The Wall of Life

THE WALL OF DEATH from benedict campbell on Vimeo.

wall-of-death.co.uk

benedict1.com

Courts ban cops with above-moron I.Q.s

"Dumb cops, dumb cops, whatcha gonna do, whatcha going to do with a low IQ?" (theme song from COPS TV)
-Jay Leno (comedic Italian-American, motorhead collector, biker gangster, and rider of a 266MPH street-legal jet-engined All-American sportbike), NBC TV, Tonight Show

Gansta Govt is terrified of its employees who figure out 99% of what govt does is illegal. In USA today, 100% of police are criminal gangbangers, according to all cops, all prosecutors, all judges. That's THE LAW.

And ever driver faces a life sentence in prison for every year of driving safely and normaly. That's THE LAW.

---

Cops cover cop cars in cop poo

Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops


NEW LONDON, Conn. -- A man whose bid to become a police officer was rejected after he scored too high on an intelligence test has lost an appeal in his federal lawsuit against the city.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York upheld a lower court’s decision that the city did not discriminate against Robert Jordan because the same standards were applied to everyone who took the test.

“This kind of puts an official face on discrimination in America against people of a certain class,” Jordan said today from his Waterford home. “I maintain you have no more control over your basic intelligence than your eye color or your gender or anything else.”

He said he does not plan to take any further legal action.

Jordan, a 49-year-old college graduate, took the exam in 1996 and scored 33 points, the equivalent of an IQ of 125. But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training.

Most Cops Just Above Normal The average score nationally for police officers is 21 to 22, the equivalent of an IQ of 104, or just a little above average.

Jordan alleged his rejection from the police force was discrimination. He sued the city, saying his civil rights were violated because he was denied equal protection under the law.

But the U.S. District Court found that New London had “shown a rational basis for the policy.” In a ruling dated Aug. 23, the 2nd Circuit agreed. The court said the policy might be unwise but was a rational way to reduce job turnover.

Jordan has worked as a prison guard since he took the test.

Comments

And cops wonder why the "upper crust" of society has so little respect for them. At an average IQ of 104, basically half of the public is more intelligent that the cops they have to deal with.

and why is this a surprise? in all countries 99% of the cops failed to be good criminals so they ended up doing police work. idiots never qualify as great criminal masterminds...it doesn't have to do with 'being bored'...the intelligent ones will question stupid orders...and that is not acceptable even in corporations...

intelligence knows how to deal with potential boredom.

Perhaps they are more inclined to put 7 bullets in the chest of an elderly person protecting their property?

Shoot first...ask questions later.

That isn't a bright idea.

And they tell us that ignorance is no excuse.

So basicly cops are sociopaths with a lience to kill with the average inteligence of a bus driver.

Cop: Do you have any idea why I pulled you over today sir?
Me: Um, because you were a straight C- student in school?
Cop: OK asshole,step out of the car.

and they have to love donuts and have mustaches.

See also:

Unions Rush to Defend Arrested Drunk Cop Driving 143 Mph. 2d 1h

Now cops can enter homes to shut off natural gas valves!! 12/30/11

See Something Say Something results in Mall Cops reporting a guy to DHS for looking at the funny paper

'I’m a cop, I can do whatever I want' - Pulls Out Gun and Executes Man

Pussy Cop Shoots and Kills Family's Jack Russel Terrier While Trespassing

Cop abuses citizens right to travel.

CHICAGO Cops Warn Restaurants About Orders Called In From Cell Phones

The Old Lady Next Door Was Escorted By The Cops To A Homeless Shelter

---

Ideas & Trends; Help Wanted Invoking the Not-Too-High-IQ Test

NY Times

WANTED: a few not-so-bright cops.

That is the official hiring policy in this former whaling village, where Police Department officials refused to grant Robert J. Jordan a job interview because they considered him to be too smart, then waged a three-year court fight to protect their right to favor mediocre applicants.

And won.

The City of New London contends that applicants who score too high on a pre-employment test are likely to become bored in patrol jobs, and leave the force soon after the city has paid to train them. Similar cutoffs, it turns out, are frequently used by employers when they are looking for workers who must follow rigid procedures, including bank tellers, customer service representatives and security guards.

In 1996 Mr. Jordan scored 33 out of 50 on the exam, which is used by 40,000 employers across the country, including National Football League teams for potential draft choices. That was 6 points too high to qualify for an interview with the New London police.

When Mr. Jordan heard about other people being hired even though he hadn't been called, he went to the Police Department to protest that he felt sure he must have passed. He says he was curtly informed that he did not ''fit the profile,'' which litigation revealed was a score of 20 to 27.

''Bob Jordan is exactly the type of guy we would want to screen out,'' said William C. Gavitt, the deputy police chief, who interviews candidates. ''Police work is kind of mundane. We don't deal in gunfights every night. There's a personality that can take that.''

This month, a Federal judge in New Haven has ruled that the practice was constitutional since the city treats all smart would-be officers the same, and thus did not discriminate against Mr. Jordan. ''Plaintiff may have been disqualified unwisely but he was not denied equal protection,'' Judge Peter C. Dorsey of the United States District Court wrote.

Mr. Jordan, 48, is a life-insurance salesman who had dreamed of a second career protecting and serving, with an eye on the pension. He said he was astounded that he could be shut out on the basis of brain power, but not gender, sexual orientation or race.

''Being reasonably intelligent does not make you part of a protected class,'' he said, chuckling at his new command of legalese. For a certified wise man, Mr. Jordan is remarkably modest about his academic achievements, volunteering that it took him 26 years to get a bachelor's degree in literature from Charter Oak State College in New Britain, Conn. ''I'm eminently trainable,'' he said. ''I'm not up there with Mozart.''

At first the decision was greeted as a great punch line in New London, a city of 27,000. But as the news sunk in, many people said the rule was insulting to their police force, and nonsensical at a time when law-enforcement officers must deal with complicated social problems.

''Your average dunderhead is not the person you want to try to solve a fight between a man and his wife at 2 A.M.,'' said Nick Checker, 35, a local playwright. ''I'd rather have them hire the right man or woman for the job and keep replacing them than have the same moron for 20 years.'' Millie McLaughlin, 82, the lunch lady at Harbor Elementary School, worries that pupils will think that ''if they study too hard, they won't get a job.''

And Gilbert G. Gallegos, the national president of the Fraternal Order of Police, said that besides reinforcing keystone Kop stereotypes, the city's stance was self-defeating. ''The better the caliber of the police officer, the fewer problems you have in the community.''

Mr. Jordan had run afoul of turnover rates, which have been the subject of decades of study by management theorists. The publisher of the test, Wonderlic Inc. of Libertyville, Ill., has a section in its ''User's Manual'' warning clients about the cost of replacing workers who quit because they become dissatisfied with repetitive work. ''Simply hiring the highest scoring employee can be self-defeating,'' the manual says.

Wonderlic's president, Charles F. Wonderlic Jr., said variations of the 12-minute test used in New London have been given to 125 million people since his grandfather founded the company in 1937. Mr. Wonderlic said hundreds of employers have used his suggested maximum scores to exclude overly qualified applicants for positions where creativity could be a detriment. ''You can't decide not to read someone their Miranda rights because you felt it would be more efficient, or you thought they knew them already,'' Mr. Wonderlic said.

On the other hand, an expert witness for Mr. Jordan was paid $350 an hour for his conclusion that patrol work is ''cognitively complex and intellectually demanding.'' The expert, Frank J. Landy, a psychologist in Walnut Creek, Calif., pointed to the demands of such modern practices as community-oriented policing as an indication of ''the range and challenge of tasks performed by a typical patrol officer.''

MR. Jordan said he would appeal the ruling if his lawyers are willing to continue the case now that he has used up his savings. In the meantime, he is supplementing his insurance business by working for $26,000 a year -- $15,000 less than he would make as a New London patrolman -- as a state prison guard. ''In those dormitories, there's 110 inmates and one of you,'' he said. ''Your mouth better be connected to your brain.''

While those with badges and guns are called New York's finest, they will continue to be New London's fair to middling: New London officials say they plan to keep using the test to fend off smarty-pants.

---

Interview with ROBERT JORDAN

September 12, 2000

CNN Legal Analyst Greta Van Susteren interviewed Robert Jordan on September 12, 2000. The following is an edited transcript of the interview.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: Hello and welcome to Greta@Law. Robert Jordan is a smart man -- A little too smart for the New London, Connecticut, police department. His application to join the city's finest was rejected because he scored too high on the entrance exam. He sued the city for discrimination, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit sided with the New London police department, saying its hiring policy may not be smart, but it is a rational way to reduce job turnover. Bob Jordan, thank you for joining me today.

ROBERT JORDAN: Thank you for having me, Greta.

GVS: Bob, are you too smart to be a cop?

RJ: Absolutely not. I would worry about being smart enough. I don't think you can be too smart in an occupation like a policeman.

