Got nailed speeding in my fcar

Also keep in mind you are taking a complete strangers word at this...

Ive never met a driver who felt they were egregiously endangering anyone while speeding. They ALL claim they were driving safe and no one was around,etc..

I call B.S. on most of it.

 

Based on this we should all go down to the courthouse and lock ourselves up.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Oh I don't think so at all. Just man up and pay your freeking fine when you get caught instead of crying on Ferrari chat.

 

Annunaki,

Given that Zach is from Cyprus, I think we should acknowledge that he may have a better perspective on the rules of a civilized society.
(Cyprus has been a civilized society for about 10,000 years.)

 

It would be interesting to know what percentage of those that own Ferraris have NEVER driven their car 20 over the speed limit. Including all posters on both sides of this thread. How many of those would be willing to accept a misdemeanor on their record for this oh-so-heinous crime? If so why don't they march down to the local law enforcement department and admit their crime and turn them selves in?

 

Thats like saying because someone has class because they were born to parents who have class. Or to say someone is smart because they live next to MIT.

You keep coming up with completely illogical things...but keep trying !

 

I used to drive like a bat out of hell....and I paid my tickets like a big boy and once almost went to jail. I was prepared for it because I knew I was going that fast.

No one is on his case for speeding. We are on his case for crying like a big baby.

 

Zack, I agree completely. If you don't work the system you're gonna get worked. Just
the way it is. Apparently some here really enjoy paying into the system. I for one acknowledge there are laws but also realize that I can be a better safer driver at 70mph than the 85yr old lady driving 40. Just one example of how it's all about revenue.

 

Anybody with some balls would accept the fine and move on. I've driven like a complete fool and drunk on my ass so many times when I was younger it isn't funny. I have never "not accepted" the fine for complete and blatent stupidity.

 

A buddy of mine was pulled over for going 132mph over the causeway from northshore to southshore down in NOLA area. He thinks the officer was a jerk for pulling him over and couldn't understand what the big deal was. There weren't any other cars around. The officer got called on a more serious event somewhere and gave him a ticket that isn't fully filled out. He is ignoring it.

I guess when we the citizens can't be trusted to make reasonable limits for ourselves they make tough laws.

 

I think the point here is that the punishment doesn't fit the crime. For all you law abiding ferrari owners, how about 1 mph over the limit is now considered attempted murder and punishable by death. Are you getting a lawyer or "taking it like a man".

 

I think the point is:

don't forget innocent until proven guilty! He is entitled to a fair trial, but according to Ferrari chat he is supposed to "man up" and pay all types of fines, get points on his license, and possibly jail time? Are you kidding me?

Towns and their whole enforcement of laws in many areas I've experienced are disgusting.

I once got a speeding ticket, went to the court, and literally every single person met with the DA, and the duck's ass just reduced it down to a parking ticket and made them pay a fine, every time. All it is about is money, it's disgusting.

Get a lawyer and fight it, don't listen to the people here saying to "man up," yea cause the possibility of up to 12 months of jail time is something you should risk taking. The poster who said that lawyers, DAs, and judges play golf together is correct, my father was a criminal defense attorney and I used to hear the stories.

Steve

 

That's not the point. He admitted that he is guilty. He admitted that he was speeding, that it was reckless but he just don't want to accept the consequences that comes with it.

Of course he can fight for it but its just funny how he keeps saying that he got nailed for speeding, that he was driving recklessly but then say that he don't accept the consequences like he doesn't deserve it.

 

Also don't forget the OP is a Woosie. Balls are an endangered species around here.

 

I think that if you can afford it, you should always fight the charges. Problem is, most people can't afford it so they get screwed. In any event, it doesn't hurt to go to court and see if the judge is in a good mood, I've had 2 or 3 speeding tickets reduced to essentially nothing just by showing up.

 

My advice....

Forget about it, don't waste your money on an attorney, and don't waste your time defending yourself. I sympathize as to why you wouldn't want the "reckless driving" on your record --- it's far worse than a speeding ticket (or any other moving violation), and only a little bit better than a DUI, in most states. In fact, many insurance carriers will cancel a policy for a reckless driving conviction --- although most states will NOT suspend your license for it.

