You can have my calculator...when you pry it out of my cold, dead hands.

[Razer]

A real re-vo-lew-shun-ary... Nutjob. You'll note there's no info
whatsoever what the fine was for.

Probably contempt of court for ranting at the judge until a bailiff had
to ball-gag him..

He'll show up with a Tec9 at your favorite behaviorally-controlled
entertainment area someday soon.

Rr


On 04/26/2017 11:34 PM, jim bell wrote:
>
> http://www.autoblog.com/2017/04/26/oregon-fines-man-500-for-using-math-to-fight-red-light-cameras/
>
> ×
>
> Oregon fines man $500 for using math to challenge red-light cameras
>
>
>     It's a free-speech issue. And math is math, Oregon!
>
>
>
> Few things in this world are as universally despised as traffic
> cameras. After his wife received a ticket for tripping a red-light
> camera, Oregon resident Mats Järlström openly criticized the Orwellian
> devices and the mathematical formulas these cameras use. It seems Big
> Brother doesn't take too kindly to dissenters, as according to the
> Institute for Justice
> <http://ij.org/press-release/lawsuit-challenges-oregon-law-prohibiting-mathematical-criticism-without-license/> Järlström
> was fined $500 for violating a law that prohibits mathematical
> criticism without a license.
>
> Free speech is a term that's often misconstrued. It's not some blanket
> to hide behind while spouting ridicule and hate to anyone and
> everyone. In the US, what free speech does protect is the right of a
> person to openly criticize the government, as Järlström was doing when
> he argued that the equation which governs the traffic light
> <http://www.autoblog.com/tag/traffic+light/> timers was out of date.
> After being fined, Järlström filed a lawsuit against the ban on
> mathematical debate.
>
> The Institute for Justice says the actual fine was for Järlström
> calling himself a "professional engineer." The thing is, Järlström
> does have a degree in electrical engineering, though he doesn't carry
> a state license. In Oregon's eyes, that doesn't make him a real
> engineer. Järlström's initial issue was that the green-yellow-red
> progression was too short for lights with a left or right turn. Using
> his engineering expertise, he began to criticize the math equation
> that governs this timing, hence the fine.
>
> Järlström and the Institute for Justice claim these licensing boards
> violate free speech by fining those who criticize both the boards and
> the government agencies behind things like traffic cameras. A lawyer
> for the Institute for Justice makes the point that you don't need to
> be a licensed lawyer to write an article disagreeing with a Supreme
> Court decision. Free speech, whether used to challenge Supreme Court
> decisions or traffic cameras, is a fundamental freedom granted by US
> Constitution.
>
> And it's also no stretch to say that using mathematics is a
> fundamental human right - part of what actually makes us human. No law
> can take away our math.
>
> [end of quote]
>
>            Jim Bell

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 9346 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20170427/dff70b4e/attachment.txt>