Search Results for 'Sl'

[metrognome]

MSG — as I read the SMC, it is legal to pass a car that is traveling at less than the speed limit, as long as you are not in a ‘no-passing zone’. You must pass on the left and you are not allowed to exceed the speed limit while passing; this would make it pretty challenging to pass safely … I’d relax and enjoy the view instead. Also, I’m not a lawyer, so I may have missed something in the code.

SMC 11.52.130 Minimum speed regulation — Passing slow-moving vehicle.

No person shall operate a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law. Any person following a vehicle being driven at less than the legal maximum speed and desiring to pass such vehicle shall not exceed the speed limit when passing such vehicle. Where any slow-moving motor vehicle tends to congest traffic, any peace officer may cause such vehicle to be removed from the roadway and permit the congested traffic to be relieved. (RCW 46.61.425(1))

(Ord. 108200 Section 2(11.52.130), 1979.)

---

SMC 11.14.385 No-passing zone.

“No-passing zone” means the portion of the length of a roadway indicated by a sign and/or:

A. A double centerline consisting of a broken yellow line and a solid yellow line when a vehicle is being driven adjacent to the solid line; or

B. A double centerline consisting of two (2) solid yellow lines.

(Ord. 108200 Section 2( 11.14.630), 1979.)

---

SMC 11.53.200 Overtaking other traffic on the left.

The operator of a vehicle overtaking other traffic proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left of such overtaken vehicle at a safe distance and shall not again drive to the right side of the roadway until safely clear of the overtaken traffic. (RCW 46.61.110(1))

(Ord. 122742 , Section 11, 2008; Ord. 108200 Section 2 (11.53.200), 1979.)

[richwseattle]

Fed the little stinker by hand a little while ago. He’s very sweet, and very wary. We’ve lined up a trap and we’ll see what comes of that. In the meantime he has food and a warm place to sleep outdoors.

[LeftWing]

Seriously? I didn’t even know she had messed up until everyone pounced on her.

[richwseattle]

The pooch seems to have settled in at naturalandorganic’s yard for the time being. Since we’re neighbors we’re teaming up to “bring him in”. Natural told me that he took food by hand a few times. He was sunning in the yard this morning, and I tossed him a few pieces of bacon, and got a guarded tail-wag out of him.

We’ve been trying to get the Humane Society on the line, but so far this morning 20 minutes on hold was all we could endure. We’ll keep trying.

I also happened to speak with a nice lady who lives nearby who also has been trying to get close to the little guy. She may have a home for him. For our part if he needed fostering (after checking for a chip and getting him some medical attention), we were willing.

A big thanks to naturalandorganic for providing him a comfy place to sleep these cold nights. If we can’t bring him in today, we’ll be adding a microwaved heat pad to his bed before nightfall.

Stay tuned.

[LeftWing]

and she’s obviously more attractive than black cats -and DOESN’T SMELL.

[Sue]

I live on that stretch of Fauntleroy and see lots of interesting traffic violations. The best one yet: Cars stopped at the light at Fauntleroy and Dawson. A southbound driver decided that he would drive into the parking lane, passing cars on the right, then inch slowly into the intersection, then turn left (across the rest of the southbound traffic still stopped), I guess pretending that he was coming from Dawson, in order to make a U-turn on Fauntleroy. Seriously?

[Al]

In the past week I have seen the following actions by drivers, all between Morgan St and Alaska…

1) Driver travelling southbound on Fauntleroy in the early evening. Driver was using center turn lane as a passing lane, passing vehicles at a high rate of speed (near Brandon).

2) While I was on the bus #54, returning home from work at approximately 5:00 pm, bus was travelling down California Ave southbound. Bus was passed by a vehicle using the center turn lane as a passing lane. Bus was not travelling slow from a stop, nor preparing to stop. Bus driver was also surprised by driver. This was near the Rite Aid where a woman was hit and killed while using the crosswalk last year.

3) Yesterday evening, about 7:00, as my spouse and I were driving southbound on Fauntleroy, we saw a driver travelling northbound (near Brandon) use the center turn lane to pass two other vehicles also travelling northbound.

This is unacceptable, and all happened within ONE week. I am a frequent pedestrian a bicycle commuter who uses this area. I am appalled at the driver mentality – drivers need to be ticketed harshly for this behavior. Someone will be hurt or killed as a result.

