Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 55

Thread: Virginia law allows folks to ignore red light camera tickets!

  1. #1
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,601

    Virginia law allows folks to ignore red light camera tickets!

    Most people should know this already, but just in case, the rule is this: unless you are served personally (i.e., deputy hands you the summons), there is no penalty for ignoring red light camera tickets mailed to you or tacked to your door.

    See blogs at http://blog.motorists.org/toss-your-...-camera-ticket & http://757hamptonroads.com/2010/08/2.../#comment-3026

    Let's get the word out - if localities know they will not make money on ticket scammeras, they will not enage in these accident producing schemes.

    See 2005 VDOT red light camera report at http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/05-vdot.pdf:

    As the 2005 RLC VDOT report states in Appendix H: Virginia’s red light camera law “ultimately requires a personal notification, which may prove prohibitively expensive for some jurisdictions.”

    In more detail, the 2005 RLC VDOT report on page 110 explains this as follows:

    “The new statute referenced in section A., § 8.01-296, is the provision for service of
    process in civil actions, which has been borrowed by the Virginia General Assembly for the
    present purpose. It outlines several options for achieving satisfactory service, beginning with an
    attempt at personal in-hand service, and moving on to a series of de-escalating forms of
    substituted service: delivering to an adult at the defendant’s usual place of abode; posting on the
    front door of such abode in conjunction with mailing; and finally, by order of publication in
    appropriate cases under the provisions of the applicable code sections. It is the second of these
    that gives Virginia its nickname as a “nail and mail” state, meaning that for most civil actions,
    posting notice on the defendant’s front door in conjunction with mailing will constitute sufficient
    notice. However, this is not so for red light camera citations under the code, for the second
    statute referenced above is § 19.2-76 which, as we have already seen, requires personal in-hand
    service if the “nail and mail” approach does not succeed in bringing the defendant into court.
    Thus, under Virginia’s red light camera statute as it is now worded, the mere mailing of a
    citation without personal service by a law enforcement officer does not constitute sufficient
    notice under the statute’s own terms. While the statute permits the jurisdiction to make the
    initial attempt to summon the accused to court via mail, if that person fails to respond, he or she
    is not considered to have been satisfactorily served with notice. Default judgments entered under
    such circumstances (when the defendant fails to appear in court on the appointed return date)
    would thus not be binding, and the defendant could not be charged with contempt for failing to
    comply with such a judgment. Hence, despite its ostensive distancing from the requirements of
    Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-76, Virginia’s red light camera statute comes full circle and, in the end,
    requires personal service before a default judgment may be entered against no-shows.”
    Last edited by Mike; 10-10-2010 at 05:33 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Columbia, in the Peoples Republic of Murderland
    Posts
    5,369
    It's a shame they don't have such a law in MD...

    I'd LOVE to ignore the Private Contractor from Texas who drove all the way to NC to attempt to serve me a citation for one of those illegal MD speed/red light cameras...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  3. #3
    Regular Member OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    891
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    It's a shame they don't have such a law in MD...

    I'd LOVE to ignore the Private Contractor from Texas who drove all the way to NC to attempt to serve me a citation for one of those illegal MD speed/red light cameras...
    You can always have them arrested for trespassing. After you tell them to leave, if they don't start moving immediately they are trespassing.

    I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

    Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)

  4. #4
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Columbia, in the Peoples Republic of Murderland
    Posts
    5,369
    I would NEVER condone vandalism or arson, but this news story from NOLA shows how folks in the Big Easy deal with these cameras...

    http://www.wwltv.com/news/Vandalism-...104746784.html
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    5,521
    Sounds like VA is somewhat schitzophrenic, in that one side is attempting to collect, and the other side is attempting to block.

    It's been attempted around the world for more than 20 years and it DOESN'T WORK for a very large number of reasons, not the least of which is the rather serious corruption inroads which invariably accompany the law.

    I've written about this before, but apparently, folks (aka state legislators) remain either unrealistically idealistic, or they're monetarially tethered to the companies who stand to profit hugely by these measures even if the traffic results are squarely not in the best interests of society.
    Our rights are not subject to "interpretation" by well-meaning but Constitutionally illiterate politicians. They are absolute and unwavering, as are We the People. Some rights are specifically mentioned; many are not. ALL are protected by our Constitution, especially the Ninth and Tenth Amendments

    "One of the best things about our Republic is that we're as free to have our own opinions as we are from having the opinions of others forced upon us."

