Man this thread went to ****... Someone just lock it or something before a huge flame war starts.

You are so kind. Hold me!



No. Be a man and finish what you started.

Haha, I didnt start the fire, you guys did. I just wanted to see what laws people choose to obey and which they do not.

Doesn't mean I agree with the law. There are numerous laws I don't agree with. Especially ones in which most people, including cops, do not follow.

Actually, drinking one beer probably wouldn't put you over the limit in the first place (thus breaking the law), so my point still completely stands. Also, I don't believe that "common sense, logic, and people who do crash scene reconstruction" could possibly stand against what is simply basic math and physics. You aren't applying logic to this, nor common sense. You're simply claiming it without providing any reasoning. I have provided reasons for my logic. If you're going to argue this, I suggest you find ways to poke holes in that.



Yet again you miss the point. Oh, and I've never seen anyone pulled over for rolling 5mph through a stop sign. EVER. I even did it right in front of a cop who was camping an intersection.

I won't accept a fact that's not in contention. And I will sit here and tell Bob that his idea of "safety" is ridiculously overblown and that it is just as safe, if not safer. I just wrote up a nice big long post on why that is true. Perhaps you might want to look at it, since what you're arguing is not even the topic at hand here.

Um.. if you can't drive a car after one beer you shouldn't be driving.. because 1 beer wont do **** to your judgement. And you could still pass a sobriety test.

Titties!

Yea I know that. But you can still get in a heap of trouble if you blow under the limit and you cause an accident.



Ah, so because you haven't seen it means it doesn't happen. Guess what, I've gotten one. So your point?



Oh so you don't agree with it so it's ok for you to break it?



You don't even agree with yourself.

Look, you're just trying to justify what you do is just as safe as someone who comes to a complete stop. It's not. A rolling car can slip out into the intersection and get hit. A stopped car can not. Deal with it.

Not any more trouble than you would had you not drank anything at all. It's an all or nothing law, not a "scale".

Then you probably weren't going 5 mph either.

Yes, that blanket statement is exactly what I meant! Hurr. Try reading more into what I said completely instead of generalizing to the point of ridiculousness.

It isn't, and that statement is not relevant to this conversation. I don't roll through stop signs to make a statement.

Nice try, but you still haven't read my post from earlier where I already covered this. If your car rolls out into an intersection and you hit someone, you made a judgment error, the same exact error you'd make if you completely stopped then moved into the intersection and hit someone. If you are unable to make a proper judgment in the massive amount of time allotted to you while rolling along at 5mph, you probably shouldn't be driving.

Let me clarify and reiterate the major issue I have with Bob's view. He says that it is an unnecessary risk. Driving on the highway, while legal, is also an unnecessary risk. How many deaths occur on highways in a year? You don't need to drive on a highway, you can always take a side road. Yet to Bob that's okay, despite the fact that it's far more dangerous than rolling through a stop sign at 5 mph.

THAT, is the issue. Nothing else.

Matt, they can and do arrest you if your car doesn't become completely immobile (AKA 0 mph) at a stop sign. If they don't they are being lazy, or do not care.

Its definatly like this out here in Quebec, so I'd be surprised it wasn't the same elsewhere.

Then again, there might be a reason we call it 'Fair un stop americain'. (Make an american stop.)

The only cops that do that are small town cops who hate their life. They'll get you for 5mph over the limit, rolling a stop sign, anything. This is why someday I hope Hubbard Texas disappears into oblivion.

What, they get you for robbing a bank too? Those bastards!

Ok, I'm going to say you're right on this one. But I'm also going to say that in the state of Virginia, you are entirely wrong, I don't know how it is in your state. If a cop decides to give you a BAC test at the scene of an accident you were in, and you blow say, .04, you will get into trouble. You will not get arrested for DUI, but your fines will go up, it will be your fault, and you will get charged with wreckless driving and endangerment. You will receive the maximum fine for both, and depending, could receive jail time.

And it is very much a scale. .08 - .14 BAC, 5 days in jail $500 dollar fine, VASAP, restricted license. .15 - .20, $1000 fine, 10 days in jail. .20 and up, 30 days in jail, suspended for three years $2500 fine.

Do not even argue this. My step father is a cop, I hear about stuff like this all the time, and my brother has been through it.



You have absolutely no idea how fast I was going. I had came to a complete stop, but there was a car in front of me. When he went, I followed right behind him. I had just let my foot off the brake and rolled through the sign. Ticket.



I'm assuming you are referring an interestate, I can't make it to work without getting on a highway. But Bob's point is he is obeying the law and being a safe driver. You can be a safe driver on a highway or interstate and get into a wreck, but you wouldn't be breaking the law. Driving on the interstate is not necessarily unsafe either. If you distance yourself from other drivers, pay attention to what they are doing and what you are doing, go the speed limit, you probably won't get into a wreck, since driving on a highway itself isn't necessarily dangerous. Be safe, you're good. Rolling a sign itself is unsafe.

