JERSEY CITY LIST - Message Forum

Forum Index

Board index » All Posts (bodhipooh)

Bottom

« 1 ... 4 5 6 (7) 8 9 10 ... 123 »

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#181

Home away from home

Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
A solution like gondolas could actually move a ton of people from one side to the other, so its impact would be larger than a pedestrian bridge that very few people would actually use.

I agree a gondola makes more sense than a bridge, but you'd still never get it past the riverfront stakeholders even if you could wangle the real estate.

This is the part that I think most people underestimate the most: any project touching the NYC side will undoubtedly run into huge amounts of litigation. I wouldn't be surprised if it got mired in the court system for 5-10 years. Plus, you would have a lot of time spent in environmental and safety reviews bv the Coast Guard, NYS, NYC, NJ, etc.

But, in the end, something needs to be done, and might as well start sooner before we find ourselves with a real crisis. With ~30K more units coming to JC, the PATH will be much more chaotic in the very near future.

Posted on: 2019/1/9 21:22

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#182

Home away from home

Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:

? A tram across the Hudson would be much more expensive than a ped/bike bridge. The Roosevelt Island tram, which is around 900m in length, cost $25 million just to renovate in 2010.

? A Liberty Bridge would almost certainly be free to cross, and a Hudson tram would almost certainly charge for rides. I.e. a tram not just more expensive to build and maintain, it's more expensive for people to use.

? Roosevelt Island tram has a max capacity of 14,000 trips per day. (That could go higher if it ran 24 hours, but... it doesn't.) Again, we are at unknown cost-per-trip comparisons, but it seems like a pedestrian bridge would be less expensive, more amenable to tourists, and could have a similar capacity.

? Like RI, a tram probably won't operate 24/7. A Liberty Bridge would almost certainly be open 24/7.

? A tram would basically go from waterfront to waterfront, meaning that like the ferries, those crossers have to use some other system to continue their commute. (That's also true if you walk, but not if you bike.)

? Like the ferries, trams require waiting (7-15 minutes); a pedestrian bridge does not. So while a tram will move faster than walking, you might only save 10-15 minutes.

? Needless to say, a ped/bike bridge is much greener than a tram.

To put it another way: A tram has all the same problems as the ferries, except that it's more expensive to build and operate. Yay...?

Yeah, I'll go for a Liberty Bridge -- or even ferry expansions and subsidies -- over a tram. No question.

You should spend some more time reading about urban funiculars and new gondola systems. They can move 3,000 - 4,000 people per hour, at high speeds over 20 MPH, and do so over long distances. A Hudson crossing would be about 5 minutes from boarding to arrival. Not all that different than PATH, comparing EXP to WTC, or Newport to Christopher.

A solution like gondolas could actually move a ton of people from one side to the other, so its impact would be larger than a pedestrian bridge that very few people would actually use.

Posted on: 2019/1/9 18:52

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#183

Home away from home

People keep throwing out the eventual deployment of 10-car trains, but they seem to not know this solution is only coming to the NWK/WTC line. That solution will do nothing for the overcrowding in the 33/JSQ line.

Posted on: 2019/1/9 18:36

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#184

Home away from home

Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
The Bayonne Bridge is being raised to 215 feet to allow for taller ships to pass. The article states this fantasy proposal to be a 200ft, so it should accommodate most tall ships. Since it's pure fantasy, I'm sure they could just increase it to 215ft or taller if warranted.

That's the necessary height for cargo ships, but the Hudson has other type of traffic, like cruise ships, that would be taller. The newest Royal Caribbean ships top out around 70-75 meters, so 215ft would cut it for that.

Posted on: 2019/1/9 4:07

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#185

Home away from home

The bridge in the referenced article is set at 200 feet above ground, which is plenty high, but it wouldn't be tall enough for the most recent cruise ships to be able to clear it, such as the Oasis-class ships from Royal Caribbean, which are about 75m.

Any pedestrian bridge being built will have to be at least 100m (330 ft) above the water to ensure it accommodates current and future sea traffic.

Posted on: 2019/1/9 4:04

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#186

Home away from home

Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

ConstantReader wrote:
1) During rush hour, run fewer trains on the 33rd-Hoboken schedule and make up the difference with more 33rd-JSQ trains. The Hoboken trains on the 33rd St. line are significantly less crowded than their JSQ equivalents.

As I understand it, the problem is traffic and signalling in tunnels, not a shortage of rolling stock.

Dolomiti, are you just trying to tweak me with the bridge comment knowing it drives me nuts? Of all the stupid ideas, it's the stupidest. Even if it was doable (it's not) there's probably no lower return on transportation investment than allowing the relatively few people who live downtown and work in Lower Manhattan AND are inclined to walk or bike to do so.

And, inclined to walk ~30 minutes just to cross that hypothetical bridge.

And yet, thousands of people do exactly that, every day, with the Manhattan and Brooklyn Bridges.

Quote:
There are no pedestrian bridges in the world with that kind of length for very good reason.

Try again.

Big Dam Bridge is 1.28km; Bob Kerrey Bridge is 940m; Nescio is 740m. Those are all relatively new bridges.

It's not common, but that alone does not prove it's a bad idea. E.g. almost no transit systems in the US use open gangway cars; does that, in and of itself, prove that it's a bad idea?

The width of the Hudson is twice that of the East River where all three bridges (Williamsburg, Manhattan, and Brooklyn) are located. You are comparing apples to oranges.

A bridge from DTJC to Lower Manhattan would be over 1.25 to 1.5 miles, at a minimum. None of the examples you mention are nowhere near that. Try again.

Very few people commute via the Brooklyn. It is estimated that 4,000 people cross it every day. Take away the sizable amount of visitors/tourists, and the number that is actually commuting to/from work is very small. About 2.5K cyclists cross it every day. Even under the best/rosiest of estimates, you have 5,000 commuters crossing the Brooklyn bridge every day. That's about 5 - 7 PATH trains, or 30 minutes of added rush hour service.

If you want to see a more efficient method to add capacity, at least suggest cable cars/gondolas. That could be a much more effective solution than the idiocy that is a pedestrian bridge over the Hudson.

Posted on: 2019/1/8 19:59

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#187

Home away from home

Quote:

edgewordwise wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
I pretty much universally support demand pricing for cars, but the whole point in the metro area is to get people NOT to use their cars. So punishing them for using PATH seems self-destructive. Even if the effort is to get people to shift schedules, it's still discouraging people from using transit.

An added surcharge during congested rush hours is not punitive: the PATH (or, any other mass transit system in high demand) is akin to a commodity, and there is nothing wrong to have a surcharge if the demand outstrips supply.

Ultimately, I think the best solution would be a regional approach. This mess of paying two or three fares to commute a few miles (say, from Bayonne, JC, or Hoboken) into NYC is crazy. Not even the outrageously expensive London system compares. If you have to pay those three fares (light rail, PATH, and subway) you are looking at over $16 per day. Times two (for a couple) that amounts to $32+. You might as well drive!

Don?t forget the cost of parking garages. Driving only saves you money if you luck out on free street parking. Thankfully I work in NJ, so I limit visits to NYC on evenings and weekends when the metered spots become free. If I do have to go during the day, I find free parking in the Upper West Side above 79th and take the subway. Smoothparking.com and the Best Parking App have been helpful in that regard.

I would hope connecting the PATH to the MTA if possible would mean free transfers.

Even when you factor in parking, it can be cheaper for a couple (or, more people) to split up the costs of gas, tolls, and parking if you take advantage of things like early bird pricing.

Case in point: today we had a morning appointment in the UES. It would have cost us $24 r/t (and taken close to an hour, each way) to get up to East 80th. Instead, we drove in, spent about $15 (HT toll, plus around $4 for meter parking) and it took us 45 minutes (that includes the time to get up there and circle twice to find a metered spot) So, no overcrowded train hassle, no walking, no dealing with the rain, or the wind, and we spent less, and got there faster. The idea that driving into Manhattan is crazy and not viable is simply not true.

Either make driving less enticing (with something along the lines of congestion pricing) or make mass transit more enticing. But, as it stands, the math is not all that great for everyone to opt for mass transit.

