During the last three weeks it has come to light that a
Fairfax County Firefighter set another Fairfax County Firefighter's personal
property on fire during a dispute which prompted a police response. As creepy,
disturbing, and disconcerting as this act is, apparently neither the fire
department nor the police department seems concerned enough to conduct a formal
investigation. One would only imagine some disciplinary action is in order?

World English Dictionary
arson
— n
criminal law the act of intentionally or recklessly setting
fire to another's property or to one's own property for some improper reason

They ask you during your polygraph about arsenic activity

Iknow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They ask you during your polygraph about arsenic
> activity

Not for me they didn't. Hehehehehehe
Attachments:

Arsonist firefighters are more common than you'd think.

"Arsenic"?

Clobbersaurus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Arsonist firefighters are more common than you'd
> think.


Serial arsonist are almost always connected to firefighters. Either being on or being close to one.

Firefighers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> During the last three weeks it has come to light
> that a
> Fairfax County Firefighter set another Fairfax
> County Firefighter's personal
> property on fire during a dispute which prompted a
> police response. As creepy,
> disturbing, and disconcerting as this act is,
> apparently neither the fire
> department nor the police department seems
> concerned enough to conduct a formal
> investigation. One would only imagine some
> disciplinary action is in order?
>
> World English Dictionary
> arson
> — n
> criminal law the act of intentionally or
> recklessly setting
> fire to another's property or to one's own
> property for some improper reason


90% of fire fighters are mentally screwed up and firefighters in general start almost as many fires as they extinguish. Only a fool desperate for attention would become a firefighter or a cop. I have to work with some of these idiots from time to time. The only group of county employees worse than public safety are the frickin school bus drivers.

county employee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Only a fool desperate for
> attention would become a firefighter or a cop. I
> have to work with some of these idiots from time
> to time. The only group of county employees worse
> than public safety are the frickin school bus
> drivers.


Firefighters are paid to sleep, cant beat that. My friend worked in a Reston station. He said nothing pisses a real fighter more than those claiming to run into burning buildings all the time. He did five years at that station and never saw a working fire. Lots of auto accidents but no building fires.

I had a guy live near me who had all that crap in his yard, he even had one sign that said a hero lives here. Bullshit bumper stickers about how he fights fires and saves lives. Give it a rest.

Case in point...

county employee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Firefighers Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > During the last three weeks it has come to
> light
> > that a
> > Fairfax County Firefighter set another Fairfax
> > County Firefighter's personal
> > property on fire during a dispute which prompted
> a
> > police response. As creepy,
> > disturbing, and disconcerting as this act is,
> > apparently neither the fire
> > department nor the police department seems
> > concerned enough to conduct a formal
> > investigation. One would only imagine some
> > disciplinary action is in order?
> >
> > World English Dictionary
> > arson
> > — n
> > criminal law the act of intentionally or
> > recklessly setting
> > fire to another's property or to one's own
> > property for some improper reason
>
>
> 90% of fire fighters are mentally screwed up and
> firefighters in general start almost as many fires
> as they extinguish. Only a fool desperate for
> attention would become a firefighter or a cop. I
> have to work with some of these idiots from time
> to time. The only group of county employees worse
> than public safety are the frickin school bus
> drivers.


And what is it you do again?

..........we've all seen Backdraft, yo............

Names? Where?

Troll...........Troll...............Troll..........

I recall an incident about 20 years ago at station 14 (Burke) when a FF (#1) pulled a gun on co-worker (#2) who was rumored to be having an affair with #1's wife. Not sure about whether LE became involved, but I remember that #1 was transferred to another station.

......and work on B-team.

Virginian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Troll...........Troll...............Troll.........
> .

Is that you Caussin, trying to cover another one up?

.

Tick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I recall an incident about 20 years ago at station
> 14 (Burke) when a FF (#1) pulled a gun on
> co-worker (#2) who was rumored to be having an
> affair with #1's wife. Not sure about whether LE
> became involved, but I remember that #1 was
> transferred to another station.

Greetings and thank you for the website to air out some disconfort with some, not ALL, but some COPS/GOVERMENT OFFICALS.

I have lost and lots of documentation, videos, pics and witnesses to coloborate my issuesas follow:


I got an HOV ticket few years ago as this was my very first time driving in the AM hours on I66 East Bound, when the exit for ALL none HOV riders could get out, but in my confusion I intended to get out on the exit to the rights and instead I went left when the left lane was for HOV. Again lots and lots of construction and very difficult to understand where to go. So here is my issue; I went to court and ended up with a full morning wasted, and a fine I believe of nearly $180 and that was that. So in the next few weeks, months and now years I notice that ALL LAW ENFORCEMENTS WITH GOVERNMENT CARS, FROM FBI, SHERIFFS, ETC RIDE UP AND THEY RIDE DOWN ON HOV AND VIOLATE THE OUR LAWS. I don't understand why the captains, Lt. etc (higher ups) do not address this matter and see it so normal. it really fuels mi to see this. I have learned that when ever i have been stopped i have always received a ticket, but we are not on the same page with out law enforcement violators. hey dirty cops why is it that you feel you are above the law! You have a job, not a right.. cheers and keep nailing these pricks/and also the lady law enforcers. I'm all for the LAW, but it must be straight across the board. ABSOLUTELY NO EXCEPTIONS.

DIABLO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Greetings and thank you for the website to air out
> some disconfort with some, not ALL, but some
> COPS/GOVERMENT OFFICALS.
>
> I have lost and lots of documentation, videos,
> pics and witnesses to coloborate my issuesas
> follow:
>
>
> I got an HOV ticket few years ago as this was my
> very first time driving in the AM hours on I66
> East Bound, when the exit for ALL none HOV riders
> could get out, but in my confusion I intended to
> get out on the exit to the rights and instead I
> went left when the left lane was for HOV. Again
> lots and lots of construction and very difficult
> to understand where to go. So here is my issue; I
> went to court and ended up with a full morning
> wasted, and a fine I believe of nearly $180 and
> that was that. So in the next few weeks, months
> and now years I notice that ALL LAW ENFORCEMENTS
> WITH GOVERNMENT CARS, FROM FBI, SHERIFFS, ETC RIDE
> UP AND THEY RIDE DOWN ON HOV AND VIOLATE THE OUR
> LAWS. I don't understand why the captains, Lt. etc
> (higher ups) do not address this matter and see it
> so normal. it really fuels mi to see this. I have
> learned that when ever i have been stopped i have
> always received a ticket, but we are not on the
> same page with out law enforcement violators.
> hey dirty cops why is it that you feel you are
> above the law! You have a job, not a right..
> cheers and keep nailing these pricks/and also the
> lady law enforcers. I'm all for the LAW, but it
> must be straight across the board. ABSOLUTELY NO
> EXCEPTIONS.

While I definitely get what you are saying, at least there is no outright danger to them being in the HOV. what really chaps my ass is seeing them parked in fire lanes or no parking zones, this is a public safety issue. They will sit on the side of the road without lights or hazards burning. There is a reason they put those things on the cars.

I notice that ALL LAW ENFORCEMENTS
> WITH GOVERNMENT CARS, FROM FBI, SHERIFFS, ETC RIDE
> UP AND THEY RIDE DOWN ON HOV AND VIOLATE THE OUR
> LAWS.

because they are exempt, its in the code

start over Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I notice that ALL LAW ENFORCEMENTS
> > WITH GOVERNMENT CARS, FROM FBI, SHERIFFS, ETC
> RIDE
> > UP AND THEY RIDE DOWN ON HOV AND VIOLATE THE OUR
>
> > LAWS.
>
> because they are exempt, its in the code


Show it.

EDIT: Here it is, I thought it detailed that the vehicle must be 'on duty' or 'on a call' I was wrong. It looks like a blanket exemption.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+33.1-46.2



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2012 04:30PM by JBass.

prev | next


§ 33.1-46.2. Designation of high-occupancy vehicle lanes; use of such lanes; penalties.

A. In order to facilitate the rapid and orderly movement of traffic to and from urban areas during peak traffic periods, the Commonwealth Transportation Board may designate one or more lanes of any highway in the interstate, primary, or secondary highway systems as high-occupancy vehicle lanes, hereinafter referred to in this section as HOV lanes. When lanes have been so designated and have been appropriately marked with such signs or other markers as the Board may prescribe, they shall be reserved during periods designated by the Board for the exclusive use of buses and high-occupancy vehicles. Any local governing body may also, with respect to highways under its exclusive jurisdiction, designate HOV lanes and impose and enforce restrictions on the use of such HOV lanes. Any highway for which the local jurisdiction receives highway maintenance funds pursuant to § 33.1-41.1 shall be deemed to be within the exclusive jurisdiction of the local governing body for the purposes of this section. HOV lanes shall be reserved for high-occupancy vehicles of a specified number of occupants as determined by the Board or, for HOV lanes designated by a local governing body, by that local governing body. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this section, no designation of any lane or lanes of any highway as HOV lanes shall apply to the use of any such lanes by:

1. Emergency vehicles such as fire-fighting vehicles, ambulances, and rescue squad vehicles,

2. Law-enforcement vehicles,

3. Motorcycles,

4. a. Transit and commuter buses designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the driver,

b. Any vehicle operating under a certificate issued under § 46.2-2075, 46.2-2080, 46.2-2096, 46.2-2099.4, or 46.2-2099.44,

5. Vehicles of public utility companies operating in response to an emergency call,

6. Until July 1, 2012, vehicles bearing clean special fuel vehicle license plates issued pursuant to § 46.2-749.3,

7. Taxicabs having two or more occupants, including the driver, or

8. (Contingent effective date, see Editor's note) Any active duty military member in uniform who is utilizing Interstate Route 264 and Interstate Route 64 for the purposes of traveling to or from a military facility in the Hampton Roads Planning District.

In the Hampton Roads Planning District, HOV restrictions may be temporarily lifted and HOV lanes opened to use by all vehicles when restricting use of HOV lanes becomes impossible or undesirable and the temporary lifting of HOV limitations is indicated by signs along or above the affected portion of highway.

The Commissioner of VDOT shall implement a program of the HOV facilities in the Hampton Roads Planning District beginning not later than May 1, 2000. This program shall include the temporary lifting of HOV restrictions and the opening of HOV lanes to all traffic when an incident resulting from nonrecurring causes within the general lanes occurs such that a lane of traffic is blocked or is expected to be blocked for 10 minutes or longer. The HOV restrictions for the facility will be reinstated when the general lane is no longer blocked and is available for use.

The Commissioner shall maintain necessary records to evaluate the effects of such openings on the operation of the general lanes and the HOV lanes. He shall report on the effects of this program. This program will terminate if the Federal Highway Administration requires repayment of any federal highway construction funds because of the program's impact on the HOV facilities in Hampton Roads.

B. In designating any lane or lanes of any highway as HOV lanes, the Board, or local governing body as the case may be, shall specify the hour or hours of each day of the week during which the lanes shall be so reserved, and the hour or hours shall be plainly posted at whatever intervals along the lanes the Board or local governing body deems appropriate. Any person driving a motor vehicle in a designated HOV lane in violation of this section shall be guilty of a traffic infraction which shall not be a moving violation and on conviction shall be fined $100. However, violations committed within the boundaries of Planning District Eight shall be punishable as follows:

For a first offense, by a fine of $125;

For a second offense within a period of five years from a first offense, by a fine of $250;

For a third offense within a period of five years from a first offense, by a fine of $500; and

For a fourth or subsequent offense within a period of five years from a first offense, by a fine of $1,000.

Upon a conviction under this section, the court shall furnish to the Commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles in accordance with § 46.2-383 an abstract of the record of such conviction which shall become a part of the person's driving record. Notwithstanding the provisions of § 46.2-492, no driver demerit points shall be assessed for any violation of this section; except that persons convicted of second, third, fourth, or subsequent violations within five years of a first offense committed in Planning District Eight shall be assessed three demerit points for each such violation.

C. In the prosecution of an offense, committed in the presence of a law-enforcement officer, of failure to obey a road sign restricting a highway, or portion thereof, to the use of high-occupancy vehicles, proof that the vehicle described in the HOV violation summons was operated in violation of this section, together with proof that the defendant was at the time of such violation the registered owner of the vehicle, shall constitute in evidence a rebuttable presumption that such registered owner of the vehicle was the person who committed the violation. Such presumption shall be rebutted if the registered owner of the vehicle testifies in open court under oath that he was not the operator of the vehicle at the time of the violation. A summons for a violation of this section may be executed in accordance with § 19.2-76.2. Such rebuttable presumption shall not arise when the registered owner of the vehicle is a rental or leasing company.

D. Notwithstanding the provisions of § 19.2-76, whenever a summons for a violation of this section is served in any county, city, or town, it may be executed by mailing by first-class mail a copy thereof to the address of the owner of the vehicle as shown on the records of the Department of Motor Vehicles. If the summoned person fails to appear on the date of return set out in the summons mailed pursuant to this section, the summons shall be executed in the manner set out in § 19.2-76.3.

No proceedings for contempt or arrest of a person summoned by mailing shall be instituted for his failure to appear on the return date of the summons.

E. Notwithstanding § 33.1-252, high-occupancy vehicles having three or more occupants (HOV-3) may be permitted to use the Omer L. Hirst-Adelard L. Brault Expressway (Dulles Toll Road) without paying a toll.

F. Notwithstanding the contrary provisions of this section, the following conditions shall be met before the HOV-2 designation of Interstate Route 66 outside the Capital Beltway can be changed to HOV-3 or any more restrictive designation:

1. The Department shall publish a notice of its intent to change the existing designation and also immediately provide similar notice of its intent to all members of the General Assembly representing districts that touch or are directly impacted by traffic on Interstate Route 66.

2. The Department shall hold public hearings in the corridor to receive comments from the public.

3. The Department shall make a finding of the need for a change in such designation, based on public hearings and its internal data and present this finding to the Commonwealth Transportation Board for approval.

4. The Commonwealth Transportation Board shall make written findings and a decision based upon the following criteria:

a. Is changing the HOV-2 designation to HOV-3 in the public interest?

b. Is there quantitative and qualitative evidence that supports the argument that HOV-3 will facilitate the flow of traffic on Interstate Route 66?

c. Is changing the HOV-2 designation beneficial to comply with the federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990?

G. [Repealed.]

(1973, c. 197; 1983, c. 339; 1988, c. 637; 1989, cc. 573, 744; 1993, cc. 82, 587; 1994, cc. 212, 426, 439; 1995, c. 55; 1996, cc. 34, 187, 191, 695, 921, 1037; 1997, c. 504; 1998, c. 321; 1999, cc. 914, 960; 2000, c. 322; 2002, cc. 89, 757; 2003, c. 324; 2004, c. 704; 2006, cc. 600, 873, 908; 2007, c. 317; 2008, c. 511; 2009, c. 676; 2010, cc. 111, 133, 390, 485; 2011, cc. 735, 881, 889.)