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Urban Skeet City, Alabama
    Posts
    874
    Is it too much to ask that THE GOVERNMENT work WITHIN the law?
    It takes a village to raise an idiot.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Anywhere but here.
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirbinator View Post
    Is it too much to ask that THE GOVERNMENT work WITHIN the law?

    +1, then we wouldn't need to constantly argue about exercising our 2a rights would we?
    This site has been hijacked by leftists who attack opposition to further their own ends. Those who have never served this country and attack those who do are no longer worthy of my time or attention.

  8. #8
    coolfrmn
    Guest
    My problem with them:

    1. There is no judgement call made. i.e. - if your tailgated etc.

    2. The corruption. Cameras owned by companies that have a monatary stake in the fines. They change the yellow lite timing to catch more offenders. It was in the national news. Here is one link I found.

    3. Cause more rear end collisions because people don't want to risk a ticket.

    http://thedailycougar.com/2010/10/28...of-corruption/

    http://blog.motorists.org/6-cities-t...es-for-profit/

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23710970...me_and_courts/

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,093
    My daughter got one of these tickets. (Actually, it was mailed to my wife; it was her truck. We insisted that my daughter pay the fine.) The ticket contained two pictures. One showed all four wheels behind the stop line and the light being red. The second showed all four wheels in front of the stop line and the light being red. Both photos clearly showed the tag number. I drive through that intersection all the time and have almost been hit by red light runners numerous times. The yellows are plenty long enough to stop.

    I, for one, applaud red light cameras. The intersections in town that don't have them have three or four cars going through on a clean red after a sufficiently long yellow. The ones that have the cameras are having a reduced incidence of long trains of cars following each other through the red light, knowing that the traffic in the other direction physically can't go until the caboose goes through.

    Folks are learning.

    On the rear-ending. That will happen when a car, usually speeding, will suddenly decide they can't beat the light (or suddenly notice the intersection has a camera), and they are being followed too closely by someone else who should be stopping for the light. Anyway, that impact will typically be far less than the impact of a t-bone by a red-light runner. I know; I have been the victim of both a rear-ending (I had been stopped for a few seconds when a logging truck with faulty brakes plowed into me) and a t-bone by someone who failed to stop and hit me full-tilt.

    Bully for red light cameras.

  10. #10
    coolfrmn
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    My daughter got one of these tickets. (Actually, it was mailed to my wife; it was her truck. We insisted that my daughter pay the fine.) The ticket contained two pictures. One showed all four wheels behind the stop line and the light being red. The second showed all four wheels in front of the stop line and the light being red. Both photos clearly showed the tag number. I drive through that intersection all the time and have almost been hit by red light runners numerous times. The yellows are plenty long enough to stop.

    I, for one, applaud red light cameras. The intersections in town that don't have them have three or four cars going through on a clean red after a sufficiently long yellow. The ones that have the cameras are having a reduced incidence of long trains of cars following each other through the red light, knowing that the traffic in the other direction physically can't go until the caboose goes through.

    Folks are learning.

    On the rear-ending. That will happen when a car, usually speeding, will suddenly decide they can't beat the light (or suddenly notice the intersection has a camera), and they are being followed too closely by someone else who should be stopping for the light. Anyway, that impact will typically be far less than the impact of a t-bone by a red-light runner. I know; I have been the victim of both a rear-ending (I had been stopped for a few seconds when a logging truck with faulty brakes plowed into me) and a t-bone by someone who failed to stop and hit me full-tilt.

    Bully for red light cameras.
    If opperated honestly & properly, then yes. But we all know the allmighty dollar drives companies though.

    Just to play devil's advocate... What happen to being able to face your accuser?

    Amendment VI
    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

    Love ya eye95..
    Last edited by coolfrmn; 12-24-2010 at 09:25 AM.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,093
    Quote Originally Posted by coolfrmn View Post
    If opperated honestly & properly, then yes. But we all know the allmighty dollar drives companies though.

    Just to play devil's advocate... What happen to being able to face your accuser?

    Amendment VI
    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

    Love ya eye95..
    One may request a hearing and present evidence that justifies or excuses running the red light. There are several justifications and excuses built into the law. It is a hassle to have the hearing, but the photos present a pretty damning prime facie case that the law was broken.

    The cameras are having the desired effect, and I see zero evidence that the program is being run unjustly. My daughter has likely adjusted her driving habits a tad. I wish they'd put more cameras up at other intersections.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    5,521
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    The yellows are plenty long enough to stop.
    I'm glad you've experienced justice, as opposed to the perversion thereof (shortening of yellow times) red light cameras seem to encourage in order to achieve a greater payout.

    I, for one, applaud red light cameras.
    Personally, I think would look rather silly, standing on the streetcorner, clapping your hands...

    The intersections in town that don't have them have three or four cars going through on a clean red after a sufficiently long yellow. The ones that have the cameras are having a reduced incidence of long trains of cars following each other through the red light, knowing that the traffic in the other direction physically can't go until the caboose goes through.
    Provided hard and fast laws are in place concerning what determines the setting of yellow light times, I would not be opposed. However, I would expect, nee', demand, those considerations include speed limits in the area, adjustments for rain, sleet, snow, and grade (angle of inclination/declination) of pavement.

    Folks are learning.
    Not about what matters! Any of the just-mentioned conditions can double stopping distance. Are they included in the equations they use to "calculate" yellow light times? I think not!

    Hooray for the Va Assembly's pulling the rug out from under the sting of this ridiculous measure.

    On the rear-ending. That will happen when a car, usually speeding, will suddenly decide they can't beat the light...
    Actually, it happens when one care slams into the back of another.

    I have been the victim of both a rear-ending (I had been stopped for a few seconds when a logging truck with faulty brakes plowed into me) and a t-bone by someone who failed to stop and hit me full-tilt.
    Same. Seven times.

    Bully for red light cameras.
    I have another term, also beginning with the same four letters. However I believe my term more aptly describes the mindless support regurgitated towards this as of yet immature and very easily manipulated i.e. corrupted technology all to readily espoused most by those who stand to monetarily gain the most.

    Are you a cop, eye95? For the last several weeks, you've certainly been sounding like one, and I am not in the least referring to our disagreement over May 1. Rather, I'm referring to your stance on a number of issues like this, as well as the nature of your response to our disagreements. I hate profiling, and won't, other than to say...

    ...I am a C.O.P. - completely objective person.

    Well, that's a goal, anyway, and probably one I won't achieve in my lifetime. I'll never stop trying, however, primarily by keeping my eyes and ears open and always listening to dissention opinions (including yours), but more importantly the reasoning behind them.

    But it'll be the arguements themselves which change my mind, not who's giving them, nor how often they're uttered, and certainly not with how often or vociferously they're uttered. In fact, that'll always signify not their validity, but rather, the fact they can't stand on their own.
    Our rights are not subject to "interpretation" by well-meaning but Constitutionally illiterate politicians. They are absolute and unwavering, as are We the People. Some rights are specifically mentioned; many are not. ALL are protected by our Constitution, especially the Ninth and Tenth Amendments

    "One of the best things about our Republic is that we're as free to have our own opinions as we are from having the opinions of others forced upon us."

  13. #13
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    14,982
    A republican who likes Gov. Authority imagine that. Red light cameras are an intrusion, and there are evidence they don't really help. They give tickets out even when a cop wouldn't. Having a pro active police force is an intrusion on our constitutional liberty and now they want machines and computers and corporations to do policing?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,093
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    ...
    How's that you're-the-only-person-on-my-ignore-list thing workin' for ya? Not well, it seems.

    Show me an unaltered video of a badly timed traffic light with a red-light camera, and I will agree that that camera is unjustly taking money. Until then, I see a bunch of bluster by folks who don't like a very effective law enforcement system.

    If you don't want to pay red-light tickets, drive at the posted speed limit and don't try to beat lights. We've got those lights all over Montgomery, and I have zero problem not getting tickets from the cameras.

    And, like I said, behaviors are being altered. Good.

    Oh, and, moving on. Feel free not to ignore me and reply to this message. I won't respond to you.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Uber_Olafsun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    584
    I don't agree with them on the fact that they give the ticket to the owner not the driver. A cop pulls you over they see who is driving and they get the ticket. I got one of these in dc but because the car is in my wires name it came in her name. Then it puts the burden on the citizen to tell who was driving if it was not them. I am sorry innocent until proven guilty. Not the other way around!

  16. #16
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    14,982
    Quote Originally Posted by Uber_Olafsun View Post
    I am sorry innocent until proven guilty. Not the other way around!
    Just not the case anymore, been to court lately? For anything?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Newport, Virginia
    Posts
    10,503
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Are you a cop, eye95? For the last several weeks, you've certainly been sounding like one, and I am not in the least referring to our disagreement over May 1. Rather, I'm referring to your stance on a number of issues like this, as well as the nature of your response to our disagreements.
    He's something, alright. I've been bothered by this poster since day 1. And when I say bothered, I don't mean in the ordinary way that I am bothered by any person with whom I disagree.

    No, there is something insidious about the positions he takes and his modes of argument. A cop he very well may be.



    Oh, and for those who may be on the fence: I've never been busted by a traffic camera, and I don't run red lights. I don't even push them unless it is unsafe to stop (well, sometimes in San Francisco, I may push them, just a little. ). I don't even speed anymore except on backroads (never breaking the law, of course ).

    But I've also paid attention to traffic engineers (unlike our police and government) who have long shown that speed limits increase accidents and road fatalities (except in the most abused of residential neighborhoods), and that red light and speeding cameras only enhance these problems.

    With too many regulations, people pay too much attention to avoiding tickets, and not enough to basic road safety.

    Case in point: consider (as any traffic engineer will tell you) the highway. Without speed limits, lane courtesy reigns, as people know they may get a ticket for driving slow in the left lane, and will hold up other, legitimate traffic. Since people automatically self-regulate their speed to their comfort level (exception: 16-year-old males, but they don't follow speed limits either), traffic becomes quite safe.

    Compare to the highway with arbitrary and capricious revenue-generating speed limits: Lane courtesy is forgotten, with folks driving at (or below) the speed limit in the left lane, thinking "hey he'd have to break the law to pass me, so I don't need to let him pass". I myself have done this, much to my perpetual shame. People become wannabe speed enforcers for others, and traffic hostility reaches a high.

    As a traffic engineer could tell you, lane changes are the most commonly accident-producing maneuvers, and this new environment has encouraged lane changes in anger, and against drivers who wish to compete in order to maintain their "speed limit police" lead position in the left lane. The get-to-the-right-accelerate-fiercly-cut-off-to-the-left maneuver becomes commonplace (as opposed to the get-over-to-the-left-maintain-constant-speed-get-over-to-the-right-some-time-later-if-a-faster-driver-approaches-you-from-behind).

    The result? Traffic accidents (and concomitantly fatalities) go up, along with police-hustled revenue. Who benefits? Certainly not the people, or safe drivers.
    Last edited by marshaul; 01-16-2011 at 11:37 PM.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    16,850
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    SNIP Traffic accidents (and concomitantly fatalities) go up, along with police-hustled revenue. Who benefits? Certainly not the people, or safe drivers.
    Dammit, now I gotta go find my dikshunary.

    College kids. Sheesh.




    ETA: "accompaniment; an event or situation that occurs at the same time or in connection with another." wordnetweb.princeton.edu

    Note: "at the same time" has the same number of letters.
    Last edited by Citizen; 01-17-2011 at 12:44 AM.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Newport, Virginia
    Posts
    10,503
    Haha! You definitely "elicited" a laugh with that!

  20. #20
    Regular Member oldbanger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    beckofbeyond - Idaho
    Posts
    413

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    54

    I think they're a good idea, sorry

    I've experienced them in many countries (Europe) and as pointed out above;

    If you run the red light, you are automatically in the wrong unless you can show some good reason (safety related) why it was necessary - driving at excessive speed and running out of time and space to stop for it is not such a reason (although for safety reasons, you actually probably should just keep going and pay the fine like a man).

    If someone drives into the rear of your vehicle, they were driving too fast or too close or paying insufficient attention to road and traffic conditions, maybe even all three. Regardless, they're going to be paying for your car, their car, possibly facing prosecution and you're sure to sue for any injuries. This hypothetical situation is not grounds for you to commit an actual offence.

    The monetary issues... well, this varies from nation to nation. In the UK people get upset with speeding cameras and red light cameras because the revenue is ringfenced and must be spent on still more cameras. There are steps to alter this and many councils (they are county level local government) are removing cameras or rendering them inoperative on grounds of safety but actually because it costs them money to run the cameras but they get no revenue from them, themselves. In other nations the situation is usually more sensible. In the USA it would seem that private contractors are getting a cut, which does worry me, I have to say.

    Points to bear in mind about traffic signals:

    On green, as you approach, you should be OFF the gas and preparing to SLOW TO A STOP, until you are close enough to the signal that at your present speed you could not stop or the signal changes (in which case you STOP!).

    On amber, as you approach, you come to a STOP unless it occurs when you are already too close to stop, in which case you carry on.

    On red, you STOP. This is not rocket science. If you cannot see the signal yet, you drive AS IF IT IS RED. This is because it could be and you MUST STOP if it is, whereas if it turns out to be in your favour, you can simply carry on with no danger (and accelerate if you need to).

    Really, if you don't understand this already or choose to ignore it, these cameras were made to catch you and fine you, in the hope of changing your behaviour for the safety of the rest of us. The USA has an atrocious road death toll when compared to other 'first world' nations and poor driving accounts for the majority of it, despite the focus on alcohol recently (which is obviously very serious too).

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Newport, Virginia
    Posts
    10,503
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidheal View Post
    I've experienced them in many countries (Europe) and as pointed out above;

    If you run the red light, you are automatically in the wrong unless you can show some good reason (safety related) why it was necessary - driving at excessive speed and running out of time and space to stop for it is not such a reason (although for safety reasons, you actually probably should just keep going and pay the fine like a man).
    Right off the bat your position stems from a premise which is both false and, were it true, utterly heinous.

    That premise being that red light tickets ought to apply when there is no time or room to stop, and that violators should, for safety, "keep going and pay the fine like a man".

    Have you ever bothered to study how laws actually work? Have you ever considered the phenomenon of "incentive" at a societal scale?

    Red light cameras which worked under the premise you've created would be a far, far worse idea than no cameras at all. You could fully expect accidents to go promptly up.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    54

    Reading comprehension is your friend.

    Nope, not what I wrote. Nice try though. :¬)

    If there is not time to stop you were travelling too fast on approach and that's precisely why the cameras have been rolled out. If there is not time to stop as the light goes to amber, however, you continue on your way and will not trigger the camera.

    I suggest you learn to drive better and read better, soon. With respect, you have to be pretty poor at both to misread what I wrote and adavance the nonsense you just did.

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Newport, Virginia
    Posts
    10,503
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaidheal View Post
    Nope, not what I wrote. Nice try though. :¬)

    If there is not time to stop you were travelling too fast on approach and that's precisely why the cameras have been rolled out. If there is not time to stop as the light goes to amber, however, you continue on your way and will not trigger the camera.

    I suggest you learn to drive better and read better, soon. With respect, you have to be pretty poor at both to misread what I wrote and adavance the nonsense you just did.
    So now you're going to impeach my driving record because we disagree in a debate?

    Do you know the first thing about me, my age, or my driving record, "son"?

    When you were busily studying reading comprehension, did you ever hear about something called an ad hominem?

    And your position was quite clear. I've not failed to comprehend it. You, sir, have failed to comprehend the problem with your reasoning. And I have no obligation to continue a discussion with a person who is more interesting in impugning my character than in having a straightforward discussion on these ideas and their merits alone.

    I will leave you to have fun with others who will, similarly, find no validity in your defense of these devices.
    Last edited by marshaul; 01-27-2011 at 11:40 AM.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    54

    Cool LOL Calling me son won't change what you wrote.

    I don't need to know nor care about your 'record' to indict you for advancing your poor understanding of my post and even worse understanding of how to drive safely and competently. Have a nice day!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •