goes back to the Hendobus.

"I'm going to give you a warning, please be a little more careful. By the way, we're testing out our K-9 dogs and I was wondering, would you be willing to let us have Sluggo here sniff your car, just for practice?"

"I'd really rather not consent to a search, Officer, and it would be a waste of your time anyway because I don't have any alcohol or contraband. I'd like to be on my way now."

"OK." (Lets me go)

Cops can no longer prolong the stop for the purpose of getting a K-9 dog if you refuse a search. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court told them to cut that **** out.

Oh another story from a friend of mine. He got pulled over on a Colorado highway doing something like 60 in a 55 or something weak, because he really had to pee and there was a rest area like 4 miles ahead. Cop asks, "Why are you in such a hurry?" "I really have to pee and there's a rest area right ahead." Cop says, "There's a tree right over there." So my friend goes and takes a leak behind it and after the cop finished writing his speeding ticket he wrote him one for public urination. Talk about a dick. The guy did challenge both tickets and got them both taken away.