Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can't even drive home anymore without receiving a ticket on 75 through GA. Last 2 times I drove I got one, the first for going 80 in a 70 (come on I was with the flow and trying to make time) and the second for going 73 in a 70. The cop was one of those guys sitting on top of the overpass and he pulled 2 of us over. It was a construction zone because there was 1 cone out still (and no construction which had been finished for months...who would have seen it?). Both tickets were 10 miles apart, one in Tifton area and one in Sparks. It's borderline criminal the lengths they go to arrest decent citizens who they know will pay the fines just because the economy has reduced their coffers just like everyone else's.
Interesting. I drive 75 quite often. I've also spent a considerable amount of time driving all of Atlanta, Washington DC, Raleigh, and several other larger cities all over America. Plus I'm from a small town in Mississippi, so I drive "home" through Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia several times a year.
I've been driving for almost 30 years. I've never gotten a speeding ticket. Why do you think that is? I'll give you one guess.
Well aren't you special. You may be the only person I have ever heard of that has never received a ticket, especially over 30 years. I think people should be given breaks if they have never caused or been in an accident. I knew of a lady that was one of my middle school carpool drivers who drove below the speed limit. Talk about scary! I doubt she received tickets, but I know she caused/was in several wrecks. One of the other carpool drivers was a dad who had just moved down from northern VA and he was the most aggressive driver (he joked about what we thought was traffic here in Jax). Both were extremes, but we all still felt safer with dad than the nutcase slowpoke mom who entered 95 on Park onramp going about 30-35 mph. Eventually three of us split from the slowpoke mom because nobody liked her personally either.
Also, just 2 weeks ago there was an article in the WSJ that provided direct evidence of certain cars with certain drivers getting pulled over more than others. I'll let you venture a guess which kind of cars get pulled over more and which kind of drivers get actual tickets once pulled over.
Hmmm that's not what 4 of my fraternity brothers say who work there now (and their pictures also indicate otherwise). Also I can share at least 50 links of photo threads of LA that show CROWDED sidewalks in non-tourist areas. I hear from people all the time who live there (including a cousin of mine who is from there and moved back for a time) that LA is actually very walkable and does not deserve its bad reputation.
We aren't talking the Inland Empire or the Valley, we are talking about Los Angeles County and even parts of Orange County. Pasadena is also very walkable (had a good friend that went to Cal Tech and tried to convince me to go there...he is from New York and he always talked about Pasadena and LA).
Most of the places where people walk in Los Angeles are really big shopping centers with really big parking complexes. Note that I enjoy walking in certain areas of Los Angeles (like along the part of Beverly Blvd. that has all the furniture stores). But - when you walk - you'll pretty much have the sidewalk all to yourself. Robyn
Well aren't you special. You may be the only person I have ever heard of that has never received a ticket, especially over 30 years. I think people should be given breaks if they have never caused or been in an accident. I knew of a lady that was one of my middle school carpool drivers who drove below the speed limit. Talk about scary! I doubt she received tickets, but I know she caused/was in several wrecks. One of the other carpool drivers was a dad who had just moved down from northern VA and he was the most aggressive driver (he joked about what we thought was traffic here in Jax). Both were extremes, but we all still felt safer with dad than the nutcase slowpoke mom who entered 95 on Park onramp going about 30-35 mph. Eventually three of us split from the slowpoke mom because nobody liked her personally either.
Also, just 2 weeks ago there was an article in the WSJ that provided direct evidence of certain cars with certain drivers getting pulled over more than others. I'll let you venture a guess which kind of cars get pulled over more and which kind of drivers get actual tickets once pulled over.
Consider yourself lucky and knock on wood.
Thats the problem with just plucking random people out of thousands of drivers on the road. You dont know who that person is, how careful they are, etc. Meanwhile grandma never gets pulled over because she never breaks the speed limit, but can't drive worth a damn & doesn't pay attention. That kind of stuff is what really causes accidents, but there's no way to know it. Thats why public transportation is the way to go because it totally removes all of that.
Yeah, I've never ever thought it was a fair, or even efficient system for preventing accidents. Its total BS & just something they say so they can write tickets. They need to make it justified.
P.S. I dont think she's lucky. I'd imagine she's female (attractive?) & been pulled over before (by male cops). Just no tickets
If I could change things Id put the SJTC on Main Street in Springfield.
I would expand the monorail train to Riverside 5 points, Shands Hospital, Stadium Arena & San Marco Square.
UNF & JU would be downtown.
Change name of Main Street to Bridge Street to highlight Main Street Bridge.
Give Mayport more ships than Norfolk!
Commuter rail system that connects Orange Park, Fernadina Beach & St Augustine to the terminal stations on the skyway monorail.
And if I could change things I'd allow mid and high rise residential and commercial and mixed use development anywhere within 10 miles of downtown. No cutesy "preservation" districts. You can't have decent mass transit without population density - and you can't have population density if lots of areas close to downtown are zoned only for single family houses. Robyn
Thats the problem with just plucking random people out of thousands of drivers on the road. You dont know who that person is, how careful they are, etc. Meanwhile grandma never gets pulled over because she never breaks the speed limit, but can't drive worth a damn & doesn't pay attention. That kind of stuff is what really causes accidents, but there's no way to know it. Thats why public transportation is the way to go because it totally removes all of that.
