Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Dallas News)   Texas forces pregnant woman to abort the HOV lane   (dallasnews.com) divider line
    More: Awkward, Roe v. Wade, Dallas, Sheriff, Lee Harvey Oswald, Constable, High-occupancy vehicle lane, Police, U.S. Route 75  
•       •       •

3553 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Jul 2022 at 1:35 AM (12 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



160 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-07-08 11:20:52 PM  
"One officer kind of brushed me off when I mentioned this is a living child, according to everything that's going on with the overturning of Roe v. Wade. 'So I don't know why you're not seeing that,' I said.

"He was like, 'I don't want to deal with this.'

Oh boo-farking-hoo. I'm so farking sorry you have to deal with this for five minutes of your life, you farking choad.

And good for her.

/better claim it as a dependent, too.
//and get child support.
 
2022-07-08 11:40:46 PM  
Funny thing about declaring that all unborn fetuses are people: there sure are a lot of federal and state laws that affect "people" as opposed to "citizens"
 
2022-07-09 12:07:26 AM  
C'mon Texas, pick a side once and for all.
 
2022-07-09 12:57:55 AM  
I love malicious compliance.
 
2022-07-09 1:38:00 AM  

thecactusman17: Funny thing about declaring that all unborn fetuses are people: there sure are a lot of federal and state laws that affect "people" as opposed to "citizens"


Would "unborn people" count as citizens? Or do people only become citizens when they're born? Do we need to deport all the fetuses? Where would we deport them to?
 
2022-07-09 1:40:07 AM  
Hope she takes it to court.
 
2022-07-09 1:40:23 AM  
Look, as a devout Christian, god mandated all women must be put through agony because they ate from the tree of life. To not allow us to torture women is an affront to my devout Christianity. You have no right to impede on my free exercise of religion by applying your non torturing women laws. It is in the constitution. The handmaiden, sexual harasser and rarest told you so.
 
2022-07-09 1:40:48 AM  
I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.
 
2022-07-09 1:44:49 AM  

EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.


God demands that the carpool lane is for white men or some combination of non suspicious other toned people who are watched very closely, in Jesus' name amen.
 
2022-07-09 1:44:59 AM  

pestossimo: thecactusman17: Funny thing about declaring that all unborn fetuses are people: there sure are a lot of federal and state laws that affect "people" as opposed to "citizens"

Would "unborn people" count as citizens? Or do people only become citizens when they're born? Do we need to deport all the fetuses? Where would we deport them to?


When you arrest/detain the host body. Are you violating the fourth amendment rights of the unborn?
 
2022-07-09 1:45:12 AM  

EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.


What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.
 
2022-07-09 1:45:29 AM  
Artist's representation of the cop

i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2022-07-09 1:47:18 AM  
That her fetus doesn't yet have a SSN is a failure if the state to ensure that it's not an illegal immigrant.
 
2022-07-09 1:51:08 AM  

pestossimo: thecactusman17: Funny thing about declaring that all unborn fetuses are people: there sure are a lot of federal and state laws that affect "people" as opposed to "citizens"

Would "unborn people" count as citizens? Or do people only become citizens when they're born? Do we need to deport all the fetuses? Where would we deport them to?


14th Amendment specifies that citizens must be either born or naturalized, and the naturalization process cannot be completed by a fetus because it requires a variety of identifying information to be recorded and verified.

Which means yes, theoretically we CAN deport unborn babies. Which I think would be a great way to start some shiat with conservatives and draw attention to the absurdity of the situation they've created.
 
2022-07-09 1:51:37 AM  

austerity101: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.


Perhaps it's irrelevant to you...but it's still my belief.

Do you have a differing opinion as to why they were created?  Other than to provide an thinly veiled opportunity to bash cops for enforcing the law, that is.
 
2022-07-09 1:52:36 AM  
So since birthright citizenship grants citizenship by virtue of being born in the US. And since now fetuses are persons under the law in many states. Does that mean that the fetus is a person who does not have US citizenship, this being eligible for deportation. I guess a baby also gets citizenship based on one of their parents being a citizenships, but again it seems all the mechanisms to grant such citizenship are triggered by birth.

/Maybe the sovcitz idiots have been right all along
 
2022-07-09 1:53:21 AM  

Flowery Twats: Hope she takes it to court.