But, here's the sad news.... Reckless Driving is, in most scenarios, a "judgment" made by the officer --- not a quantitative, measurable infraction such as speeding, running a red light, DUI (blood alcohol level), etc. The problem with any "judgment" charge is that the officer is usually given tremendous latitude by the court, and because it is essentially someone's "opinion", rather than a piece of data, it is nearly impossible to argue against it successfully. Certainly do consult with an attorney, and see what they have to say. But, my guess is they will tell you (in proper diplomatic words, of course ) that "you are boned, my friend".

Oh yeah...... ask me how I know

The good news is that it does come off your record after a period of time (at least for insurance purposes) the same way a speeding ticket does --- unlike a DUI which hangs around indefinitely, these days.

 

The posts on this topic are fascinating to say the least. Several say he ought to man-up and accept the penalty. You guys have convicted him without any proof of guilt! For a CRIME, no less, since Virginia regards reckless driving as a crime, not an infraction.

All he said was that he was nailed for 84 in a 60 zone. He didn't say he was going over 60. Just that the cop thought he was going 84. The radar could easily have been reading that silver sports car flying by him at the exact same moment. How can you know for sure the OP was going fast enough to be "reckless"? He might have been speeding, too, but with the presence of a faster car going by him, how can we be sure the OP wasn't going less than 84, maybe sufficiently less that it's no longer "reckless" but just "speeding." It sounds like reasonable doubt to me, which should be the standard since he is being accused of a CRIME!

Holy cow, I wouldn't want any of you guys to sit on the OP's jury!

 

Im saddened by some of the posts in this thread.

 

If he didnt do it Im pretty sure he would have pointed that out.

 

A guy driving a Ferrari twenty over is a speeding ticket. A guy driving a Chevy twenty over is a speeding ticket.

To me reckless driving is a soccer mom driving a suv the speed limit with a couple of kids in it while yaking on the cell phone and sipping a latte.

Yeah, I said it!

 

Or......a guy driving an Audi sedan, 7 mph over, getting pulled over for it, and having the momentary lapse of good judgment to argue with the cop about it, piss him off, and have him elevate it into a Reckless Driving charge because that's his prerogative!!!!!!

Yes it's true ---- it happened to a (ahem) "friend of mine once"

 

Shouldnt have argued w the cop

I was pulled over around 140...cop was pissed. I was polite and admitted i was being an idiot and that I pretty much deserved everything coming. He told me he could throw me in jail, etc... I submitted.

He gave me an 80 in a 65

 

Uh, now of course this is only based on cop and law and order TV shows I've seen, but I'm pretty sure it's innocent until proven guilty, the burden of proof is on the state to prove the crime, and a person accused of a crime isn't supposed to be convicted when he merely does not deny the charge. He had no obligation point out that he was not speeding. It's up to the state to prove that he was. If/when you are caught speeding, would you know for sure what speed you were going? Enough to know whether it was 84 mph and not 79 (the difference between reckless at >20mph over the limit and speeding for <20mph over)? How do you know if the OP didn't let off the accelerator when startled by the silver car flashing by, so much so that he scrubbed off enough speed to be below 80mph? And that's assuming he was over 80 to begin with. Most cars have a larger radar signature than Ferraris, so I have no problem believing that the radar read the other car and not the OP's car, but of course since the Ferrari "looks" faster, he got tagged. Should people be convicted of a CRIME on such flimsy evidence and bias?

 

that is the kind of post that makes me sad. the attitude that even if we know we are guilty we should try and squirm out of our personal responsibilty

that attitude is the cause of so many of societies problems

 

How does he "know" he's guilty of "reckless" driving as opposed to "speeding"? Why should he accept being held guilty of a crime when he didn't even know that he did it? He never said he did it. A lot just assumed he did. The attitude that the state is always right is even more dangerous. But I respect your right to have a different opinion.