Don't forget, if the cop isn't wearing his hat, the ticket is invalid!
this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2025
138 points (97.9% liked)
InsanePeopleFacebook
2910 readers
109 users here now
Screenshots of people being insane on Facebook. Please censor names/pics of end users in screenshots. Please follow the rules of lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
if you’re pregnant the officer has to allow you to urinate in his hat
What
its a weird myth thats been around for a while in the UK
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/can-pregnant-woman-legally-urinate-14609039
Don't forget to extend your middle finger towards the police officer while winking and waggling your eyebrows up and down! This is a secret mason salute and they can't arrest you after that or the Head Poobah will come down from his space ship and take away their policing license and give you $10,000!
You forgot about having to dress in drag and do the hula.
The police when they pursue me for 2 miles on the interstate to the nearest church: 😔
Nobody has ever been arrested at a church before. /s
Nobody who attends church could be a bad person
Remember, they have to tell you if they're a cop.
Private property owners can have it towed instead.
Drive through the front door, then chant the castle doctrine. Law enforcement, or anyone for that matter, won’t be able to cross the door step then.
Wow. This reminds me of something I heard way back in the 80's, where word was if you managed get away long enough to park and get out of your car, they couldn't prove that it was you driving and you'd get away with it.
I think there's a grain of truth in there; like, if they didn't actually see your face, and somehow you escape and get back to your house without them seeing you actually exit the vehicle... I don't know. It was all sort of theoretical back then, and being predicated on winning a car chase pursuit I'd forgotten about it until just now. I wonder if that's some ancestor rumor to the current web of SovCit beliefs.
Depends on the infraction, but isn't the owner of the car liable in cases where the driver can't be determined conclusively?
Like, for example, with speed cameras... If your face was obscured in the picture, you still get a ticket in the mail if you're the registered owner of the car.
Just like parking tickets are ultimately the responsibility of the owner, since there's usually no one driving when the ticket is issued.
I think it depends on where you are, and probably which decade. I lived in Munich a long while ago, and they had face cameras for catching red-light runners. I knew a few people, personally, who got off because the camera didn't get a good picture of their faces. I don't know a lot of places where the vehicle owner is held responsible; like your car gets stolen and taken for a joy ride, someone gets run over, and you're held responsible for manslaughter just because you hold the title?
But I don't know. Laws change, and are different in every state in any case.
Oh, the converse of the Munich story is one friend who got her ticket in the mail and it's a perfect picture of her, driving, beer can in-hand, leaning forward and looking directly up into the camera. They had this little red light that would blink a couple of times before it took the picture, and even knowing what it is, the instinct to look up at the blinking light was pretty effective at getting good photos.
It matters how the law is worded (at least in the US). Parking tickets are always worded that the owner of the vehicle is responsible. Otherwise anyone could claim they weren't the one that parked there. Generally speeding and actual moving infractions go to the driver not the owner.
Hell yeah, sovereign citizens
You can also pull out a mickey and a blunt, and party on!
It always hurts me a little bit to see people putting so much time and energy into being this absurd. It feels like a depressing indictment of, well, everything.