California Lunacy Thread

#2,228
#2,228
www.foxnews.com

GOP lawmaker warns that blue state's likely move will make gas prices skyrocket: 'Affordability issue'

Rep. Vince Fong, R-Calif., is one of the many voices raising concerns about a recent oil refinery closure announcement having a greater impact on American wallets.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

"It's a warning that California's fuel supply is in jeopardy, and it's all caused because of [Democrat Gov.] Gavin Newsom's poor energy policies. That's the root cause, and the rigid regulatory environment, all the mandates, all the new regulations that have been put on these refineries, and now it's putting our fuel supply in jeopardy. And this isn't just an energy issue. This is an affordability issue. This is a jobs issue. This is a reliability issue,"

"California's energy policy is at a breaking point," Fong said. "This is not a market failure. This is because of regulations and mandates that are pushing refineries to close. They can't survive in this and make it economically feasible to function in California. And those who are going to suffer are everyday Californians."
As of Sunday, Californians are paying an average of $4.83 per gallon, which is significantly higher than the $3.15 national average, according to AAA.
 
#2,229
#2,229
just bob said:
Do you ever ask Huff or his lover this question?
Click to expand...
I am once again telling MAGAs that deflecting and saying “what about what this guy is doing?????” doesn’t make them correct

someone else sometimes being wrong doesn’t mean that every dumb MAGA outrage is automatically true
 
#2,230
#2,230
HeuperDrive said:
I am once again telling MAGAs that deflecting and saying “what about what this guy is doing?????” doesn’t make them correct

someone else sometimes being wrong doesn’t mean that every dumb MAGA outrage is automatically true
Click to expand...
That's where you're wrong. Not only am I correct, I am superior to you.
 
#2,232
#2,232
marcusluvsvols said:
Varying penalties on speeding tickets from new cameras installed. Poor people? 50% off.
Homeless people? 80% off.

Lmao. "Equity" speeding cameras
Only in CA...backed by Newsom
Click to expand...
I can somewhat understand this. Was in the Bay Area 15 years back headed to the airport at 5:00am to return the rental and catch an early flight. Got a camera citation for not coming to a complete stop while turning right on red $480. I then understood why so many folks were riding bicycles - couldn’t afford to drive!
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and W.TN.Orange Blood
#2,233
#2,233
marcusluvsvols said:
Varying penalties on speeding tickets from new cameras installed. Poor people? 50% off.
Homeless people? 80% off.

Lmao. "Equity" speeding cameras
Only in CA...backed by Newsom
Click to expand...
Which is good if you're okay with local governments getting your income information. Why have the same offense break a poor person and be a trifle to a rich one?
 
#2,234
#2,234
EasternVol said:
Which is good if you're okay with local governments getting your income information. Why have the same offense break a poor person and be a trifle to a rich one?
Click to expand...
I think there is a Scandinavian country which charges a percentage of income or net worth for tickets/fines from police. Would you support a system like that in America?
 
#2,238
#2,238
EasternVol said:
Which is good if you're okay with local governments getting your income information. Why have the same offense break a poor person and be a trifle to a rich one?
Click to expand...
depends on what can be determined as "cruel and unusual punishment".

is it really justice to charge Zuckerberg $1,000,000 for going 5 over the speed limit, but charge someone in bankruptcy $10 for going 50 over just because they are broke?
at some point the "balancing" makes the punishment far outweigh the crime.

does this break down apply to non-fine based punishments as well?

if you are 50 or below, assault with a deadly weapon gets you 25 years in prison.
if you are 65 to 51, assault with a deadly weapon gets you 15 years in prison.
if you are 80 to 66, assault with a deadly weapon gets you 5 years in prison.

you also know this is going to turn into unequal application of the law. cop chases down someone doing 70 in a school zone, runs their tag, finds out they haven't worked in 10 years and are on disability, and just lets them go, because the fine isn't enough. meanwhile in Beverly Hills you have cops sitting on every corner handing out $10k tickets for jaywalking.
 
#2,240
#2,240
I watched a Murphy Diesel recovery video and the CHP pulled them over while going from AZ to a job in CA, just for some dried mud on their excavator..literally had to drive vack to AZ to have it washed..wasnt even much. Eff CA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and hog88
#2,242
#2,242
C-south said:
Then poor people should be the best drivers. A scaled fine system is simply ridiculous. Not surprised you support it.
Click to expand...
Again, this is about revenue not safety. Being a good driver in no way prevents police from giving you a ticket. The state is incentivized to give more violations.

No one is surprised you again fail to grasp what's being discussed. You're a panda (or zebra which puts you closer to a donkey)
 
#2,244
#2,244
EasternVol said:
Which is good if you're okay with local governments getting your income information. Why have the same offense break a poor person and be a trifle to a rich one?
Click to expand...
Well the state will likely already have it if they collect taxes

Could allow people to go to court to get the fine lowered based on verified income. If they don't want to then just pay as written. Of course the poor have a harder time getting time off but it starts somewhere
 
#2,245
#2,245
hog88 said:
Exactly, tickets are about revenue so using income in determining fines the police would target the nicer vehicles since they are more likely to have more affluent drivers.
Click to expand...
Good since they possible have more influence

I think we're getting closer to the root of the problem and it's not drivers
 
#2,248
#2,248
hog88 said:
No chit, glad that you are starting to pay attention.
Click to expand...
Yeah I've been a big govt stooge and am just now seeing the light. For years I've believed it's a sign of healthy govt if you have to fine and steal from your constituents to fund projects
 
#2,249
#2,249
utvolpj said:
Again, this is about revenue not safety. Being a good driver in no way prevents police from giving you a ticket. The state is incentivized to give more violations.

No one is surprised you again fail to grasp what's being discussed. You're a panda (or zebra which puts you closer to a donkey)
Click to expand...

Sure it’s partly about revenue but you still have to give them a reason. Just because you disagree with traffic laws, regardless of how petty, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be enforced. This is just you looney leftists being lazy with your typical social “justice” horses***.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman
#2,250
#2,250
C-south said:
Sure it’s partly about revenue but you still have to give them a reason. Just because you disagree with traffic laws, regardless of how petty, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be enforced. This is just you looney leftists being lazy with your typical social “justice” horses***.
Click to expand...
It's 99.8% about revenue so it's a big piece of "partly"

It means they all don't have to be viewed as revenue producing for the state. If a cop wants to pull you over they will do it. This has nothing to do with social justice and all about an oppressive govt finding itself thru fines and theft

You have a very child-like view of police and govt. Well if they pulled someone over they must have a good reason 🤣
 
  • Like
Reactions: swampfoxfan
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top