Silverplum
Senior Member
So you expected the officer to cringe into submission because you used a 4-syllable technological word?
-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
NJ 39:3-29B Failure to possess driver registration
- Thread starter TrafficGuy
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
Just Blue
Senior Member
TrafficGuy
Junior Member
Zigner: The device that transmits is your cell phone. You are correct that I would not have access to the maintenance records at first. Feel free to refute this if I'm wrong; during discovery I have the ability to request records from an officer in regards to the last time the device used was properly set up using an external tuning fork, or the maintenance record of when the last internal tuning was performed. I also have the ability to request the officer's notes from the stop so what makes requesting other maintenance records any different?
Blue Meanie/Sliverplum: No I don't expect "the officer to cringe" because if you had read my post I never made any mention of anything technical until I was asked to explain how I would prove the accuracy. So I did so in technical terms to be as exact as possible (again I originally mentioned GPS because that's what everyone is familiar with). I don't expect someone to explain or understand how a TCP/IP stack or HTTP works even though you use it every time you get on the internet. Just because someone didn't take the time to actually read what I wrote and doesn't fully understand it doesn't make it wrong.
Blue Meanie/Sliverplum: No I don't expect "the officer to cringe" because if you had read my post I never made any mention of anything technical until I was asked to explain how I would prove the accuracy. So I did so in technical terms to be as exact as possible (again I originally mentioned GPS because that's what everyone is familiar with). I don't expect someone to explain or understand how a TCP/IP stack or HTTP works even though you use it every time you get on the internet. Just because someone didn't take the time to actually read what I wrote and doesn't fully understand it doesn't make it wrong.
Zigner
Senior Member, Non-Attorney
I don't expect someone to explain or understand how a TCP/IP stack or HTTP works even though you use it every time you get on the internet. Just because someone didn't take the time to actually read what I wrote and doesn't fully understand it doesn't make it wrong.
Why do you think your understanding of network communications has anything to do with this? Why do you think that your understanding of network communications is greater than that of others that post here?
Pompous much?
TrafficGuy
Junior Member
It's an analogy. I'd like to point out that "This is pointless because you won't even take a moment to consider that you may be wrong. Because of the fact that it's irrelevant, I'm done." was said by you. Any time someone has actually contributed useful/helpful information to the questions asked; I've thanked them (including you when you mentioned the irrelevancy of the records).