[dhg]

Boilerplate, yes, but it should be relevant. Internet for all is not a slogan in response to net neutrality.

[JustSarah]

Sorry, but if car drivers were allowed to cross through the bus-only lane to choose their route, there’d be so much criss-crossing that the purpose of the bus-only late would be defeated.

One can catch a glimpse of what this would be like on pretty much any morning in which traffic is backed up on the bridge. Screw the rules; cars drive up the bus-only lane only to slam on their brakes at the last possible second to cut onto the 99 on-ramp, they cross back and forth from the I-5/1st Ave.-bound lanes to 99-bound (“Ooh, this way must be faster… no, this way! Wait, I was right the first time!”), and generally just eliminate the benefit we bus-riders usually enjoy.

So no, I don’t think allowing “cross-over” traffic is a good idea.

[JoB]

HMCRich…

Reagan’s 100th b-day has produced a slew of specials on the old gipper…

the man was far more complex than his myth…

and right now Obama’s policies have far too much in common with the gipper’s for this liberal to feel any relief…

[nuni]

almost got in to an altercation at Rocksport one time because this lady had like 6 of her kids in there and they were just running around, making tons of noise, touching everything, just being overall annoying and unruly. Needless to say I gave her the death glare, except that she caught me haha. Her drunk ass goes “don’t worry, I’m watching them”, which obviously she was not. This went on the entire time we were there, while she was entertaining some other drunk guy at her table. Not once did she even glance up to see what her brats were up to. I couldn’t help but make more comments like “oh don’t worry guys, she’s watching them” and made sure to say it loud enough so she could hear. Needless to say, on our way out of the restaurant she got up in my face and was like ” you need to mind your own business!” to which I replied “you need to watch your kids” and then very calmly walked out.

[JoB]

this is from Cliff Mass

he wants us to call now to stop our legislators from spending precious education dollars on an untested math program…

but read it yourself..

Cliff tells a compelling tale..

http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2011/02/throwing-away-our-new-car.html

[redblack]

geez, rich, ya’ hillbilly. why don’t you just slather them in ketchup?

a red wine reduction sounds nice. shallots, taragon…

[HMC Rich]

You should be deported immediately with just about everyone else who lives here in the US. I get the aisle seat.

And Jo, I do understand not all entered “legally”.

Fine. I will reword it. Many Americans have ancestors who came to this country and went through the proper steps to become citizens of the United States of America. Some did not and others were forced.

I also had the same issue in tracing the Wisconsin family (1800’s) compared to the Massachusetts/Virginia (1600’s) family. The information for the German ancestors was very difficult to find, but finally there was some out there.

My point was…. There needs to be a better immigration policy. A good guest worker policy and efficient government agency to take care of the people who are skirting the system.

[cclarue]

I am curious as to how/why the change came about from the past when kids were to be seen and not heard to this current oh he’s just a child behaving like a child. He’s expressing himself type culture?? Is it the shift in the family unit? More divorce ? Less church?Progress? I am curious to know what others think. I am 40. My parents divorced when I was 2. Mom remarried when I was 5, divorced again at 13. I wasn’t allowed to misbehave in public and I didn’t. I remember even thinking ooh there are elderly people around I better really be on my best behavior..As a teenager I was so mouthy to my mom but not if grandma was visiting. I only had 2 spankings my entire childhood so it’s not like I was beaten into submission. There was just an expectation of respect. Period. In turn my kids have the same set of expectations, if you act right you are allowed certain things if you don’t you aren’t . They are school age now but I don’t ever recall having to remove them from a restaraunt because they knew better than to act up in public. I do recall flicking my oldest in target once for starting to act out probably over a toy or something anda woman giving me a dirty look. I didn’t say anything to her but I wanted to tell her look ma’am I can harmlessly flick my child if I choose and she can be taught right from wrong by me or I can let her do whatever her little heart desires and she will be your(societys) problem later. Back to the question how/why the shift to letting kids act however they please?

[hammerhead]

The Washington State Legislature is now considering a bill that will help low-income pet owners of Washington State, save animals’ lives, and protect the general public at the same time. (Senate Bill 5151 / House Bill 1226. Currently in committee.)

