Recent comments in /f/newhampshire

wetsockssuckass t1_javu57b wrote

It sounds like you could be talking about Cardigan. It’s visible in the distance on a clear day from the top of the first hill after going by the northbound rest area. The top doesn’t have trees so with snow it’s prominent. It’s basically directly ahead of you on one of the long straight sections before you start going downhill to the 89 exit

If it was closer to the 89 exit and straight ahead of you as you go down hill to the 89 exit that is kearsarge as others explain

0

TheGrateKhan t1_javrfbg wrote

Because the principle is worth defending for the benefit of ALL of us. As i said in the lower portions of my statement, today its these people. Tomorrow it could be Sununu banning all Black Lives Matter protests because they're trespassing on city property without permission. Or Anti War protestors, Second Amendment supporters, Second Amendment detractors.

I dont care what the opinion expressed is or if i agree or disagree with what they say or do. Your speech is protected and needs to remain as such. One day, people that we disagree with will be in power; and if they can restrict where or when or what you can say, you wont be happy.

You dont do the right thing because its popular. You do the right thing, especially when everyone else doesnt want you to, because its the right thing to do. These guys may have done things with their speech that i disagree with and detest, but that doesn't mean we go and do the wrong things to them. It is specifically how we treat those we disagree with, that defines our character.

12

underratedride t1_javpxtp wrote

(So far) cloud boy has been spot on. Models showed Littleton not getting a whole lot. We’re around 3-4 inches now, radar looking good.

We’ve had about a foot across three events this week. I wasn’t looking forward to another foot today. 4-6 not too bad if we can end around there.

Nice to see the southern part getting hammered like usual.

41

TheGrateKhan t1_javntfp wrote

All the normal disclaimers: bad things are bad. Being hateful isnt good. Dont do bad things.

That being said, these people are being charged with some form of hate crime, but not because they simply had the signs, its because they "trespassed" when they hung the sign on the highway. Allegedly, the reason they're being charged is because they didn't have a permit to hang the sign.

All the times ive seen cups smashed into overpass fencing, making words, those all had permits? Every "welcome home So and So" sign tied to the bridges? Everyone else always has permits? Are these permits "shall issue" and no one is allowed to deny you, but you still have to apply? Up until i heard about this case, i thought that anyone could just use those areas as a personal canvas.

I know its "evil hateful monsters" being " finally taught a lesson " but just imagine these people were protesting in favor of equality. What if the sign said "Make New England Diverse " ( considering NH is 60-80% Caucasian) would the townspeople still complain and get this group arrested for trespassing as a hate crime? It still meets all the prerequisites.

On a technical basis, they weren't even trespassing. Trespassing requires you to be somewhere that you arent allowed and refusing to vacate that area after being informed of such. Theyre allowed to be on the overpass. They can protest on the overpass with the message they were spreading. Where the govt says they "broke the law" was the hanging of the signs on the overpass without a permit. That sounds like a vandalism charge, not trespassing. However, a vandalism charge wouldnt seem reasonable if it would take 10 minutes and some scissors to cut down a couple zip ties or strings, so the sign wouldve had to be more permanent like graffiti to warrant that type of charge.

Regardless of the message spread, they shouldve been given the opportunity to remove the signs without issue. From what I can find, they werent given a lawful order to leave or remove the signs before the arrest. In fact, an article from Seacoastonline says that the group "'dispersed without any real confrontation' after speaking to police the night of the incident ".

While today its evil racists being brought to justice, tomorrow that same law and line of thinking can be used against any one of our political, social, economic, etc. opinions.

−24

usual_nerd t1_javmyas wrote

You’re right about crashes, but your assessment of the training of transportation engineers is not correct. Having questionable priorities based on years of car-focused policies isn’t the same as only watching training videos. Civil engineering has many sub specialties and most college programs give you a few classes on each with options for more electives. There are arguments to be made about whether a broad base of understanding or specialization is more important, but water resources engineers and geotechnical engineers don’t get more specialization either. Most learning takes place on the job while you are an engineer-in-training (min of 4 years).

3

usual_nerd t1_javlwjl wrote

The number of serious crashes on Route 4 is higher than comparable roads in NH. It has an unsafe design that encourages high speeds in areas with far too many driveways. When you have cars entering and leaving the main road, they have to go relatively slow. When you have a speed limit if 50 with a design that allows people to go faster than that, the engineers are responsible for many of the crashes, even if drivers should also be improving their behavior.

2