GVS: Take me back, Bob. What happened to you? You took an exam and what was the score?

RJ: I scored a 33 out of a possible 50. It's just a silly, standardized, off-the-shelf intelligence test, referred to as the Wonderlic Test. I believe you have 12 minutes to get as many answers correct -- unless you want to get the job as a police officer in New London -- as possible and I guess an equivalent score is 125 or merely two standard deviations above the mean for the relevant IQ score.

GVS: Now, Bob, the Wonderlic Test -- is that actually administered by the New London police, or is that one you took separately?

RJ: It was a regional exam, so that if you were interested in working for a number of departments, they all drew from this consortium called the Law Enforcement Council. Rather than everybody give their own test, you take one regional test and departments that are interested can draw from those test takers.

GVS: Now according to what I've read, Bob, the New London police only interview those who score between 20 and 27 and you got a 33, and that the average score nationally is a 21 to 22 with an IQ equivalent of 104 and your IQ is 125. What did you say to the New London police when they said, in essence, Bob, you're too smart?

RJ: Well, actually, the person I talked to was the personnel manager and when I inquired as to why I hadn't had an opportunity to at least return some biographical information to them because I understood that they were interviewing people, that's when he told me that, quote, "Listen, Mr. Jordan, we don't like to hire people with a too high an IQ to be a cop in this town." Of course, I was aghast at the philosophy he was espousing and when I asked him to elaborate on why he had made this determination, he suggested that the role of a police officer in society was a very boring, routine, mundane, unchallenging type of position, and someone with any gray matter between their ears would rapidly become disenchanted and leave that type of work for something more exciting like being a personnel manager for the city of New London. (Editor's Note: The New London, Connecticut Police Department declined to comment on the case.)

GVS: So you went to the federal district court, you lost there, you went to the U.S. Court of Appeals, you lost there, and they said that it was, they found that New London had shown a rational basis for the policy and that there was a rational way to reduce job turnover. You're not going to the U.S. Supreme Court, Bob?

RJ: Unless my attorney was willing to do it pro bono, I'm afraid that this is it for me. I'm financially exhausted over all of this, but I might add that there is absolutely no data whatsoever, Greta, to support this so-called rational policy that the Wonderlic Company espouses. In other words, there are absolutely no empirical studies that have ever been, no scientific evidence, no exit interviews that have ever been conducted to prove that intelligent people leave law enforcement disproportionately. I'm sure as a society at large, we'd be happy to hear that fact.

GVS: You also wrote a letter on April 9, 1997 to the president of the United States, Sen. Christopher Dodd, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, and the governor of Connecticut, John Rowland. Have any of those gentlemen responded to you?

RJ: No, they have not. Apparently, no one is interested in having a constituent named Bob, because I have actually written my own personal congressman twice, and I just cannot get a response from anybody. Nobody seems to care about my plight.

GVS: Why do you want to be a police officer?

RJ: I had done the work both on part time, in a municipality, and on a seasonal basis for the state of Connecticut through the Department of Environmental Protection, Law Enforcement in the Parks, that sort of activity. I enjoyed patrol work. I thought I had a real knack of dealing with people, which isn't surprising because I have been selling life insurance since I was 22-years-old. I developed a lot of people skills over the years, and I thought I might like to do it on a full-time basis. It doesn't seem that unreasonable at age 45 to want to have a career change since the spokesman for the most recent state trooper graduating class this summer was a 53-year-old former attorney from Fairfield County. He was chosen by his classmates to be the speaker because he did such an excellent job, I guess, as a candidate for the state trooper in Connecticut. That class by the way, included more ex-nurses and teachers and other highly educated professionals than any other class. I think that you want to encourage people to go into service helping the public, who are educated and flexible enough to adapt to whatever the demands, and certainly in police work you have changes in society, demographics, policing policies, community policing.

GVS: You know, as I listen to you, Bob, I've got to tell you, when I first read of your plight, I thought there must be something wrong -- certainly someone can't be too smart for a job, certainly someone would not be disqualified for scoring too high on an entrance exam. Have you thought about being clever, and go back and take the exam and throw a couple questions?

RJ: You know, if I had little or no pride in myself, if I could shake off the values that were inculcated into me in grammar school where you take a test to select as many correct answers as possible, not the other way around. If I wanted to be a bureaucrat, I guess I could do that, but I'm not going to that. I fortunately was hired by the Connecticut Department of Correction, and I feel a good deal of loyalty toward them now, because at least they gave me an opportunity to serve in a way I think that society gets a good officer from me. And I get to have a living wage and good benefit package for my family.

