Cause a car crash? Chula Vista fire wants you to pay
in [Drive]
|
From: Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS on 5 May 2010 16:09 This is just common sense. Make the criminals pay for the problems they cause. Lots of cities are going to this. http://www.760kfmb.com/Global/story.asp?S=12431059 Updated: May 05, 2010 1:09 PM MDT Cause a car crash? Chula Vista fire wants you to pay - You could soon be paying for emergency services if you cause a car crash in Chula Vista. Tuesday night, council members talked about a private company that would do the billing. There was no vote on the issue, but under state law Chula Vista has a right to bill DUI drivers. The proposal would expand the city's collection to at-fault drivers with fees ranging from $435 to $2100. "If somebody runs a red light or they are speeding and they crash into somebody else they're at fault, and they're violating the law. I don't think the taxpayers need to have that burden of paying for somebody who's violating the law," said Chula Vista Fire Chief Dave Hanneman. "I think it's ridiculous, like I said we are already paying taxes as it is, and then to add more to that I don't think so. I'm opposed," said one resident. ..
From: Nate Nagel on 5 May 2010 21:35 On 05/05/2010 04:09 PM, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote: > This is just common sense. Make the criminals pay for the problems > they cause. Lots of cities are going to this. > > http://www.760kfmb.com/Global/story.asp?S=12431059 > > Updated: May 05, 2010 1:09 PM MDT > > Cause a car crash? Chula Vista fire wants you to pay > > - You could soon be paying for emergency services if you cause a car > crash in Chula Vista. > > Tuesday night, council members talked about a private company that > would do the billing. There was no vote on the issue, but under state > law Chula Vista has a right to bill DUI drivers. > > The proposal would expand the city's collection to at-fault drivers > with fees ranging from $435 to $2100. > > "If somebody runs a red light or they are speeding and they crash into > somebody else they're at fault, and they're violating the law. I don't > think the taxpayers need to have that burden of paying for somebody > who's violating the law," said Chula Vista Fire Chief Dave Hanneman. > > "I think it's ridiculous, like I said we are already paying taxes as > it is, and then to add more to that I don't think so. I'm opposed," > said one resident. > > . I actually agree with this, but only if "speeding" means "driving too fast for conditions" and/or speed limits are actually set using appropriate engineering guidelines, not by politicians as they are here (see link I posted to RAD earlier this week about speed cameras in MD and pay attention to the quotes. Try not to throw things at your monitor.) nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel
From: Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS on 6 May 2010 01:50 On May 5, 7:35 pm, Nate Nagel <njna...(a)roosters.net> wrote: > > . > > I actually agree with this, but only if "speeding" means "driving too > fast for conditions" and/or speed limits are actually set using > appropriate engineering guidelines, not by politicians as they are here Engineering guidelines? HAHAHA. All laws are written by politicians, you idiot. You can't drive too slow.
From: Larrybud on 6 May 2010 08:15 Nate Nagel <njnagel(a)roosters.net> wrote in news:hrt6cv01reo(a)news2.newsguy.com: > On 05/05/2010 04:09 PM, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS > wrote: >> This is just common sense. Make the criminals pay for the >> problems they cause. Lots of cities are going to this. >> >> http://www.760kfmb.com/Global/story.asp?S=12431059 >> >> Updated: May 05, 2010 1:09 PM MDT >> >> Cause a car crash? Chula Vista fire wants you to pay >> >> - You could soon be paying for emergency services if you cause >> a car crash in Chula Vista. >> >> Tuesday night, council members talked about a private company >> that would do the billing. There was no vote on the issue, but >> under state law Chula Vista has a right to bill DUI drivers. >> >> The proposal would expand the city's collection to at-fault >> drivers with fees ranging from $435 to $2100. >> >> "If somebody runs a red light or they are speeding and they >> crash into somebody else they're at fault, and they're >> violating the law. I don't think the taxpayers need to have >> that burden of paying for somebody who's violating the law," >> said Chula Vista Fire Chief Dave Hanneman. >> >> "I think it's ridiculous, like I said we are already paying >> taxes as it is, and then to add more to that I don't think so. >> I'm opposed," said one resident. >> >> . > > I actually agree with this, but only if "speeding" means > "driving too fast for conditions" and/or speed limits are > actually set using appropriate engineering guidelines, not by > politicians as they are here (see link I posted to RAD earlier > this week about speed cameras in MD and pay attention to the > quotes. Try not to throw things at your monitor.) It total and utter bullshit because the authorities will ALWAYS find a law which was broken so that they don't have pay the cleanup costs. After all, if someone crashes, seems pretty obvious to me that "failure to control vehicle" had occurred!
From: Brent on 6 May 2010 09:16 On 2010-05-06, Larrybud <larrybud2002(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Nate Nagel <njnagel(a)roosters.net> wrote in > news:hrt6cv01reo(a)news2.newsguy.com: > >> On 05/05/2010 04:09 PM, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS >> wrote: >>> This is just common sense. Make the criminals pay for the >>> problems they cause. Lots of cities are going to this. >>> >>> http://www.760kfmb.com/Global/story.asp?S=12431059 >>> >>> Updated: May 05, 2010 1:09 PM MDT >>> >>> Cause a car crash? Chula Vista fire wants you to pay >>> >>> - You could soon be paying for emergency services if you cause >>> a car crash in Chula Vista. >>> >>> Tuesday night, council members talked about a private company >>> that would do the billing. There was no vote on the issue, but >>> under state law Chula Vista has a right to bill DUI drivers. >>> >>> The proposal would expand the city's collection to at-fault >>> drivers with fees ranging from $435 to $2100. >>> >>> "If somebody runs a red light or they are speeding and they >>> crash into somebody else they're at fault, and they're >>> violating the law. I don't think the taxpayers need to have >>> that burden of paying for somebody who's violating the law," >>> said Chula Vista Fire Chief Dave Hanneman. >>> >>> "I think it's ridiculous, like I said we are already paying >>> taxes as it is, and then to add more to that I don't think so. >>> I'm opposed," said one resident. >>> >>> . >> >> I actually agree with this, but only if "speeding" means >> "driving too fast for conditions" and/or speed limits are >> actually set using appropriate engineering guidelines, not by >> politicians as they are here (see link I posted to RAD earlier >> this week about speed cameras in MD and pay attention to the >> quotes. Try not to throw things at your monitor.) > > It total and utter bullshit because the authorities will ALWAYS > find a law which was broken so that they don't have pay the > cleanup costs. > > After all, if someone crashes, seems pretty obvious to me that > "failure to control vehicle" had occurred! Notice how government is not giving up their monopoly on emergency services, just deciding to charge one of the involved parties even though government already took money socialist style from everyone to provide those services. If the services are so costly then it's time to allow a free market of emergency service providers. Perhaps people could set up a contract that costs a few dollars per year with a provider. It could become part of auto club type coverage or maybe automobile insurance. Then people's tax burdens could be* reduced much more than they will pay for private services. *not that government would ever do that. The unions of emergency service workers would fight the end of the government system tooth and nail too.
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 Prev: Do you feel guilty about the oil spill or take a chill pill? Next: Globalization=Feudalism? |