Charges will be dropped because Texas doesn't want to deal with the BS

She got stopped, and warned, that is enough for the po po

Now if she wasn't white? probably might try double murder charges on the LE
 
2022-07-09 1:59:20 AM  

zoltan2000: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

God demands that the carpool lane is for white men or some combination of non suspicious other toned people who are watched very closely, in Jesus' name amen.


Here are some other toned people to watch closely.

Fark user imageView Full Size

Fark user imageView Full Size

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-07-09 2:02:07 AM  
We're going to have to re-do the census.
 
2022-07-09 2:09:24 AM  
They only count as people when its punitive.
 
2022-07-09 2:09:50 AM  
I asked Amy O'Donnell, spokeswoman for Texas Alliance for Life, an anti-abortion group, what she thought of this unusual situation.
She replied, "While the penal code in Texas recognizes an unborn child as a person in our state, the Texas Transportation Code does not specify the same. And a child residing in a mother's womb is not taking up an extra seat. And with only one occupant taking up a seat, the car did not meet the criteria needed to drive in that lane."


Wow, instead of saying "sure, why not?" she couldn't spit the cop dick out of her mouth. Also, she's totally full of shiat, as Texas Transportation Code DOES define personhood:

TRANSPORTATION CODE
TITLE 7. VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC
SUBTITLE C. RULES OF THE ROAD
CHAPTER 541. DEFINITIONS
SUBCHAPTER A. PERSONS AND GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES
Sec. 541.001. PERSONS. In this subtitle:


(yadda yadda yadda)

(4) "Person" means an individual, firm, partnership, association, or corporation.

And finally, a cursory search yields nothing about number of occupied seats.

I know, it's totally shocking that a conservative would lie to defend their bullshiat logic. They really are a bunch of 8 year olds making it up as they go along.
 
2022-07-09 2:10:08 AM  

EasilyDistracted: austerity101: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.

Perhaps it's irrelevant to you...but it's still my belief.

Do you have a differing opinion as to why they were created?  Other than to provide an thinly veiled opportunity to bash cops for enforcing the law, that is.


I drove in the carpool lane with my two kids today. Neither of them have licenses. I am a monster.

MWUAHAHA
 
2022-07-09 2:13:52 AM  

EasilyDistracted: austerity101: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.

Perhaps it's irrelevant to you...but it's still my belief.

Do you have a differing opinion as to why they were created?  Other than to provide an thinly veiled opportunity to bash cops for enforcing the law, that is.


I think carpooling was the intent of the HOV lane, but the traffic signage does not reflect/mandate that it's 2+ licensed drivers. HOV lane signage in Texas very commonly says "HOV 2+" or "2 or more persons per vehicle". Sometimes it says "carpools only 2 or more persons per vehicle". The rule of the HOV lane is 2+ persons per vehicle, licensed or not. TXDoT HOV Lanes
 
2022-07-09 2:15:20 AM  

sxacho: EasilyDistracted: austerity101: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.

Perhaps it's irrelevant to you...but it's still my belief.

Do you have a differing opinion as to why they were created?  Other than to provide an thinly veiled opportunity to bash cops for enforcing the law, that is.

I drove in the carpool lane with my two kids today. Neither of them have licenses. I am a monster.

MWUAHAHA


YOU DESERVE A TICKET!
 
2022-07-09 2:17:11 AM  

jook: I asked Amy O'Donnell, spokeswoman for Texas Alliance for Life, an anti-abortion group, what she thought of this unusual situation.
She replied, "While the penal code in Texas recognizes an unborn child as a person in our state, the Texas Transportation Code does not specify the same. And a child residing in a mother's womb is not taking up an extra seat. And with only one occupant taking up a seat, the car did not meet the criteria needed to drive in that lane."

Wow, instead of saying "sure, why not?" she couldn't spit the cop dick out of her mouth. Also, she's totally full of shiat, as Texas Transportation Code DOES define personhood:

TRANSPORTATION CODE
TITLE 7. VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC
SUBTITLE C. RULES OF THE ROAD
CHAPTER 541. DEFINITIONS
SUBCHAPTER A. PERSONS AND GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES
Sec. 541.001. PERSONS. In this subtitle:

(yadda yadda yadda)

(4) "Person" means an individual, firm, partnership, association, or corporation.

And finally, a cursory search yields nothing about number of occupied seats.

