From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote in
news:11820-4214AB53-876 @storefull-3257.bay.webtv.net:
They very rarely use a helicopter for traffic

enforcement

Perhaps in your neck of the woods, they do not, but in the larger cities
and metropolis', they most certainly do.

They don't use them to stop speeders

Correct, a helicopter does not stop speeders, they engage with the units
on the ground that stop the speeders.

you

dumb jackass.



That mother-issue really has you screwed up...just when you thought you
were over it.


People who are running from police yes, but

the casual speeder is not caught from a

helicopter.


Called a bear-in-the-air. Of course, if you left the cave of despair
once every few years, you would be clued in.

That **** went out long ago it is too expensive
and you still need officers on the ground,.


Of course you do, Dave...for pulling over the speeder.

talk baout something you know about tipsy like
fishing or trolling 2 things you are good at

Or dangling my loyal subject as the court jester for all to enjoy. See,
I share my good fortune and sunny disposition.

From: pam
(itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge)
(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote in
news:11820-4214ABD6-877 @storefull-3257.bay.webtv.net:
By whose definition? Yours? It's wrong.
A non-radar state would mean just what the phrase connotates: the state
is void of radar.

Mine and any company who proposes to sell

radar to Pennsylvania,


Oh, a marketing ploy certainly makes it official, then.

i didnt say they were devoid of radar or a non

radar state.



That IS exactly what the phrase you invoked
means.

I said penns was not a radar state by any

means there are states that use radar in every
town municipality and boro, penns is not one

of them, that means they are not really a

"radar state" that is not thier primary means of

speed enforcement. Do the state police use

em sure do, but there are more towns and

municipalities than state police by a large

stretch hence it is not really a radar state...

Now go twisty some more words around since
you dont understand.


You invoke a PR department's marketing strategy and permit it to define
legalities for you,,,and tell another they don't understand the law.
Great show!

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 04:44:32 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:



But nowhere does it state that any grace is given when the speed
measuring device is mechanical or electrical, as per paragraph (1). So
if they are using a paragraph (1) device then they CAN bust you for
doing 56 in a 55 zone.

Yes, but none of the police that I'm aware of use any methods other
than ELECTRONIC means. RADAR and VASCAR, as well as the old tape
strips across the road (which have all but disappeared) are all
considered electronic devices.


Once again, you demonstrate, to people with normal comprehensive
ability, that you can't understand what you read. It's no wonder you
jump to the wrong conclusions over and over again in the scant 4 years
that you have been polluting this newsgroup. Your pattern of habitual
incomprehension is all the more apparent if one walks through Google
for a few minutes.

This is my last word on the subject.


Only because you have been proven wrong and you can't admit it.


Unless you can come up with a "mechanical" or simple electrical speed
measuring device in common use in Pa., then you can't prove that I'm
wrong. You are attempting to disprove the majority of cases, by citing
a small exception.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:35:08 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 04:44:32 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:



But nowhere does it state that any grace is given when the speed
measuring device is mechanical or electrical, as per paragraph (1). So
if they are using a paragraph (1) device then they CAN bust you for
doing 56 in a 55 zone.

Yes,


Then your statement was wrong. Apology accepted.


but


"but" nothing. You didn't qualify your statement until after is was
proven wrong. Changing your tune after getting caught doesn't negate
the fact that you were wrong and can't admit it.


none of the police that I'm aware of use any methods other
than ELECTRONIC means. RADAR and VASCAR, as well as the old tape
strips across the road (which have all but disappeared) are all
considered electronic devices.


So because -you- aren't aware of any such methods that means they
don't exist? Gee, another conclusion based on absense of proof.


Once again, you demonstrate, to people with normal comprehensive
ability, that you can't understand what you read. It's no wonder you
jump to the wrong conclusions over and over again in the scant 4 years
that you have been polluting this newsgroup. Your pattern of habitual
incomprehension is all the more apparent if one walks through Google
for a few minutes.

This is my last word on the subject.


Only because you have been proven wrong and you can't admit it.


Unless you can come up with a "mechanical" or simple electrical speed
measuring device in common use in Pa., then you can't prove that I'm
wrong. You are attempting to disprove the majority of cases, by citing
a small exception.


A car speedometer can be a mechanical device used for measuring speed.
And pacing a speeder is probably the simplest, easiest, most reliable
and most widely used method of catching speeders. That's hardly a
"small exception". And I'm sure that there are other devices that fall
into the category of paragraph (1) or they would have limited the
paragraph to just speedometers.






----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:
(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote in
news:11820-4214ABD6-877 @storefull-3257.bay.webtv.net:

By whose definition? Yours? It's wrong.
A non-radar state would mean just what the phrase connotates: the state
is void of radar.

Mine and any company who proposes to sell radar to Pennsylvania

Is that what you do for a living, George?

--
http://NewsReader.Com 30 GB/Month

itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:
(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote in news:11821-4214AD53-
:

Now you are back-pedaling with "Pa is not REALLY a radar state". LMAO,
Again,,if it was a non-radar state, radar would not be implemented by
the authorities. In fact, you are the only one I have ever heard ue the
term "non-radar" state when the state does in fact, use radar. Can you
cite a single source where you took this phrase from? Perhaps a link or
provide for it? Of course you can't, Dave, it;s why you are lending
support to yourself.

I took this right from a radar manufacturers meeting room, I was there.
Heard it first hand. If you are not on a state highway you will never
recieve a speeding ticket from radar? Why because Penns is not really a
radar enforcement state, it is not thier primary means of speed
enforcement. I am speaking of the state in general now go **** yourself
dave McCampbell

Is that why bird dogs are illegal in PA, the state owns that revenue?

--
http://NewsReader.Com 30 GB/Month

On 17 Feb 2005 17:22:50 GMT, Steveo wrote:

itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:
(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote in
news:11820-4214ABD6-877 @storefull-3257.bay.webtv.net:

By whose definition? Yours? It's wrong.
A non-radar state would mean just what the phrase connotates: the state
is void of radar.

Mine and any company who proposes to sell radar to Pennsylvania

Is that what you do for a living, George?


Careful Steveo. Twisty thinks he's me......

Dave
"Sandbagger"

Dave Hall wrote:
On 17 Feb 2005 17:22:50 GMT, Steveo wrote:

itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:
(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote in
news:11820-4214ABD6-877 @storefull-3257.bay.webtv.net:

By whose definition? Yours? It's wrong.
A non-radar state would mean just what the phrase connotates: the
state is void of radar.

Mine and any company who proposes to sell radar to Pennsylvania

Is that what you do for a living, George?

Careful Steveo. Twisty thinks he's me......

George posts as you.

--
http://NewsReader.Com 30 GB/Month

"itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge"
wrote in message ...
(I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote in news:11821-4214AD53-
:

Now you are back-pedaling with "Pa is not REALLY a radar state". LMAO,
Again,,if it was a non-radar state, radar would not be implemented by
the authorities. In fact, you are the only one I have ever heard ue the
term "non-radar" state when the state does in fact, use radar. Can you
cite a single source where you took this phrase from? Perhaps a link or
provide for it? Of course you can't, Dave, it;s why you are lending
support to yourself.

I took this right from a radar manufacturers meeting room, I was there.


Staring down the waveguides and pushing the buttons.


Heard it first hand. If you are not on a state highway you will never
recieve a speeding ticket from radar? Why because Penns is not really a
radar enforcement state, it is not thier primary means of speed
enforcement. I am speaking of the state in general now go **** yourself
dave McCampbell