What will Bill 5151/1226 will do if enacted?

This bill, if passed into law, will levy a small fee on cat and dog food at the rate of $0.025 (that’s 2 and a half cents) per pound. This would be $1.25 for a 50-pound bag of food. The monies collected will be put in a dedicated fund that will subsidize the costs of spaying and neutering of cats and dogs by participating veterinarians.

The program will benefit low-income Washingtonians wishing to spay or neuter their pets. Under the program, the cost will be $20 for dogs and $10 for cats. Proof-of-income requirements on pet owners will not be burdensome. Feral cats will be eligible for free spay and neutering.

Controlling the cat and dog population will help save taxpayers’ dollars by reducing the number of animals handled by local animal care and control agencies. One Washington shelter reported the average cost to handle an animal is $93. (Stray animal pickup and delivery to the shelter costs an additional $150 to $200.) For every animal that is not handled by animal control or shelters, the savings can be significant. For that reason alone, spay/neuter legislation will save Washington’s cities and counties millions of dollars in animal control costs and lower the number healthy, adoptable dogs and cat that are put to death over the long run.

Why is this bill so important for FCAT, FAF and other animal support groups?

Currently organizations that help animals (groups like FCAT and FAF) have to spend much of their already thinly spread resources on spaying and neutering costs. Even though we have vets in Seattle who are willing to give us a price break, we are still spending more time than we’d like carting individual animals to Seattle and back home. If 5151 passes, people in small towns will be able to take animals in by themselves, and this will free up FCAT and FAF to concentrate on larger colonies of feral cats anywhere in Washington.

Working with larger colonies of animals is where our resources are best used, and this is where more of them will be used if 5151 passes.

Please contact your local representatives and tell them to support 5151/1226. It’s an easy win for FCAT and FAF, a win for the people of Washington State, and a win for the animals.

Your representatives in the 34th District:

http://34dems.org/elected-legislative.htm

More info on SB5151 and what you can do to help: http://savewashingtonpets.org/default.aspx

(WS Blog member DP contributed to this post.)

Pamela Brumell

[DP]

hooper: Do you mean specifically “slash health-care waste” —or do you mean you want to just slash health-care spending across the board?

No wait. Don’t tell me. You think this is not even a problem because everyone can afford their own insurance, right?

Here we go again . . .

*************************************************************************************

On wealth and taxation in general:

Of course I recognize that many rich people have worked hard for their money. I admire them. Other rich people inherited their money, however, or essentially swiped it on Wall Street and places like that. I don’t admire this second group, but I don’t believe in doing away with the capitalist system for all that. In some ways it’s still a very good system, in spite of its flaws.

I do believe in taxing wealthier people at a higher rate, even though I recognize this to be fundamentally unfair to the rich who worked hard for their money. But you see, progressive taxation is the only way to ensure that we, as a society, can meet everyone’s basic needs, without throttling the entrepreneurial spirit that helped make this country great.

How would America fare under a system of progressive taxation?

— The hard-working poor would benefit most, by taking advantage of better health care and educational opportunities.

— The hard-working rich might suffer under progressive taxation (it depends on a lot of things) or they might actually benefit, from a healthier, smarter workforce. (See: “Germany.”) In any case, the hard-working rich wouldn’t go extinct under such a system.

— The lazy rich would suffer most under progressive taxation. But who cares? They’re parasites anyway. Let ’em work for a change, like everyone else.

–David

[DP]

The point is to avoid saddling people with labels that describe them by just one aspect of their person.

Agreed, and to this I must add that there is also a point at which we, as English speakers, must draw a line and say: No. I’m not going to cripple the language by loading it up with inapt and bulky terminology.

metrognome: If you can explain to me why “wheelchair-bound” is some kind of epithet that is not relevant or clear to the point I was making, I’m all ears. Which is not to say that I am constituted solely of ears, but I think you can infer what I meant by that term.

When we say a person is “home-bound” or “bed-bound” we obviously don’t mean that the person is literally chained to their home or bed. Ditto for wheelchair-bound. In context, it can be appropriate.

And if you can think of a smoother, better term I could have used in the particular sentence, please let me know what it is and we can debate it on the merits.

I’ll try to keep an open mind, which is not to say that I’ll be sawing a hole in my skull and . . .

