| jaj001@iglou.com 2005-05-31, 8:54 am |
| On Tue, 31 May 2005 00:31:53 -0400, poboxdc@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>jaj001@iglou.com wrote:
resumed[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
than[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>Photogrammetry via those old cameras was inaccurate at best.
>Furthermore accident scenes are not closed off nearly as long
>as other incidents, such as homicide scenes. You seem clearly
>out of touch with true accident reconstruction and just another
>impatient driver on the highway who thinks your right to save
>a few minutes super cedes the rights of the accident victims.
>
>Your tune has been sung before, and rejected by the
>courts and everyone else who knows the true score.
>
>(KM)
Show me rights of accident victims in the constitution of this great
country and I will stand down.
I rebut the non-existent rights of accident victims with the
constitutional mandate to protect the general welfare (this includes
economic welfare). When I see an interstate shut down for three hours
because of accident reconstruction, I am ready to find the first court
of competent jurisdiction and litigate in class action for the costs
incurred by all of the drivers for lost travel time, late loads, etc.
The bottom line, I am still in touch with accident reconstruction.
The Chief of Police in the small hamlet where I live will not buy
accident reconstruction equipment.
cheers
|