• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NYC mayor's SUV caught breaking traffic laws

ludin said:
i didn't miss anything. no you show me the law where they don't have to obey the law first.
Click to expand...

Prior to your entrance to this thread, none of my posts had anything to do with the law. You then asserted as fact that the driver broke the law. It is your obligation to back up your assertion and you have failed to so.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Prior to your entrance to this thread, none of my posts had anything to do with the law. You then asserted as fact that the driver broke the law. It is your obligation to back up your assertion and you have failed to so.
Click to expand...

you obviously didn't read the OP. he was caught going through 2 or 3 stops signs. going 15 miles/h over the speed limit. please read the OP so that you know what we are discussing.
i didn't assert anything it is in the very 1st post of this thread.

now you have to prove that the mayor and his driver in a non-emergancy situation is allowed to break traffic laws. you are going to have a very hard time doing this.
 
SBu said:
Non-story and "gotcha" reporting. There are so many other legitimate things to criticize this guy about, this is just "gotcha" reporting at the local level.
Click to expand...

I think this is a prime example of how our elected officials see themselves as the elites with do as I say not as I do laws. They always seem to know what is best for the little guy and think the little guy doesn't know or is even aware what is best for him. Then our political elite do exactly the opposite of what they are telling us what is best for us.
 
ludin said:
you obviously didn't read the OP. he was caught going through 2 or 3 stops signs. going 15 miles/h over the speed limit. please read the OP so that you know what we are discussing.
i didn't assert anything it is in the very 1st post of this thread.

now you have to prove that the mayor and his driver in a non-emergancy situation is allowed to break traffic laws. you are going to have a very hard time doing this.
Click to expand...

Here is your first post in the thread:

ludin said:
yet you should. if you were caught doing this you would have a suspended license, thousands in fines and probably some jail time as well.
yet because it is the mayor or part of the mayor's party nothing happens.

whoever was driving violated the law and is subject to the same laws as everyone else. being mayor or the mayor's driver doesn't give you special privilege to do what you want.

whether he was knew or didn't know is irrelevant. the person driving did know and should be held accountable. driving like that puts the public at risk.
Click to expand...

Your first post in this thread was an assertion of fact that the driver broke the law. It is your obligation to back up your assertion and you have failed to so.
 
Perotista said:
I think this is a prime example of how our elected officials see themselves as the elites with do as I say not as I do laws. They always seem to know what is best for the little guy and think the little guy doesn't know or is even aware what is best for him. Then our political elite do exactly the opposite of what they are telling us what is best for us.
Click to expand...

I suppose he should follow the speed limit exactly (he was going like 10mph over), and then blame any failures on missing deadlines due to traffic. I suppose you would rather the business of the city wait for traffic to clear out.

I'm not saying that you don't have a point, I just disagree about how big this issue actually is.
 
notquiteright said:
Hmmm so the news crews says 2 stop signs and you say many and 'blowing through'. Either they stopped for many of your many or there were not that many... Did the news crew say the SUV never stopped or did a rolling stop or just 'blew through'?
Click to expand...

I didn't say he went through "many"; I said he was in an residential area where, typical for NYC, there are many stop signs.

And it's not like he's in a bus or a train with darkened windows. It's a SUV! He's not oblivious...or maybe he is
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Here is your first post in the thread:



Your first post in this thread was an assertion of fact that the driver broke the law. It is your obligation to back up your assertion and you have failed to so.
Click to expand...

It is against the law to speed. It's not a criminal offense, but it is against the law.
 
SBu said:
I suppose he should follow the speed limit exactly (he was going like 10mph over), and then blame any failures on missing deadlines due to traffic. I suppose you would rather the business of the city wait for traffic to clear out.
Click to expand...

That isn't a legitimate reason to speed. If you get pulled over for speeding on your way to work, "I'll miss a deadline" will not get you out of a ticket.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
That isn't a legitimate reason to speed. If you get pulled over for speeding on your way to work, "I'll miss a deadline" will not get you out of a ticket.
Click to expand...

It could be if it deals with the saftey and welfare of a city of millions of people. Most jobs don't carry that kind of responsibility.
 
ludin said:
you obviously didn't read the OP. he was caught going through 2 or 3 stops signs. going 15 miles/h over the speed limit. please read the OP so that you know what we are discussing.
i didn't assert anything it is in the very 1st post of this thread.

now you have to prove that the mayor and his driver in a non-emergancy situation is allowed to break traffic laws. you are going to have a very hard time doing this.
Click to expand...

True enough.

Police in OH are required by OH law to follow all traffic laws when not responding to emergencies.

I'd bet that NY is similar.
 
sangha said:
I didn't say he went through "many"; I said he was in an residential area where, typical for NYC, there are many stop signs. And it's not like he's in a bus or a train with darkened windows. It's a SUV! He's not oblivious...or maybe he is
Click to expand...

So in an area where there are many stop signs he is filmed not coming to a complete stop at two. His driver must know the routes with very few stop signs.

An SUV with darkened windows, and as I have said before, if he was working he may not have known he arrived at his office until told to get out. Hell for all anyone knows he was catching 40 winks.

You ASS-U-Me waaaaay too much in this.
 
notquiteright said:
Then don't ASS-u-me so much about what did and didn't happen, holding someone to a higher standard requires YOU have a higher standard to follow in accusing...

oh wait, no you don't- we are online.... my bad.... ;)
Click to expand...

Are you really saying that - online or not - it is inappropriate to criticize a politician that seems to flout the very laws that he preaches?

That's all I did you know. My comments in the thread were apolitical. It was reported that a politician was touting traffic safety and then didn't seem to feel that he was subject to those regulations or ideas. I did criticize him for that. So, instead of making this about me, or my rights of criticism, how about telling me why I'm wrong and why he should not be subject to criticism. I'm amenable to explanation - if I'm wrong to do this and you make a good case why, I'll retract my statements. That's the "debate" part of this.

FWIW, I also criticized his predecessor, albeit for other reasons. That is what we do here. I hope you're not defending him because he belongs to a party that you support. I'm an equal opportunity politician-basher.
:peace
 
notquiteright said:
So in an area where there are many stop signs he is filmed not coming to a complete stop at two. His driver must know the routes with very few stop signs.

An SUV with darkened windows, and as I have said before, if he was working he may not have known he arrived at his office until told to get out. Hell for all anyone knows he was catching 40 winks.

You ASS-U-Me waaaaay too much in this.
Click to expand...

I assumed nothing. His driver broke the law and he is responsible. It is particularly noteworthy given the fact that he has launched a campaign about driver and pedestrian safety. You can excuse it all you want, but many people are going to see it differently than you. There's no doubt that this story will hurt him politically
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Oh me too, don't get me wrong. I'm not holding police officers up as paragons of virtue, I'm just pointing out that there are specific circumstances where they are permitted to do things others are not, and that when they do so they are not flouting or showing disdain for the law.

There are a veritable smorgasbord of examples of police officers who do in fact flout or showing disdain for the law. I'm just saying I don't think this is necessarily one of them.
Click to expand...

Mr. De Blasio is a mayor, not a police officer. If he hadn't been preachy on the topic, this event would have gone unnoticed by everyone.

IMHO, this was hypocritical, not catastrophic. He's not a paragon of evil. But he set a poor example on a topic he seems to be promoting. I'm not calling for the death penalty, just recognition of a false face.
 
SBu said:
It could be if it deals with the saftey and welfare of a city of millions of people. Most jobs don't carry that kind of responsibility.
Click to expand...

No, sorry. If you need to be someplace at a certain time to do your job, you do what everybody else does -- you hit the street early enough to get there on time. Failure to do doesn't give you the right to break the law, it just means you suck at your job and should be replaced.
 
sangha said:
They weren't responding to a call.

Try and discuss the actual event.
Click to expand...

You acted like the simple act of speeding is a violation of the law. I pointed out a clear example where speeding is not a violation of the law, because the speeder in question has the legal authority to speed.
 
If he wasn't driving the gotcha report is entirely lies. Had he been just another citizen and been pulled over on every one of those offenses (not likely of course for any citizen), absolutely nothing would have happenned to the passenger's license. Now, for comparison they should have followed a cabbie and a town car around for the day.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
You acted like the simple act of speeding is a violation of the law. I pointed out a clear example where speeding is not a violation of the law, because the speeder in question has the legal authority to speed.
Click to expand...

It is a violation of the law. Your example does not apply to this event.
 
sangha said:
I assumed nothing. His driver broke the law and he is responsible. It is particularly noteworthy given the fact that he has launched a campaign about driver and pedestrian safety. You can excuse it all you want, but many people are going to see it differently than you. There's no doubt that this story will hurt him politically
Click to expand...

Ya sure did, but let's clear up a few mis-facts of yours... it isn't a LAW, it is civil code. You violate civil code and get citation. You break a law and get cuffs and a tour of a local jail. next security details do act differently than mommy mobiles. Like it or not they ignore certain civil codes and if there are any threats against the Mayor the security detail doesn't take chances.

If the reporter caught the Mayor heading to Walmart in his private car, at the wheel driving like this, yeah have fun. But he was leaving a public event anyone with a grudge knows about. I know it chaps some civilians but an LE driver of a security detail does stand a tad above civil codes when it comes to the safety of the VIP he is charged with safeguarding.

I have no doubt many see it differently, but I doubt it hurts him much- those who don't like him will continue to do just that. Those who support him will shrug it off as he still is better than....... Those like me, know North East Yankees drive like insane folks at the best of times. What I saw the driver do, roll stop signs and speed is absolutely no different than what I saw in Philly/NJ/ New York/ New Hampshire/Mass/ even quaint Maine... the joke many Penn folks tell is, "Oh he must be from NY" if they see a driver drive crazy.

Now again you ASS-U-ME the Mayor knew the driver rolled signs, sped and spit on the sidewalk. You ASS-U-ME that LE security details don't have approval to ignore civil codes IF they in their highly professional opinion cause no harm and it helps safeguard their VIP.

I ask again- what would you have him do as being 'responsible'???
 
specklebang said:
Mr. De Blasio is a mayor, not a police officer. If he hadn't been preachy on the topic, this event would have gone unnoticed by everyone.

IMHO, this was hypocritical, not catastrophic. He's not a paragon of evil. But he set a poor example on a topic he seems to be promoting. I'm not calling for the death penalty, just recognition of a false face.
Click to expand...

If I take as a given that his security arrangements are a necessary evil, it is reasonable to me that his driver do certain basic things to make the job of someone trying to hurt the mayor more difficult. I have no more issue with this than I would with the mayor wearing a ballistic vest despite the fact that the average citizen is not allowed to.

If the question is the risk-benefit analysis of the tactics used, that would be a whole different story, but that's not what's happening here. This is like complaining that the Secret Service can walk into the White House armed while average citizens can not. Duly appointed authority figures are given powers that most of us do not have because it has been decided that they need them to do their job.
 
sangha said:
It is a violation of the law. Your example does not apply to this event.
Click to expand...

TacticalEvilDan said:
Please show the portion of the law which prohibits the mayor's protection detail from doing what it has been observed doing. Not the portion of the law that anyone else would've been cited for violating -- the portion of the law which says his protection detail can't do that.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see some actual legal references out of either you or ludin, since you're making a very specific assertion.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
No, sorry. If you need to be someplace at a certain time to do your job, you do what everybody else does -- you hit the street early enough to get there on time. Failure to do doesn't give you the right to break the law, it just means you suck at your job and should be replaced.
Click to expand...

So you never go 10 mph over the speed limit? How...conformist of you.
 
notquiteright said:
Ya sure did, but let's clear up a few mis-facts of yours... it isn't a LAW, it is civil code. You violate civil code and get citation. You break a law and get cuffs and a tour of a local jail. next security details do act differently than mommy mobiles. Like it or not they ignore certain civil codes and if there are any threats against the Mayor the security detail doesn't take chances.

If the reporter caught the Mayor heading to Walmart in his private car, at the wheel driving like this, yeah have fun. But he was leaving a public event anyone with a grudge knows about. I know it chaps some civilians but an LE driver of a security detail does stand a tad above civil codes when it comes to the safety of the VIP he is charged with safeguarding.

I have no doubt many see it differently, but I doubt it hurts him much- those who don't like him will continue to do just that. Those who support him will shrug it off as he still is better than....... Those like me, know North East Yankees drive like insane folks at the best of times. What I saw the driver do, roll stop signs and speed is absolutely no different than what I saw in Philly/NJ/ New York/ New Hampshire/Mass/ even quaint Maine... the joke many Penn folks tell is, "Oh he must be from NY" if they see a driver drive crazy.

Now again you ASS-U-ME the Mayor knew the driver rolled signs, sped and spit on the sidewalk. You ASS-U-ME that LE security details don't have approval to ignore civil codes IF they in their highly professional opinion cause no harm and it helps safeguard their VIP.

I ask again- what would you have him do as being 'responsible'???
Click to expand...

The civil code is part of the law and there is no evidence that the drivers were responding to any threat.

The security detail is not above the law and there is no evidence that the drivers were responding to any threat.

What people in Okla-freakin-homa think, or even people in Philly, Mass, etc think, doesn't really matter. It's what his constituents think. And while I don't think this is going to lead to an impeachment, it does make him look bad which is what I said in the very first post I posted in this thread.

And again, I did not assume anything. Please stop misrepresenting what I've said.

And what I would have him do is to give clear instructions to his drivers that they should obey the traffic laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom