Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Traffic Cop Questioned in Encinitas
CVC Section 22356 Increase of Freeway Speed Limit to 70 Miles Per Hour Increase of Freeway Speed Limit to 70 Miles Per Hour 22356. (a) Whenever the Department of Transportation, after consultation with the Department of the California Highway Patrol, determines upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey on existing highway segments, or upon the basis of appropriate design standards and projected traffic volumes in the case of newly constructed highway segments, that a speed greater than 65 miles per hour would facilitate the orderly movement of vehicular traffic and would be reasonable and safe upon any state highway, or portion thereof, that is otherwise subject to a maximum speed limit of 65 miles per hour, the Department of Transportation, with the approval of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, may declare a higher maximum speed of 70 miles per hour for vehicles not subject to Section 22406, and shall cause appropriate signs to be erected giving notice thereof. The Department of Transportation shall only make a determination under this section that is fully consistent with, and in full compliance with, federal law. (b) No person shall drive a vehicle upon that highway at a speed greater than 70 miles per hour, as posted. (c) This section shall become operative on the date specified in subdivision (c) of Section 22366.— July 20, 2012 10:42 a.m.
Traffic Cop Questioned in Encinitas
Correctamundo Harriet. Except you also have CVC Section 22349 Maximum Speed Limit which states: Maximum Speed Limit 22349. (a) Except as provided in Section 22356, no person may drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than 65 miles per hour. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person may drive a vehicle upon a two-lane, undivided highway at a speed greater than 55 miles per hour unless that highway, or portion thereof, has been posted for a higher speed by the Department of Transportation or appropriate local agency upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey. For purposes of this subdivision, the following apply: (1) A two-lane, undivided highway is a highway with not more than one through lane of travel in each direction. (2) Passing lanes may not be considered when determining the number of through lanes. (c) It is the intent of the Legislature that there be reasonable signing on affected two-lane, undivided highways described in subdivision (b) in continuing the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit, including placing signs at county boundaries to the extent possible, and at other appropriate locations.— July 20, 2012 10:40 a.m.
Qualcomm Expectations Disappoint, but Stock Rises After Hours
http://sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2012/jul/2…— July 20, 2012 10:22 a.m.
Qualcomm Expectations Disappoint, but Stock Rises After Hours
Nothing is beyond repair, it simply takes the desire to affect the repairs, which at this point, apparently too few have.— July 19, 2012 2 p.m.
Qualcomm Expectations Disappoint, but Stock Rises After Hours
If one has had a few hundred shares since around late late '93 to early '94, I think one would be very happy with their return, provided of course, that one was able to resist temptation and leave them alone until they were ready to retire.— July 19, 2012 1:57 p.m.
Qualcomm Expectations Disappoint, but Stock Rises After Hours
Ideally, politicians should not accept donations from ANY corporations. I want them representing ME.— July 19, 2012 9:24 a.m.
Qualcomm Expectations Disappoint, but Stock Rises After Hours
I think the high was back around the end of 1999 at about $90 so that would make it down around 30%. But I don't know if I would characterize it as down fairly sharply. I mean that was over 10 yrs ago and in the past 10 years the price has risen from the low teens to around $60, so one could really say it's been trending upward over that time. I guess it's just semantics. I do know this though. If someone happened to invest a few thousand dollars around the time if their initial offering and was smart enough to treat it as an long term investment and also reinvest the dividends instead of cashing them out, despite the fact that that the stock is down 30 some dollars from the high back in 1999, I think they would still be fairly happy with their investment. Just my own personal thoughts, but then again, I don't think I'm nearly as greedy as some others are. I've always been less concerned about making a fast buck and concentrated more on having a sound retirement fund. So I'm ok with how things have turned out. Just my opinion. Opinions vary.— July 19, 2012 9:23 a.m.
Traffic Cop Questioned in Encinitas
Yeah, I don't need to google it. It is CVC 22350. But it doesn't state you can drive at any speed that is safe for the conditions, regardless of the posted limit. No where does it say that is perfectly legit to drive faster than the posted limit. What it says is that no person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property. In other words, the maximum speed may be considerably lower than the posted speed limit, depending on condition of the roadway. As for the first part of your comment, well that's just typical lawyer speak. We all know that it's not a lawyers job to find the truth, it's to get their client off. We also know that there's a difference between being innocent and be found not guilty. Obviously, it the the charging authority can't make their case, then you're found not guilty. So let me rephrase the question. Forget the legal stuff, all the due process. Do you feel it's right when a person is found "not guilty", for what ever reason, even when they are are not "innocent". I don't mean in legal terms, I mean your own personal opinion. Is it right when someone who has clearly broken the law gets off when they are not innocent, regardless of the crime. Is it ok when someone commits murder and gets away with it because of incompetent prosecution— July 18, 2012 6:42 p.m.
Traffic Cop Questioned in Encinitas
so let me make sure I understand you. It's ok to break the law, so long as you believe the charging authority can not prove it, do I have that correct? Also what is this "Basic Speed Law, which states you can drive at any speed that is safe for the conditions, regardless of the posted limit"? Can you provide documentation of this law?— July 17, 2012 8:59 p.m.
San Bernardino Council Votes for Bankruptcy
I read last evening that San Bernardino has until at least Wednesday the vote whether or not to declare a fiscal emergency. City council members delayed making a decision after a hearing last night where many residents and city employees urged the city to seek an alternative. Apparently, since the announcement last week, The city’s credit cards have been canceled, many vendors are now demanding payments in cash and as many 25 employees have said they plan to retire shortly, which will mean large payouts for unused vacation time as well as an increase the pension payments the city must make. The council also voted unanimously to direct staff to begin formal negotiations with all unions on renegotiating contracts. One member of the city council has also said that there has been no evidence brought forward to substantiate the city attorney's claims of falsified budget documents and the city attorney has since later backed away from that statement, saying he was unsure if there had been intentional intentional wrongdoing. So the saga continues.— July 17, 2012 7:16 p.m.