Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Need reason why even speeding tickets should be defended against??

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    Need reason why even speeding tickets should be defended against??

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/deaf-driv...072302902.html

    He was arrested twice in Florida in 2010 — once for petit theft and once for speeding. ^^^

    So clearly people will look at your MV record to see if force was warranted because you were previously found guilty of SPEEDING. And these people many include the arbiters looking into the facts related to a shooting..."....well, he was a dangerous speeder too ..."

    I wonder if I get shot they'll be using all my dismissals and not guilty verdicts to support I was a "good boy".

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/deaf-driv...072302902.html

    He was arrested twice in Florida in 2010 — once for petit theft and once for speeding. ^^^

    So clearly people will look at your MV record to see if force was warranted because you were previously found guilty of SPEEDING. And these people many include the arbiters looking into the facts related to a shooting..."....well, he was a dangerous speeder too ..."

    I wonder if I get shot they'll be using all my dismissals and not guilty verdicts to support I was a "good boy".
    Only if they are in the public record, that you have failed to demonstrate, as they are in Wisconsin.

    And again, I am stunned, stunned I say, at the blasé attitude here on OCDO towards scofflaw drivers.
    Last edited by Nightmare; 08-24-2016 at 12:09 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    ...blasé attitude here on OCDO towards scofflaw drivers.
    I also have a blasé attitude toward asinine traffic laws.

    It is actually possible to be a good driver that obeys the good laws, and be an illegal driver that plays the cat-and-mouse game with the stupid laws.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    I also have a blasé attitude toward asinine traffic laws.

    It is actually possible to be a good driver that obeys the good laws, and be an illegal driver that plays the cat-and-mouse game with the stupid laws.
    Yet another elite. LOL
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Yet another elite. LOL
    Perhaps, I pretty much drive exactly the way my law-enforcing examples do.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Perhaps, I pretty much drive exactly the way my law-enforcing examples do.
    Just give me a heads up when you travel via automobile or other conveyance so that I can stay off the sidewalks. Much appreciated.

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post

    So clearly people will look at your MV record to see if force was warranted because you were previously found guilty of SPEEDING. And these people many include the arbiters looking into the facts related to a shooting..."....well, he was a dangerous speeder too ..."

    I wonder if I get shot they'll be using all my dismissals and not guilty verdicts to support I was a "good boy".
    As I understand it, such information as past convictions are generally not admissible in court. Potential jurors generally get dismissed if they are too well informed of media reports regarding the case they are going to judge.

    So no, a speeding conviction is not going to materially change the outcome of either a criminal trial involving self-defense use of force, or a civil trial seeking redress if you are wrongly harmed by an LEO.

    That said, wrongfully issued traffic tickets should be fought. A traffic ticket properly issued should probably be plead out and applicable fine paid.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Just give me a heads up when you travel via automobile or other conveyance so that I can stay off the sidewalks. Much appreciated.
    Touché!

    And I was thinking about that some more and must protest the "elite" label. After all, that would imply I feel I get to do things that you shouldn't. On the contrary!
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  9. #9
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    And again, I am stunned, stunned I say, at the blasé attitude here on OCDO towards scofflaw drivers.
    I expect full compliance with about 99% of all traffic laws as I believe they are based on solid, objective evidence of improving public safety. Red means stop. Stop signs mean "stop" not merely "slow and yield". One should keep his car in proper repair with lights working correctly, etc. Signal lane changes and turns. Use the proper lane, observe proper following distances, and stay on the correct side of the road.

    And I have nothing but contempt for those who exceed posted speed limits in school zones, residential areas, and most other surface streets. The survival rate for pedestrians struck by a vehicle plummet from about 90% when the car is traveling at 15 to 20 mph, to 10% when the car is in excess of 50 mph.

    But having endured the tyranny of Nixon's/Carter's federally mandated double-nickel in a State where my hometown was 300 miles from my State capital, and 400 miles to the northern border of my State, before AC was standard in most cars or any school buses, I picked up a few tickets for not dramatically slowing my speed down on long, lonely stretches of rural highway and InterState freeway.

    Since the repeal of that asinine speed mandate that most Easterners can't even begin to understand the problems imposed, I've had nary a ticket. Turns out my first speeding ticket was for doing 80 in a 55 zone. That exact same stretch of road, with 3 times the traffic volume, is now posted at what our State Department of Transportation has determined, via both professional study and empirical evidence/experiment, to be a perfectly safe, reasonable, 80 mph. My behavior hasn't changed. But now my preferred speed is legal.

    During the federal slow mandate, Las Vegas Review Opinion Page Editor (and later, one-time Libertarian VP candidate) Vince Suprynowicz penned an article in which he claimed that a large percentage (I forget the exact percentage) of traffic deaths in Nevada at the time were single car run offs. People were falling asleep making long drives across deserted, desert roads. It wasn't just Nevada.

