Cranbury Forum | Bulletin | Info Sharing
[Click here to bookmark this page: http://cranbury.info]
▪
Cranbury School
▪
Cranbury Township
▪
Cranbury Library
▪
Cranbury.org
▪
Cranburyhistory.org
(Press Ctrl and = keys to increase font size)
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
[http://cranbury.info]
->
News | Events
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Emoticons
Font colour:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Font size:
Tiny
Small
Normal
Large
Huge
Close Tags
[quote="Guest"][quote="Guest"]The only pleasure in this topic is seeing how worked up this one poster is. They are obsessed with this issue and write massive essays over-and-over. It obviously frustrates them to no end that the world has not arranged itself to their personal liking and it is causing them considerable stress.[/quote] I am not 'obsessed with the issue', I am concerned about it because its something that reduces safety on roadways. What about the people who whine endlessly for speed limits to be lowered? Are they obsessed with it? I bet you wouldn't be saying that to THEM. This has nothing to do with personal liking. This has to do with traffic laws being set against rational scientific standards. What about that is my personal liking? [quote]Good. because he/she seems like a loser. They have only themselves to blame because this issue is absolutely out of their control and complaining here does nothing but raise their blood pressure, especially when their complaints fall on what they perceive as "unworthy" ears who for some crazy reason just don't "get it." Ha, ha. I normally don't wish someone stress, but man you've earned it with all your hatred. [/quote] What hatred? I made a rational argument as to what I believe to be true, and its supported by evidence. I'm simply tired of people repeating the same tired false 'conventional wisdoms' over and over and over again and its a waste of time to talk to people who won't change their views no matter what. I'm trying to make a case that this isn't true so that more people understand the issue. What on earth is wrong with you? [quote]You need to learn to take a deep breath, relax and let it go. Seriously. Or if you can't, at least try and channel it into something with at least the remote chance of a payoff, like starting a petition (I wouldn't sign it but someone inevitably will) or attending county meetings to speak. Because obsessing on it here will count for absolutely nothing.[/quote] You're completely ridiculous. Assuming you are were the person before telling me that "you got banned because youre lying blah blah blah" YOU were the one stirring stuff up , and then call me obsessive for making a rational argument? Your level of 'response' to my post is "youre just whining because you get speeding tickets and things aren't what you like"???? Is this seriously your level of comprehension? Because I already stated that I am interested in this issue in GENERAL, and oppose the current system because it does not conform to scientific engineering standards. You are being biased and spinning things around because it doesn't fit your worldview. If someone is not willing to change their mind if presented with the facts and only relies on their own emotions as basis for their worldview, then its pointless to talk to them, not that they're 'unworthy'. The other problem is that the more you use logic and reason with these people, the more stupid you look in THEIR eyes, which is another reason not to bother with them.[/quote]
Options
HTML is
ON
BBCode
is
ON
Smilies are
ON
Disable HTML in this post
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Jump to:
Select a forum
Topics
----------------
News | Events
School | Parenting
Blogs by Cranbury Residents
Shopping | Good Deals | Price Talk
Home Sweet Home
House For Sale
Home Sales Pricing Records
Financial | Stocks | Mutual Funds
Cool Bytes & Bits
Garage Sale | ForSale Ads | Things to Trade
Tech Related (PC, Internet, HDTV, etc.)
Interesing and Fun Stuff to Share
What's Your Favorite?
Interests | Hobbies
Cranbury History
Radom Thoughts | Sports | Kitchen Sink
Amazon Deals
Local Business Info
----------------
Local Business Ads (FREE)
Support
----------------
Daily Sponsored Message & Amazon Ads
About Us | Your Privacy | Suggestion | Sponsored
Test Area (Practice your posting skills here)
Topic review
Author
Message
Guest
Posted: Tue, May 17 2011, 7:44 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Look, if you want to make it 50 mph, this is not the right place. Ask a court to decide it for you if you really want it your way.
Oh after construction is finished around mid June Middlesex county has no choice but to raise it back to 50 MPH. 35was just a temp. construction speed.
You realize that saying it doesn't make it true, right? You realize everyone knows you have no idea what you're talking about and doesn't take you seriously? And you realize using pulling year-old posts up to comment on that are completely redundant to current ones anyway makes you look like an obsessed wacko, right?
Guest
Posted: Tue, May 17 2011, 6:50 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
Look, if you want to make it 50 mph, this is not the right place. Ask a court to decide it for you if you really want it your way.
Oh after construction is finished around mid June Middlesex county has no choice but to raise it back to 50 MPH. 35was just a temp. construction speed.
Guest
Posted: Sun, Sep 26 2010, 4:05 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
By the way, I used to live in Plainsboro.
Guest
Posted: Sun, Sep 26 2010, 4:04 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Like I said, its one of the worst examples of an underposted speed limit in the area. Eventually, I'd like to raise speed limits on rural and urban freeways to 70-85 instead of the pathetic 55 and 65 which is universally disobeyed.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Sep 25 2010, 3:53 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
I have obtained the speed studies for Darrah ln. and Princeton Pike past franklin corner rd. in Lawrence. Both are posted 25 but the speed studies seem to indicate that a limit of 40 or 45 would be more appropriate according to the 85th percentile. I will be attending the town meeting to give a presentation suggesting changing the limits. If I can eventually get these two roads changed, I'll be moving up to the whole town, then other towns and the state roads. Hopefully old trenton will be posted 55 and 133 will be 65 ; o
Do you live in town?
The poster said previously they did not and likely would never be on OTR again. Which makes this all the more interesting.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Sep 25 2010, 2:18 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
I have obtained the speed studies for Darrah ln. and Princeton Pike past franklin corner rd. in Lawrence. Both are posted 25 but the speed studies seem to indicate that a limit of 40 or 45 would be more appropriate according to the 85th percentile. I will be attending the town meeting to give a presentation suggesting changing the limits. If I can eventually get these two roads changed, I'll be moving up to the whole town, then other towns and the state roads. Hopefully old trenton will be posted 55 and 133 will be 65 ; o
Do you live in town?
Guest
Posted: Sat, Sep 25 2010, 2:16 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
I have obtained the speed studies for Darrah ln. and Princeton Pike past franklin corner rd. in Lawrence. Both are posted 25 but the speed studies seem to indicate that a limit of 40 or 45 would be more appropriate according to the 85th percentile. I will be attending the town meeting to give a presentation suggesting changing the limits. If I can eventually get these two roads changed, I'll be moving up to the whole town, then other towns and the state roads. Hopefully old trenton will be posted 55 and 133 will be 65 ; o
Do you live in town?
Guest
Posted: Sat, Sep 25 2010, 1:00 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
I have obtained the speed studies for Darrah ln. and Princeton Pike past franklin corner rd. in Lawrence. Both are posted 25 but the speed studies seem to indicate that a limit of 40 or 45 would be more appropriate according to the 85th percentile. I will be attending the town meeting to give a presentation suggesting changing the limits. If I can eventually get these two roads changed, I'll be moving up to the whole town, then other towns and the state roads. Hopefully old trenton will be posted 55 and 133 will be 65 ; o
Considering these roads are not in Cranbury what is the validity to this board? Good luck there and then at the county for OTR.
Guest
Posted: Sat, Sep 25 2010, 11:18 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
I have obtained the speed studies for Darrah ln. and Princeton Pike past franklin corner rd. in Lawrence. Both are posted 25 but the speed studies seem to indicate that a limit of 40 or 45 would be more appropriate according to the 85th percentile. I will be attending the town meeting to give a presentation suggesting changing the limits. If I can eventually get these two roads changed, I'll be moving up to the whole town, then other towns and the state roads. Hopefully old trenton will be posted 55 and 133 will be 65 ; o
Guest
Posted: Mon, Sep 6 2010, 12:33 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Thanks for your support. It also seems that speed limits like this (in fact, most speed limits, even though they're not as blatantly ridiculous as this one) are actually federally illegal because regulatory signs are federal devices licensed for use by the state. The federal standard for these devices is that necessity
must
be established by an engineering study, and that a probable cause threshold for when someone is a hazard to others must be established by rational science, not the whims of local or county politics. Obviously this is not very well adhered to, but it seems to be a possible defense against unjust tickets or a possible way to change some of these limits.
Yeah, good luck with that.
Sadly I'm also aware that the local and county courts will probably laugh at this, but hey, if there's a legitimate foundation in law, maybe it can get somewhere eventually.
