Keep in mind that you have a legal obligation to mitigate your own damages. Taking a picture to document that you intentionally parked in a way that would make it difficult for another driver to exit their parking space likely wouldn’t help you as much as you think it would.

I would have deserved it.

No, that’s not what the article is saying. The bill didn’t say that switch=intent. The bill said that intent to harass must be present, and supporters of the bill said that the judiciary would find the presence of the switch enough evidence to satisfy the element of intent to harass. Also, even if the bill did…

Yes, did you? It says nothing about outlawing a smoke switch. The bill in question is about outlawing rolling coal, not the device that helps you do it.

That being said, if I got pulled in a vehicle with a fuel switch like this for rolling coal, it’s not something I could easily get out of.

Yes. The bill did not outlaw intending to harass or having a smoke switch. The bill outlaws rolling coal.

The ONLY reason for rolling coal is for smoking on other road users.

Anyway, there are switches out there that do boost power without the smoke. Gale Banks has done an awesome job of this. Those will be illegal now because of someone’s “intent to harass.”

You’re still missing the point. THERE NEVER WAS A “CLAUSE” IN THE BILL THAT WOULD HAVE MADE IT ILLEGAL TO HAVE THE INTENT TO ROLL COAL OR TO HAVE A SMOKE SWITCH IN YOUR TRUCK.

You know that’s got nothing to do with the law being discussed, right? The law doesn’t say (nor did the proposed law say) that having a smoke switch is intent to roll coal and illegal. You seem to be very confused.

Exactly. But they’re Republicans, so fuck ‘em anyway. Amiright?

What do you mean by “intent laws”?

Ignorance of the law has never been a defense against it though.

Republicans are all for protecting assholes

The way it was written before basically said that anyone with the device only had it for harassment purposes.

The good news is, with that provision removed, it doesn’t matter WHY someone chooses to defeat their EPA-regulated emissions devices

I’m not aware of any other purpose for it, so... what was the problem Republicans had with it?

It gets to the heart of I fear I’ve had before... What if you bought a truck used and was unaware of, and never used the switch, but it was discovered by an asshole cop who now charges you with “intent to roll coal” even though you didn’t have any such intent.

To be fair, it’s not inherently anti-feminist to support legislation that places certain controls on the bodies of women (or any other people, for that matter).

“If he was being a dick ( I know nothing about Skrillex, so I don’t know if that would be out of character ) I could see the situation escalating to him actually being detained, but that punishment doesn’t fit the crime alone.”