Poetic Justice at Last!

In article >,
Scott en Aztlán <newsgroup> wrote:
>As seen on the KTLA Morning News: An SUV driver in San Francisco
>flicked a lit cigarette out his window, but the wind blew it back into
>the car, setting it on fire. The car was a total loss, and the driver
>received a citation for littering.
>
>BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! !
>
>Take that, you ****ing scumbag litterbug smokers!!!

I hope he beats the citation. He may have attempted to litter, but he
obviously failed, and "attempted littering" probably isn't an offense.

Matthew Russotto wrote:
> In article >,
> Scott en Aztlán <newsgroup> wrote:
>> As seen on the KTLA Morning News: An SUV driver in San Francisco
>> flicked a lit cigarette out his window, but the wind blew it back
>> into the car, setting it on fire. The car was a total loss, and the
>> driver received a citation for littering.
>>
>> BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!
>>
>> Take that, you ****ing scumbag litterbug smokers!!!
>
> I hope he beats the citation. He may have attempted to litter, but he
> obviously failed, and "attempted littering" probably isn't an offense.

I suppose it depends on whether he left the pile of ashes ther or not!

"Matthew Russotto" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Scott en Aztlán <newsgroup> wrote:
>>As seen on the KTLA Morning News: An SUV driver in San Francisco
>>flicked a lit cigarette out his window, but the wind blew it back into
>>the car, setting it on fire. The car was a total loss, and the driver
>>received a citation for littering.
>>
>>BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! !!
>>
>>Take that, you ****ing scumbag litterbug smokers!!!
>
> I hope he beats the citation. He may have attempted to litter, but he
> obviously failed, and "attempted littering" probably isn't an offense.

Actually, they can get him after all. If my memory serves me correctly, the
law proscribes "Tossing burning material from your vehicle"--there's nothing
that says it has to land on the ground. Then again, if there were no
witnesses, he can recant his confession to the cops and plead the 5th.

It all comes out in the wash anyway--his car burnt up and the incident
became a national spectacle. That made a bigger impression than a $500 fine


I'm with Scott on this--scumbag litterbugs do vex me as well.

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> As seen on the KTLA Morning News: An SUV driver in San Francisco
> flicked a lit cigarette out his window, but the wind blew it back into
> the car, setting it on fire. The car was a total loss, and the driver
> received a citation for littering.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg.../suvfire17.TMP if
you want to read the article.

In article >, Arif Khokar wrote:
> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>> As seen on the KTLA Morning News: An SUV driver in San Francisco
>> flicked a lit cigarette out his window, but the wind blew it back into
>> the car, setting it on fire. The car was a total loss, and the driver
>> received a citation for littering.
>
> http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg.../suvfire17.TMP if
> you want to read the article.

2004 model vehicle too... beautiful. I wish all the litterbug smokers
would get a clue.

"Tossing a burning cigarette onto the road is a misdemeanor, and even
though this particular cigarette never actually hit the road, Fish will
probably be cited all the same, the CHP said. The citation can be up to
$1,000."

this reminds me of something. I was on the bicycle northbound waiting at a
traffic light intending to cross a major road when the light went green.
There are vehicles in a turn lane waiting to turn from westbound to
southbound. A smoker is holding his sig out the window and is first in
line. He drops his sig. A huge gap in traffic that everyone could have
turned through is lost as he opens his door and goes to recover his
freshly lit sig.

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> As seen on the KTLA Morning News: An SUV driver in San Francisco
> flicked a lit cigarette out his window, but the wind blew it back into
> the car, setting it on fire. The car was a total loss, and the driver
> received a citation for littering.
>
> BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!
>
> Take that, you ****ing scumbag litterbug smokers!!!
>

One Ford Excretion SUV less! Great

In article >,
Brent P > wrote:
>In article >, Arif Khokar wrote:
>> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>>> As seen on the KTLA Morning News: An SUV driver in San Francisco
>>> flicked a lit cigarette out his window, but the wind blew it back into
>>> the car, setting it on fire. The car was a total loss, and the driver
>>> received a citation for littering.
>>
>> http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg.../suvfire17.TMP if
>> you want to read the article.
>
>2004 model vehicle too... beautiful. I wish all the litterbug smokers
>would get a clue.
>
>"Tossing a burning cigarette onto the road is a misdemeanor, and even
>though this particular cigarette never actually hit the road, Fish will
>probably be cited all the same, the CHP said. The citation can be up to
>$1,000."

If that's the actual wording of the statute, he should be found "not
guilty". Small comfort it will be, I'm sure.

Hmm. The actual wording is a bit of a mess:

CVC 23111
"No person in any vehicle and no pedestrian shall throw or
discharge from or upon any road or highway or adjoining area, public
or private, any lighted or nonlighted cigarette, cigar, match, or any
flaming or glowing substance. This section shall be known as the
Paul Buzzo Act."

However, I still say "not guilty". He didn't discharge anything upon
any road, highway, or adjoining area. Nor did he discharge anything
from any road, highway, or adjoining area. The act does not say
(though it was probably intended to say) "from any vehicle".

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> As seen on the KTLA Morning News:
> An SUV driver in San Francisco
> flicked a lit cigarette out his window,
> but the wind blew it back into
> the car, setting it on fire. The car
> was a total loss, and the driver
> received a citation for littering.
>
> BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!
>
> Take that, you ****ing scumbag
> litterbug smokers!!!

I hear you! I especially hate them when they discharge their still lit
coffin nails during the dry season. I'm sure you are all too familiar
with that out west as I am are over here.

I guess that old saying, "what goes around, comes around," applies
(literally) in this case. The best part of the article that Arif
references was where our Mensa candidate leaves the burning SUV in
neutral and it goes rolling down the bridge...

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when this guy explains to his insurance
company (and/or the finance company) exactly what happened to his SUV...

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 07:14:28 -0800, Scott en Aztlán
> wrote:

>As seen on the KTLA Morning News: An SUV driver in San Francisco
>flicked a lit cigarette out his window, but the wind blew it back into
>the car, setting it on fire. The car was a total loss, and the driver
>received a citation for littering.
>
>BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! !
>
>Take that, you ****ing scumbag litterbug smokers!!!

Just the ones that litter.

As a non-littering smoker, I will say he got what he deserved.

"Skip Elliott Bowman" > wrote in message
. net...
>
> Actually, they can get him after all. If my memory serves me correctly,
> the law proscribes "Tossing burning material from your vehicle"--there's
> nothing that says it has to land on the ground. Then again, if there were
> no witnesses, he can recant his confession to the cops and plead the 5th.
>
> It all comes out in the wash anyway--his car burnt up and the incident
> became a national spectacle. That made a bigger impression than a $500
> fine
>
> I'm with Scott on this--scumbag litterbugs do vex me as well.
>
>

Except the settlement he gets from his insurance company comes from all of
us paying the premiums.