I see the point you're making Cool Matty, but it doesn't change the fact you're being needlessly unsafe. I do it all the time to, like I said I've gotten a ticket for it and will probably get another one. But I'm not lying to myself thinking I'm being safer. You sort of summed up the whole reason to stop in your very first post. You ran two stop lights, because you "weren't paying as much attention as you should have been". Well, one day you could not be paying as much attention as you should be when you do that rolling stop. You might just roll right into oncoming traffic and get nailed, you might not. Coming to a complete stop at the stop sign for like two seconds could very well be what could save your life.

And where I live it's far safer to be on a highway than a back road. Back road you can easily run off the road and drop down a mountain.

And are you forgetting that you just called Bob out because you refused to believe him? People can do things differently than you, I'm sure you're aware, which just makes refusing to believe him being nothing more than an *******.

So you just admitted that one beer wouldn't do anything. Thanks for agreeing with me.



Why would I argue when you just agreed with me?



So you didn't even slow down for the stop sign. Congrats, that's not even what we're talking about.



lolwut. You can be the safest driver in the world and still be in a horrible wreck on a highway.



Then stop speeding on the back roads. On highways you have variables with which you have absolutely no control over, and vast quantities of it. They're called other drivers.

Matt, are you high? How in the world did you just infer that I said one beer wouldn't do anything? I citied a BAC of .04, which is below the limit for DUI by half. I then proceed to giving examples of the kind of trouble you would get in for blowing a .04.



Again, what the hell? I just specifically stated I was at a complete stop. I was two - three feet behind a car, I checked while I was waiting for him to go. When he started going I went as well, no faster than what you would consider safe for a rolling stop.



And those exist on back roads to. Other drivers, road conditions, weather conditions, etc.



Yea...I noted that as well. But if you're safe you greatly reduce the risks of being in an accident. Other drivers of course can cause you to be in a wreck. Distancing yourself helps, there is plenty of road.

I did.



Dude...at 1.4, you're very dead. Perhaps you mean .14?

But he didn't, and he didn't mention any of his friends having a turbo either.


There are a ton of things that the manufacturer specifies not to do that almost everyone does. Like using different oil, different oil filters, different brand of brake pads.

Yea my bad. I will edit post for clarity.

Your reading comprehension skills are severely lacking, and you're accusing people of not reading what you post and putting words in your mouth. That's funny.



Same as above



Same as above x2



Master of the Obvious.

.

If I am failing reading comprehension then why is it that I am the only one who is actually accounting for what is posted and providing non-anecdotal reasoning for it? Please.




Tell me about it. Apparently it needed to be said because it wasn't getting through to him. Reading comprehension, skipping posts, all that jazz.

Actually, what you stated was what you'd get for blowing a .08+, which is what the law states. The .04 crap was simply that, crap. It's not part of the law for DUI, as much as you try to dance around that. You proved my point, I agreed, and there we go. Avenger apparently can't read either if he missed something that obvious.

Let's not forget that your entire drinking analogy was absolutely inane and irrelevant in the first place, also.

You didn't slow down for the stop, you sped up to go through it. Pretty simple.

again.

And all of which are amplified on a highway/interstate. Not only is there more drivers, but they're going at higher speeds, road conditions must be upheld to a higher tolerance to account for said speed, weather exponentially increases the risk while driving at those higher speeds, etc etc etc ad nauseum.

And getting hit after stopping at a stop sign is also a risk. And we're right back to my original argument all over again, with you having said absolutely nothing of value on the subject.

Simply put, you are so focused on the little details that you are missing the big picture. Which is probably why you keep missing the points I am making and instead respond with annoyingly inane crap, forcing me to spell out everything to you.

When you post that someone didn't slow down at a stop sign when they clearly stated they did, you fail at reading comprehension.

Except what he stated is that he sped up through. He was stopped behind a car. The only way he could possibly move forward is to speed up to the stop sign. Mind finding a flaw in that, cause I sure as hell aren't seeing it.

Then say as much instead of keeping it to yourself, if that's even what happened.

It is, as you said, "what he stated", so I have no reason to believe it went any other way. Now what was that about reading comprehension? And I stated that he didn't slow down for the stop sign already. Seems you and Spectrael just want me to repeat myself over and over.

this thread makes me

I'm going to go stop some cars tonight. Have fun arguing!

Seeing as he stopped behind the car that was infront of him, he slowed down and even stopped. But, if you want to keep repeating yourself, please do so.

Nah Matty I just think Avenger was right, your reading comprehension just flat out sucks.

