I Can Rationalize That Behaviour

SoapboxI glanced at the driver stopped beside me at a red light today. He was busily chatting with someone via the cell phone that he was holding to his ear with his right hand. A marked police vehicle pulled up to our right and stopped to wait for the red as well. The driver beside me noticed, put his phone on speaker, held his hand below dash level and kept on with his conversation. The police vehicle departed on the green and when it was our turn this driver was rolling into the intersection well ahead of the light changing.

Coincidentally, I also watched a YouTube video this evening created by the Abbotsford Police Department. It's two minutes of the best and worst driving excuses for the past year as heard by the officers at roadside. It is abundantly clear that some drivers do not accept any responsibility for their behaviour on our highways. I've often described this as the philosophy of "I'm important, you're not. I'm in a hurry, get out of my way!" These people really do not care about sharing the road with you and me.

Both of these incidents started me thinking about my own experiences in traffic law enforcement. It would appear that our government has introduced new legislation to control hazardous driving behaviour and there is more public advocacy for safer behaviour but there is still no shortage of drivers willing to put themselves first. It's curious that our system also allows them the opportunity to be the only instructor for a new driver, but I digress.

This article is the only action that I felt comfortable about taking to counter the driver on the cell phone. Catching his attention and showing disapproval could invite road rage. Waving like a maniac to attract attention of the officer at the intersection was not likely going to be that successful. In the end, it looks like he won. Maybe you really can't legislate against stupidity.

I drive an Econoline, it's 7' tall.  What drivers are doing in adjacent vehicles as I go past them in the adjacent lane approaching a red light is obvious.  Sometimes the majority of them are holding a phone just 'out of sight' below the dashboard, and engaged with it.

This battle is far from over; in the UK, they have proposed doubling the fines and penalty points in order to combat the scourge.

As a professional driver I can't count all the times I see this behaviour every single day. The over abundance of self importance is astounding. I recently bought myself a dash camera for my truck because I felt I have to, to hopefully prevent myself from being railroaded from this type of attitude. There is no such thing as respect or courtesy on the road anymore. In this day and age where political correctness is at an all time high, society is hippocritical when it comes to driving. Its an overwhelming sense of entitlement. Basically people are Neanderthals behind the wheel. One of the statistically highest mortality rates in the world and driving is treated as a right and taken far too much for granted. The level of education in our country, for driving, is very low. Unfortunately we can't educate attitudes. I guess that's why being in such a hurry all the time has now become "normal". We spent probably hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax money so people can "legally" save 15 minutes driving from Kamloops to Vancouver. This is important now?

I suspect that having the police confiscate the driver's cell phone will provide enough of an in-your-face consequence to get this important safety rule across. The phone could be retrieved at the officers' end of shift. There'd be a whole lot of opposition to enacting a law such as this, and a firestorm of protests for a while after it's enacted, but it'd be in the public interest and safety. 

Perhaps this consequence has been discussed already, and I just missed it.

"It is abundantly clear that some drivers do not accept any responsibility for their behaviour on our highways"

While this is true - it's not because people are stupid, it's simply because most of the public don't know their RIGHTS. Having an educated society is tantamount to having an orderly and responsible society. But in the growing global police state of the NWO, (thanks in part to the massive lies of 9/11) the result of total world mind control cannot happen with an educated society. The public must be fed fast unhealthy food, fake hollywood and TV crap that caters to our subconsious primal instincts, pharmaceuticals that make us more sick, and politics that breads corruption and sociopathic behaviour as the "only way to get ahead" - modelled again in Zollywood. This is only the tip of the iceburg of mind control.

Every one of us goes through state madated "public" education in which we learn absolutely nothing about the essentials of life - healthcare, money, poitics, history (big lies), goal setting, and most important - law and rights of the individual. At best, the average child walks away from public school learning either obedience and/or bullying as a part of life you can't avoid. And then when we grow up and leave school, we stop our education and carry on these roles as obedient workers or as governing bullies regulating others.

The obedient child turns into a tax collector for the state without knowing any history of taxation, a doctor who knows that getting a "good education" will allow him/her to be economically set for life and remain in a higher status in his culture, a soldier who enters the military and obeys orders to "lawfully" murder others under the guise of "National Securiy" while travelling the world on the side of the "good guys". The bully leaves school and either continues their ignorance in unlawful ways or goes into the industry of law enforcement, politics or becomes a Lawyer. (If everyone knew their rights, there would be next to no Lawyers, Police, and Politicians.)

For every RIGHT the individual has, there is a corresponding DUTY to carry out - it's like a balance sheet (Debits/Credits). Using the Queens highways to travel is a RIGHT regardless of the mode of transportation - this is part of the history lesson purposely ommitted in public schools and at the Justice Institute (for Police). Using the roads (which belong to the people and not the state) is NOT a priviledge granted to us by the state, it's a RIGHT that cannot be taken (inalienable). A licence by definition is "permission to do something that would otherwise be illegal". How can our inalienable common law right to the use of the highways be illegal? Hmmm.

However, we've been duped through decades of propaganda into thinking we need permission to exercise our RIGHTS and that the state can legislate morality. Yes only stupid people believe this meme.

As mentioned above, it would appear our government has introduced new legislation to control hazardous driving behaviour but appearances can be deceiving - especially when legislation is enforced by a gun and brute force (ie Bullying).