I know, it's totally shocking that a conservative would lie to defend their bullshiat logic. They really are a bunch of 8 year olds making it up as they go along.


Seems like a state penal code should overrule the state transportation code in the event of conflicting guidance.
 
2022-07-09 2:18:18 AM  

Megathuma: "One officer kind of brushed me off when I mentioned this is a living child, according to everything that's going on with the overturning of Roe v. Wade. 'So I don't know why you're not seeing that,' I said.

"He was like, 'I don't want to deal with this.'

Oh boo-farking-hoo. I'm so farking sorry you have to deal with this for five minutes of your life, you farking choad.

And good for her.

/better claim it as a dependent, too.
//and get child support.


Who wouldn't be fine with a joke assignment at work? You're a baker and customer wants a cake in the shape of a giant penis or you're a carpenter and the homeowner wants a deck constructed in the shape of a giant penis or you're a plastic surgeon and...

You're hourly, just roll with it and be glad you don't have a truly crap assignment like pulling dead rats out of the cheese chute again just because corporate doesn't want to redesign the Whooper machine.
 
2022-07-09 2:19:24 AM  
Double standards in Texas?

Fark user imageView Full Size


/go figure
 
2022-07-09 2:21:44 AM  

austerity101: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.


Allow a second driver no matter who.
 
2022-07-09 2:22:42 AM  

sxacho: EasilyDistracted: austerity101: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.

Perhaps it's irrelevant to you...but it's still my belief.

Do you have a differing opinion as to why they were created?  Other than to provide an thinly veiled opportunity to bash cops for enforcing the law, that is.

I drove in the carpool lane with my two kids today. Neither of them have licenses. I am a monster.

MWUAHAHA


You accidentally bring up a valid point, which is that some parents may opt to use a carpool to get their kids to school (one parent carries 2 or 3 neighborhood kids to school or wherever one day, then the parent next door does it the next day, and so on), so it could still be that the lone adult in the car with multiple kids might still be achieving the purpose of the carpool lane, even according to the narrow definition presented. Good luck enforcing that.
 
2022-07-09 2:28:28 AM  

EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.


Other than that's not the way it's posted or defined by any law or statute, I guess you can continue to believe that and be dead wrong. It's much like religious people. They can believe whatever they want, but they are 99.9999999999999999999999999999% likely to be dead wrong.
 
2022-07-09 2:31:05 AM  

Frederf: Megathuma: "One officer kind of brushed me off when I mentioned this is a living child, according to everything that's going on with the overturning of Roe v. Wade. 'So I don't know why you're not seeing that,' I said.

"He was like, 'I don't want to deal with this.'

Oh boo-farking-hoo. I'm so farking sorry you have to deal with this for five minutes of your life, you farking choad.

And good for her.

/better claim it as a dependent, too.
//and get child support.

Who wouldn't be fine with a joke assignment at work? You're a baker and customer wants a cake in the shape of a giant penis or you're a carpenter and the homeowner wants a deck constructed in the shape of a giant penis or you're a plastic surgeon and...

You're hourly, just roll with it and be glad you don't have a truly crap assignment like pulling dead rats out of the cheese chute again just because corporate doesn't want to redesign the Whooper machine.


As a baker I'd like to say I don't ever get requests for giant penis cakes and although I'd rather make boob cakes it's still a little disappointing.
 
2022-07-09 2:33:48 AM  
My nutsack may contain 6,000,000 sperm right now, and since a sperm is 1/2 of a person, this car has 3,000,000 passengers and is definitely elegable for the HOV lane.  Ossifer!
 
2022-07-09 2:36:59 AM  

EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.


I totally get your point. I don't think kids should count in carpool lanes, because the point of carpool lanes is to reduce traffic. Kids wouldn't take their own cars if their parents didn't drive them somewhere.
BUT, the LAW in TX says a gestating being is a full people with all the rights of a viable individual.
...
If the GOV says a clump of cells is people, then she's technically in the right saying there are two people in the car. If a cop doesn't want to deal with that, just like they may not want to risk their life defending people who were born 10 years ago, then they need to find another profession. And she should take legal recourse to get these idiots to understand the unintended consequences of their short sighted actions.

It's all good to dictate to the masses what's right and wrong, until the masses ask for details. That's always been a problem for organized religion. They hate to be nailed down (ha!) on any point, because they say one thing, but there is always a "dispensation" available to meet their needs.
 
