Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Unspec7 t1_jbggndq wrote

Reply to comment by samwiseganja96 in So now we're not even bothering with the fake paper plates huh? by 101ina45

>potentially embolden people to comit hit and runs.

Oh come on. For the vast majority of people, the primary decision between running and stay isn't because of a fear of being caught after the fact. People are generally good people and want to do the right thing.

1

RebeccaLoneBrook29 t1_jbgkr97 wrote

I agree that they want to do the right thing, unfortunately, most people are not in a situation to stay and pay for their misdeeds.

3

samwiseganja96 t1_jbgky53 wrote

Yes fear of being caught. Less of a chance to be caught with 1 location on a vehicle that has a unique identifier as opposed to 2 locations with a unique identifier. Less of a chance to be caught doing something means that more people are going to do something right.

It's okay if this is a hard concept for you to understand.

3

Unspec7 t1_jbgxyo8 wrote

>Yes fear of being caught

Oh, I didn't realize the main reason I don't go out and rob a bank is because I'm scared of being caught.

You're basically implying that humans are nothing more than animals and the main thing separating us from animals is the law. We all know that's not true.

2

samwiseganja96 t1_jbgyrk8 wrote

You seem to be under the impression that I said fear of being caught is the only reason for not commiting crimes. There's a whole host of contributing factors to why people do or do not commit crime. One of those factors is how easy the person commiting or not commiting crimes can be caught. This is the main reason why cameras are put on stores. Some stores even put fake cameras.

Again I understand if you're having a hard time understanding these concepts as you seem to be having a hard time understanding what I am saying. You seem to cherry pick certain words I use and argue against those instead of arguing against the logical statements I'm making.

3

Unspec7 t1_jbh7ty0 wrote

>You seem to be under the impression that I said fear of being caught is the only reason
>
>Considering that 5 of the states you listed also have the highest occurrence of hit and runs I'd hypothesize that not having a front plate could potentially embolden people to comit hit and runs.

This necessarily implied that the main reason people don't commit hit and runs is because they fear being caught. You're the one who used the term embolden. Further, I never said ONLY. You're the one who seems to be reading "only" from "main".

Let's be realistic now. We both understand that most people won't suddenly feel more inclined to commit a hit and run simply because front plates aren't required anymore. I get that you're trying to obfuscate how people actually behave so you can support your argument, but we both understand that people aren't primarily motivated by the legality of crimes when they consider committing a crime. In fact, when there is a hit and run, I doubt there's any consideration of the legality of running away. Most people are decent people and understand that they should stay because it's the morally right thing to do.

>logical statements I'm making.

What logical statements? You threw out some random statistics that have no correlation to each other. They weren't even correct stats - for example, the top 5 states in hit and runs is Wyoming, Iowa, Michigan, Illinois, and Virginia. In that list of 5, only 1 is a no front plate state (Michigan). Even in the top 10, only 4 of the 10 are no front plate states (Michigan, Ohio, Kansas, West Virginia)

Quit clutching at your pearls, front plates don't do jack shit.

2

samwiseganja96 t1_jbhjk20 wrote

I encourage you to reread my comments so you can fully understand the words I'm saying in their entirety.

I hope your StANcEd beamer doesn't get totalled by a jackass without the proper license plates.

Typical stanced beamer owner behavior.

1

Unspec7 t1_jbhjuy0 wrote

>I encourage you to reread my comments so you can fully understand the words I'm saying in their entirety.

"I have no idea how to come up with a proper response and had my ass handed to me in the logic department so will just regurgitate the same shit over and over again". Nice. You haven't addressed ANY of my points about your "facts", so... yea you're just arguing in bad faith at this point.

Don't worry, I actually PrEpARE and have a front and rear facing dash cam. Wow, it's like we have technology.

1

samwiseganja96 t1_jbhkihx wrote

Nah m8 I laid out my points. I don't need to argue anymore you just have to do the reading.