I would argue with primary experience that it's not about safety but rather revenue collection to create economic hardships to the common man/woman - as has always been in the face of tyranny or deceptive divine rule. First and foremost - traffic court is not a court of common law jurisdiction and is not a constitutional court of Canada, it is Maritime Admiraly Law and they don't hear any common law arguments. It's a business that conspires with ICBC to create mass amount of power via money. This is a fact. (next time you go to traffic court - ask if it's common law jurisdiction and see the reaction of the court!! - hallarious)

Second, most modern obedient police don't care about safety - except for their own kind - they only do their jobs to maintain economic status and make close to 6 figures a year. It's not an easy job, but then again neither is being a bully - you have to maintain your 'tough' status and make sure everything is under control. If Policing was voluntary, you'd see more genuine people helping our community - not decieving the public by hiding in bushes with radar guns or acting like the homeless on the side of the road collecting revenue for the state. Pathetic for Peace Officers to engage in such slimy work!

Third and most evident that statutory legislation is not about safety but rather revenue collection and a form of direct taxation is the fact that talking on your phone, speeding, driving without a seatbelt or any of the hundreds of petty infractions such as driving with a burnt out tale light a) hasn't created any damages to any other individual (ie. no civil proceedings) and b) there's no criminality involved (no criminal code infraction).

Without either of these two issues involved (no damage to another individual and ciminal intent) shows an economic deception of mass proportion. Hey! You were speeding 5 km over the speed limit - now give me money and I will forgive you!! Hey! you were looking at your phone while wainting for the green light - now give me money and I will forgive you!!

When Canadians learn their RIGHTS they learn their limitations and obligations to their neighbours and community. When people feel they have no rights or don't know their rights, they essentially have no duties or obligations to anyone else - much like children need supervision because they are irresponsible. And everything they do either feels like a crime or that they have to be secretive in their daily actions. (like making money "under the table" and not paying taxes on it)

But in the end, this messed up NWO mind control society we all live in can be overcome when the Police learn real history of Law (not staturtes and acts that have the "force of Law" - bang bang) and stop bullying people around (in their militarized uniforms and ERT tactics of force and brutality) for the purpose of state revenue collection and the People turn off their TV's and start learning about their rights and respecting not only other people, but themselves. 

You can legislate stupidity - look at the world around you. People are paying high costs for their own slavery and want nothing to do with fighting tyranny and bullying (except when it comes to your local high school wearing pink shirts and waving to all the drivers supporting anti-bullying day). We voluntarily signed up for our drivers licences, it's not mandatory!

We turn a blind eye to the massive illegal military occupations and organized murder (aka - war) while paying the very taxes that create our slavery. Politicians are praised behind their bullet-proof glass instead of thrown in jail for coprruption and treason. Multinational corporations "legally" rape our world and environment via "free trade negotions" and all people want is "everyday low prices" from child slave labour. 

Yes my friend, stupidity by society is not by accident - order out of chaos wins the race. But luckily lots of people are waking up to this information and gathering behind the scenes. 


... I thought this was about cell phones and like that.

Obviously, much more is at stake, here! blush

Talking about distracted driving, my son-in-law was re-ended by a rented truck the day before yesterday just at the traffic light by the Courtenay RCMP station. Both he and the driver pulled around the corner and entered the police station to report the incident. As the officer was pulling up the offending driver's licence on the computer, the officer stopped in her tracks and asked the lady if she had been stopped by the police. She answered that she had  been stopped for using her cell phone earlier in the day before she rear ended the vehicle stopped at the traffic light by the police station. She denied using her cell phone when she rear ended the vehicle in front of her. If she wasn't talking on the cell phone, what could have taken her attention away from the stopped vehicles at the traffic light? She was alone in her rented vehicle so there wasn't a person inside the vehicle to distract her. Maybe someone from cyberspace via a cell phone?

And to be fair, you haven't presented any evidence here - vicarious or otherwise - to show that she was in fact using her cell phone when she collided with your son's vehicle.  It's a common enough occurrence, and has been the most frequent type of 2-vehicle crashe since long before mobile phones were invented.  Driving an unfamiliar vehicle may also have been a factor, who knows?

At the same time though, I find it puzzling that police officers are somewhat aribitrarily allowed to impound vehicles on the suspicion that the driver may have been impaired, or might have been exceeding the speed limit by more than 40 km/h; and yet no legislation is in place for them to impound the phone from somebody who they have witnessed to be using it while behind the wheel.  That's just nuts; particularly as suddenly being separated from their mobile phones for a week, or a month, or whatever, would be a serious hardship for many people, be they teenagers or business people who 'need' to stay connected.

I wonder why the RCMP officer didn't ask to check her phone to see whether it was in active use at the time of the collision, also?

There is absolutely no sense nor reason is taking people's private property for administrative infractions.

The only reason the population even supports such draconian measures is because it was pitched as a personal war of "good drivers" vs "the bad drivers". Your personal feelings of anger were induced by 3rd party emotions. We are all under constant psychological attack to keep us aggroed at each other.

In reality everyone is a good driver and a bad driver at different times.

So lets make the enforcement of safety in our transportation system about the safety.
And when a driver is making a bad choice reflect that choice onto their license, in points, forget dollars.
And when a point threshold per time is reached - take the license.

however neither my car or my cellphone have such inscription.