2022-07-09 2:37:41 AM  

EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.


That doesn't make any sense.  The whole idea is to get as many people into a single vehicle as possible so as to a) maximize fuel usage and b) reduce road congestion.  The licensing part doesn't matter one bit.  I'm not even sure how you'd police that requirement.  Ideally we'd have everyone on mass transit for the greatest impact, but our society isn't built that way, so we need to reward having more people in single vehicles, whether it's their own family or a group of strangers from a local ride sharing stop.
 
2022-07-09 2:37:49 AM  

EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.


Here, I'll make it simple:

HOV =/= carpool

...if the statute was carpool, you'd have a leg to stand on. But it isn't, so STFU
 
2022-07-09 2:39:34 AM  
Put someone in the trunk and use the HOV lane.

Let me know what happens.

Also, since he repeated "outside the body", I'm fairly certain that this has been tried before.

There's lots of legal nitpicking to do here, but she's going to lose on a trial based on the merits. Likely Texas won't want to take a chance, and either the prosecution will drop it, or appellate courts will just not hear it. As the cop said, fight it and it will be dismissed, probably. But you're not establishing any new reading of any law nor regulation.
 
2022-07-09 2:39:39 AM  

azn_firebug: EasilyDistracted: austerity101: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.

Perhaps it's irrelevant to you...but it's still my belief.

Do you have a differing opinion as to why they were created?  Other than to provide an thinly veiled opportunity to bash cops for enforcing the law, that is.

I think carpooling was the intent of the HOV lane, but the traffic signage does not reflect/mandate that it's 2+ licensed drivers. HOV lane signage in Texas very commonly says "HOV 2+" or "2 or more persons per vehicle". Sometimes it says "carpools only 2 or more persons per vehicle". The rule of the HOV lane is 2+ persons per vehicle, licensed or not. TXDoT HOV Lanes


Yes...that's the law and I don't have a problem with that.  Justifying HOV lanes by saying they reduce traffic and emissions, then not really using them for that reason is typical government bait and switch.

And if the pregnant lady is really adamant about her fetus being counted as a person, then she should be ticketed for having two people occupying the driver's seat at the same time.  :)
 
2022-07-09 2:41:04 AM  
Step 1) pass "personhood" laws at the state level

Step 2) start an IVF warehousing business

Step 3) pay poor gen zers and millennials for their eggs and men for their sperm with low-ball figures

Step 4) create 10's of millions of embryos in a lab

Step 5) Use embryo support as leverage in a virtual hostage negotiation with the government to get tax cuts and deregulation of other industries (save the unborn childrens!!!)

Step 6) Undermine the 2030 census with embryos.
 
2022-07-09 2:45:07 AM  

RyansPrivates: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

Here, I'll make it simple:

HOV =/= carpool

...if the statute was carpool, you'd have a leg to stand on. But it isn't, so STFU


Semantics...people use the terms interchangeably. Switch to decaf, Francis.
 
2022-07-09 2:45:26 AM  
If you're a Republican you should lose your rights as a human.

Because you've systematically elected politicians that legally turned corporations and embryos into  people at the expense of human rights for 95% of the population.

You are complicit and you were heavily warned not to do this.

You belong in a supervised prison labor camp, working with hazardous chemicals and dangerous equipment.
 
2022-07-09 2:50:48 AM  

thecactusman17: pestossimo: thecactusman17: Funny thing about declaring that all unborn fetuses are people: there sure are a lot of federal and state laws that affect "people" as opposed to "citizens"

Would "unborn people" count as citizens? Or do people only become citizens when they're born? Do we need to deport all the fetuses? Where would we deport them to?

14th Amendment specifies that citizens must be either born or naturalized, and the naturalization process cannot be completed by a fetus because it requires a variety of identifying information to be recorded and verified.

Which means yes, theoretically we CAN deport unborn babies. Which I think would be a great way to start some shiat with conservatives and draw attention to the absurdity of the situation they've created.


I mean america rips children from their mothers in detention camps. The uteruses from women in those detention camps. So I guess that's a way to get an abortion, be an"illegal" immigrant.
 
2022-07-09 2:52:33 AM  

EasilyDistracted: austerity101: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.

Perhaps it's irrelevant to you...but it's still my belief.