Yeah, I've never ever thought it was a fair, or even efficient system for preventing accidents. Its total BS & just something they say so they can write tickets. They need to make it justified.
P.S. I dont think she's lucky. I'd imagine she's female (attractive?) & been pulled over before (by male cops). Just no tickets
I think the statistics show that both very young and very old drivers tend to have more accidents per mile they drive than those in the middle. Doesn't have anything to do with the price of onions - but I'm with mississippimagnolia - driving over 40 years. No accidents - no tickets (never pulled over either). And you're not saying that people shouldn't be allowed to drive cars - are you? Only that public transportation should be an option for those who care to use it. Right? Robyn
And if I could change things I'd allow mid and high rise residential and commercial and mixed use development anywhere within 10 miles of downtown. No cutesy "preservation" districts. You can't have decent mass transit without population density - and you can't have population density if lots of areas close to downtown are zoned only for single family houses. Robyn
I agree with you there. There are a lot of nice homes that have historical and architectural value, but there are some old homes that don't need to be saved at all costs. I still think there are plenty of surface parking lots and post World War properties that no longer serve a useful purpose that could be redeveloped first.
The areas with the highest potential for dense redevelopment/infill are along major arteries like Main St, Phillips, Atlantic, Beach, University, Myrtle, Moncrief, Blanding and Cassat closer in to town, of course Riverside towards 5 Points and on Oak, etc. Jacksonville beach is also ripe for denser development, but some bimbo from Huntsville, AL who hasn't even lived here for very long rammed a law through prohibiting any development over 35 ft that wasn't alread approved.
I am about to blow this whole thread away with photos of Los Angeles and there will be tons. I will post links to no less than 25 different threads highlighting different parts of the city. Los Angeles is very very dense in most places, but it has its single family areas, too. There are very nice single family residential neighborhoods off of Wilshire Blvd (between Beverly and Wilshire Blvd right in town), of course Beverly Hills/Holmby Hills/Malibu, and Pasadena into S LA. The trick is picking the right corridors to develop high density and the right areas to keep single family. I think you just have something against the Avondales and San Marcos.
Nope - it's all got to go. Riverside - Avondale - South Bank - Springfield. Whatever. Particularly stuff on the River. Lots of areas near downtown Miami that used to have single family mansions for the rich on the water are now high rise corridors. Do you or do you not want a city? Building high rise condos in JAX Beach or any of the other places you mentioned won't turn JAX into a city. To build a city - you need density in and around the urban core.
See - everyone with even a little money wants to keep his little "cutesy in-town" suburban neighborhood. With non-urban density. And then everyone wonders why JAX isn't a real city. Robyn
I think the statistics show that both very young and very old drivers tend to have more accidents per mile they drive than those in the middle. Doesn't have anything to do with the price of onions - but I'm with mississippimagnolia - driving over 40 years. No accidents - no tickets (never pulled over either). And you're not saying that people shouldn't be allowed to drive cars - are you? Only that public transportation should be an option for those who care to use it. Right? Robyn
I'm saying the underlying problem is that there is no way to gauge potential "problem drivers", whether they're young, old, drunk, high, overmedicated, etc. Cops can't be everywhere, and when they are somewhere, for them to just randomly be plucking out a single driver out of thousands for going 73 in a 70 isn't doing jack squat (besides filling some quota & maintaining a revenue stream). Last I checked, people were still crashing, dying/getting seriously injured, driving drunk, etc.
So you'll never stop it. The only way to lessen it is to get less cars on the road. No, I'm not saying take people's cars away (thats the other extreme). But when there is absolutely no viable choice, that's a problem. I'm sure we could all name several people we've personally known in our lives who have died in a car accident. But its looked at as "acceptable deaths" simply because its just the way it is & we have no choice. I personally think that's NOT acceptable & it shouldn't have to be that way. Maybe if some of those people had more choices, they wouldn't have had to die so needlessly.
Point is, driving is about the most dangerous thing a regular person can do in their day to day lives. I don't think its acceptable that we should be basically forced to be putting ourselves/our families lives at risk daily just to go to the grocery store & other mindless errands. Do you??
...randomly be plucking out a single driver out of thousands for going 73 in a 70 isn't doing jack squat (besides filling some quota & maintaining a revenue stream). Last I checked, people were still crashing, dying/getting seriously injured, driving drunk, etc.
Kerry, I am just going to say it straight out. No cop has ever stopped you for going 73 in a 70. It just did not happen. Both of my brothers are cops. My husband is Federal Law Enforcement. I have spent years working in criminal law. I'm not an attorney. But I've worked on hundreds of DUI and traffic cases.
First, no way would a ticket for 73 in a 70 hold up in any court in this country. Not a chance. There is not a judge in this country that would expect a person to hold a speed within 3 mph of the limit. And no cop would ever stop you for that. I know lots and lots of police officers. Most won't even look twice unless you are 10 over. Some will stop you for 8-9.
Cops do not randomly pluck cars out. There is no law enforcement conspiracy. Even cops that aren't the most ethical aren't stopping cars going 3 over the limit. Doesn't happen.
If you are weaving, tailgating, speeding in a school or work zone,...you'll get stopped. If you are driving with the flow of traffic even 8-10 over the limit, you are not going to get stopped.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
