Thursday, January 31, 2013

My Day In Court

Okay, let's stop pretending... speeding tickets have little if anything to do with 'public safety' and everything to do with raising revenue for the police state. I am not talking about reckless endangerment or someone traveling at a rate of speed that is well beyond the flow of traffic. I am talking about going a few miles over the posted speed limit and being pulled over and ticketed as if you were a danger for exceeding an arbitrary and ridiculous minimum speed limit set by the state in order to raise money to further their useless and heinous existence.

People for the most part drive with the flow of traffic and stay within a reasonable and safe speed based on road conditions, weather, time of day and other factors. This can be observed on any given day while driving around town. Except for the occasional lunatic, traffic moves at a fairly common and prudent speed. So with exception for the occasional reckless driver, speed limits are set by the drivers and most people will only drive at speeds that are within safe and prudent speeds. This however is in no way in relation to the ridiculous and low speeds set by the state in order to raise revenue.

If the posted speed is 45 this really should be an average safe speed that could carry an upward or downward departure depending upon time of day, weather and road conditions. This is already true as it relates to downward departures of the speed limit. If for example it is dark and raining and visibility is very low and you are in a posted 45 MPH speed zone, you could be ticketed for driving 45 MPH. This is what is known as 'driving too fast for conditions' and even though you were not driving faster than the posted speed, you were supposed to have used your own judgment in determining that 45 was too fast for the current conditions.

Since it is up to us to use common sense to determine when we should exercise a downward departure of the speed limit, shouldn't the same hold true for an upward departure when road conditions are such that driving 5 to 10 miles over the posted speed would still be considered safe and prudent based on those conditions?

This was to be one of the many arguments that my attorney would use in court.

So begins my adventure...

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Federal Court Indicts President Obama – Will not see the end of his second term!

Is God Just Pretend?

I have never been one who cared much for political correctness, and the subjects of religion and politics are two subjects I most often like to talk about. I am sure one of the main reasons is because I am a non-conformist; I don't act in a particular manner because society says that I should. If society decides something is taboo, chances are that is the exact thing I will talk and write about. I also have several articles that are of a political nature, so if speaking about the unspeakable is something that is damaging to your delicate senses, then you should pass on anything I may write because those are going to be the subjects.

I will be writing this as an atheist for atheists who may find themselves debating people of faith and may not be as versed on all the talking points, but also for people of faith who are not afraid to look at other views without feeling threatened or offended. You should never be unwilling to look at other points of view, no matter how much you believe you already know the 'truth.' Many people of faith have never taken the time to really even investigate their beliefs, they just accepted them...after all that's why it's called faith.

My main purpose in writing this is not to cause offense, but that is almost certain to happen. I can understand why this would be; no one likes to have their beliefs called into question because it may make them appear to be foolish or stupid. This would be the main reason for people getting upset and not even wanting to discuss the matter, because deep down inside they also know it does not sound believable. By not talking about it they do not have to try and defend the indefensible. But is it better to hold onto beliefs that you may have not examined in full, or examine them and determine if they are really worth holding onto at all? This is written from an atheist's point of view, and will be critical of many things sacred to religious people. There is no way to discuss these topics without offending someone.

As a Libertarian I believe people should have the right to believe in anything they want to believe matter how silly or implausible others may believe those things to be. With that being said, I would like to point out that having a right to your belief, does not void someone Else's equal right to have an opinion opposite yours and be vocal about it. You do not have a right to not have your beliefs challenged or to not be offended.

I have tried to write this in what I feel is as least offensive tone as I could, because it was important to me for atheists and theists alike to be able to read this. But please understand that I am an atheist, and as such it is hard for me to be as non-bias as some of the people reading this would like, just as it would be hard for a theist to write about atheism I am sure. But with that said, I am sure most will agree that for the most part it is non-offensive as is possible.

Atheists that will use this, or any other book, must be aware that it's not very likely they will succeed in 'convincing' a person of faith to change his or her opinion of their faith... if that is your goal. You may feel frustrated and annoyed because the person you are talking to cannot easily see what you see so clearly. Most likely this person will be as equally frustrated that you cannot fathom the greatness of their God...

Continue reading below-

Ban Everything



Moon Bat Logic

In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings the anti-gun moon bats have started once again chanting their ban guns mantra. This incident was tragic and I am in no way trying to down play this tragic event, but just like in so many other tragic events involving guns, this knee-jerk reaction that the answer to this problem is banning guns is just feeble minded and not the answer.

The thought process involved in thinking that banning guns will somehow magically make gun violence disappear is akin to thinking that banning fatty foods will solve the obesity problem or that banning automobiles will solve the automobile accident problem. While it's true that automobiles are used in 100% of all accidents involving automobiles, this does not mean that the solution to stopping automobile accidents is to ban automobiles, but this is the exact logic that anti-gun activists use to make their case for gun bans...

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

Why Do People Believe Bullshit?

Why are people so prone to believe in bullshit? I am not just talking about religion (although religion is complete bullshit) but all things bullshit. Fortune tellers, astrology, talking to the dead, alien abductions, end of the world, ESP, Ouija Boards, near death experiences, Faked Moon Landing, war on drugs, Criminal Justice, gun control, government, taxes, "Evil Wal-Mart", recycling, Global Warming, the Bible, Creationism....Elvis is still alive.

There is almost nothing that people will not believe. No matter how absurd and completely ridiculous something may sound, chances are there are people that truly believe it. The fact that people believe all this bullshit just makes me want to look at them and ask "what the fuck?"

What is wrong with these people? Were they dropped on their heads as babies? Did they eat too much lead based paint as a child? Or is this really nothing more than a neurological disorder these people suffer from?

We may never really know for sure, but one thing is certain...this is all 100% bullshit!