Guest
Posted: Mon, Sep 6 2010, 12:32 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Thanks for your support. It also seems that speed limits like this (in fact, most speed limits, even though they're not as blatantly ridiculous as this one) are actually federally illegal because regulatory signs are federal devices licensed for use by the state. The federal standard for these devices is that necessity
must
be established by an engineering study, and that a probable cause threshold for when someone is a hazard to others must be established by rational science, not the whims of local or county politics. Obviously this is not very well adhered to, but it seems to be a possible defense against unjust tickets or a possible way to change some of these limits.
You need to get out more. Meet your neighbors, try not to think about traffic signs. Please don't buy a firearm.
Well sorry to disappoint you, but I already do get out plenty. And I already own several AK-47's. Just kidding, but why shouldn't I buy a firearm? How is that relevant?
Oh I get it, you're calling me a crazy loser in thinly veiled terms. Sorry for being concerned over peoples' safety. I guess me getting 1% as 'worked up' over the traffic law system being completely irrational as the soccer moms screaming to make limits 25 or 30 on a main road and acting like their kids are gonna die if they don't get their way is just me being a 'crazy loser'.
I'll tell you what...I'm probably very unlikely to do anything 'crazy' in the foreseeable future. Probably less likely than you. See this is why I wonder why I'm getting booted from here, and stuff like this is allowed to stay. I haven't said anything like this to anyone here.
Guest
Posted: Mon, Sep 6 2010, 10:19 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
Thanks for your support. It also seems that speed limits like this (in fact, most speed limits, even though they're not as blatantly ridiculous as this one) are actually federally illegal because regulatory signs are federal devices licensed for use by the state. The federal standard for these devices is that necessity
must
be established by an engineering study, and that a probable cause threshold for when someone is a hazard to others must be established by rational science, not the whims of local or county politics. Obviously this is not very well adhered to, but it seems to be a possible defense against unjust tickets or a possible way to change some of these limits.
You need to get out more. Meet your neighbors, try not to think about traffic signs. Please don't buy a firearm.
Guest
Posted: Mon, Sep 6 2010, 9:06 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
Thanks for your support. It also seems that speed limits like this (in fact, most speed limits, even though they're not as blatantly ridiculous as this one) are actually federally illegal because regulatory signs are federal devices licensed for use by the state. The federal standard for these devices is that necessity
must
be established by an engineering study, and that a probable cause threshold for when someone is a hazard to others must be established by rational science, not the whims of local or county politics. Obviously this is not very well adhered to, but it seems to be a possible defense against unjust tickets or a possible way to change some of these limits.
Yeah, good luck with that.
Guest
Posted: Mon, Sep 6 2010, 3:09 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Thanks for your support. It also seems that speed limits like this (in fact, most speed limits, even though they're not as blatantly ridiculous as this one) are actually federally illegal because regulatory signs are federal devices licensed for use by the state. The federal standard for these devices is that necessity
must
be established by an engineering study, and that a probable cause threshold for when someone is a hazard to others must be established by rational science, not the whims of local or county politics. Obviously this is not very well adhered to, but it seems to be a possible defense against unjust tickets or a possible way to change some of these limits.
Guest
Posted: Thu, Sep 2 2010, 7:04 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
... what I want to do is just get the information out there in a practical sense and perhaps improve safety a bit here and there. I know very well that I don't have much power over this, but like people are interested in various issues, I am interested in traffic engineering and want to increase awareness of it in general, not because changing the speed limit on OTR would do anything on the large scale.
That makes sense to me. Good luck!
Guest
Posted: Wed, Sep 1 2010, 9:20 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Topic locked?
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
My daily comic relief...
I wish I could be a fly on the wall and watch the physical reactions of this poster as he gets so worked up over this.
I guess everyone needs their cause. You could come up with a dozen worse traffic issues within a few mile radius but this one seems to have tapped a nerve. Probably screwed up their commute. Nevermind what a mess all the changing speed limits they keep revising on Cranbury Neck -- doesn't affect his commute...
WORKED UP !!!!!!!!!!!!! NO ONE IS GETTING WORKED UP PAL !
Your attempts at sarcasm are lame and annoying. Stop trying to mock me and act like an adult.