I've a question for our police officers..

[1badtie]

Originally Posted by ssjoe

52 in a 40. I wouldn't have stopped you unless there were other factors, ie. congested area, kids playing outside, school zone etc. I give 15 mph buffer zone. No excuses when you are 15 mph or higher.

true thatt...

[Blue70SS]

Originally Posted by Mark25

I have often felt that there should be different levels of driver's licenses...that is, licenses for those who "prove" via driving tests and driver education, etc., that they can handle cars at higher speeds than others who can't even walk straight. I mean, you wouldn't give an F-18 to a person qualified only to fly a Piper Cup, right? But if you've attended one of the more expensive driving schools and passed their driving test with flying colors, then you should be able to drive faster than the numnuts who went to A-1 Driving school where all you had to do was pay the fee and they hand you your certificate. It would also mean that you would have to be re-tested (on the road) every few years to ensure that you can still meet the high standards.
So, when that cop pulls you over, you can whip out your "Platinum Driver License" and he will say..."Thank you, please be on your way, no ticket merited here."
AFTER ALL, DRIVING SHOULD BE A PRIVILEGE AND NOT A RIGHT.

I like this guys ideas..... would have to add car inspected and speed rated for given levels, then a special license plate and drivers license awarded. Could start the American Autobahn Association! Wait - wake me up, I'm dreaming!!!!!!

Okay, now reality.............. SLOW DOWN. You've already used your "ticket buffer" and will soon loose your liciense and not be able to enjoy your great car. My son didn't take this seriously and will problably be loosing his liciense in a few weeks. I personally would buy a real expensive radar detector, not for you to speed with, but as added insurance you wake up when your daydreaming or just plain not thinking. I would rather pay $500 for a radar dectector than pay easily $1000 and more in insurance fees. Also escorts newest radar can be set to display your speed via GPS in case your speedometer is slightly off. Even if 2 MPH off, that could cost you a speeding ticket. Let's say your the typical person that gets away with 5-8 MPH over because most officers don't pull over unless 10+ on major roads. If your doing 8 over according to your speedometer but it's off 2 MPH, you may get the ticket. This especially applys if driving different vehicles, non stock tire sizes, etc. I would keep within 5 MPH if I were in your shoes till record gets better. WISH MY SON WOULD HAVE LISTENED!

[Blue70SS]

Originally Posted by Rayner

In Australia, some guys snuck up and nabbed the license plates off of a speed van then proceeded to place them on their car and 'speed by' said van several times later that day. The result was the speed van that essentially ticketed itself several times. It made the papers over there (mainly because it was f-ing hilarious.)

Now this is funny, made me laugh instantly

[Rayner]

Originally Posted by brtaus

The laws aren't arbitrary; how they are enforced is arbitrary.

My belief is if they can be selectively enforced, they are by their nature arbitrary.

I mean think of all the laws on the books and how they differ from place to place two examples:

Tint -- In California, you can't have tint on your front side windows. In Texas you can, but you're limited to the level. In other states, they don't give a rat's @$$ what your tint level is. That's arbitrary. Because there is no need for such a law, someone just "decided" it was a good idea.

Front plates -- Some places require them, some don't care. When you're pulled over, the cop is behind you anyway, so why require a front plate?

One state has a max speed of 55 and one has a max speed of 75 on their highways. One state up in the Pacific Northwest doesn't (or didn't as of 10 years ago) have a speed limit at all. Again -- arbitrary.

"Some guy" or group of guys "somewhere" decided what YOU can and cannot do with your car.

[Don O]

Get a good radar detector and drive safely.

Don O

[Rayner]

Originally Posted by Don O

Get a good radar detector and drive safely.

Another misinformed driver. Detectors are useless.

[jleinaweaver]

you need to get a few of those "PBA" get-out-of-jail-free cards to give to the officer.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by Rayner

Tint -- In California, you can't have tint on your front side windows. In Texas you can, but you're limited to the level. In other states, they don't give a rat's @$$ what your tint level is. That's arbitrary. Because there is no need for such a law, someone just "decided" it was a good idea.

It was a great idea actually. Why is there no need for it?

Originally Posted by Rayner

Front plates -- Some places require them, some don't care. When you're pulled over, the cop is behind you anyway, so why require a front plate?

I've actually made stops before based on running front license plates. Actually, just last week a BOL came out on a plate on a felony hit and run (some pedestrian got ran over) and I caught the guy becuse he was behind me. If the guy didn't have a plate, I probably wouldn't have looked twice. Do you think the victim and their family is a little grateful for the law?

Originally Posted by Rayner

"Some guy" or group of guys "somewhere" decided what YOU can and cannot do with your car.

It's called government that you help elect. Do you suggest we should do away with states/state laws and fall under one set of laws? Say, California standards?

[two_wheel_mayhem]

If you can't beat the join them.....or Don't hate the player hate the game.

I get pissed when I get tickets, which usually amounts to one or two a year.

But I'll take my lumps before I'd do their job.

[Rayner]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

It was a great idea actually. Why is there no need for it?

