• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

22450(a) CVC question

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Silverbolt

Junior Member
CdwJava, you're right. I did intially post that it was 15 feet in my first post. It was a typo on my part, and I apologize.
 


JIMinCA

Member
CdwJava, you're right. I did intially post that it was 15 feet in my first post. It was a typo on my part, and I apologize.
Even if you were 15 feet behind the line, I personally don't see where that crosses over into the relm of inappropriate nor violating the statute. However, I'd still be very interested to see what the cop's notes say.
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
Even if you were 15 feet behind the line, I personally don't see where that crosses over into the relm of inappropriate nor violating the statute.
If 15 feet before the line is "at" the limit line, then there is no point in even requiring a stop. Fortunately, that is not the case.

- Carl
 

JIMinCA

Member
If 15 feet before the line is "at" the limit line, then there is no point in even requiring a stop. Fortunately, that is not the case.

- Carl
As I stated earlier, 2 inches is obviously OK... stopping a block away is clearly not reasonable. There is lots of grey that lies in between. I merely suggest that 15 feet lies closer to the "OK" part of the grey than it does to the "not reasonable" part.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
As I stated earlier, 2 inches is obviously OK... stopping a block away is clearly not reasonable. There is lots of grey that lies in between. I merely suggest that 15 feet lies closer to the "OK" part of the grey than it does to the "not reasonable" part.
And your suggestion is WRONG (as is oh so much more that you post).
 

JIMinCA

Member
And your suggestion is WRONG (as is oh so much more that you post).
I find your screen name to be inappropriate for you. Zinger is defined as "A witty, often caustic remark." While your remarks are caustic, they are no where close to witty. However, a zinger is typically a sly remark meant to distract a debate or conversation from the facts at hand. With that in mind, you may be appropriately named indeed.

I have yet to see one retort from you based on any fact, evidence or even a rational opinion. If you would like to discuss "why" I am wrong based on something substantial, then your posts will merrit infinitely more respect than they currently do.
 

JIMinCA

Member
And your suggestion is WRONG (as is oh so much more that you post).
I do, however, give you credit for discrediting yourself in your signature. Your personal discredit obviously means that you recognize that there is no validity in anything you say. Therefore, you recognize and admit that the quoted post above must be wrong which would means you really believe I am right.

Good job.
 

The Occultist

Senior Member
I find your screen name to be inappropriate for you. Zinger is defined as "A witty, often caustic remark." While your remarks are caustic, they are no where close to witty. However, a zinger is typically a sly remark meant to distract a debate or conversation from the facts at hand. With that in mind, you may be appropriately named indeed.
hahaha!! Are you kidding me?? Before you try to make such STUPID attacks, please take a moment to reread what his handle is, because I promise you, it is NOT "Zinger". Go on, take a look. :rolleyes:
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top