"Poverty made her speed" Nice.
Ferguson Missouri
- Thread starter Jayv
- Start date
Sativa Quemador
Well-known member
BAHHAHHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAAHHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
can everyone on GTAM PLEASE use this an excuse next time you get pulled over..
Lady- Officer, you cant give me a ticket fopr speeding. Im poor !
Officer- Yes, i can see by your bank account. I also see you owe in 4 different counties.
Officer- Judging by your debt, we have to let you go, and if you incurr another 2k of debt, you will be eligible for 1 B&E charge dropped.
have a nice day
I know your imagination is quite strong, so you seriously shouldn't have any problem conceiving how poverty might encourage people to break the law.
Sativa Quemador
Well-known member
What excuse? She was speeding and was fined and that's the way it should be in my books. She was even OK with that. What I'm explaining is the cause for her actions.
Aren't you the one who just finished saying "relax dude'"?
Because they think they're non-lethal. But if you ask me, they should never bother with tasers, just guns.
What about abolishing those micro-municipalities which serve no function other than to pay the salaries of their administrators? I dunno, just an idea.
Give it some thought and let me know what you think should be done based on the realities on the ground, not based on your prejudices.
Sativa Quemador
Well-known member
yeah, i said relax, i wasnt targeting you....
but then you went and said something really really stupid. like poverty made her speed....lol
if anything, poverty would slow you down. better gas mileage, no worries from fines/tickets
better to drive lawfully while driving illegally ( without proper info )
Strange, it wasn't targeting me but it was in reply to my post... OK.
And yeah news flash; poverty induces illegal activity. And NO, that doesn't "excuse" it.
Last edited:
Would that fall under it's a reason(mildly) but not an excuse? While it's commendable that she's pulling herself up by the bootstraps can we give her a pass on rules of the road until such time she reaches a set earnings threshold? Sure, why not
Sativa Quemador
Well-known member
Would that fall under it's a reason(mildly) but not an excuse? While it's commendable that she's pulling herself up by the bootstraps can we give her a pass on rules of the road until such time she reaches a set earnings threshold? Sure, why not
she had enough money to pay for her tattoo's.
probably has the latest I-phone and other gear
Last edited:
Snobike Mike
Banned
This.
[video=youtube;5f0mVn0HH6U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f0mVn0HH6U[/video]
Sativa Quemador
Well-known member
looters.....
scum.
would love to see a pic of the duck dynasty guys sitting on a roof of a fake store filled with fake stuff.
just waiting for some looters.... lol.. they also use the call of the looter. smashed glass and alarm bells while shouting obscenities...
dont ask. yes i am.
scum.
would love to see a pic of the duck dynasty guys sitting on a roof of a fake store filled with fake stuff.
just waiting for some looters.... lol.. they also use the call of the looter. smashed glass and alarm bells while shouting obscenities...
dont ask. yes i am.
CanadianBiker
Well-known member
Driving is a privilege, not a right. It carries certain obligations, such as being insured, having your vehicle in good repair, and obeying the traffic laws. She chose not to. She could have avoided all the problems which came out of it by simply not breaking the law in the first place. Then she compounded it by failing to appear, another choice she made.
No, we don't all speed. I very rarely do. OK, so I ride a Harley which can barely get out of its own way, but I have complete control of the throttle and it's entirely up to me how fast I go. And it doesn't matter if the speed limit is for safety or for laughs, the fact is it's the law, there are large signs indicating that law and drivers can expect penalties if they disobey. The fact she had multiple infractions and still cries victim indicates to me that she's unwilling to take any responsiblity for her actions.
As for the other examples described in the article, all of the individuals claim they always acted politely and respectfully and within the law in every interaction they've had with the police. Just a regular church choir, apparently. Somehow, I have my doubts.
The whole article was written with a distinct slant and those who have similar beliefs, i.e., that personal responsibilty takes a backseat to playing victim at every opportunity, will swallow it whole and declare it gospel.
I'm sure that St. Louis County has its problems and it's not alone in that regard. But the article was so biased as to lose all credibility for me. For example, it often cited the huge disparity between the towns' black populations and the towns' overwhelmingly white councils. So my first question is, why is an electorate that is +80% black electing white councils when race is such an issue? How many qualified black candidates were there? Any? Why weren't they elected? Surely withover 80% of the voters being black, there should be at least some. For that matter, who votes in these elections? If the majority of black voters aren't excercising their rights (and personally I think voting is an obligation), it's on them and them alone. Those kind of omissions make the article suspect at best.
I know you'd like to think that anyone who doesn't come to the exact same conclusions you did somehow lacks reading comprehension but that's not the case. I think your mind was already made up before you read one word and all the article did was validate your own opinion. So be it. But don't question other people's acuity simply because they don't think the same way you do.
And juries, grand juries, etc. are empanelled based on the voter registration records. Makes you wonder who registers.