Posted on: 2019/1/8 18:10

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#188

Home away from home

Quote:

ConstantReader wrote:

1) During rush hour, run fewer trains on the 33rd-Hoboken schedule and make up the difference with more 33rd-JSQ trains. The Hoboken trains on the 33rd St. line are significantly less crowded than their JSQ equivalents.

Were you not around 3.5 years ago when the PA did exactly this? The Hoboken ditzy mayor lost her shit over having two trains taken away, never considering that the absolute majority of the HOB/33 trains run partly, or mostly, empty, while the JC trains are always packed to the gills. She kept throwing out numbers claiming that the HOB station had seen statistically greater growth than any other station, and the reduction in trains was unfair. Of course, lies, damn lies, and statistics: a small increase in HOB ridership numbers translates to a large statistical increase. The stark contrast between HOB and JC trains is plainly visible at 33rd, where you get to see how those HOB-bound trains leave with empty seats, while the ones heading to JC are often full by the time they leave the station.

Posted on: 2019/1/8 18:00

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#189

Home away from home

Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

ConstantReader wrote:
1) During rush hour, run fewer trains on the 33rd-Hoboken schedule and make up the difference with more 33rd-JSQ trains. The Hoboken trains on the 33rd St. line are significantly less crowded than their JSQ equivalents.

As I understand it, the problem is traffic and signalling in tunnels, not a shortage of rolling stock.

Dolomiti, are you just trying to tweak me with the bridge comment knowing it drives me nuts? Of all the stupid ideas, it's the stupidest. Even if it was doable (it's not) there's probably no lower return on transportation investment than allowing the relatively few people who live downtown and work in Lower Manhattan AND are inclined to walk or bike to do so.

And, inclined to walk ~30 minutes just to cross that hypothetical bridge. It is simply a silly idea.

There are no pedestrian bridges in the world with that kind of length for very good reason.

Posted on: 2019/1/8 17:42

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#190

Home away from home

Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
I pretty much universally support demand pricing for cars, but the whole point in the metro area is to get people NOT to use their cars. So punishing them for using PATH seems self-destructive. Even if the effort is to get people to shift schedules, it's still discouraging people from using transit.

An added surcharge during congested rush hours is not punitive: the PATH (or, any other mass transit system in high demand) is akin to a commodity, and there is nothing wrong to have a surcharge if the demand outstrips supply.

Ultimately, I think the best solution would be a regional approach. This mess of paying two or three fares to commute a few miles (say, from Bayonne, JC, or Hoboken) into NYC is crazy. Not even the outrageously expensive London system compares. If you have to pay those three fares (light rail, PATH, and subway) you are looking at over $16 per day. Times two (for a couple) that amounts to $32+. You might as well drive!

Posted on: 2019/1/7 23:54

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#191

Home away from home

Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
I pretty much universally support demand pricing for cars, but the whole point in the metro area is to get people NOT to use their cars. So punishing them for using PATH seems self-destructive. Even if the effort is to get people to shift schedules, it's still discouraging people from using transit.

The car isn't a viable choice. Driving into Manhattan is crazy, reserved for the likes of Yvonne. There is no (cheap) parking and the tunnels are near gridlocked. Transit is the only way to go and that will become even more obvious in 10 or 20 years. The thousands of apartments under construction in Journal Square, Harrison and Newark will be the breaking point for both PATH and the tunnels.

I think you are getting the value/cost analysis all wrong. Obviously, lots of people choose to drive, as evidenced by the very gridlock you reference. I personally know a bunch of people who choose to drive into the city, instead of dealing with mass transit. If you do it right, it can be the same, or less, to drive, particularly if you do so with another person (or two) and split the costs. Heck, I myself often choose driving over mass transit, but there are factors that favor my doing so (I can commute on a motorcycle, which means I am able to find free on street parking, and I am also able to adjust my commuting times to avoid the usual crush from 7:00 to 9:00) but other people (like couples who both work in the city) can choose to drive and break even, without the hassle of the packed trains and things like inclement weather.

Posted on: 2019/1/7 23:40

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Would MTA be a better operator for PATH? And other ideas...