GVS: Thank you, Robert Jordan, for joining me. Thanks to our viewers for logging on to Greta@Law. For more legal news and commentary, go to CNN.com/Law. And also visit the Burden of Proof home page at CNN.com/Burden.

---

The courts have barred all Amerikans from having high I.Q.s, and every day require All Amerikans to consume poisons that lower I.Q. by 30 points.



The 100-million Amerikans who refused to comply with this law were executed and turned into Solent Green cosmetic products for resale.

Any journalist who reports actual facts is fired immediately. Ask Glenn Beck, fired 1 week after reporting Congressman Ron Paul's plan to nationalize the foreign private "Federal" Reserve Bank that counterfeits all so-called "US dollar bills" (Federal Reserve Debt Notes) and steals 100% of national income tax revenue. DOH!!!


Fox News made in Commie China: google Deng Wen Di Murdoch

New Year Chillout

Click for free MP3 download

Ambient thrills and chills from the surface of the moon....wherever that may be.

Playlist:

Bassic: Tranquility Bass
Vangelis: Bladerunner Blues
Cardamar: Nebra Skydisk mix
Apollo 11: Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Michael Collins, Mission Control
Apollo 16
Apollo 17
Space Shuttle Columbia: Final Voyage
Astronauts Gone Wild: Bart Sibrel

Hollywood Award-Winning Apolloscam Archive by Pirate News









Fair use for non-commercial news and educational use per 17 USC 107

Merry Christmas

Jeremiah 10 Christmas Cards

1: Hear ye the word which the LORD speaketh unto you, O house of Israel:
2: Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
3: For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
4: They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
5: They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
6: Forasmuch as there is none like unto thee, O LORD; thou art great, and thy name is great in might.
7: Who would not fear thee, O King of nations? for to thee doth it appertain: forasmuch as among all the wise men of the nations, and in all their kingdoms, there is none like unto thee.
8: But they are altogether brutish and foolish: the stock is a doctrine of vanities.
9: Silver spread into plates is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz, the work of the workman, and of the hands of the founder: blue and purple is their clothing: they are all the work of cunning men.
10: But the LORD is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting king: at his wrath the earth shall tremble, and the nations shall not be able to abide his indignation.
11: Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens.
12: He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion.
13: When he uttereth his voice, there is a multitude of waters in the heavens, and he causeth the vapours to ascend from the ends of the earth; he maketh lightnings with rain, and bringeth forth the wind out of his treasures.
14: Every man is brutish in his knowledge: every founder is confounded by the graven image: for his molten image is falsehood, and there is no breath in them.
15: They are vanity, and the work of errors: in the time of their visitation they shall perish.
16: The portion of Jacob is not like them: for he is the former of all things; and Israel is the rod of his inheritance: The LORD of hosts is his name.
17: Gather up thy wares out of the land, O inhabitant of the fortress.
18: For thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will sling out the inhabitants of the land at this once, and will distress them, that they may find it so.
19: Woe is me for my hurt! my wound is grievous: but I said, Truly this is a grief, and I must bear it.
20: My tabernacle is spoiled, and all my cords are broken: my children are gone forth of me, and they are not: there is none to stretch forth my tent any more, and to set up my curtains.
21: For the pastors are become brutish, and have not sought the LORD: therefore they shall not prosper, and all their flocks shall be scattered.
22: Behold, the noise of the bruit is come, and a great commotion out of the north country, to make the cities of Judah desolate, and a den of dragons.
23: O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.
24: O LORD, correct me, but with judgment; not in thine anger, lest thou bring me to nothing.
25: Pour out thy fury upon the heathen that know thee not, and upon the families that call not on thy name: for they have eaten up Jacob, and devoured him, and consumed him, and have made his habitation desolate.

$14-Million Lawsuit Filed Against Killer Trucker on the Dragon

Truck driver Bobby Coleman didn't even get a traffic ticket for murdering Ike Woodard. This was the 2nd murder of a biker by a trucker on the Dragon. Slow rescue by Rural Metro Taxi Service was a contributing factor in Ike's death. Trucks are already banned in Blount County on Foothills Parkway and US441 in Sevier County.

"No one here will ever know the exact details of what happened, but the rear trailer wheels passed over Ike and his bike, and the trailer stopped clear of him after running him over, so it is possible that Ike stopped for the truck, and the truck wasn't able to stop in time for him."
-PZFZ1, ETR Forum

UPDATE: Blount grand jury declares open season for truckers to murder bikers on the Dragon

"The truck traveled 20-30 feet AFTER hitting, dragging and running over Ike and his bike, UPHILL. I haven't driven flatbeds, but I have hauled gas tankers. I can tell you, an empty tank weighs about the same as the trailer that killed Ike and is what I used to call a two door sports coupe. I could beat my buddy's Mitsubishi pick up off the line with one. Granted, his was a 4-banger 5 speed, but we're talking big rig versus pick-up. The truck that killed Ike was going speed limit or better. I assure you. It wasn't escorted because it was fairly early in the AM and I hadn't arrived yet (I was the first local that I was aware of there that day). I was on my first northbound pass of the day when I came up on the scene. One of his buddies was in shock and told me it was Ike. I spoke to Trooper Skeen about it and he said it didn't look good. They had diverted in the air to Blount Memorial. He was dead at that point. Assuming the family is suing out of greed is a little myopic as well. He has two minor daughters that deserve at least a benefit. He had medical bills that mounted even though his life wasn't spared. His mother has to deal with all of that sort of crap, too. A case like this will be settled out of court for a paltry sum. After she pays her shark of a lawyer, she won't see anywhere near $14 million. Get real."
-CreekDevil, ETR Forum

Family sues for $14.5M in fatality on ‘Dragon’

By Wes Wade
Maryville Daily Times

The family of a motorcyclist killed in a collision with a tractor-trailer on “The Dragon” in August has filed a $14.5 million lawsuit in Blount County Circuit Court.

The suit was filed Thursday on behalf of several family members of 45-year-old Christiana resident Dwight Ross Woodard, who died the morning of Aug. 3 after a collision with a tractor-trailer driven by Bobby Frank Coleman, 47, of Nashville, Ga.

Coleman is named as a defendant in the suit along with his employer, the Blackshear, Ga.-based Thom’s Transport Company Inc.

The complaint alleges that Coleman violated several state statutes as his truck crossed into Woodard’s lane of travel, blocking both lanes of U.S. Highway 129 in a curve near Mile Marker 5. According to a Tennessee Highway Patrol report, Woodard was traveling southbound on his Triumph Triple Speed motorcycle when he struck the left side of the trailer as it crossed over into his lane.

Criminal charges have not been filed in the crash.

According to the complaint, Woodard remained conscious and alert until an ambulance arrived nearly an hour after the wreck, but died about 30 minutes later on his way to the hospital.

Those listed as plaintiffs in the suit include Woodard’s two daughters, ages 14 and 8, and Woodard’s mother, Patricia Thompson. They seek compensation for damages to include wrongful death, medical and funeral expenses and lost future earnings. A jury was requested to try the case.

Thom’s Transport Company Inc. declined to comment.

TDOT opposes ban

Several Nashville riders, including members of Woodard’s family, mounted a campaign shortly after the crash to persuade legislators to ban tractor-trailers longer than 30 feet from using the Dragon, an 11.1-mile stretch of U.S. 129 from Tabcat Creek to the North Carolina state line at Deals Gap.

But in a letter to U.S. Rep. John J. Duncan Jr. dated Oct. 19, Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) Commissioner John C. Schroer said it was the department’s decision not to implement a ban on tractor-trailers from using the highway.

“It is our position that the economic impact of restricting tractor-trailers along this federally designated U.S. route would severely impact commerce, as there is no reasonable alternative route for commercial traffic in this vicinity,” Schroer wrote.

The commissioner added that TDOT provides enhanced safety advisories in regards to potentially dangerous roadways and that it is the responsibility of motorists to exercise a greater amount of caution when traveling winding mountain roads.

“We recognize that this was a tragic event,” Schroer continued. “However, we do not feel we can give priority to one group of motorists over another by restricting certain types of vehicles from U.S. 129.”

The letter also noted that TDOT, in conjunction with the motorcycle industry, had conducted a series of studies on the Dragon in 2008 to identify the root cause of severe crashes and to then implement safety improvements. In researching fatal crashes, the department said that during the last three years only one crash involved a collision between a motorcycle and tractor-trailer.

According to Schroer’s statement, the study found that speed in relation to negotiating curves on the Dragon was the major underlying issue related to severe crashes and fatalities. TDOT has since implemented a series of improvements along the corridor, including posting new signage and markings, paving pull-off areas and installing enhanced signage discouraging truck traffic from using the highway, the letter states.

TDOT records indicate that 17 motorcycle fatalities have occurred on the Dragon during the past six years.

see also:

Dragonater Archive: Trucker murders another biker on the Dragon

Court Says Dragon Speed Limit is 65 MPH - Critical info for winning a wrongful death case.

