yeah well if you look at the docket history half of firestone bills are about defining or redefining something lol
1 Like
a strong nay from me
1 Like
why not
even the congress I was in had like 3 bills on the table.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
Welcome back to the bill talk show with your host Sharkfish82 and sometimes co-host @jasonbourneaxis
Today is a quick topic that honestly, just seems like an unneeded addition to an already good defined law.
Today is a simple bill called “A Bill to Amend “A Bill to Redefine Streetracing”
Currently, the current law states that it is: “A form of illegal driving which takes place on public roads in which two or more vehicles compete to see who is the fastest while breaking road laws in the process.”
The amended version would have it state now as: “A form of illegal driving which takes place on public roads in which one or more vehicles compete the fastest time or to see who is the fastest while breaking road laws in the process.”
What is the reasoning behind even adding it as one or more honestly, to me it is a unneeded change as it really ain’t a race when it is one car and how do you even determine that a single car is racing by itself? I highly doubt a group of people are gonna be like “oh yeah we are racing one by one seeing who is fastest”
I know it’s just a one word change but it again doesn’t really need to change but /shrug maybe I’m just being picky
Shark boi out 
Bill Link: A Bill to Amend "A Bill to Redefine Street Racing"
I don’t see why the one was added to it. That’s not street racing that’s just speeding. You can’t race without some kind of an opponent. Even if the person is racing against a record of time to get from one end of 401 to the other no LEO can just look at someone who is speeding and go “oh yep hes racing to beat his record to get somewhere.” Not only is it hard for an officer to tell if someone is racing their own time it is also dangerous to the people of Firestone because people might be arrested just because they were speeding.
1 Like
We make law for stupid people huh? That why we had a law to prohibit standing on a traffic light pole. I got a person in the country Who admited he was doing a race against himself/a Time attack and according to the actual law. I wasn’t able to arrest him for street racing when he was doing an alone race @851raymond @sharkfish82 . Sorry for my grammar I’m on my phone
I’m not sure what you mean by making law for stupid people or how that even correlates with anything but in a situation like that you cite them for speeding and reckless driving. Someone could be doing 90 SPS down redwood BLVD that doesn’t mean you can immediately come to the conclusion that they are racing themselves. There is simply no way for a cop to just look at a car by itself and come to the conclusion that it is racing against itself. This also could raise a problem where a cop could pull someone over for speeding and say “well you were competing for time to get there as fast as you could” and arrest them for street racing and according to the definition it would be a completely legal arrest.
1 Like
I’m a good co host
First off, what is this even supposed to mean? Are you saying the citizens are stupid or us? Don’t really know what you mean by that
This doesn’t really connect with the topic, I said this is an unnneccary addition to an already fine law, not that it wasn’t a law we needed or something like that.
You realize you can’t act upon that either way really when you think about it, a man could easily be saying “yeah I was speeding” and then you fine them and they were like “I DIDN’T DO ANYTHING, FALSE CITATION AAAAA” I have seen an influx on this in the county and that’s why we have probable cause where we have to physically see them break the law/get evidence that they did it. If you pulled them over after actually seeing them speed and when you ask them “know why I stopped you?” and they say they were trying to beat a time or something maybe that be an exception but again, can still arrest/cite for reckless, speeding and etc
The reason I wrote that fucking bill was to stop dumbasses from falling on cars and blocking the traffic lights. and preventing self harm as it is
Technicaly, self harm is against roblox TOS. If they decide to jump infront of a car it’s frp so he can be arrested or cited. And if he stand on the light pole arrest him for disodery conduct. I should write a bill on that Who knows 
I just read that and lost brain cells
Disorderly conduct is a bitch charge for they one. There is a bill on the light poles and disorderly conduct. Learn your shit rep
Post moving got wonky it seems.
Bill talk pt6
Evening everyone, welcome to the new megathread featuring my bill talks. I am your host Sharkfish82 alongside my current co-host @jasonbourneaxis. Today, we will be talking about the bill “A Bill to define Road Rage as Assault”.
First off, let’s read the preamble:
“In Real Life, road rage falls under assault and battery in most states. Firestone Citizens should be able to rely on this bill if passed, as Road Rage happens everyday within the County.”
Ok, so they are trying to add another definition to assault, why not make an amendment to the most recent adaptation of assault/vehicular assault then a whole separate bill to classify it as assault? Wouldn’t that be easier?
Now, onto the definition: “Road Rage shall be defined as: An aggressive or angry behavior exhibited by a driver of a road vehicle. These behaviors include physical threats or dangerous driving methods targeted toward another driver or a pedestrian in an effort to intimidate or release frustration.”
There are already preexisting charges you could charge someone for all of these examples:
Physical threats? Conspiracy to commit a crime
Dangerous driving? Dangerous driving
If they hit them? Vehicular assault
If they miss them? Reckless driving (possibly even attempted murder)
The next section then states:
“In the event of a Road Rage, there must be Witness or Physical Evidence. The victim must feel threatened in any sort of way, or be in imminent danger.”
Huh? There is already something called probable cause. I really don’t see why this had to be added as I believe this should be common knowledge if you are conducting an arrest.
Now, the charges if you conduct this:
1st-2nd time: 100-150 dollar cite
3rd+: Max of 360 seconds
Ok so, lemme get this right, a man is physically making threats, trying to hit someone and such and I can only be like “oh lemme give you a cite don’t do that again!” for the first 2 times? This confuses me quite a bit. Why don’t you use the same charges you would use for vehicular assault which this bill is mostly aiming towards as you are using a vehicle to try and hit someone or make threats to hit them with the car. To me for this type of crime, always make it optional to choose between a cite or an arrest depending on the severity.
Anyways, I digress and I suggest that congress doesn’t pass this bill. As always, feel free to discuss.
Shark boi out
Link to bill: A Bill to define Road Rage as Assault
This is retard bill. So honking and yelling is assault now, ok
Jason, I ask that you reconsider, it is unnneeded
i will reconsider