#192

Home away from home

The idea of a peak surcharge is not outlandish. As you suggest, it could help persuade some people to adjust their commute times, helping to alleviate congestion and overcrowding.

The 10-car solution is only coming to the NWK-WTC line. So, that will not help the overcrowded hell that is the JSQ/33rd line.

Posted on: 2019/1/6 2:42

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: PATH (pathetic attempt at transporting humans)

#193

Home away from home

Quote:

bjay wrote:
Good points here. But I'm tired of the old argument made by the Times reporter that it is somehow inappropriate for tunnel tolls to subsidize mass transit operations. It's entirely appropriate, and good public policy.Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

mscottc wrote:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/02/nyr ... dule=News&pgtype=Homepage

I was just about to post the same article. The reporter does a good job of presenting some facts, but never seems to question the wasteful ways that led the Port Authority to spend 4 BILLION dollars in the reconstruction of the WTC station. That should have been addressed in the article. Perhaps the PATH wouldn?t be such a money pit if more fiscal restraint was being exercised. Also not addressed: why is the Harrison construction project going to cost so much. The article mentions projected spending of ~250 MM, but prior numbers I had seen indicated the cost was pegged around 500 MM. Either way, it seems like a lot of money for what amounts to a tiny station with very limited ridership.

Agreed. The idea that tolls should be exclusively used for some other purposes is hogwash, when the PA saw it fit to spend 4 BILLION dollars in a vanity project that lacks enough demand (1 WTC is STILL 25% vacant, and this is despite the city and state giving away sweet enticements to get companies to relocate there) with a companion architectural boondoggle that doubles as a mall and commuting station which has a puzzling (and incredibly unfriendly) layout that is already having issues.

Posted on: 2019/1/5 17:31

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: PATH WTC to close on weekends for 2 years!

#194

Home away from home

Quote:

bjay wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
... and I don't see how the ferry transfer system would work: it's not like NY Waterway has a way to verify you rode the PATH (unless they are planning to install a machine to verify your PATHcard or Metrocard were used within X amount of time, which seems super far fetched) or perhaps they intend to have a "red jacket" staff member handing out transfer chits, as it used to be done 20+ years ago?

They are handing out the transfer tickets from inside the paid fare zone at WTC and at Exchange Place. You have to enter the station, go through the turnstile, get your paper ticket, then exit the station. Old school, but at least it works.

They really should add service on the 33rd St. line. Or "lines" -- they ought to get rid of the combined JSQ-HOB detour on weekends.

Thanks for the clarification/confirmation!

While this is a "solution", it is still quite easy to game the system: for someone wanting to ride the ferry into lower Manhattan, it would be cheaper to walk into the Exchange Place station, pay the PATH fare, grab a transfer ticket, and then walk right out. I wonder if they have thought of that.

Posted on: 2019/1/5 17:24

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: For six years, Jersey City schools chief was at center of conflict

#195

Home away from home

Quote:

brewster wrote:
What's amazing about the whole Lyles thing, and I can't tell if it's bad reporting or murky conflict, is there's no policy being debated, just personal hurts. If the teachers are resistant to change in a failing system, maybe "us vs them" is necessary.

We have serious misallocations of resources in our system, we pay more to our staffs than almost anybody and provide less extracurriculars than almost anybody. There's no afterschool music in the entire district yet we pay our Janitors more than 98% of other comparable districts. WTF? Why is this taken as normal??????

District budget data
https://www.state.nj.us/cgi-bin/education/csg/18/csg.pl

I can only hope the next Superintendent is chosen for their vision and strength, not for hitting the right identity buttons.

I think you zeroed in one of the biggest issues: there is an entrenched resistance to ANY change. Every time this topic comes up for discussion, it seems to derail into a back and forth between people clamoring for change, and fiscal accountability, and those who cross their arms and say "this is the way it is" or "we work hard for our money" or "you don't know what it is like so you don't get an opinion".