A think a better question is: Why *is* there a need for it? The only explanation I've ever heard is to protect the cop during a traffic stop. Yet the tint on the rear window can be 'limo style.' If you're approaching from the rear, a bad guy can shoot through the back window same as he can through a side window.

There's no need for a law on window tint. Many people are sensitive to the sun -- they burn, it hurts their eyes, etc. Even eye doctors will tell you that you need to limit your eyes' exposer to the sun. But if you can't have your side windows tinted, you're doing nothing but ruining your eyes with sunlight.

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

I've actually made stops before based on running front license plates. Actually, just last week a BOL came out on a plate on a felony hit and run (some pedestrian got ran over) and I caught the guy becuse he was behind me. If the guy didn't have a plate, I probably wouldn't have looked twice. Do you think the victim and their family is a little grateful for the law?

Oh goodie. The "victim appreciation" card. I love those. I bet the victim and their family would be happier if the cops were able to prevent the crime to begin with. Or perhaps they'd be happier if California self and home defense laws were like they are in Texas.

That you just "happened" to catch a guy by his front plates isn't really a convincing argument. That's somehow like you're trying to suggest the guy would go un-caught forever were it not for those front plates. I think you just got lucky, honestly. The truly bad guys who flaunt their lack of respect for the laws wouldn't have a front plate for you to see anyway. It's kinda like a person who's messed up enough mentally to do a school shooting doesn't care that there's a sign saying "No guns allowed" on the campus.

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

It's called government that you help elect.

Incorrect. Many of these laws were on the books before I was even voting age. So I had no hand in creating them or putting them in place.

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

Do you suggest we should do away with states/state laws and fall under one set of laws? Say, California standards?

If you want the laws to be seen as less arbitrary, yes. One state's standards should be applied. I think Texas has wonderful laws. Sure, they have laws for front plates and window tint -- but unless your car has limo tint on the windows, they don't really care. I was pulled over by a cop who saw me front the front and he didn't even see fit to "mention" anything about my lack of a front plate.

As every state is different, though, it's lame to drive cross-country and be illegal in one state and then legal in another. Are you telling me that my tint or whatever is magically so much more nefarious simply because I crossed a state line? I doubt it.

[Rayner]

Originally Posted by two_wheel_mayhem

If you can't beat the join them.....or Don't hate the player hate the game.

I get pissed when I get tickets, which usually amounts to one or two a year.

But I'll take my lumps before I'd do their job.

The only lumps I take are lawyers' fees. $75 a pop is far cheaper than a $250 ticket.

[wbt]

Originally Posted by biojack

if you follow the speed limits, then it is irrelevant how polite and cooperative you are. Don't give them a reason to pull you over.

Bingo.

[two_wheel_mayhem]

Originally Posted by Rayner

The only lumps I take are lawyers' fees. $75 a pop is far cheaper than a $250 ticket.

I understand your plight, but am starting to doubt your credibility.

$75 buys about 15 minutes of a decent lawyer's time. When I say decent I mean worthy of fighting a traffic violation, not someone who defends criminal cases because we all know an attorney of this nature would not be bothered by such chump change nonsense.

Ive dealt with a few lawyers in my time, and they are quick to want to make "deals" that you could obtain yourself by talking to the prosecutor yourself.

Like some lawyer is gonna go to trial for you for 75 bucks and makes your problems go away 100% of the time, with no costs over and above his fee of $75?

Either he's your brother, or you are just being a blowhard.

[Rayner]

Originally Posted by two_wheel_mayhem

I understand your plight, but am starting to doubt your credibility.

$75 buys about 15 minutes of a decent lawyer's time. When I say decent I mean worthy of fighting a traffic violation, not someone who defends criminal cases because we all know an attorney of this nature would not be bothered by such chump change nonsense.

Ive dealt with a few lawyers in my time, and they are quick to want to make "deals" that you could obtain yourself by talking to the prosecutor yourself.

Like some lawyer is gonna go to trial for you for 75 bucks and makes your problems go away 100% of the time, with no costs over and above his fee of $75?

Either he's your brother, or you are just being a blowhard.

Or the third option -- you don't have a clue what you're talking about. A traffic lawyer goes to the ARRAIGNMENT. The jury trial (if you want to push it that far) is significantly more expensive.

Both of the lawyers I use for traffic offenses charge $75 per violation. For that amount, they set the initial court date and show up with you (usually they have about 20 or so people scheduled for the same session, so they only have to go once). At that session (also known as the arraignment) they talk to the prosecutor about the charges for each person they are representing that day. Often, if the charge is minor, or if the cop doesn't show, etc., the prosecutor drop the charges.

If that doesn't happen, then my lawyer will push for any one of the more favorable outcomes that do not include the ticket going on my record.

Now, if the 'favorable outcome' is for you to simply pay the fine and you still don't agree that you should do that, he will set a date for a jury trial. That starts at $600-$700. Most of his cases have no need to go that far.

Apparently, you've done no research on the subject. I did my research with the first ticket I got when I got back stateside. Since then, I've always hired a lawyer. And as I previously stated, since I returned stateside, the only ticket that appears on my record was from *before* I returned.

It never ceases to amaze me how the number of people who claim "I know my rights" to a cop is often almost the same number of people who assume they know how lawyers work.