Flash Your Headlights!

[PlaceofDis]

We don't need more restrictions on how we drive, we need more restrictions on who can drive.

dead on. its way to easy to get a license here. tighten the test, weed out the bad drivers, and i would imagine that highway and city driving would be a lot less dangerous. if people knew how to drive smart, and more about their cars there'd be less issues.

 

[.Andy]

I go over the limit all the time on the highway. No tickets, no accidents.

Speeders aren't dangerous. Speeders who are also morons are dangerous. I pay attention to my surroundings. I know how to handle my car, and if I see anything that requires me to slow down, whether it's a cop, a slower driver, someone stuck on the side of the road or bad weather, I slow down immediately. The people who go 20 over and feel like they are invincible are the ones that end up killing someone.

Sorry to burst your superiority bubble genious but from your attitude you're most definitely one of those overconfident morons that thinks they're invincible.

 

[iBlue]

Sorry to burst your superiority bubble genious but from your attitude you're most definitely one of those overconfident morons that thinks they're invincible.

neener neener neeeeeenerrrr. I busted you with an adorably ironic spelling error.

(I tend to agree with your line of thinking however. No one is invincible and it's a pity when people think to the contrary)

 

[Evangelion]

My whole issue is the irony of this statement combined with your many excuses put forth when it was pointed out that you were encroaching, if not breaking a Forum Rule.

*sigh*.... Like I have REPEATEDLY said: I did not know of that rule. Now that I know of it, I follow it. People who flash their lights are well aware that speeding is illegal. Can you see the difference there? I did not knowingly break rules, nor did I knowingly help other break any rules. Those who flash their lights do. Notice the difference?

If those people warning others of a police-lookout didn't know that speeding was illegal, then you would have a point (but why would they be warning others then?). But since they do know, your comparison is meaningless.

If you are going to be so adamant that rules be followed you should not be trying to defend yourself when it is pointed out that you yourself are not following rules.

Now that I know of the rule, I follow it. Those who flash their lights already know of the relevant rule, yet they help others break it. Again: notice the difference?

And the second thing I said was that the wording of the rule was confusing. Which it was. That was not said to defend my actions.

Ignorance is not a defense in court so ignorance of the forum rules should not be a defense here.

And now that I know of the rule, I'm following it. I did not deny breaking that particular rule, nor did I demand that I must go unpunished. Had I been dragged to court over my crime, I would have said that "guilty as charged". How's that for a defense?

I wouldn't be taking any issue with what you are saying if you had just said "I was not aware of that rule, and I will try to avoid doing things like this in the future."

And that is exactly what I'm doing here. Should I have made a press-release over it? The ONLY thing I did was to tell why I did the crime I did: I did not know of that rule. Did I say "No, I didn't break the rules!"? No I did not. Did I insist that that particular rule does not apply to me? No I did not. Did I say that I should go unpunished? No I did not. I did say that I thought the rule was written in a confusing way, and had I read it beforehand, I would have propably misunderstood it. But that STILL was not an excuse for my crime, and I never claimed that it was.

Seriously: do I need to draw a picture here?

By making excuses you are selectively applying rules to yourself while claiming to be fed-up with people selectively applying rules to themselves.

I'm not making any goddamned excuses here. The situations are not even remotely similar. Those who flash their lights, know that they are helping others break the law.

You have not said this

Then stop sounding like I did, OK?

but when asked for clarification on where the rule was, and when the rule was pointed out you've done nothing but try to make excuses about how unclear the rule is and how it does not harm anyone.

First of all: the rule IS unclear. In my book "several" means 3-4 or even more. Maybe I'm alone with that intrepetation, who knows. But still, using the word "several" when you mean "two or more" is quite confusing. Apparently the mods disagree with that, and their word is final. And I would not knowingly break any rules, not here or elsewhere. So I wanted to tell why exactly I did what I did: because I did not know of that particular rule. Now that I know of it, I follow it. As to my actions "not harming anyone": I said that when you started comparing my crime to beating up old ladies.

What if you didn't know, or were out driving on a stretch of road where the limit signs were few and far between, and you haven't seen one? Ignorance is not a defense in Court and it shouldn't be.

*sigh*... You just don't "get it", do you? Why do people flash their lights to other roadgoers? To warn them of police ahead. Why would they want to do that? So they wouldn't get a speeding-ticket. WHy would they get a ticket? Because speeding is illegal. So they KNOW that speeding is illegal, so they can't claim ignorance on this matter.

Which could be interpreted as an "I didn't see it so I shouldn't be bound by the consequences" type post.

Um, no, it couldn't.

My entire point is that while sitting on a position of being "100% fed-up with people who believe that rules and laws do not apply to them" you could have been a lot more gracious and less defensive when it was pointed out that you were not 100% in compliance with the rules yourself.

And I have explained this maybe twenty times to you already.... Those people KNOWINGLY break the rules. They KNOW what the rules are, and they make the conscious decision to break them. I UNKNOWINGLY broke the rules. Yes, I broke the rules, and if mods had decided to punish me for it, so be it. I NEVER denied breaking the rules, nor did I claim that I should not be punished for it. I said the truth when I said that I did not know of that particular rule, and I added that the rule is quite confusingly worded that I would have propably misunderstood it in any case. That does not change the fact that I broke the rules, however.

Seriously: If you don't understand what I'm trying to say here, then I really don't know what else I could do.

 

[atszyman]

And the second thing I said was that the wording of the rule was confusing. Which it was. That was not said to defend my actions.

First of all: the rule IS unclear. In my book "several" means 3-4 or even more. Maybe I'm alone with that intrepetation, who knows. But still, using the word "several" when you mean "two or more" is quite confusing. Apparently the mods disagree with that, and their word is final. And I would not knowingly break any rules, not here or elsewhere. So I wanted to tell why exactly I did what I did: because I did not know of that particular rule. Now that I know of it, I follow it.

When a forum member pointed out that you were skirting forum rules you immediately asked where the rule was and it you started sounding defensive when the location of the rule was pointed out. It may be that I was reading too much into the tone of your posts but to me it sounded like you were trying to justify your breaking of the rules while simultaneously damning others who were selectively applying rules to themselves which irked me.

As to my actions "not harming anyone": I said that when you started comparing my crime to beating up old ladies.

As for putting words in peoples mouths, you compared speeding to beating up old ladies. I used that analogy to compare posting multiple times in a row with a personal insult on the forum I never compared posting multiple times in a row with beating up old ladies.

I think we got off to a colossal misreading back and forth. I kept reading your posts about the rule breaking as being very defensive against breaking a forum rule, and it didn't help that when pointed to the rule you immediately started debating it's clarity. You may not have intended it to sound as defensive as I read it but I stand by my reading as a valid interpretation as well. I have a real problem with hypocrisy and the more you argued the more it sounded like you were somehow defending your violation while trying to condemn others for not following laws/rules.

I do see your point about flashing your headlights, but would helping someone avoid a speeding ticket be like helping rob an old lady? NO! Are you helping someone break the law? Yes. Is it particularly harmful? In 99.99% of the cases, no it is not.

But if we're talking hypotheticals here, what if by flashing your headlights you got someone to look at their speedometer and be more conscious of their driving rather than have them get pulled over and pissed off about getting a ticket and driving the rest of their journey more aggressively and being much more of an a$$ than they would have been just chugging along exceeding the limit? Sometimes the warning can be safer than letting them get pulled over.

Some people will always flash their headlights for whatever reason, some won't and some still have no clue what it means.

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

And I think we're done... aren't we...?

This thread hasn't been on topic for a long long time...