I don't think people really take it as normal. I think there is a general sense of apathy because the truth is that we barely shoulder the cost of our local BOE. I know you get annoyed when Monroe brings up the matter of the state paying for the majority of our budget, but it is something that is important to this debate. Imagine what would happen if instead of paying for just 1/6 of our local BOE budget, JC residents had to shoulder 1/3 of it. Overnight, our school taxes would double and our property tax rate would go by 25% to about 1.9%. That's still low by NJ standards, but people woulds definitely find it appalling (as borne out by the reaction to the recent reval) and that's just 1/3 of the budget. If we had to pay for half our BOE budget, our school taxes would triple, and our property tax rate would go up by 50% to about 2.2%.

If people felt the pain of having to fund the wasteful ways of our BOE, they would be clamoring for reform and cost cutting measures.

Posted on: 2019/1/4 18:38

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: PATH (pathetic attempt at transporting humans)

#196

Home away from home

Quote:

mscottc wrote:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/02/nyr ... dule=News&pgtype=Homepage

I was just about to post the same article. The reporter does a good job of presenting some facts, but never seems to question the wasteful ways that led the Port Authority to spend 4 BILLION dollars in the reconstruction of the WTC station. That should have been addressed in the article. Perhaps the PATH wouldn?t be such a money pit if more fiscal restraint was being exercised. Also not addressed: why is the Harrison construction project going to cost so much. The article mentions projected spending of ~250 MM, but prior numbers I had seen indicated the cost was pegged around 500 MM. Either way, it seems like a lot of money for what amounts to a tiny station with very limited ridership.

Posted on: 2019/1/2 18:14

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: DTJC ? Where

#197

Home away from home

Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
I don't know...that was so outrageous that I think it could have been staged to go viral on you tube or wherever.

Have you not seen or heard the many follow ups? The employee was (rightfully) terminated.

And, if you don't believe his actions are at all common, you need to get out more, or spend more time reading. Emotional fragility among millennials, as a whole, is a serious problem that has gotten plenty of press and it is being studied extensively. I have personally witnessed similar meltdowns as the one shown in the video, and it is both sad and eye-opening. A generalized inability to handle adversity and/or setbacks is a serious reason to be concerned for the future of our country.

Posted on: 2018/12/31 14:42

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: PATH WTC to close on weekends for 2 years!

#198

Home away from home

Quote:

Mmmm wrote:
Beginning on January 5, 2019, through December 20, 2020, PATH?s World Trade Center Station will close every weekend, excluding major holidays, from 12:01 a.m. on Saturdays, until 5 a.m. on Mondays. During this time, PATH service will end at Exchange Place and a free ferry transfer will be available for service between Harborside Ferry Landing in Jersey City and Brookfield Place Terminal in New York City. See below for more details.
http://www.panynj.gov/alerts-advisori ... ath-weekend-closures.html
http://www.panynj.gov/photo/path/PATH ... service-map-eng-thumb.jpg

We first got word about this almost a month ago and I am surprised by how little conversation has been generated by this announcement. The two year duration seems WAY TOO LONG, and I don't see how the ferry transfer system would work: it's not like NY Waterway has a way to verify you rode the PATH (unless they are planning to install a machine to verify your PATHcard or Metrocard were used within X amount of time, which seems super far fetched) or perhaps they intend to have a "red jacket" staff member handing out transfer chits, as it used to be done 20+ years ago?

As it is usual for the PANYNJ, the details are scant and the explanations vague.

Posted on: 2018/12/28 22:27

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: PATH WTC to close on weekends for 2 years!

#199

Home away from home

Quote:

nafco wrote:
Is there zero accountability?

Yes. Absolutely zero.

Posted on: 2018/12/28 22:16

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Council approves new Special Improvement District on West Side

#200

Home away from home

Quote:

Brian Becker, owner of the Dairy Queen and an adjacent lot, would pay $1,773. Becker, 68, echoed Heir's comments, saying the city can spend all the money it wants to clean up West Side Avenue and it won't help. City officials pushing for the SID are "out of their frigging minds," he said.

"It's not about the money. It's about the people who live there," Becker said. "They clean those streets six days a week. It's the people that live in the city that just don't care."

Not disagreeing with him, but those are pretty harsh words for a business owner for whom most customers are (most likely) from the area. What a way to crap all over them.

Posted on: 2018/12/21 16:08

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: minivan or suv car service

#201

Home away from home

I have had some really bad experiences with local car services that were booked ahead of time but failed to show up at the pre-arranged time. After the last experience, which resulted in missing an overseas flight and the company owner being a total ass and refusing to accept responsibility, I vowed to never to go through the same again.

My suggestion would be to NOT sweat the idea of requesting an UberXL or UberSUV the morning of your trip. If for some reason you are unable to request such a vehicle, you can always call for two cars and have the group travel to the airport in two cars. The total cost will be about the same, certainly within $10, and DEFINITELY cheaper than any local car service, or the quoted reservation price you mentioned.

Posted on: 2018/12/19 16:09

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools

#202

Home away from home

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
If the city did not give out sweetheart tax abatements, then there would be no need for a payroll tax.

This is just your opinion, not a proven fact.

Posted on: 2018/12/12 22:15

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools

#203

Home away from home

I hope they succeed. The payroll tax is a terrible measure that does not even solve the BOE deficit.

Posted on: 2018/12/12 0:39

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: N.J. lost Amazon to Long Island City; can it win Gucci with $14.7M EDA incentive?

#204

Home away from home

Quote:

Stringer wrote:
N.J. lost Amazon to Long Island City; can it win Gucci with $14.7M EDA incentive?
By Anjalee Khemlani
Trenton | Dec 11, 2018 at 11:57 am
The New Jersey Economic Development Authority on Tuesday approved a $14.7 million Grow New Jersey grant over 10 years to entice luxury brand Gucci to open a central U.S. customer hub in Jersey City, rather than Long Island City, Queens.
The company currently has 25 jobs in Secaucus and many customer service jobs around the country.
The company wants to bring 210 jobs to the planned hub, according to the application.
It plans a $6.6 million capital investment for the proposed office space at 70 Hudson St. near the Exchange Place PATH station.
http://www.roi-nj.com/2018/12/11/poli ... with-14-7m-eda-incentive/

This is ridiculous... a $14.7 MM grant to have 210 jobs transferred here works out to 70K for each job. That seems outrageously high, and emblematic of the out-of-control spending perpetuated by the State of NJ.

Posted on: 2018/12/12 0:37

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: Temporary Handicapped Parking Placard in NJ Question?

#205

Home away from home

Quote:

Haggis wrote:
The spouse is having feet surgery (both) in near future. Absolutely will need help, looking at 3+month healing time.
Will be using a wheelchair.
How far in advance of the actual surgery should we apply for a Temporary Handicapped Placard?
How long from application to arrival in the mail does it take?
Thanks.

For a temporary placard, you will need to fill out a form and bring it to the JCPD.

Links:
Form: https://www.state.nj.us/mvc/pdf/vehicles/SP-68.pdf
Information: https://www.state.nj.us/mvc/vehicles/disability.htm

Posted on: 2018/12/11 18:15

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: JC Woman Accuses Murphy Staffer of Rape

#206

Home away from home

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
... but your suggestions are outlandish and your proposed solutions unworkable and will never see the light of day.

...

And you Bodipooh seem more interested in defending the rights of rapists with empty rhetoric, than engaging in a constructive debate. Think I'm done responding to you.

Sure, that is EXACTLY what I am doing. You claim to want to engage in a constructive debate, but your reaction says otherwise: the moment the logic fault in your stand is pointed out, you get up in a huff, stomp your feet and scream "I am going home and taking my marbles with me".

Nobody is defending the rights of rapists, but those who seek to weaken the legal protections of the accused in the name of fairness do so out of a myopic view. Our system may not be perfect, but it really seeks to strive for fairness and impartiality.

So, go ahead and walk way huffing and puffing but, if you truly want to engage in a constructive debate, you have to be willing to listen to all viewpoints and be willing to accept when you are wrong, or mistaken. You have done none of that.

Posted on: 2018/12/8 20:13

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: World Trade Center PATH station to close on weekends through 2020

#207

Home away from home

Quote:

MDM wrote:
Quote:

SRhia wrote:
Every time I think they cannot do any worse, they somehow

The Port Authority never wanted the PATH system It is a red-headed step-child they were forced to take on, in order to be allowed to build the original WTC.

BINGO. The PATH is truly an afterthought to the PA.

While the city administration was patting itself on the back for the "deal" they negotiated with the PA for transfer of ownership of the land on which the powerhouse is located, the PA executives were laughing all the way to the bank: they got the city to agree to a two-year timetable to move the power substation equipment one measly block to the south! And, then, after the move is completed the city will supposedly bring in a developer to rehabilitate the powerhouse. It is so very doubtful there will be anything left to rehabilitate after two more years of neglect. And, of course, while this was being negotiated, the PA was planning the WTC shutdown and waited until the last minute to announce that.

Posted on: 2018/12/8 19:23

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: JC Woman Accuses Murphy Staffer of Rape

#208

Home away from home

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

If you take a car without documented evidence of the owner's permission, you can be charged and convicted of theft. Irrespective of whether you claim the owner gave you verbal consent. How is this different?

You are really grasping at straws here... if you are caught with someone else's property it is 100% on you to demonstrate you have permission to have said property on/with you. There is a tangible asset for which you must be able to account. So, of course you have to have provable consent/proof that is OK for you to have that property.

The issue of consent is not to be dismissed, but your suggestions are outlandish and your proposed solutions unworkable and will never see the light of day.

Quote:

And there are also plenty of laws where presumption of innocence is diluted. Existing rape shield laws being an obvious example.

You obviously do not know or understand what a rape shield law is, or entails. It does not, in any way, dilute the presumption of innocence. What those laws do is prevent attacks against the character of the accuser. The accused is still presumed innocent and proving his/her culpability is still the responsibility of the prosecution, while the rape shield laws prevent the defense from trying to get off the accuser by shifting blame to the victim.

Posted on: 2018/12/8 17:40

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: JC Woman Accuses Murphy Staffer of Rape

#209

Home away from home

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

@bodhipooh

You picked a rare and mostly absurd example as a counterpoint. I'm not a lawmaker - so, no, I haven't considered every edge case. But the same principle could apply. If there's any risk of a rape allegation - male or female on female or male - those parties should be obligated to prove consent to avoid prosecution. Judges and juries can overturn the absurd entrapment cases and help shape the law. Like they do with every other law.

Just because you consider it a rare and/or absurd example, it doesn't make it so. This is PRECISELY why our legal system is predicated on the "innocent until proven guilty" principle, which is an extension of the idea that it is better for a guilty person to go free than an innocent person to be unfairly incarcerated. The burden of proof is high, and on the accusing party, because that is the only way to more or less ensure that innocent people are not unfairly convicted.

As I said in my original reply to you, thankfully we will never see your idea become reality. It would never pass muster, because it lacks common sense, it runs contrary to our established system of law, and the courts would never uphold such a law.

Posted on: 2018/12/7 17:25

Topic | Forum

bodhipooh

Re: JC Woman Accuses Murphy Staffer of Rape

#210

Home away from home

Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

Personally, I think that the law should be changed. Proof of sexual interaction without proof of consent should be grounds for a conviction.

That?s a CRAZY idea. Thankfully, it will never come to pass.

Something like this is needed to shift the balance of protection from perp to victim. What's crazy is that out of every 1000 rapes, 995 rapists walk free. And there are close to 1/2 million sexual assaults in the US every year. Victims are getting little to no protection under the existing system.

...and carrying condoms was considered crazy by many before aids.

(I'd agree it would be crazy to introduce such a law retroactively.)

@Monroe - Nope. No joke.

Obviously, you have not thought this through properly. The reason we have a "innocent until proven guilty" system is precisely because the opposite is too easy to game or abuse.

If your idea was made law (proof of sexual interaction without proof of consent would be grounds for conviction) it could be used by a man, or a woman, to entrap and send to jail any number of people. I could go to a bar tonight, get laid, then go to the local precinct in the morning and claim some woman coaxed me into sex (I would have the proof) and she wouldn?t have any proof of consent and would simply get sent to jail.

You really ought to take a minute to really think through what you are suggesting.

Posted on: 2018/12/7 12:36

Topic | Forum

Top

« 1 ... 4 5 6 (7) 8 9 10 ... 123 »