I stated trouble you would get in for blowing anything. It automatically becomes your fault, and you get the maximum fine for it. No where did I mention anything about getting a DUI for blowing a .04. This stuff happens everyday in my state. Virginia has a ZERO tolerance policy for ANY crime commited with any BAC. You might not get a DUI for blowing a .04, but you could get a DWI and you will likely be taken to the station to blow into their breathalyzer, and they very well might hold you over night. Then, however, I proceeded to tell you the trouble for DUI in VA.

You don't seem to have the ability to infer anything what so ever. Look at my example of how I got a ticket. I was stopped completely behind the vehicle. I then rolled through the stop sign. If you roll a stop sign as you describe, you never come to a complete stop. I was stopped, but what I failed to do was stop at the sign AGAIN after the car in front of me took a right. The only reason behind me giving you my example is that you said "you've never seen" anyone get a ticket for it.

I see your big picture I've done stated a few times over now, but I still don't agree with you. Rolling a stop sign just isn't a good idea, flat out. Your example of the highway system is one that can't be argued by your reasoning to begin with. Yes, of course there's a greater risk obviously by virtue of the fact you're going faster and there are more motorists. But then again driving itself is a risk, I'm assuming that's the point you were trying to make to Bob, everything is risky. Well Captain Obvious duh, but let's be practical here.

You've said several times that people who can't check at 5mph shouldn't be on the road. Well, if you ask me, anyone who openly admits to speeding because they don't agree with the speed limit and admits to running two red lights because he wasn't paying attention (a trait very common with teen drivers, maybe that's the problem here) doesn't really need to be on the road.

I'm not posting here again. You've proved your stupidity, arrogance, and ignorance for me here yet once again. The very idea you would tell me something that I know differently from FROM EXPERIENCE just proves your stupidity. Have fun.

Good for VA, however that's not the law in the other 95% of the country. Perhaps you should be more descriptive next time.

Oh, and yet again I repeat that the whole drinking analogy was irrelevant.



Except, you know, the average person slows down when going to a stop sign, not speeds up.



I am being practical. If anything I am insisting that we be practical. I said that driving on the highway is more risky than rolling through a stop sign. If Bob (and you) believe rolling through a stop sign to be so inherently dangerous, then by that same token you should not be on the highway. Why is this so hard for you to understand?



A. Never said I speed because I don't agree with it. I said I don't agree with it period, regardless of whether I actually speed on the road or not.
B. I apologize for having the guts to admit I've made mistakes in driving in the past? And I laughed my *** off at your "teen drivers" comment. I'm 22, and I made those mistakes over 4 years ago, when I just started driving. I like to believe I'm at least somewhat more experienced now.
C. I also do not know of anyone who has not made a single judgment error while driving. Are you trying to say that you have never, ever screwed up while driving? No one is perfect. No one is.



Wonderful, maybe then Bob will reply and we can get back to the heart of the matter before you threw in your dull diatribe.

Do you even read what you write?

If you're stopped behind the car at the stop sign, you have to speed up to get to the stop sign since your car was stopped, chief.

That's the point. He sped up to the stop sign and didn't slow down. I think I am going to go cry now. Too many facepalms for one day.

There is no other choice but to speed up since the car was, you know, not moving. And how fast could he have been going? No faster than you were on your rolls through stop signs. So why are you making such a big deal out of nothing?

He brought it up? And apologies if you don't see the difference between slowing down for a stop sign and speeding up through it, regardless of speed.

So, how do you get your car from a complete stop to moving with out speeding up?

Apparently this is gone way over your head, read back a few posts.

I'm going to go against what I said and just post here again. I find this fascinating for some reason.



I did. I stated I'll consider you right because I didn't know how it was in other states.



The whole drinking analogy was the same thing. You think you've got the skill to roll a stop sign, someone who's drank a beer thinks he's still ok to drive. The law says you're not suppose to do either. It's the exact same thing.



I said that I took my foot off the brake and rolled through it. I didn't say I punched the gas. Now, excuse me for not clarifying enough for you since I'm under the impression that you drive and what not, but when you take your foot off the brake and you're in drive in an automatic transmission, you start to roll. Less than five miles per hour which you consider safe speed to roll a sign. The fact that I was rolling, after leaving a complete stop, but did not actually stop on the white line the stop sign required me to stop at, is why I got the ticket. Can you not understand this? The cop approaching from behind saw this, and gave me a ticket.



You're being logical with this arguement, not practical. By logic if we find that taking risks isn't something worth doing, then yes, you'd be correct. But being practical means we have to accept certain risks. Breaking the law by rolling a sign is both breaking the law and taking an optional risk by not stopping. You're not going to get hit if you come to a complete stop assuming you're not out in the road. If you roll it, like I said earlier in one post, it could be the difference between an accident and not an accident. Now of course seeing how you like to argue I have to put a disclaimer that someone can of course run right into you because they just suck at driving, but there is nothing you can do to prevent that.



