Martin: Legally, RCR is at fault. The logic behind those laws is what I question. Judging by your response, you feel that their potential adverse impact on liberty is equitable to their positive impact for the 'general good.' I strongly disagree.

Ian: You must have lost me at "self-absorbed twit." Did the remarks thereafter have more merit?

AUA:

I gather that you disagree. You don't seem to say why, other than hiding behind the tired argument that it is infringing upon our liberties. I don't feel like my liberties are endangered when laws are passed to ensure that I wear a seatbelt or I have to register my car in the state in which I reside. Honestly, if this is how you define an attack on your liberty, I would hope that you'd be chaining yourself to the gates of the White House to protest the NSA's wiretapping program.

There are reasons I don't generally expound in such a forum, and they include "keeping long-winded my diatribes off of other people's blogs" and "not wasting my effort." That said, I take exception to your use of the word hiding. It isn't hiding to say "this is a fucking ridiculous intrusion into my personal life and choices."

Are there seatbelts to protect the safety of the passengers in a metrobus? Hooks that we can attach ourselves to as we're going down the metro escalators to keep from tripping and falling?
If the reason is, as someone stated above, that wearing a safety-belt will enable you to retain control of the vehicle in the event of an accident, then what of those damnable Airbags that obstructs your vision in those crucial seconds following a collision? I could go on and on about it, but I'm not inclined to waste my time much further.

I've always felt everyone should receive state-issued walkers, just to be safe. Or better yet, a "rascal".

Jebus. Okay, first of all, Martin, my car is registered in Virginia because it's registered to my mom. When I bought the car I had no job and no credit (I was in school), and thus couldn't get a decent loan. Considering my mom "owns" the car and doesn't live in the District, I don't see why she should have to register her car in the District. Just because something is a law doesn't mean it's not fundamentally wrong.

As for the seatbelt stuff, I think you missed the point. The point is that I think DC cops could find better ways to spend their time than issuing seat belt tickets.

RCR:

Ownership isn't the issue with your car -- it's who uses it and where it is parked. I'm sure that your Mom could add you to the vehicle's title. She probably should, if she hasn't already. But regardless of ownership, the car is parked in the District. As such, it is taking up space that should be granted to District residents first. Since you are a resident, I don't much see the trouble of having the tags changed. As much as people complain about how hard it is, it really isn't. And if you're not willing to make this simple change, then I can't have sympathy for the fact that you'll keep getting $100 tickets.

As for the seatbelt trap, I agree that the cops could be making better use of their time.

at least you weren't riding dirty.

The title is held by the bank, and yes, I've looked into it, it would have been a pain in the ass to do. That's precisely why I didn't do it.

I find the 'taking up space' argument rather disingenuous, especially since I park on a street that isn't even zoned and has plentiful parking. If it were about space, they would zone it.

But if it makes you feel anybetter, I recently refinanced the car in my own name, and am awaiting the paper work so that I can register it in DC. It was a lease-to-buy thing and I was waiting until the end of the lease.

I'm not sure if I agree with DCist Martin's assessment that registering your car in DC is "not that difficult." Most people have to take a day off from work to line up like David Copperfield orphans at the DMV to get the appropriate tags. And switching the title is not easy either. But what do I know? I'm a simple VA resident...

Anyway, RCR you were at fault for not wearing your seatbelt. But I admit that I often do not buckle up if my drive is 5-10 min long. I think a $50 ticket amount is a little much for not wearing a seatbelt. If it were an issue about money I would be OK with a $25 fine.

" As much as people complain about how hard it is, it really isn't. "

Oh, I hate to even get started on this because it's going to end up being such a long and boring answer. But seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about.

My dad and I were co-holders on the title to my old car (registered in AZ)--my folks made the intial payment on it when I graduated from college, and I spent three years after that paying it off. Between DC and AZ's laws, we were told that 1) there would have to be a "nominal financial transaction" ("not less than $200") between us to get him removed from the AZ title; 2) the car would then have to be conditionally re-registered in AZ under temporary plates to reflect the change in ownership; 3) it would have to be re-inspected in AZ before it could be granted said temporary plates; 4) we would both have to be "physically present signatories" for this entire process -or- to keep him as a co-owner on a new DC title; 5) DC refused to pass the car after three safety inspections on the grounds that it had tinted windows (it didn't); 6) AZ refused to "provisionally extend" my registration without a passing safety inspection, or to accept a MD or VA inspection (both of which I passed at one point or another) since I live in the District.

On the off chance that this still sounds like just a few minor paperwork details that could be taken care of in the course of a pleasant afternoon, please note that either solution requires my father, myself, and the car to be in the same place at the same time. So to all the routine costs of registration, you need to add at the very least a round trip ticket for my father from Phx to DC for the sole purpose of signing a piece of paper at the DMV (he was here once in the two year period that the registration drama was going on).