Do you have a differing opinion as to why they were created?  Other than to provide an thinly veiled opportunity to bash cops for enforcing the law, that is.


My opinion on what a carpool lane should be is also immaterial. It only matters what a carpool lane is, for the purposes of this legal case. You are attempting to redefine what a carpool lane is in order to indict this woman. Why is beyond me, but regardless, it's an absurd and mean-spirited thing to do, especially in the wake of the evisceration of reproductive rights.
 
2022-07-09 2:55:41 AM  
When it comes to the ticket, this is strictly a semantics angle to win it -- and she'll probably win it. If Texas is like other states, the sign does not say anything about where people are sitting or anything about them being in or outside of another person: it just says "2 or more persons per vehicle".

I would love to see Texas have to spend millions of dollars just to redo their HOV signs because of these lawsuits. It would be even funnier if they had to replace the sign gantries because "2 or more persons who exist outside of another human and are sitting in their own seat" ends up being too heavy for the existing structures.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-07-09 2:55:42 AM  
Same thing with your taxes:

"To claim a baby as a dependent, the baby must have been born alive during the current tax year.
If your child wasn't born until the next year, you can't claim the baby as a dependent, even though your pregnancy lasted most of the tax year."

So now you should be able to claim an unborn child as a dependent with the full tax reduction as a live child.
 
2022-07-09 2:57:08 AM  
i.imgflip.comView Full Size
 
433 [TotalFark]
2022-07-09 2:57:25 AM  

mistahtom: If you're a Republican you should lose your rights as a human.
...
You belong in a supervised prison labor camp, working with hazardous chemicals and dangerous equipment.


I realize how popular this won't make me, but, maybe you should dial it back a little.
 
2022-07-09 2:57:25 AM  

vrax: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

That doesn't make any sense.  The whole idea is to get as many people into a single vehicle as possible so as to a) maximize fuel usage and b) reduce road congestion.  The licensing part doesn't matter one bit.  I'm not even sure how you'd police that requirement.  Ideally we'd have everyone on mass transit for the greatest impact, but our society isn't built that way, so we need to reward having more people in single vehicles, whether it's their own family or a group of strangers from a local ride sharing stop.


So how does cramming six unlicensed kids into a minivan reduce road congestion?  They're not going to drive themselves and potentially contribute to reducing the number of the cars on the road.  Regardless, that's not how the laws are written and enforced and I have no problem with someone with kids using the carpool (HOV, Diamond, etc) lane.  I would never advocate pulling over a vehicle because the occupants were obviously not licensed.  .I was just saying that the underlying reason for the lanes is to reduce the number of cars on the road.

Others have successfully fought lane violations using the fetus defense. I don't agree with it.

I can't wait for the guy who absorbed his twin in the womb to claim that he's actually transporting two people hen pulled over for a lane violation.
 
2022-07-09 3:00:19 AM  

farkinstance: My nutsack may contain 6,000,000 sperm right now, and since a sperm is 1/2 of a person, this car has 3,000,000 passengers and is definitely elegable for the HOV lane.  Ossifer!


Ah yes, the good ol' "Deez Nuts" defense.
 
2022-07-09 3:00:57 AM  

austerity101: EasilyDistracted: austerity101: EasilyDistracted: I've always thought that a carpool lane requirement should be 2 or more licensed drivers.  The primary purpose of the lane is to reduce congestion by rewarding folks who opt to ride-share.

She got the ticket that she deserved.

What you think the carpool lane should be is utterly irrelevant.

Perhaps it's irrelevant to you...but it's still my belief.

Do you have a differing opinion as to why they were created?  Other than to provide an thinly veiled opportunity to bash cops for enforcing the law, that is.

My opinion on what a carpool lane should be is also immaterial. It only matters what a carpool lane is, for the purposes of this legal case. You are attempting to redefine what a carpool lane is in order to indict this woman. Why is beyond me, but regardless, it's an absurd and mean-spirited thing to do, especially in the wake of the evisceration of reproductive rights.


Not trying to redefine it at all.  I know what it is and how it's interpreted.  But the justification used to create the lane doesn't match how it's used.
 
2022-07-09 3:01:17 AM  

thisisyourbrainonFark: Artist's representation of the cop

[i.imgur.com image 636x440]


Where's the third panel, where he's giving the finger to represent writing the ticket anyway.
 
Displayed 50 of 160 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.