Faced with bigger world problems that are of major importance to the welfare of our country, they focus on this.

The Supreme Court has dealt with this issue before, and Google's refusal was upheld once before. Yahoo allegedly complied with this demand. Microsoft has made no statement. So, the new attorney general is trying a different approach to "get into the net"!

This is not a matter of being liberal or conservative, it's a bigger matter of being RADICAL! Dictionary Definition: "One who wants to make 'fundamental' changes, as in government or society!. Bawdy Shop beware??

quote:

---

Originally posted by beachbum:
calling our President and his staff a gang shows a lot of disrespect to our President and the country.

---

Respect for:
Tom Delay. Bill Frist, Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and his Halliburton Billions and secret energy committee, and george bush himself. I don't think so!

Try not to make a habit of posting lies. Can the above make that statement?

quote:

---

Originally posted by mellowyellow:
under the guise of protecting children from pornography.

---

If Google, or any other internet entity is making it easier for children to post, access, make or do ANYTHING with pornography, MORE POWER to President Bush and his gang to do whatever is necessary to stop it, or at least put a dent in it!! What do you mean by "guise"?? If it's there, it needs to be dealt with....period! What are you worried about?? My kids surf the internet and we have the computer where we can monitor them, but every now and then, an advertisement will get by or something objectionable will get displayed, and it just pisses me off!!

Using the words "constitutional rights" and the phrase "children and pornography" in the same paragraph is a guise as well. What does either have to do with each other??

------------------
Sub Stanger/Oxford White 2003 Mach 1.
MustangsandMore Member #91
MCA Member #61863

Past Mustangs: '84 GT 5-speed; '91 GT auto; '70 M-code Mach 1, grabber yellow; '95 GT-S 5 speed, green, wrecked and totalled; 1995 GT-S 5 speed, bright yellow; '94 6-banger, wifes; '89 LX 5.0 vert, '90 LX 5.0 hatch, '69 M-code Mach 1, 4 speed, 1990 5.0 LX 'vert w/ AOD converted to T-5.

quote:

---

Originally posted by adragon8u:
ever see this? It's funny.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/funnyvideos/v/bushdrunk.htm

---

------------------
Sub Stanger/Oxford White 2003 Mach 1.
MustangsandMore Member #91
MCA Member #61863

quote:

---

Originally posted by mellowyellow:
Respect for:
Tom Delay. Bill Frist, Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and his Halliburton Billions and secret energy committee, and george bush himself. I don't think so!
[This message has been edited by mellowyellow (edited 01-20-2006).]

---

While we're making a list, wouldn't it be fair to include Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, et. al.

Let's not pretend that spying on American Citizens is something new. What about having FBI files in the White House residence on all of your political enemies? Or sicking the IRS on your political enemies?

Which is worse, monitoring a cell phone used to call Al Queda or using federal resources to go after those in the opposing party?

According to the New York Times, the National Security Administration has been monitoring every email sent. Guess which President approved that one? That program started under President Clinton. Is reading your emails any worse than listening to selected cell phones?

I just want to point out that there is blenty of blame to go around here, not just on the Bush Administration. Previous administrations on both sides of the ploitical isles have been guilty of the same things here.

1 JFK, or any Kennedy
2 Slick Willy & Ms Slick Willy and (gang)
3 LB Johnson
4 Warren, of thr Warren commission
5 J. Edgar Hoover
6 George Bush, Sr & Jr.
7 John Stennis, Miss Sen for approx 50 yrs
8 John Eastland, same as Stennis
9 Ross Barnett, Ms Gov during the 60s

Just a few of a long list

Its really much to do about nothing

And does anyone really think we have enough people in the Federal Gov't to monitor all the millions of phone calls made each day?

The monitoring system ("wire-tapping" is really a poor choice of words)is set up to monitor for specific words ,groups of words and phrases then "red flag" this for review.

How many of you really think the "Fed's" are listing to your everyday phone calls?
They're not,move on,get over it,they are monitoring the overseas calls made daily.

I talk to Shanghai at least twice a week,email often,,I'm sure someone looked or listen,and I really feel sorry for them cause it ain't nothing exciting about Phenolic Resins
sam

quote:

---

Originally posted by SUBMARINER MUSTANGER:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by adragon8u:
[b]ever see this? It's funny.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/funnyvideos/v/bushdrunk.htm

---

[/B][/QUOTE]

Bush is shoveling another bucket of political horse s**t to take attention away from way more important issues, like our young people dying every day in a war that was begun for very questionable reasons. I don't intend to get into a dabate over that particular issue, its just more important to get it resolved and stop the bloodshed.

The Google database will have literally billions of searches. How will anyone ever be able to scan all that data to garner anything of use?

The dream of contolling content on the Internet is just that, a dream. How does the US go about regulating all the content, whatever it is, from foreign countries?

This bruhaha over Google is no more than a thinly veiled attempt to placate the bible thumpers, no offense intended to anyone.

The only way to regulate what your kids see on the Internet is to monitor what they are doing all the time or keep them off it. Don't put the computer in their bedrooms or anyplace out of the way in the home. The dining room or living room keeps it where it can be easily watched. Its not just porn that needs to be prevented. There are chat rooms that have led to kidnappings and assaults, also radical groups recruit via the web. There is all kinds of really bad stuff out there, along with lots of very good content. Vigilance is the key. Anyone that truly understands the technology of the Internet knows legislative content control is impossible.

What would come to mind if someone mentioned a country where there was one set of candidates on the ballot. USSR? Nazi Germany? Communist China perhaps?

That is exactly the admitted goal of Carl Rove, the Presidents number one right hand man. A one party system of Republicans, of course, is what he and others are after. Our political system needs some repair work, but eliminating one party isn't the answer.

I see many parallels between George W. Bush and Richard M. Nixon. I thought we'd never see another President as bad as Nixon, but hes met his match. Both have shown a blatant disregard for the law and the rights of the people that elected them. I thought we'd never see another one as bad as LBJ too. Boy was I wrong about that!

To call all this radical is an understatement. Bush and his boys are good at running interference to draw attention away from far more important issues and hide their true intentions, at least they think they are good at it. If this wasn't all so deadly serious it would make a good comedy.

I have all the respect in the world for our country and the office of the President. I have no respect for a man that uses that office to further his personal interests and those of his already obscenely rich and powerful allies.

All they want to do is see if a kid searches for "bunny rabbit" do they get a return that links them to the playboy website, etc. And if it does, what needs to be done to regulate how porn websites are managed or how the search engines run.

For those who don't know, if Steve wanted, he could put Chevy, Camaro, Corvette, etc in the keyword header of Mustangsandmore, and people searching for those would get this page, even though there is nothing about those subjects on this site. Porn sites do the same thing to get people "in the front door," so to speak.

Why is it so hard to understand that the government has different people with different responsibilities? So, when you say that the justice department looking into a child's access to porn is diverting attention away from the war on terror, you are implying that every government employee's only job right now is the war on terror? No, it doesn't work that way. There is such a thing as telling one person to do this and another to do that, and if they are doing both at the same time, it doesn't mean one is any less important than the other.

Don't worry, I'll take care of making sure my kid only searches for stuff like "mickey mouse" and "barney", but I'd still like to know that when he does, all he gets from the search is kid related websites to click on.

Sams correct,I can do that my 68 site,change the META tags and Monday when the Bots sweep my site,which I have setup to be done every other week,they will pick up the new words.

I can add "classic chevy" or "large breasted women" to the list and the Bots don't know the difference.

I think it's a common sense thing that these assh_les are stopped from doing this.

