by Horatio Bunce
Does “Constitutional Carry” also mean I can have a BB gun in Johnson City – or does the U.S. Constitution not apply there?
By guest writer Eric Peters
The problem with speed limits is they’re arbitrary and presumptive.
A velocity maximum is decreed, and you are presumed a threat to others if you exceed it. Almost everyone understands this is silly—else almost everyone would not “speed” routinely. Most of us do not play Russian roulette, for instance, irrespective of any laws forbidding it, because we don’t need to be threatened with a ticket to refrain from putting a loaded gun to our heads.
Almost everyone understands that driving five, ten mph, or even faster than above whatever the speed limit is isn’t like that. That “breaking” the speed limit is like stepping on sidewalk cracks and not likely to break your momma’s back. It is why few feel shame or guilt when “caught” going faster than the speed limit. Indeed, the opposite is likely true. Drivers resent being extorted by the courts and insurance mafia over something we know caused no harm and was not likely to cause harm.
Interestingly, this defeats the supposed purpose of speed limits if the purpose isn’t to pretextually fleece motorists.
Ostensibly, speed limits are posted—gird yourself—for “our safety.” It is an almost mathematical axiom that the very last thing intended is the plain meaning of those two words when you hear those two words.
An altogether different meaning is intended, which can be demonstrated by pointing out how useless speed limits are as information about how fast or not it is safe to drive on any given road, especially an unfamiliar one.
This ought to be the purpose of speed limits—advisory rather than arbitrary. Suppose limits convey useful information about speed in relation to the road ahead instead of the set-deliberately-below-the-speed most people drive on that road. More might actually drive the advisory speed limit. Inevitably, most drivers ignore the posted limits and see them as easy pickings for on-the-go tax collection.
Part of the problem is vocabulary.
A speed limit sounds like some engineering threshold, like an engine’s RPM limit. Exceed the redline, and engine damage is probable because the engine’s mechanical limits have been exceeded.
Most people take care not to exceed the redline because they know it has objective informational value, and they’d better pay attention to it.
But a speed limit is nothing like that. It is a statutory limit—something illegal to exceed because it has been so decreed but not necessarily harmful in and of itself.
It is obviously not an objective threshold beyond which danger lies, which is why most people do speed, regardless of any statute. General contempt for speed limits is universal, which undermines “our safety.”
It is not because people “speed,” but because the correlation between the signage and conditions is so tenuous that most of us ignore the signs unless police are in the vicinity. While some drive too slowly relative to the speed, the rest of us are driving to make sure that traffic does not needlessly bunch up when it could be flowing much more smoothly. This sets up a bizarre and irritating dynamic.
The speed limit obeyers are often taking a kind of righteous delight in their rigid obedience, which in their minds justifies not yielding to the drivers exceeding the speed limit because they are breaking the law! While the “speeders” understandably get exasperated by the “slowpoke” ahead who is preventing them from driving at a speed they know isn’t dangerous, even if statutorily unlawful.
If “our safety” rather than our money is desired, the gov, perhaps, should post speed advisories with no fines attached.
This would benefit drivers not familiar with a given road by giving them a sound ballpark idea about how fast they ought to enter an unfamiliar curve, for instance. They would be given heed for the sake of safety as opposed to fear of a fine.
Because we have speed limits, people tend to either completely ignore them—knowing they can likely take the curve up ahead at ten or even twenty MPH faster than the sign says is “safe” (even at the risk of a ticket) because they have been driving that road and taking that curve every day for the past ten years at ten or even twenty MPH faster than the sign says is “safe.”
If a driver is not familiar with the road and has not taken the curve up ahead every day for the past ten years, they see the sign that says twenty-five MPH and creates a road hazard by driving preposterously slow for the curve. The next time they take that road, they’ll probably ignore the sign, like almost everyone else.
Motorists then habituate a combination of contempt for the signage as well as mindless obedience of signage irrespective of conditions, and neither is of much service to the cause of “our safety.” The entire regime is as counterproductive and cynical as it is profitable.
This explains why probably speed limits as absolute won’t end anytime soon.
Eric Peters lives in Virginia and enjoys driving cars and motorcycles. In the past, Eric worked as a car journalist for many prominent mainstream media outlets. Currently, he focuses his time writing auto history books, reviewing cars, and blogging about cars+ for his website EricPetersAutos.com.
Editor’s Note: The opinions expressed in this newsletter are those of the author.
by Horatio Bunce
Republican Governor Phil Scott instructed Vermont’s public schools to interrogate returning students today to determine whether they had enjoyed a holiday gathering with more than just their immediate family or whether they had traveled to gather with others for Thanksgiving. If the students snitch on their family, they will be forced to online classes only for 14 days or 7 days plus a negative Coronahoax test.
If the Coronahoax tests really work and mean anything, why can’t they just get one on Monday and go right back if they are negative? Why can’t the asymptomatic be assumed healthy until proven sick? We have done it that way for every other disease. Why are they assumed to be infected and must test, yet the rest of the allegedly asymptomatic “infected spreaders” in the school require no testing? Which junk science should they follow? Fauci’s new claim that children do not carry/spread Coronahoax, or that all asymptomatic people are infected carriers? In either case, Phil Scott and the State of Vermont are wrong with their new Family Snitch policy and will not protect “public health”.
Vermont Governor Directs Schools To Interrogate Students About Their Family’s Thanksgiving Activities
George Orwell describes this exact tactic in 1984:
“They had played a similar trick with the instinct of parenthood. The family could not actually be abolished, and, indeed, people were encouraged to be fond of their children in almost the old-fashioned way. The children, on the other hand, were systematically turned against their parents and taught to spy on them and report their deviations. The family had become in effect an extension of the Thought Police. It was a device by means of which everyone could be surrounded night and day by informers who knew him intimately.”
“Nearly all children nowadays were horrible. What was worst of all was that by means of such organizations as the Spies they were systematically turned into ungovernable little savages, and yet this produced in them no tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the Party. On the contrary, they adored the Party and everything connected with it… All their ferocity was turned outwards, against the enemies of the State, against foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals. It was almost normal for people over thirty to be frightened of their own children.”
There are many who are rightfully upset about turning public school students into Family Snitches. However, I would suggest many never noticed that the schools have been doing this for many years (See the D.A.R.E. program for example). They just didn’t worry about it because the children were being trained to snitch on those they saw as “bad” and if they weren’t doing “bad” things, they would have nothing to hide.
by Horatio Bunce
The State of Tennessee has a Covid-19 dashboard site now that allows you to look at the trends for Coronahoax tests in each county. The graphs show the number of positive tests in gray, negative tests in a bluish color and the 7-day average of percentage of positive tests as a red line. The same graph format is used for each county, but the scale on the graph changes so that the scary red %positive trend line is always big and apparently the highest value at first glance. But, they use two different scales, the one on the left side is the % positive for the red line and the right side scale is the number of tests. You can move your cursor along the timeline at the bottom and see the actual numbers for each calendar day. I thought it might be interesting to see how the mask-mandated counties are looking compared to others. What you will see in nearly every county is a sudden ramp of positive case percentage beginning in last week of September into October. Just as Coronahoax appeared to have nearly eradicated the flu and pneumonia in the spring (along with many other deadly diseases), I expect the “second wave” that was amazingly predicted for the never-been-seen-before Coronahoax, will be again attributing nearly all influenza “cases” as Coronahoax.
I have been expecting the typical, “influenza-like-illness” ramp up again this fall as soon as the “free” flu shots were getting pushed out. It turns out that injecting people with influenza creates widespread “influenza-like-illness” in your community. I believe the people receiving the flu shot who then immediately become symptomatic for a number of days are spreading the flu shot strain to the community around them. They spread it to their households and people they are in contact with. Kids take it to school and spread it throughout the school and typically at some point during the year, schools shut down for a week or more because of viral sickness. This happens every year. This never happened in Tennessee in the 1970’s-80’s when I was in K-12 schools. But we didn’t have “free” flu shots pushed by the government and big Pharma every year at taxpayer expense. No flu shot signs on every shopping center corner, no $5 bribes to get your flu jab. We also know that the flu shots give you a 36% greater chance of contracting another respiratory virus (besides the one you just injected yourself with) such as the Coronahoax. We knew this last fall when the Dept. of Defense study came out. The CDC then recommended high-dose (4x the normal dose) flu shots for all people over 65 years of age in the following weeks. It is unbelievable that anyone in “public health” is advocating flu shots at this point if they really believe the Coronahoax is deadly enough to justify shutting down society. The test graphs for most of the counties show this ramp which coincides with the roll-out of flu vaccines. It doesn’t care whether your county makes you wear a mask or not. When rising positive test rates are pointed out for the mask-mandated areas, they want to blame it on people not adhering to the mandated rules. When rates are low in non-mask areas, those same people want to point to population density and say the people are all spread out so they don’t spread the virus. Well, if the masks and social distancing work, how come these areas get this ramp at the end of September into October? Did every single one of the masked up areas suddenly rebel against the rules at the exact same time? Maybe, just maybe face diapers don’t protect you from a virus that was injected into your arm. And they don’t prevent you from shedding your flu shot virus to others.
Let’s look at a few examples:
Blount County: Note the ramp beginning in the end of September.
by Horatio Bunce
Good to know Sen. Kelsey thought it important that county/local folks have zero power to do anything about it. Important enough to sponsor Google’s “autonomous vehicle technology” bill to protect robot cars instead of us.
“I’m Speechless”: Police Chase Down Tesla On Autopilot Doing 90 MPH With Driver And Passenger Asleep
“Another day, another story of a horribly irresponsible Tesla owner “beta testing” the company’s Autopilot software while putting countless other lives at risk. And likely, another day the NHTSA in the U.S. will do nothing about it. Today’s story comes out of Canada, where a 20 year old man is facing charges for sleeping behind the wheel of a Tesla that was doing more than 90 mph. The RCMP was called when witnesses saw “a speeding Tesla electric car heading south of Edmonton, and what appeared to be no one behind the wheel,” according to NBC. Both front seats were fully reclined and both the driver and the passenger appeared to be asleep, according to the report. The car was doing about 87mph on a roadway with a posted speed limit of about 68mph. Police say that when chasing the Tesla down, it accelerated to more than 90mph as other drivers on the roadway pulled over after seeing the patrol car’s lights. RCMP Sgt. Darrin Turnbull said: “Nobody was looking out the windshield to see where the car was going. I’ve been in policing for over 23 years and the majority of that in traffic law enforcement, and I’m speechless. I’ve never, ever seen anything like this before, but of course the technology wasn’t there.”
by Horatio Bunce
“Stunning, but sadly no longer surprising video was posted on Tik Tok this week of what appears to be three 20 something guys, indulging in alcoholic beverages while their Tesla – with no one in the driver’s seat – barrels down the highway.
It is the latest thumbing of the nose to the NHSTA, who has repeatedly failed to meaningfully address how Tesla’s Autopilot has played a role in several fatal crashes across the nation.”
“A Tesla on Autopilot smashed into the back of a patrol vehicle on the side of the road near Benson, Arizona today, according to Arizona’s Department of Public Safety Twitter feed….”We can confirm the driver indicated to troopers the Tesla was on autopilot at the time of the collision….The impact caused the patrol vehicle to collide with the back of an ambulance, but fortunately the occupants of the ambulance weren’t injured. The driver of the Tesla had non-life-threatening injuries.”
You can see the Tesla using “autonomous vehicle technology” swerve and lock wheels as it approaches the pedestrian, then release brakes and pile head-on into an overturned truck.
“Recall, earlier this year the NTSB revealed that Autopilot had played a role in a fatal 2019 Model 3 accident in Delray Beach, Florida.
The driver had set the car to go 69 miles per hour 12.3 seconds before the crash took place on a highway that had a speed limit of 55 mph, according to Bloomberg. The NTSB also revealed that the driver’s hands were not on the wheel for the final 7.7 seconds before the crash.
The NTSB had also arrived at similar findings regarding a 2016 Florida crash where another Tesla driver didn’t react to a truck in the roadway. In that instance, the NTSB found that Tesla’s Autopilot design contributed to the cause of the accident.”
Do these reports of accidents caused while using driverless vehicles or “autonomous” vehicle technology concern you? Do you know that Tennessee Republicans made it impossible for your local county or municipal government to do anything about them operating on the roads you pay for? Here’s how it happened:
Tennessee District 35 Representative Jerry Sexton first took office in 2015 as part of the 109th General Assembly. As a freshman legislator, one of his first sponsored bills was HB0616 which prohibited county and local governments from making any ordinances or statutes regulating operation of a vehicle in their boundaries using what was then called “autonomous vehicle technology”. A pretty strange topic for a freshman legislator from a rural district. Why would Rep. Sexton feel that autonomous vehicle technology was being unreasonably assaulted by his neighbors and needed some form of protection back in 2015? I am willing to bet that exactly ZERO Grainger and Claiborne county constituents were requesting this legislation. So how did the bill originate? Who “gave” it to Sexton to sponsor? Who was it supposed to benefit in the future – knowing that people WOULD eventually want to control killer robot cars that crash themselves and spontaneously combust after the lithium batteries are punctured like Tesla vehicles have many times been shown to do? At the time, a handful of Republicans argued in support of this bill and stated that this type of technology already existed – citing technology such as proximity sensors in bumpers or parallel park assist. The bill seemed like a solution in search of a problem. No locality in Sexton’s district was trying to prohibit vehicles with backup cameras, proximity alerts or park-assist. However, these legislators so concerned about “autonomous vehicle technology” completely ignored other existing autonomous vehicle technology such as large trucks with compression or “jake” brakes which actually ARE discriminated against by county/local governments. Plenty of towns still have their “No Jake Brakes” signs, including those in Rep. Sexton’s district (see Highway 25E northbound entering Tazewell for example) – a “state highway” where allegedly this bill would protect autonomous vehicle technology as it was sold. This is also proof his constituents didn’t and still don’t believe in the principle of the original “autonomous vehicle technology” bill. It is proof the TNGOP was not really defending autonomous technology that pre-existed – because they have never removed these prohibitions IN THEIR OWN DISTRICTS.
Once successfully tying the hands of the people with Sexton’s freshman bill, the redefinition of “autonomous vehicle technology” has changed to reveal the true purposes and what corporate interests would benefit from future bills. If you watch the very first video in Transportation sub-committee, Sexton mentions Google as a beneficiary that was in process of driverless vehicle experimentation, but it was carefully not described to the committee members voting on the bill. They would have had to read the bill – I know, a foreign concept in modern legislative bodies – to see the plain language: