Got nailed speeding in my fcar

now THAT IS funny!!!!

Just when I think someone can't get more absurd when these subjects are debated, we get a guy who thinks the cops write tickets because they are scared of the "real" criminals.

The cops DO get jaded, no doubt, from handling/witnessing the aftermath of the crashes.
Tickets do generate revenue, so does serving warrants etc. Only in the smallest of jurisdictions is "money" a consideration for officers.

 

I hardly ever say this but "WTF" are you for real???????????? Please come to Montana with your out of state plates and try that crap!!!!

 

f#ck Virginia

 

VA does seem a little over the top with penalties, I'll give you that. What I, and probably most other officers see, is a huge decline in self responsibility. Yes you should question authority, especially when you feel violated, but you should also stand up to your actions.

I got pulled over for doing 84 in a 75 while passing a car on the freeway. I spoke to the Trooper about working as an officer for a few minutes. He went to his car, then returned with a citation. I signed it, paid it, and lived on accepting my responsibility. Do I give a ticket to everybody I catch speeding? Nope.

If you've already been to driving school in the last 12 months, I'd say you haven't learned your lesson. But honestly, I won't blame you for fighting the punishment on this one, just don't think you'll get out squeaky clean. I hope for you that they reduce it or make some other deal. Honestly, we (ok most) don't go into a traffic stop thinking we are doing it for the money. Our agency sees such a small portion of it that we really don't notice it directly. We have done studies showing that traffic stops reduce crime, even if they don't get a citation. I know it's a different story on the freeway, though.

This, as most of the "stupid cop gave me a ticket for speeding" posts go, was fun to read.

All the best, and enjoy your car where you can!

 

FYI, was a VA resident and had VA tags and registration at the time. However, that's irrelevant. Or should be. Law Enforcement shouldn't be playing favorites. Even-handed application.

You might also recall the case in which a motorcyclist was cited for reckless at triple digit speeds in Nebraska. Judge threw out the reckless charge saying speed, in and of itself, is not prima facie evidence of recklessness.

Here it is...

Nebraska Judge: 128 Mph Not Reckless Under Statute
The Associated Press

Speeding is not necessarily reckless, even at 128 mph, a judge ruled in the case of a motorcyclist who tried to flee from state troopers.

With some reluctance, County Judge John Steinheider ruled last week that Jacob H. Carman, 20, was not guilty of reckless driving on Sept. 5, when he was spotted by a trooper who then chased him at the top speed of his cruiser's odometer - 128 mph.

"As much as it pains me to do it, speed and speed alone is not sufficient to establish reckless driving," the judge told Carman on Friday. "If you had had a passenger, there would be no question of conviction. If there had been other cars on the roadway, if you would've went into the wrong lane or anything, I would have convicted you."

Otoe County prosecutor David Partsch acknowledged that Carman could have been charged with speeding but, "We felt that the manner in which he was operating the motorcycle was reckless."

Carman didn't get off entirely. He was fined $300 for expired tags and other violations.

CW

 

BTW, I suspect that the OP's offense will be reduced from a reckless to a mere 10-19 over the limit. It's within the prosecutor's discrection, there was hopefully no harsh words exchanged with the officer and the speed isn't all THAT far off. Bumping it down, if the OP has a clean record shouldn't be too big of a problem, but I do think he should take it seriously, obtain counsel and take the proper, penitent stance.

CW

 

Supreme Court Candidate

 

Do you guys subscribe to Car and Driver? I ask because there was an article about speed limits in the last issue, and it really would have helped with a lot of the disputes on this thread. In any case not fighting an unjust law reminds me of the old saying: "evil prevails when good men do nothing."

I've attached the article below so you guys can read it:
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Most of my speeding tickets have been for harmless speeds of 5 or 8 miles over 35mph. And yet I break the 55/65mph highway limits with free abandon, often going 80, 90, 100mph with never a ticket seen. I use a radar detector 100% of the time on the freeway, have never hit anyone nor been the cause for an accident.

So I say to the officers who are posting here, in due respect, despite the intentions for safety, the actions and behavior of law enforcement appear to be petty and ineffectual in that direction. Surface street ticketing for 6mph over the limit is a joke and nothing but a function of welfare, job justification.

 

There is no question that speed limits have not stayed up with the times. Roads, cars, tires, safety devices and myriad other factors have made it possible to drive safely at much higher rates of speed. Often in close proximity to other drivers. Heck, the Autobahn proves that point succinctly.

So, as Wolf's article points out, why the artificially-low posted speeds? More importantly, it's highly likely that most people exceed the limit. Every time they get in the car. Without accident. And, I seem to recall reading previously that limits are set at 85% of the expected safe speed (but I may have that confused).

The DMVs and politicians are a) lazy, b) inept, c) revenue-generators or d) sensationialistic. Or, all of the above. And, probably a few other things, too. But, I do think a soccer mom with three screaming kids in the car, a latte and cellphone in her hands, doing her make-up and 10mph over the speed limit in a crowded neighborhood is arguably more unsafe than a trained-race driver doing 20mph over the speed limit in a finely-tuned vehicle on a straight, empty, limited-access, multi-lane highway. Sell THAT to State Legislators, though. Speed kills. It's easy and intuitive. Even if it's not absolutely correct.

CW

 

For some drivers in some cars. The speed limits have to account for the worst driver in a poor vehicle.

IMHO the absurdity is not so much the low limits, which is just frustrating, but the selective enforcement.

 

The enforcement is a problem, but like you and CornersWell pointed out not everyone has the same driving capabilities. The only way that I could see high speed limits in the U.S, without safety being an issue, would be to make acquiring a license a serious matter and to make the actual roads safer. Creating a test with lane techniques, wet skid pad tests, and braking techniques would be a start. I'm thinking something equal to what you have to take in Germany.

The only other option would be to create separate speed limits dependent on the performance of vehicle classes. Although this isn't really a plus because a lot of cars would loose value, and I don't think any politician would want to risk the political backlash from this. I don't even think any politician would want to suffer the political backlash from proposing harder licensing tests even though it is something that would save more lives than safety equipment.

 

Quite right. Its a tough battle to even get the state to retest people over eighty.
BTW I've found that telling the officer that you've driven the very car he just pulled you over in a legal 150 in Germany gets you no latitude.

 

How to turn off your turn signal would be a good start!

 

This should only be a test at age 60+!

 

I have long been a proponent of grading. There are classes of licenses (A, B and C or equivalent scaling), roads (A, B and C) and vehicles (same). If you have an A-rated license, an A-rated plate (denoted by color, which is determined by the vehicle registration) and are on an A-rated road, you are, essentially, unlimited and only the conditions and common sense are your guide.

If you have a B-rating in any aspect, that's your limit. And, so on. This must be a HUGE PITA for the DMVs and LEOs to enforce, but that's why I say the DMVs and Legislators are getting lazy. It's just easier to enforce one rule for all: the lowest common denominator rule. In other words, we're governed by rules that are targeted at making sure morons don't F it up. Why? Because it takes too much work (and perhaps cost) to administer something that actually accommodates the taxpaying citizen.

For one minute, think about the average driver. Now realize that one half of drivers are BELOW that average. Scary!

CW

 

..I would agree, ticketing for 6 mph over the posted spd limit is rediculous. I have never seen that, however, I HAVE seen tickets written for 6 over when the driver was actually doing 10 or more over the limit. It does sound better to indicate you received a ticket for going 6 over.

Regarding your traveling the highways in your State at 100 mph with reckless abandon, hopefully when you DO hit something, it will be a single car crash. Be sure to post and let us know how it worked out for ya.

 

But, to take your argument to the extreme then, since 0mph is the safest, let's just use that. There's no guarantee he'll actually hit anything at 100mph, though. Agreed that if he does it won't be pretty. But, you're assuming that it's an eventuality. Not necessarily a good assumption.

CW

 

I was pulled over for doing an insane 2 over once. 57 in a 55 going down a hill.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,490629,00.html

And it has some Ferrari content!

"When times are tough, it's often harder to increase revenue through traditional means like increasing sales and property taxes," Garrett said. "And traffic tickets certainly fit that bill."

Critics complain that whereas property taxes are proportionally tied to property values, motorist fines are flat taxes that have a harder impact on lower-income drivers; the laborer going 80 mph in a 12-year-old Kia pays the same fine as the trust-fund heir going 80 in his brand-new Ferrari.

 

So the Ferrari driver suffers the same penalty for committing the same crime. Where's the injustice? The lady with the scales is supposed to be blind to such considerations.

 

I think the point here is not the the Ferrari driver should pay more, but that the waitress at the Waffle House is really getting the short end of the stick.

The minimum wage earners are the ones that really get punished by VA's laws, as they can not afford the legal defense to fight the criminal charge that results from going 80 in a 70.

 

Virginia judges generally hate the manditory "Reckless Driving" for over 80mph or 20+ rule. Unless you are a habitual offender, the judge will almost automatically lower the speed to 79mph and give you the fine for the speed you were traveling, as long as the cop says that the only reason it is reckless is the speed. Now if you had been weaving in and out of lanes while doing 80+ it is a whole different ball game. Good Luck.

 

Understood. The fact that a community benefits financially from law enforcement is always going to create a conflict of interest. The fact that the little guy gets the shaft is not news, alas.


I'm just standing up for the poor misunderstood and abused over-dog

 

I gotta say, if the reason, or spirit, of a law does not apply in a certain circumstance, then the law really should not apply as well.

Example: there is a stop sign at a 4 way intersection out in the middle of NOWHERE & you can clearly see for a mile in every direction...totally not a soul in sight. So why stop for the stop sign? There's obviously nobody to endanger or hit...

Just my opinion.

As far as speeding, I love that old smart-aleck saying, "Speed does not kill....it's the really sudden stopping that does it."