As for how well Bush has done,only History will tell.And if I'm not mistaken it the job of each party to stay in power and control Congress.The Democrats sure are trying had to get back in control.So to say one Party want to control is correct,thats what they want to do be it GOP or the Democrats.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dad Vishus:
Having respect for the country has nothing to do with this. (Yes it does, Dad! Expressing concern for the welfare of YOUR Country is just that!!)

This bruhaha over Google is no more than a thinly veiled attempt to placate the bible thumpers, no offense intended to anyone.

(One thing about bush, he pays back his supporters. "Placate" is putting it mildly when it comes to Corporate America!)

Its not just porn that needs to be prevented. There are chat rooms that have led to kidnappings and assaults, also radical groups recruit via the web. There is all kinds of really bad stuff out there, along with lots of very good content. Vigilance is the key. Anyone that truly understands the technology of the Internet knows legislative content control is impossible.

What would come to mind if someone mentioned a country where there was one set of candidates on the ballot. USSR? Nazi Germany? Communist China perhaps?

(And one thing these countries did was censor and regulate communications. Trying to get into the Internet by a country, with an eye toward "protecting the populace" is frightening!}Investigating porn is just a stepping stone.

That is exactly the admitted goal of Carl Rove, the Presidents number one right hand man. A one party system of Republicans, of course, is what he and others are after. Our political system needs some repair work, but eliminating one party isn't the answer.

I see many parallels between George W. Bush and Richard M. Nixon. I thought we'd never see another President as bad as Nixon, but hes met his match. Both have shown a blatant disregard for the law and the rights of the people that elected them. I thought we'd never see another one as bad as LBJ too. Boy was I wrong about that!

To call all this radical is an understatement. Bush and his boys are good at running interference to draw attention away from far more important issues and hide their true intentions, at least they think they are good at it. If this wasn't all so deadly serious it would make a good comedy.

I have all the respect in the world for our country and the office of the President. I have no respect for a man that uses that office to further his personal interests and those of his already obscenely rich and powerful allies.

---

Read an interesting, timely article called Made In America, by Eric Peters. It's on AOL this AM. Am sure that it would be on Google. Oh Dear!! I mentioned the "G" word!!

Could you PLEASE list these Tax Credits so I can let my VP of Finance know.

Panama Canal or their port in the Bahamas, or their major involvement with ALL the major countries in S. America, or Cuba, or the Middle East

We need to protect our interest in Panama, we MUST!!

Bahamas,heck we have had a "secret military base" there since the mid 50's

Cuba- pretty important I'd say with a hostile Nation 90 miles off our Southern Coast.

As for South America we need to get involved with the developing Nations before Red China stakes claim to them.

So, 20 years later the foreign policy communicator seems like a buffoon. We'll see about this boy in 20 years but geez, now we know what Bush I was avoiding with his mysterious 100 hour war pull out (retreat?)fifteen years ago.... strange how the people blowing themselves up in our faces now were in their formative years fifteen years ago.

Don't know what the right answer is though or I'd tell you all.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Catmando:
September 11th. I remember watching the tv, at a loss for words. I remember how angry I became as I saw American citizens, covered in soot, walking aimlessly in the streets of New York. I remember people posting pictures of missing loved ones on fences and poles. I remember getting my kids out of school early because I didn't know what to do or what was happening next. I remember going to work that night, nobody really said anything much to each other, I guess we were all at a loss for words. I remember the quiet skys in the days following. I was angry, scared, confused, and unsure of the future.
I then remember the Presidents speach made on TV. I remember the President standing in the rubble with the Firemen and the speach he made then. Then I was proud, and sure, and confident we would overcome.
That is all I need to remember to know that President Bush was THE leader we needed at that time in America.
Sleep in peace tonight, people are out there trying to protect us. Even if we try to hamper them with unrealistic concerns.

---

If anyone can access searches to look for lawbreakers, look out!

Some gang of uniforms might come kicking in your door cause somebody did a Google search for Barbie Dolls.

Headers can be used to divert searches anywhere quite easily. A perfectly innocent search could lead to something entirely different.

Just be careful what you wish for and support.

BTW, I'm a fiercely independent voter. I will never register for a party.

------------------
63 Falcon 377 Cleveland stroker Flying Toilet alchohol injection. 6.19 @ 110 MPH 1/8 mile
2002 Ranger FX4 daily driver
2000 F350 PSD Crew cab dually - Like commuting in a B52!!
98 US Cargo Phantom II 28'

quote:

---

Originally posted by mellowyellow:
Furthur chiseling away at Constitutional Rights: The bush gang is now targeting Google, under the guise of protecting children from pornography. They want access to Google's database.

---

------------------
SkinnyMan
Tupelo, MS

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dad Vishus:

BTW, I'm a fiercely independent voter. I will never register for a party.

---

A BIG AMEN DV!!! anyone who votes for a candidate because he/she is with a certain party is an IDIOT!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by capri man:
A BIG AMEN DV!!! anyone who votes for a candidate because he/she is with a certain party is an IDIOT!!!

---

I agree. It kills me that you can walk into the ballot box and pull a lever for "all republican" or "all democrat", etc.

http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/privacy/story/0,10801,107993,00.html

quote:

---

Originally posted by capri man:
A BIG AMEN DV!!! anyone who votes for a candidate because he/she is with a certain party is an IDIOT!!!

---

I agree! Morons come from both sides of the aisle.

Never forget that in any election, all you are voting for is a puppet, it almost doesn't matter who gets elected, really. The country will always be truly run by unseen forces, the way it is currently set up.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lcl:

We live in the greatest country in the world, we (the people) have the power to remove, or replace OUR "leaders". Yeah it's not perfect (nor will it ever be) but I believe that it is the best system devised by humans to govern and placate the populace.

---

Not to start a flame war, but I get fired up about these type of very general statements. And yes, I am an American!!
Yes, you can be proud of your country and all that it stands for. BUT, unless you have lived in every other single country on the planet and lived under every other form of government there is ABSOLUTELY no way you can possibly make this type of general statement and it acutally being an informed one.
Are you going to tell me that the Aussies, or Canadians, or Brits, or French, or Scandavians, etc, etc. don't have the same position in regards to their countries or forms of government? And YES, they also have the ability to remove or replace their leaders without a civil war erupting. So, who's is really the best????
Bottom line, to say you live in the greatest country with the best form of government is basically just your own opinion and not something determined through research.

I'll jump off my soap box now and yield the floor to the next speaker.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dad Vishus:
With the Feds poking into Internet activity, and I believe they will

---

Almost makes me wish Al Gore never invented the interent!

quote:

---

Originally posted by hwyman3:

Almost makes me wish Al Gore never invented the interent!

---

Yeah, I might just get a webcam so they can be bored to death watching all my suspect activities.

quote:

---

China would not seize the Amercian built companies in that country, at an "appropriate time" and take over the reigns. Does anyone know the amount of our trade deficit for 2005? And how much of that money recieved by China is being invested in American Securites? Maybe a refresher by the infamas Nikita Kruchev (sp) who made the paraphrased statement....we'll conquer you from within. Corporate America, so tunnel vision consumed with profits, that they blindly help build up the machinery to give China a MORE than obcenely rich Gross National Product, while our trade deficit is bolstered by a person who gives these American companies tax credits. Companies, who then ride the wave of large profits, yet fail to lower the price of their goods!

---

We are all to blame for this deficit,not just the administration. Every time we purchase,we vote with our wallets. Remember that the next time you buy a "quality foreign car". We as a country need to go back to our roots and become more self dependent for products. There should be stiff tarriffs on things we import,and even to the point of banning importation of goods we produce altogether.

Another point to look at: Most of these third world nations are driven by drug money,even bigger than oil. IMHO the illegal drug industry needs to be erradicated. We are at a crucial time in this war,and the smuggling of this stuff has to stop. I really believe that if this problem went away,other problems would soon have solutions too.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Catmando:
All right Hwyman3 for some comic relief!!! Dad Vishus, I know for a fact the cameras are not so we can be monitered, it is for cash flow! All of those cameras and about 75% of traffic enforcement is nothing but revenue collection!! It makes me puke. Traffic enforcement for revenue is way, way, way out of hand.

---

In all seriousness, I wholeheartedly agree about the "traffic enforcement" cameras being for revenue generation and not about traffic safety. Several news organizations have done studies where yellow light timing has been shortened AFTER cameras were installed. Heck, even when Washington, DC wanted Speed Cameras, their justification was revenue, not safety.

quote:

---

Originally posted by adragon8u:
One GOOD deed doesn't excuse a person from the mistakes that follow.

---

He's like a surfer chasing the 9th wave, catching it, thinking he can ride it forever!!
Reminds me of a boss I had and to paraphrase: "Never mind what good move you did yesterday, what are going to do today!!"

He acted as a President would in the face of disaster, and not to downplay it nor to put it in the forefront of an entire term{s}. So yesterday, he made an emphatic issue of terrorism, suggesting that those who aren't with him are probably supporters. An exaggeration, yes, but his squinty eyed, line in the sand, knock the chip off my shoulder demeanor said it well! Well.......yesterday, watching the video of the Mexican army helping a truck, mired in the Rio Grande, loaded with bales of pot, come into the US, IN PLAIN VIEW, WITH ABSOLUTELY NO INTERFERENCE is hard to take! This, while the so-called head of the Department Of Homeland Security pooh-poohs the whole Mexican "affair". The "our gang" up 'til yesterday, distanced themselves from the whole border fracas. They have steadfastly been against the fence, enforcement, and have ignored the protests of ALL 48 states, many of whom are enacting laws. This is all about payback to supporters. If it isn't please enlighten!! With those here, and those future "invited workers" that bush favors,we are talking in the millions. Not protesting as the so-called president,honcho, whatever, of Mexico spurs it on, saying they have the right to come into our Country, any time!!!!!!!!!! while "our gang" played Ostrich with head in the sand!
How EASY for an Alcrapo Terrorist to dress "appropriatly" and casually walk across with a map furnished by support groups. And while this was happening,our "fearless leader" was visiting the Intelligence Headquarters in Maryland, touting our fight against terror!!!!

Does that give anyone a "warm fuzzy feeling"? DEA had been scaled back. Customs, here, was scaled back, Airline Security takes a kick, as scissors and knivees are allowed-as long as they're under a certain limit. Any Con would tell you that a 4" shank could do a lot-particularly while in the air!

Comments yesterday, about the Army being overtaxed and Donald Rumdum's answer typifies the whole deal! A shrug of the shoulders, blaming the previous "gang"

Am an older person who didn't care for LBJ, some of Nixon's stuff(and I voted for him- once}, Carter, and some of Reagan's stuff, Clinton, and some of his stuff, but nothing, absolutely nothing, tops this clown! Get a kick outta him on his raunch, he's now got a new pickumup truck, and choppin' wood!

quote:

---

Originally posted by mustangs68:
[B
Bahamas,heck we have had a "secret military base" there since the mid 50's

[/B]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Catmando:
Traffic enforcement for revenue is way, way, way out of hand. [/B]

---

But it's good to see Air America Radio is alive and well

quote:

---

Originally posted by beachbum:
Maybe I don't understand that statement or it may be a joke, but in my area if they wanted to enforce the traffic laws on the interstates or any roadways they could write traffic tickets for speeding or running red lights every minute, all day long, seven days a week and make millions, but they don't.

---

I suppose it must be an efficiency thing.

Instead of actually stopping the violaters, they just sit in the office and wait for the pictures, sending out "invitations" to come pay your fine instead of writing tickets on the street.