(Oh forget it.)

[hooper1961]

just correcting a slight of typing that is an annoying mistake that even broadcasters routinely make that is even more annoying

[metrognome]

argiles — i would refer to it as the respectful term.

TR – thanks for weighing in; I don’t know if you noticed that that website was from 1992. I believe the ‘Disability Rag’ was the predecessor to the Ragged Edge; DR was known for publishing very provacative pieces challenging society’s assumptions about persons with disabilities.

Unfortunately, most ‘journalists’ are no longer familiar with these language concepts and still use terms such as ‘wheelchair-bound’ or ‘the diabetic’. Headline editors are even worse; I’ve actually seen such things as, ‘Wheelchair Killed in Hit-and-Run.’ Sorting Google News by ‘wheelchair’ is an eye-opening experience.

Many years ago, when I still had hair and my beard was black instead of grey, I wrote an employee training brochure for Group Health titled, ‘A Person … First’ Hardly an original title, but the concept still applies. In fact, the WA legislature was one of the first to adopt ‘person first’ language a few years ago.

It’s a matter of being respectful and about challenging yourself to look at the (likely subconscious) assumptions you are making … just like you do for other groups of people.

[WSB]

As someone who used to and – hey! – still does write news, wheelchair-bound is a no-no. People aren’t “bound” to wheelchairs – the wheelchair may well give them mobility they wouldn’t have otherwise. They use wheelchairs, or are in wheelchairs, if it’s even relevant to the discussion at all. This has always been in the styleguides I’ve customized for newsrooms large and small. Also, the “the disabled” “the homeless” etc. terminology is bad too. At the very least – again, and only if relevant – it’s homeless PEOPLE, disabled PEOPLE, etc.

And it’s always a good idea to stop and think if using that description is accurate and/or relevant. If that’s the subject you’re writing about, sure. But if you are, oh say, in the urban core somewhere and you want to mention that you were hassled by somebody … and the phrase that springs to mind is “I was hassled by this homeless guy” – how do you KNOW he’s homeless? Just ’cause he’s perhaps scraggly looking? Lord, you should see ME sometimes …

Anyway, if you have never written for a living and/or for an audience of hundreds or thousands, you might not think of that. But consider that here you do have an audience of thousands. And it is worth stopping to think, now and then, regardless of whether you are writing here or a one-on-one note to someone.

P.S. This looks like an interesting ramble on the topic – have never heard of the source before so forgive me if wandering around it leads you to anything unexpected …

http://www.ragged-edge-mag.com/mediacircus/styleguide.htm

[pigeonmom]

Does anyone know anything about a local driving school that caters to Asians?

(NOT a slur against anyone btw as there are NEVER any people of any other race in the car that I’ve seen.)

My car has received $1000 worth of damage by one of their students. They left a note and paid for repairs with cash and no insurance involvement at their insistence.

My current problem is they keep coming back to practice parallel parking with my car.

I and my housemate have repeatedly gone out and told them to not practice in front of our house and it keeps happening.

The person who hit my car was not very forthcoming with any information about who is running this school and I no longer have his phone number.

[squareeyes]

I will take the next available stall/restroom regardless of whether it is standard or disabled-equipped, but if there is someone who is obviously in need of that stall, I’m going to let them go to the head of the line since it is technically reserved for them, and merely a convenience for me. So yes, disabled people get priority for the one stall designed for their use.

[maude]

Just wondering (this isn’t meant as a slam to those who need to use the handicapped stalls). I was at an event last night and naturally there was a long line of women waiting for the restrooms. Everyone seemed to be avoiding the handicapped stall like it is only for wheelchairs or those who need assistance. I think it’s for people who need a bit more room but only after they wait in line like the rest of us. Is there a law that says those stalls are only for those needing assistance/extra room?

[skeeter]

I don’t know DP. Oregon and California both have state income taxes. Their job growth is significantly slower than ours. Washington already has high property taxes and sales taxes. Adding an income tax would make other states more attractive. We could go around and around, though, and probably never agree.

As for the state parks charging an admission fee, the thing I struggle with is MY taxes didn’t go down. I pay the same property tax and the same sales tax. And now I’m receiving fewer services. It’s just frustrating.