Biker Tickets Increase 11,400% on the Dragon - THP refuses to enforce ANY law against trucks on the Dragon

TDOT Report Bans All Biker Business on the Dragon - TDOT refuses to ban killer truacks on the Dragon, refuses to require flag vehicles for big trucks, refuses to enforce ANY current law against trucks on the Dragon

Deals Gap Dragon 'Dragstrip' - BCSO and THP refuse to enforce ANY law against trucks on the Dragon

ETR Forum posts

Dragonslayer down

RIP David Spotts, Dragon photographer. See you later.

David with Gap Yoda at the Overlook (june & july), photos by The Dragonater

photo by The Dragonater

Deals Gap Dragon on the Travel Channel

The Learning Channel does not teach countersteering at Deals Gap

America's Wildest Roads: Wet and Wild

Tornado Alley, The Dragon, the Overseas Highway and Route 4 ... these are just 4 of the roads featured in this special all about the wet and wild roads of the US.

Why the 55mph national speed limit was repealed

The NMA will pay your speeding ticket if you lose in court, even if you cover a cop car in poo

Repealing the 55 MPH Speed Limit

by Gail Morrison
LewRockwell.com

In 1990, I first learned of the National Motorists Association (NMA) when I got a speeding ticket in Texas. I fought the ticket and was found guilty. I was naive in my belief that if I wasn’t guilty of the charges, I could go before the judge and explain that there was a misunderstanding and charges would be dropped.

I was amazed at how I had been treated in the court system. When I appealed the guilty verdict, it seemed to affect the people representing the system. Prior to the appeal the DA was pleasant and somewhat paternalistic. At the request of the judge, he explained to me the procedure and escorted me to the law library. There he advised me to just pay for the ticket and go my way. However, when the trial time came the DA went for the throat – mine! Well, I lost the appeal as well, and the fine went from $10 to $144 – but during that time, I learned what was happening to motorists all over these United States.

During my research to find how to change a system that is grossly unfair, I came across a book titled "How to Beat the Radar Rap" and through the publisher I was put in touch with Jim Baxter, President of NMA. And it was through this heroic organization that I found out that there is a method to setting speed limits and placing stop signs. About this same time I met a traffic engineer who gave me a book entitled, "National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices" (NCUTCD). This is where I first heard the term "the 85th percentile" it means that traffic engineers believe the speed limits should be set at 85% of the speed adopted by free flowing traffic. But, he told me his hands were tied – all decisions were political.

Many phone calls went back and forth to Mr. Baxter and soon he asked me to be the Texas State Chapter Coordinator. That seemed like too much responsibility but I agreed to be an area coordinator. But within a few months I was Texas State Chapter Coordinator with six area coordinators under me. I lived 130 miles from Austin and for two years, I burned up a lot of rubber. We were instrumental in having several laws passed, e.g., keeping the 70 mph’s speed limit, temporarily suspended, in effect, making it easy for Texas to raise its speed limit with the repeal of National Maximum Speed Limit (NMSL). And we helped to defeat a law that would allow a judge to be fired if he didn’t collect enough traffic-fine revenue.

Every year, NMA would have a national coordinators meeting, and my colleagues urged that I be sent to Washington to bring about the repeal of the NMSL. But NMA had already retained a lobbyist in DC and he was supposed to be good. He did get a modification of the NMSL, a raise in speed limits to 65 mph in rural areas. But the hoped-for repeal of NMSL did not happen. Then in August 1994, Jim Baxter asked me if I move to Washington, D.C., and lobby for the repeal. I told Mr. Baxter: Yes, although repealing a law "cast in concrete" for 23 years seemed like an impossible dream.

On a trip back from the NMA national headquarters in Wisconsin, I drove through Washington, D.C., and met with the NMA lobbyist, who told me "you are not needed on this issue." He went on to tell me, "you cannot use my office, you cannot receive phone calls or mail, you cannot store anything." He leaned forward and said "you cannot even use the bathroom." I replied, "I guess I will have to find a place on the Hill." To which he said. "You won’t be able to afford it."

Leaving the restaurant and my new colleague, I walked around the block and stopped to talk with a woman working in her front yard. She said she was renovating an apartment, but that it wouldn’t be ready until December. I was delighted, as I would not be moving to the District until then, and I felt that an apartment on Capitol Hill would be ideal for office and living. I knew I would need to be close to the House and Senate offices.

I drove home and packed up my belonging, and loaded them into a 24’ Ryder truck. I got behind the wheel of a truck for the first time and drove alone, except for my dog and cat, to Washington. When I arrived, I was again awed by history of the area and by the importance of the Members of Congress. I felt small and insignificant by comparison.

Yet, I believed so strongly that the NMSL was a bad law, that I felt compelled to change it.

Fundamental to good law in America is the idea that the behavior of most people is reasonable. Laws are written to single out the unreasonable behavior of a minority.

Speed laws are based on the same ideas. Most people did not observe this law. It made criminals out of most motorists, leaving us with the dilemma of deciding if we should drive a safe speed or a legal speed.

But first I had to find someone to introduce a bill to repeal the National Maximum Speed Limits. As in all my work, the grassroots power of NMA activists all over the country was my secret weapon.

Scott Klugg, R-WI, introduced HR607 on January 20, 1995, but I felt it wouldn’t get the support it needed to pass. It read: A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to eliminate penalties for noncompliance by States with requirements relating to the use of safety belts and motor cycle helmets, the national maximum speed limit, and the national minimum drinking age, and for other purposes. The reason I didn’t put NMA support behind this bill was: 1) I knew the motorcycle groups had strong, active lobbying efforts to get the repeal of the helmet law; 2) NMA membership is divided on the seat belt issue; the most important part was 3) The alcohol issue would not be popular.

Pat Roberts, R-KS, said that he would introduce a bill, but then reneged and suggested that he offer HR 1007, a bill to allow 65 mph in urbanized areas of 50,000 that could now only be posted at 55 mph. I quickly withdrew NMA support from this bill, believing this bill to be a mockery.

In January 1995, I visited the office of Larry Combest, R-TX.. I spoke with his Legislative Assistant, Lisa Elledge, who was handling transportation issues. She told me Larry offered a bill every year for – maybe for five or six years now, for a repeal of the NMSL. It was sort of an office joke she said, but he really wanted the repeal. I felt HR 427 was the bill to get behind and push it as hard as I could, and we worked well together.

The Surface Transportation subcommittee of the Transportation and Infrastructure hearing for changes in the National Highway (NHS) was to be held on March 1, 1995. I had visited all the offices of the members of the subcommittee. I knew enough now to know that the leadership on both sides was against repealing NMSL. I also knew that the leadership for NHTSA, FHwA, insurance companies, and 144 safety groups were also against a repeal. I was told that "NMSL was cast in concrete – it had been in effect for 23 years, and would NEVER be repealed. . . ."

I knew that I needed something to break this mindset – but I didn’t know what.

At first I thought if I just visited the opposing members and talked logic to them that they would see the error of their ways – but I quickly realize the proverbial "My mind is made up – don’t confuse me with facts" mentality. Besides, time was running out. I needed a member of the House subcommittee to offer the amendment. Bill Brewster, D- OK agreed to offer it. This proved to be a blessing, as Norman Y. Mineta, D-CA, was going to call for party unity against the bill – and because Mr. Brewster had agreed to offer it and he was a Democrat, Mr. Mineta had to drop this idea.

I knew it would be helpful if I could get support from some of the leadership. Tom Petri, R-WI, was an ideal choice, as he represented the state with the headquarters of NMA and he was the chairman of the Surface Transportation committee.

The committee meeting was coming soon and I needed to find someone to give testimony at the subcommittee hearing. I first called Jim Baxter to come Washington and give it, but he suggested that I ask Martin Parker of Martin R. Parker & Associates, Inc., Wayne, Michigan. I then called Dr. Parker. He declined, saying that he would need his study in order to testify. The title of his study was "The Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed Limits." He had been enlisted to conduct by the Office of Safety and Traffic Operations R&D, Federal Highway Administration (FhwA). I asked him where his study was? He told me that it was being review by the Transportation Research Board (TRB).

I started telephoning people and getting the proverbial run-around. I finally talked with Margarite, the secretary for Stephen Godwin, Director of Studies and Information.

She made me an appointment for that afternoon to visit with Mr. Godwin. The visit was disappointing as Mr. Godwin told me he had never heard of the study and maybe I didn’t have all my facts straight – nicely of course. I came home wondering in what to do next.

As I walked in through my front door, the phone was ringing. It was Margarite and she said that she had found the study and it was completed. She said she would send it over to me immediately. I then called Mr. Parker back and told him, and he said I could do whatever I wanted to with the study. But in the meantime he had made other plans and could not come to DC on the dates that I had asked about.

I made 10 copies of the full report and 535 of the commentary and summaries and I took them to all members of congress. Many members of congress started telephoning NHTSA and FHwA demanding to know where this study had been and why they hadn’t seen it when the Final Report was dated October 1992. This study was the turning point of the repeal.

Senator Don Nickles, R-OK and Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell were the cosponsors of the repeal in the Senate. S-476. Time was running out, as the Transportation subcommittee would be meeting soon and if an amendment wasn’t offered, it would just not go anywhere. I had spoken with all the members, save one, Senator Lauch Faircloth. No one wanted to handle this "hot potato." I had called Senator Faircloth’s office numerous times, but couldn’t seem to get through to the person that handled the transportation issues. On Monday, May 1, I called – again- and a George Howard answered the phone. I told him who I was and that I wanted to schedule an appointment. There was a silence on the other end of the phone. Then, he said, "You just aren’t going to leave me alone until I talk to you, are you?"

I was taken aback, but I took a deep breath and as pleasantly as I could muster said, "No, I’m not. The subcommittee meeting will be on the third and I need to talk with you."

He sighed and replied "If you can be in my office in 20 minutes I will meet with you."

"Yessssss!" I said. I was in Mr. Howard’s office in 10 minutes. He listened to all I had to say about the repeal, and then without a word he turned and picked up the telephone and punched in some numbers. Then, he said into the receiver, "I have this woman in my office who thinks that we can get rid of the speed limits."

A few minutes later he turned back to me and said "We will think about it." Mr. Howard telephoned me Tuesday morning and told me that the Senator would file an amendment.

I thought that meant that he would offer the amendment in the subcommittee. I was delighted and I called all the subcommittee members’ offices and told them. That evening Mr.

Howard called me back and said that the Senator had changed his mind, and wouldn’t be offering the amendment. I exclaimed "NO! I called all the subcommittee members and told them that the Senator would offer it." Mr. Howard’s sounded flabbergasted, as he cried out "YOU DIDN’T?" I was disappointed and slightly confused as well. "I said quietly, ‘I did, I thought it was a done deal.’"

I was really low, but I thanked him for calling me and then told him "at least by telling me this evening, you won’t have to see a grown woman cry tomorrow during the subcommittee meeting."

I was as surprised as everyone else when Senator Faircloth offered the amendment and called for a voice vote. Five yeas, including the Senator from Nevada who told me the night before that he would vote nay, and three nays and one abstaining. It passed and everyone was congratulating me.

I sighed as I reflected, and wrote in my journal: Where else but in the USA could I discuss flowers with the congresswoman from NY and the congressman from ID, both living next door to me, then walk to the Senate Office building for a meeting on the speed limits. I have come a long way since I got that speeding ticket in Victoria, Texas.

Ah, little did I know that the battle was just beginning and it would be fought with the "big guns." I had been ignored by the opponents of State’s Rights and the idea that people are basically capable of making rational choices. But there was a lull and I basked in the victory.

My first inkling of what was to come, came on May 8. A press conference was held on the east lawn of the Capitol. The biggest foes of freedom from both sides of the aisle were the leadership of the Transportation committees in the House and the Senate. They were joined with NHTSA, FHWA, and the leadership of the Highway Patrol of both Maryland and Virginia. I came early to visit with people who would be attending, giving out bumper stickers "LET’S END THE HYPOCRISY: REPEAL 55" and lapel pins that were a red circle with a slash through 55. Imagine my delight when I noticed during the filming of the conference a bumper sticker across one video camera and a lapel pin on the jaunty cap of another cameraman.

I didn’t let up my efforts. I continued to visit the offices. In fact, I personally visited every office in the House – 435 to be exact and 100 in the Senate. During these 11 months I literally wore out four pairs of shoes.

Over the next six months I steadily visited congressional offices smiling, waiting, answering questions, and supplying information concerning the wisdom of supporting the repeal. Sometimes I felt holding the votes together was like trying to hold mercury.

First the National Highway Systems bill went through the Senate on June 20, 1995 and passed 65-35. When the repeal went for a vote in the House September 20, 1995, the vote was 419 yeas, 7 nays, and 8 not voting. The language wasn’t the same and it had to go into Appropriation which was very ominous as the repeal of NMSL could have been tabled and never voted on again. During this time I had tried to get an appointment with Ricardo Martinez, Director of NHTSA, but was repeatedly turned down. All is well that ends well, and a veto-proof bill was sent to President Clinton for his signature. November 28, 1995, was the end of the National Maximum Speed Limits.

NMA had done the impossible, and benefitted every motorist in America, and I was so proud to be part of it.