I thought that was called entrapment at one time.

There is alot of controversy around here about this.

I have some questions about these cameras.

Can they get an identifiable photo of the driver?

If not, do they issue the ticket to the car?

If its the owner that gets the ticket, what about when a vehicle is registered to more than one person, like a husband and wife, or a company?

I'm not opposed to enforcement of traffic laws but this a darned cheesy method.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dad Vishus:
I suppose it must be an efficiency thing.

Instead of actually stopping the violaters, they just sit in the office and wait for the pictures, sending out "invitations" to come pay your fine instead of writing tickets on the street.

I thought that was called entrapment at one time.

There is alot of controversy around here about this.

I have some questions about these cameras.

Can they get an identifiable photo of the driver?

If not, do they issue the ticket to the car?

If its the owner that gets the ticket, what about when a vehicle is registered to more than one person, like a husband and wife, or a company?

I'm not opposed to enforcement of traffic laws but this a darned cheesy method.

---

You have it right, at least with Maryland's cameras. In Maryland, the owner of the vehicle is responsible, not the driver. The owner pays a $75 fine for every infraction. The state doesn't care who's name is on the title, be it joint ownership or a corporation. SOmething like this actually bit Ford big time in Detroit. Detroit sued Ford over parking tickets on cars Ford leased to people and the tickets were unpaid. The courts forced Ford to pay the fines anyway, since legally Ford owned the cars and was responsible.

Let me use this example to cite why I hate these cameras so much. Let's say I loan my truck to a friend of mine. He goes out and runs a red light. I get teh ticket. Now, I have to go to court and prove I did not break the law. It is assumed that I am guilty until proven innocent. I always thought the opposite was supposed to be true, that you were innocent until proven guilty. The picture proves my truck ran the red light. It doesn't prove that I ran the red light.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Catmando:
I didn't start this thread, but I think it has been blown off course a bit.
If Mohammad Igottabomb has a pattern of contacting certain people in the U.S.A, why on Earth should we not look into this??? I think our goverment would be neglegent if they did not. Part of the Bush bashing does include "his" government branches not sharing information on what we knew about the terroists that hit us on 9-11. I don't think we can have it both ways. We cannot be critical of Bush or whomever is the Commander in Chief for doing too much and then in the same breath say he didn't do enough.

---

Amen. Bush is in a no win situation. Either he doesn't do enough to stop a terrorist attack, or when he does something to keep the terrorists in check he has over-stepped his authority!

quote:

---

Bottom line, to say you live in the greatest country with the best form of government is basically just your own opinion and not something determined through research.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fastback68:
[QUOTE]Bottom line, to say you live in the greatest country with the best form of government is basically just your own opinion and not something determined through research.

---

Thank you Duane Reading your post was like reading something I've written myself many a time! I've never heard it from an American though.

quote:

---

Originally posted by hwyman3:
Let me use this example to cite why I hate these cameras so much. Let's say I loan my truck to a friend of mine. He goes out and runs a red light. I get teh ticket. Now, I have to go to court and prove I did not break the law. It is assumed that I am guilty until proven innocent. I always thought the opposite was supposed to be true, that you were innocent until proven guilty. The picture proves my truck ran the red light. It doesn't prove that I ran the red light.

---

How about you own a 9mm that is not locked up and your kid takes it to school and caps the guy who picks on him everyday. Are you not negligent on that part for allowing your kid to commit a crime even though the kid does not actually own the gun.

Why should this be any different? If your buddy wants to borrow your truck, I'd say tell him not to run any red lights or he'll be paying the fine and the increase in your insurance.

To me this is easy. Similar to what was just said about Bush, damned if you do, damned if you don't. Cities have people complaining about too many people running redlights, people needlessly getting killed in traffic accidents, and not enough police to go around. So now technology comes along that frees up police to go chase bad guys instead of sitting on street corners, and wow complaints abound that the government is overstepping their bounds.

I see your point that their is great pain put upon an innocent person to prove they are innocent. Perhaps there should be an administrative function where you can call your buddy up and say "hey, WTF dude, you ran a redlight and I got the ticket", and the buddy can call an 800 number or go online or go to court with you and he pays the fine and he gets the points on his license if applicable, thus accepting responsibility for the crime.

quote:

---

Originally posted by beachbum:

That is the great thing about living here, we can have an opinion about anything or anyone, tell all and go about our merry way without fear of retaliation from the government. That is great, so why not yell it from the rooftops.

---

Basically you missed the WHOLE point of my response. Yes we can have opinions, state them and not worry about retaliation. BUTTTTTT, how is that any different from Australia, Canada, Britian, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, etc, etc. etc. or any other country with a democratically elected government??
The point being we have this freedom, but so do all the other countries I stated and it doesn't make ours "the Best" over theirs or our country any worse than any of theirs. They ALL have their good and bad points and without having lived in or done research on every single other country on the planet there is NO WAY to construe that "AMERICA is the Best" as a truly informed opinion.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 71RESTO:
Basically you missed the WHOLE point of my response. Yes we can have opinions, state them and not worry about retaliation. BUTTTTTT, how is that any different from Australia, Canada, Britian, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, etc, etc. etc. or any other country with a democratically elected government??
The point being we have this freedom, but so do all the other countries I stated and it doesn't make ours "the Best" over theirs or our country any worse than any of theirs. They ALL have their good and bad points and without having lived in or done research on every single other country on the planet there is NO WAY to construe that "AMERICA is the Best" as a truly informed opinion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sigtauenus:
How about you own a 9mm that is not locked up and your kid takes it to school and caps the guy who picks on him everyday. Are you not negligent on that part for allowing your kid to commit a crime even though the kid does not actually own the gun.

Why should this be any different? If your buddy wants to borrow your truck, I'd say tell him not to run any red lights or he'll be paying the fine and the increase in your insurance.

To me this is easy. Similar to what was just said about Bush, damned if you do, damned if you don't. Cities have people complaining about too many people running redlights, people needlessly getting killed in traffic accidents, and not enough police to go around. So now technology comes along that frees up police to go chase bad guys instead of sitting on street corners, and wow complaints abound that the government is overstepping their bounds.

I see your point that their is great pain put upon an innocent person to prove they are innocent. Perhaps there should be an administrative function where you can call your buddy up and say "hey, WTF dude, you ran a redlight and I got the ticket", and the buddy can call an 800 number or go online or go to court with you and he pays the fine and he gets the points on his license if applicable, thus accepting responsibility for the crime.

Beyond that, hey, its your truck, so its your responsibility.

---

That's kind of an apples and oranges comparrison. If I owned a 9mm gun, it would be kept under lock and key and if I had children in the house, then they would be educated about the gun and how they are not to ever touch that safe and the keys would be kept away from them. It's called responsible gun ownership.

Now for the red light cameras, If I loan my vehicle out to someone, granted it is my responsibility to make sure I loan it to someone responsible. However, if the person I loan it to run the red light, still there is nothing to respect the part of the Consitiution that states I am innocent until proven guilty. Again, that camera proves my vehicle was going through the red light, there is no proof that I went through it. Plus, what about jurisdictions that shorten the time of a yellow light, just to get more violations. Most of these cameras are run by a contractor that gets a cut of every citation. Plus, because of these shortened yellow lights, you are finding more rear end collisions because of people stopping too quickly at the light.

I don't mind police coming up with creative ways to enforce the laws, however the cameras raise too many ethical questions. For example, if the goal is law enforcement and not revenue enhancement, then they could simply park a surplus cruiser in areas that are prone to red light running. Many police departments have tried this in areas where speeding has been a problem and it has met with incredible sucess.