The more likely costs (given DC's utterly bogus refusal to pass my car on inspection) would've included the "nominal" $200, the AZ inspection fee, the new AZ registration, enough money in gas and hotels to get me from DC to AZ and back, and then the title transfer fee in DC. Plus about two weeks out of my life.

I'm sure the requirements are different depending on what state you're transferring the registration from, and they probably have enough VA to DC transfers that they've streamlined that particular process. But let's not pretend that it's "easy," or that both states won't find every excuse they can to make some cash on the deal.

That's pretty much what I was told we'd have to do when I looked into it. Granted, my mom is a lot closer than AZ, but it just didn't seem worth it.

I suppose the horror stories exist. I'm not doubting that the DMV could be made more efficient. That being said, that doesn't serve as an excuse once the ticket-writers come by, nor should it. Most everyone who moves in from out of state has to jump through these hoops. If one exception is made, the exceptions will become the rule. I don't like paying taxes, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to stop paying them.

I just think the fine is a bit excessive. For example, the double parking church goers face on a $50 fine. Same for someone blocking a fire hydrant.

We're not just talking about a few hoops, though. We're talking about a process that actually made sucking up a few $100 tickets and then eventually getting a new car more cost effective than registering the old one.

AUA: Actually, you replied to my initial message assessing RCR as acting like a self-absorbed twit in this case. So apparently no, you were entirely capable and willing to respond to my initial comments (even if you did wildly mischaracterize them, as you did DCist Martin's--a sad pattern, really).

And then my reply to your comment, which had no such twit reference, goes unanswered. How convenient for you... let's summarize:

Step one: construct fictitious, straw man argument to a comment. Step two: when called out on what you've done, to claim you didn't want to engage in the debate in the first place (on the grounds of material in the original comment you replied to).

Ok, I'll respond you fucking douche:

"Look, you're being a self-absorbed twit, and that's a generous read of things. Count me as one of the folks who are glad to hear that you got the tickets you deserve. It's just a shame that it takes those measures to get you to uphold your civic responsibilities and stop endangering those around you."

Self absorbed twit? Pretty strong assessment for someone who has never met me. As I said, I never claimed to not deserve the ticket. In fact, I think I explicitly said that I deserved the ticket. It was unfortunate that, after 30 seconds in the car, I was caught literally a split second before I was about to put my seatbelt on. But please, oh smrt one, inform me how I'm endangering anyone other than myself by not wearing my seatbelt?

But of course I'm going to fight the ticket because I'll probably win, and why should I fork over $50 if I don't have to.

"Self absorbed twit? Pretty strong assessment for someone who has never met me."

Re-read what I wrote, and what you even quoted in your reply, which was: "Look, you're being a self absorbed twit..."

That wasn't a sweeping judgement of your personality or character. It was my take on your behavior in this example. What is it with making up arguments for other people around here?

Incidentally, you might want to decide on whether or not you're going to try and stake out the moral scolding high ground, even if it's a misplaced argument, or you're going to use language like "you fucking douche". (Which is a far more total judgement, and far nastier, directed at someone you've never met.) Recap: I judged your behavior. You made a far nastier comment about me as a person. You made the argument that it's stupid to make arguments about people you don't know. I agree. Perhaps you should consider following that pearl of wisdom?

To add more to the 'let's make up arguments for other people, because the points they make we can't well answer' festival: You go on a bit of a rant about how you never said you didn't deserve the ticket. Well, I never criticized you on the basis that you did.

Now the fact that you'd contest a ticket that you feel was deserved, wasting the court's time on gaming a system with rationale that "because I can, and because I'll save some money in the process"--well that's just another shining example great civic and moral judgement. Rave on good man, rave on.

You're right. I've never met you. I could only make judgments about the persona and rationale you choose to present here on the blog. And buddy, if you really did want me to make sweeping personal judgments: with what's here, it's reading like you're trying to make being a narcissistic sociopath into the new black.

P.S. It's not that I don't enjoy a good argument, but this isn't one, and besides, ultimately this is your blog and plot o' virtual web space.

I won't return to reply to further remarks. I suspect that'll be welcome.

Wow. I was so busy dealing with the silly bullshit over at that other post that I didn't even see this stuff.

You're a very impressive person, Ian. You're just tragically intelligent, and yet misunderstood. Sensitive, yet strong.

If you need a rock to crawl under, let me know; there's this guy I'm friends with what has a quarry.

Look,
Gymnastic and dance teams have bake sales, highschool football teams have raffels, and police have random enforcement days...It is how they pay for their shiny new costumes and toys...It's no different than getting blindsided by a coworker's adorable 8 yr old daughter who is hustling wrapping paper and overpriced candy all over the office...Unless you plan ahead and implement serious strategy, they always get you.