    With posted limits between 70 and 80 mph, the drive time between my home town and Salt Lake City is less than 4 hours. When the limit was 55, the driving time was 5-1/2 hours. But the difference in real travel time is more significant. At sub 4 hours, the drive can usually be reasonably made without stops, meaning that total travel time is less than 4 hours. However, at 5-1/2 hours drive time, a stop is generally required to at least use the restroom, often to get something to drink or eat. This means that real travel time jumps from sub-4 hours to 6 hours+.

    For a single-day, round trip, the difference in travel time is more than 4 hours. This makes a difference in safety. At today's speed limits, I can leave home at 8 am and arrive by noon. I can spend 4 hours at a business meeting, a family funeral, or other event, leaving at 4 pm, arriving home by 8 pm. That is an 12 hour day which is not a stretch for most people. But under the federal double-nickel, add 4 hours to that day. I had to leave by 6 am meaning I was waking earlier than normal. I didn't get home until 10 pm, now into the danger zone for drowsy driving after a 16+ hour day that started early, after a shorter than normal night's rest.

    This ignores the nearly hypnotic effect of trying to drive 55 mph on roads that were designed, designed to be driven at 70+ in an era before seatbelts, with radial bias tires, without anti-lock brakes, and without airbags.

    The 55 mph, federally mandated speed limit was literally a killer here in the vast open spaces of the West. Its federally mandated enforcement also fundamentally changed the relationship between decent people and their peace officers. It ushered in an era of speed traps with speed limits set for fundraising, rather than being set based on objective safety criteria.

    In a similar vein, there is now ample evidence that too many jurisdictions have used red-light cameras for revenue rather than real safety. Some have gone so far as to shorten yellow light times to increase the number of tickets written. There is some evidence to suggest that such use of red light cameras have actually increased the number of crashes and injuries as drivers insist on stopping short rather than properly proceeding through a yellow light, for fear of an expensive and unjust ticket. Fortunately, Utah effectively bans the use of such cameras.

    I don't fault anyone who drives in a safe manner, while disregarding the rare, but offensive traffic law that actually reduces, rather than enhances public safety. With the repeal of the double-nickel and States/communities free to set speed limits based on sound engineering principles, there are very few traffic laws that endanger the public. But a couple do remain.

    On the flip side, some legitimate, safety driven traffic laws are so rarely enforced that violators of such laws almost never get a ticket. It is rare for anyone to get a ticket in Utah for texting while driving unless they cause a crash. It is almost unheard of for anyone to get a ticket for refusing to yield the passing lane, even though that offense carries the same penalty as exceeding the posted limit on a freeway by 10 mph. Impeding the flow of traffic is far more hazardous than exceeding the posted limit by 5 or 10 mph on a limited access freeway. But tickets are far more common for the latter than the former.

    Charles
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 08-24-2016 at 06:24 PM.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    Bob Owens has quite a different perspective on it than yahoo news and some interesting pictures that I think certainly impact the MSM narrative.
    http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/08...e-heres-proof/

    I am not reaching any conclusions until there is more information.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  11. #11
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,619
    Quote Originally Posted by deepdiver View Post
    Bob Owens has quite a different perspective on it than yahoo news and some interesting pictures that I think certainly impact the MSM narrative.
    http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/08...e-heres-proof/

    I am not reaching any conclusions until there is more information.
    I agree 100%

    "All we really know for certain right now is that narrative being crafted of Harris as a innocent victim of a murderous cop shot for attempting to use sign language is entirely made up by anti-police agitators masquerading as journalists."
    http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/08...e-heres-proof/
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 08-25-2016 at 08:35 PM.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by deepdiver View Post
    Bob Owens has quite a different perspective on it than yahoo news and some interesting pictures that I think certainly impact the MSM narrative.
    http://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/08...e-heres-proof/

    I am not reaching any conclusions until there is more information.
    Well, the very best viewpoint is that the guy was eluding. Who has not been charged with that?

    Its not reason to shoot. Not for you, not for police.

    Good article to read .... of course, further information may be coming out....who knows. My state police just told me a few days ago that the only records that they need to produce are those that they WANT to produce (when I asked for some records]. Who said this? Head Supv. of state police records dept.
    So % trustworthyness of what comes out of PDs for me? Uh, zero.

  13. #13
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,735
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    Snip

    I don't fault anyone who drives in a safe manner, while disregarding the rare, but offensive traffic law that actually reduces, rather than enhances public safety. With the repeal of the double-nickel and States/communities free to set speed limits based on sound engineering principles, there are very few traffic laws that endanger the public. But a couple do remain.

    Charles
    Repeal of what double-nickel speed limit?

    Utah, like Ohio, is a states that use a “prima facie” or “presumed” speed limit law. It’s legal to drive over the posted limit as long as you are driving safely. See 41-6a-601(1). And yes there are certain fixed speeds. See 41-6a-601(2).

    Effective 5/10/2016
    41-6a-601 Speed regulations -- Safe and appropriate speeds at certain locations -- Prima facie speed limits -- Emergency power of the governor.
    (1) A person may not operate a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions, giving regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing, including when:
    (a) approaching and crossing an intersection or railroad grade crossing;
    (b) approaching and going around a curve;
    (c) approaching a hill crest;
    (d) traveling upon any narrow or winding roadway; and
    (e) approaching other hazards that exist due to pedestrians, other traffic, weather, or highway conditions.
    (2) Subject to Subsections (1) and (4) and Sections 41-6a-602 and 41-6a-603, the following speeds are lawful:
    (a) 20 miles per hour in a reduced speed school zone as defined in Section 41-6a-303;
    (b) 25 miles per hour in any urban district; and
    (c) 55 miles per hour in other locations.
    (3) Except as provided in Section 41-6a-604, any speed in excess of the limits provided in this section or established under Sections 41-6a-602 and 41-6a-603 is prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable or prudent and that it is unlawful.
    (4) A violation of Subsection (1) is an infraction.
    (5) The governor by proclamation in time of war or emergency may change the speed limits on the highways of the state.
    Amended by Chapter 303, 2016 General Session
    Black's Law Dictionary
    prima facie: A fact presumed to be true unless disproved by some evidence to the contrary.

    So, other than the fixed speeds of 20 mph in school zone, 25 mph in urban districts and 55 mph in other locations the speed can be challenged. In other words, if can show that they only gave you a ticket just because of the posted speed and not because of recklessness you can win.

    55 mph is still on the books.

    Yes, I have challenged the posted speed limit and won.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    That which is presumed is true absent evidence to the contrary.

    The Science of Conjecture: Evidence and Probability Before Pascal by James Franklin. A great book!

    https://www.amazon.com/Science-Conje.../dp/0801871093
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    See you can win traffic cases ... I just got this in the mail from a ticket issued in June that I vigorously fought.

    Makes it #2 this year I won ... first via judge dismissing it ... this one nolled. First one was from 2013 that just got dismissed and the one nolled was from this year.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 08-26-2016 at 01:03 PM.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by color of law View Post
    Repeal of what double-nickel speed limit?

    Utah, like Ohio, is a states that use a “prima facie” or “presumed” speed limit law. It’s legal to drive over the posted limit as long as you are driving safely. See 41-6a-601(1). And yes there are certain fixed speeds. See 41-6a-601(2).



    Black's Law Dictionary
    prima facie: A fact presumed to be true unless disproved by some evidence to the contrary.

    So, other than the fixed speeds of 20 mph in school zone, 25 mph in urban districts and 55 mph in other locations the speed can be challenged. In other words, if can show that they only gave you a ticket just because of the posted speed and not because of recklessness you can win.

    55 mph is still on the books.

    Yes, I have challenged the posted speed limit and won.
    I have won for this reason too in TN a few years back. I was going 110 MPH on I40 (I think) , middle of night, no one around. When to a courthouse somewhere in hillbilly-land (courtroom had holes in ceiling, birds were flying around). Two cases before mine: 1st kid vandalized something...guilty...made to stand in the corner until the session was over (not kidding)....2nd case...old lady brandishing her shotgun at someone...judge made her promise not to do it again (again, not kidding)...then mine. Cop testified and after he was done I motioned for an acquittal listing the reasons for just what color-of-law said: lack of evidence showing that I was driving unsafely. Cop went crazy after the verdict of not guilty.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Just saw this case .... at 4thamendment.com

    http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod...-Ohio-5439.pdf

    This guy could have used me as an expert at his trial.

    Guy "speeding", weed found afterwards...3 yrs plea "deal".

    a) you cannot measure a car passing you with LIDAR .. so that's out

    b) pacing's operator to operator error rate is so high as to make it useless.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Another black eye for law enforcement.. The mantra of" getting home safe after your shift" seems to be creating trigger anxious LEO"s. Please be advised that any encounter with a leo has the potential for a deadly outcome..
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by JTHunter View Post
    St. Louis did that and their law was challenged successfully. St. Charles County (just NW of St. Louis) banned them and the MO state legislature tried to get something on the books but I don't believe they did.

    There has been some anecdotal evidence that those intersections that previously had a high incidence of "T-bone" accidents are now suffering an elevated incidence of rear-end collisions. The theory is that those drivers that used to run the lights are now cramming on the brakes at the last second when they realize they can't make it.
    I don't think that the body of work today = annecdotal anymore; its pretty much fact. But the injuries sustained are less in severity.

    But they could replace many lights with roundabouts and lower sever injuries 97% ... much much better than cameras ... which are evil.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •