IAAL,
This has gotten stupid.
MY RESPONSE: No, it's not. I would imagine this point, if you can justify it, could be important to our writer's husband. I'm sure he doesn't just drive on San Fernando Valley freeways - - that there MIGHT be a mountain or two in his way when he drives through California.
My point about the mountains, is that a judge can assess the risk factor if he chooses.
MY RESPONSE: Really? You're saying that a Traffic Court judge has "discretion" to "assess the risk factor" even when there's no Vehicle Code section concerning mountain roads versus flat land roadways? Really?
The poster clearly stated it was a 6 lane freeway, so it doesn't apply.
MY RESPONSE: Sure it does. See my explanation above, and the fact that you stated it as a legal factual statement. I just want to know where I'm wrong.
I agreed with every single thing you stated, you read my post wrong,
MY RESPONSE: No, I didn't read your post wrong. Your sentence was grammatically incorrect. So, if I was wrong, it was because of the way you wrote it.
and now we have Tami jumping in thinking this is a play ground, and I won't entertain the nut.
MY RESPONSE: I couldn't care less about that, and neither should you.
Your right about everything ok?
MY RESPONSE: Well, it's about time you admitted that!!
IAAL