Let me get this straight. You don't agree with speed limits? Why? Do you not understand what they're for? Elaborate on this for me.



I was correct in assuming they were mistakes made by a teenager then. If you think you're being a safe driver by rolling stop signs, and you openly admit to speeding, then not much else has changed but your experience. You're still making bad driving decisions.



No I'm not claiming that. But I will say that I have never even once came close to running a stop light. Let me explain this in much greater detail since you can't seem to put two and two together. You admitted to driving through a stop light because you weren't paying attention. Now, I come along and say that it's not wise to roll a stop sign because we all have lapses in judgement, brain farts, what ever you want to call it. So from your experience you know you can sometimes not be paying attention. So, what's to say that you won't be paying attention one of those times at a stop sign? If you can run a stop light, that you probably say coming from a good bit off, you obviously weren't paying attention for a good bit. Rolling a stop sign happens a lot faster than that. Now of course you can nullify this arguement right here by stating that you're always fully alert now and you can't possibly not be paying attention, but then you'd just be stupid.



Again, you can't comprehend a simple scenario. I don't know how much clearer I can be on the situation I was in that yielded me a ticket. I just don't.



I brought up my experience of it happening to me, because you seem to think because you haven't seen something happen, you were under the impression it didn't happen. You then furthered by assuming in an absolute ignorant manner that I must of been going faster than 5mph which is your 'safe' speed, when in reality I wasn't even going that fast.

Funny that that is exactly how I envisioned it happening as opposed to you stomping on the gas pedal and ripping through the intersection, but I guess that's what I get for comprehending what I read given that you said you got a ticket for rolling a stop sign in the first place.

Fascinating? That's hardly the term I'd give this facepalm-fest.



You then went on to state the 0.8 rule with nothing concerning other states. Please.



Except drinking involves a chemical reaction in your body that occurs outside of your control. So, pretty much nothing like it.



Yes, you didn't slow down for it, you sped up. How hard is that to understand? You just keep repeating it as if it's going to somehow change the fact that you sped up and did not proceed to slow down again before reaching the stop sign. It is the act of slowing down before reaching that stop sign that I am at contention with.



And taking the interstate isn't an optional risk? One that is even greater than the whole "rolling stop" issue?

Also, you keep saying "you're not going to get hit if you come to a complete stop assuming you're not in the road". And? So what? I am not going to get hit rolling through a stop sign assuming I am not in the road either. If there is oncoming traffic I'm not going to keep rolling on and take my chances, that's retarded. And as we've already established numerous times, making the decision to stop before reaching the stop sign itself is very easy and you have plenty of time to 100% anaylze the situation.




I don't agree with some. I know exactly what they're for, they're for people who can't be responsible enough to drive a safe speed based on conditions and the area, which unfortunately is a great percentage of the population. What I really have issues with is some of the decisionmaking behind many speed limits. Like my earlier example of a newly paved 2 mile straightaway with no intersections or houses (or anything to turn onto for that matter). 25mph speed limit posted, when it could have been 45mph without consequence.





If you think I'm being an unsafe driver by doing those things then your standards are set so high as to eliminate 95% of the population. Everyone breaks some driving law, I guarantee you've broken your share, possibly even from being unaware the law even existed.



Hurr, no actually it'd be more equivalent to not seeing the stop sign than it would be rolling through it.

Instead, I'll nullify the argument by saying if we're to drive knowing we could make a poor judgment call at any moment, driving on the interstate would be a downright horrible idea.

If you want a proper explanation of the red light, it was simply I looked up, had a left turn green arrow, looked up again as I was going through, and it had already turned red.

Simply put, by stopping at a stop sign instead of rolling through it, you are not changing anything. You can make the exact same incorrect judgment call to go out into that intersection even after you have stopped. The likelihood of doing so doesn't magically increase by any appreciable amount when rolling through it. By completely stopping versus rolling you're only losing MAYBE 1/2-1 second, totally not a difference when you're already looking at 5+ seconds to make such a call.

You make much quicker judgments on an expressway every day, and since you're not dead I'm assuming you can make them well.



It is clear, you're just getting all pissed off because it's not the same as what I was talking about.



I assumed that because I assumed based on what you had originally told me that you had drove through the stop sign. Then you described to me a situation in which you didn't roll through but instead didn't stop at all. You didn't slow down for the stop sign. Point. Fact. End of story. You had stopped for the car in front of you. That car is not a stop sign (ironically this is the legal reason on why you were ticketed in the first place!).

If you were paying attention you would have noticed I said nowhere that he was "stomping on the gas pedal". See how your comprehension continues to fail?