P.s. put a plate on m8

1

Unspec7 t1_jbhko0t wrote

Glad to see you finally saw sense and conceded that you lost.

Nah, I'll never be putting a plate on ever again. NJ will be dropping the front plate law probably in the next decade or so anyhow.

1

samwiseganja96 t1_jbhksjg wrote

Typical stanced beamer driver.

1

Unspec7 t1_jbhlc4p wrote

Typical MFA user

Maybe if you spent as much time in vocal lessons rather than being a contrarian on the internet, you'd be able to sing.

1

samwiseganja96 t1_jbhm3l6 wrote

Ha fucking 🤡🤡🤡 I have performed in front of thousands. 4 times at Carnegie hall haha.

1

samwiseganja96 t1_jbhl5pq wrote

Too bad that rear facing camera won't do shit when someone hits you without a front plate 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡

1

Unspec7 t1_jbhlgme wrote

You do understand that to run away from me, they need to either A) turn around or B) go past me, right? Either way I'll get a nice shot of their rear plate

Are you stupid or just a contrarian?

Edit: Given that you failed out of college, definitely the former.

1

samwiseganja96 t1_jbhmfod wrote

I have a degree lol. 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡

There are ways to not get the rear plate after someone has hit you. C) their plate is blocked by another car as they pass d) various rear plate covers use your fucking brain.

1

Unspec7 t1_jbhmt1h wrote

C) Sure, but the chances of that are so low that I'd rather just pay my insurance premiums than get front plates. D) Which is illegal. Are you just contradicting yourself at this point? What stops them from running both plates and having covers on BOTH, you donut?

True, I guess a GED kind of counts as a "degree". It does, after all, get referred to as the "Good Enough Degree".

1

samwiseganja96 t1_jbhobpi wrote

This comment is the epitome of "I haven't understood a word I read" it's like you can only hold on to a portion of this conversation. I write something and you only comprehend 1/10th of it.

Of course I'm not so daft that I think someone can run both plates with covers. I thought we were listing possible reasons you couldn't capture a plate on your front camera. was I wrong in thinking that? From your comment you made it seem like there were only 2 ways they could avoid the camera. In reality there's a multitude.

That does not take away the fact that when you have 2 plates on a car. There's 2 locations on that car with a visible unique identifier. This will absolutely make it easier to identify a car in the event of literally ANYTHING. That means accidents, robberies, kidnappings, etc it is a valuable tool. Grow up dude.

1

Unspec7 t1_jbhojb2 wrote

Nope, no metal plate will ever adorn the front of my car. I don't plan on using my car for criminal purposes anyhow, so idk why you even give so much of a shit. Goody two toes much.

1

[deleted] t1_jbinbcs wrote

[deleted]

0

Unspec7 t1_jbjg5fq wrote

Bank robbery is not a victimless crime. First, there's the people you need to threaten with grave bodily harm to coerce them to give you the money, which can inflict emotional trauma. Second, FDIC insurance funds isn't just some monopoly money that comes out of thin air. It is effectively funded by tax payers, and so the entire nation becomes your victim.

0

[deleted] t1_jbjhwz4 wrote

[deleted]

0

Unspec7 t1_jbjiiuo wrote

>oh you're the guy who refuses to use a front plate because your car looks so cool without it,

Yep, fuck front plates. Cars in general look so much better without them, they're useless pieces of metal anyhow. Unsure how that affects the rationale of THIS discussion though, but I guess ya'll really like to resort to ad hominem attacks when you realize you're in an untenable position.

And based on your rational for robbing banks: you're not nearly as good a person as you think you are.

0

samwiseganja96 t1_jbgl6rw wrote

It's okay if you want to latch on to my hypothesis while ignoring the factual statements I made.

1

Unspec7 t1_jbgxr53 wrote

Sure, you gave me factual statements, but there was no inferences to be drawn so I ignored it. How do you know that the 5 states with the highest rate of hit and runs aren't also the states with the highest rate of identification? You only gave me a national statistic for identification, not a state-by-state break down.

1