VA State Trooper encounter last week...

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

You are correct... Civil Fees that the Judge cannot control and must collect.

I know a few LEOs that are going to stop charging people with those items that will require a civil fee unless they are out-of-state. There are alternate charges that can be used.

I, for one, will be charging Virginia license holders with those sparingly in the future.

Click to expand...

I would also think that 3x fines = more people hiring lawyers = more court appearances per ticket per officer = fed up officers that stop writing "Civil Remedial Fee" tickets!

Not to mention the increased load put on prosecutors...can someone say plea bargain?

I know I'd rather give $1,000 to a traffic attorney than the greedy Commonwealth. Even if it is "for the roads!"

imported post

Ya.. somebody mentioned that too. People are going to get lawyers and your going to spend hours in court so the state can make more money.

imported post

But what about when it rains, or you want to carry more than a toothbrush, or if you like the sound of something with more than a measly 160 HP?

Click to expand...

I will not be deterred by rain. I've also got the > 160 hp covered. If you're talking RWHP, twice. Crank hp, 4 times. The last time I drag raced my 17 y.o. m/c at Budd's Creek, I rode a 1st gear wheelie, while spinning to a 10 second 1/4 mile.

Rain... not that big a deal.

Although, for foul weather, I believe that Unrequited has the correct answer.

LEO, just spread the word that non res = no warnings, no breaks. Then you guys will be able to "stick it to theMan" :dude:

imported post

Mr. Y wrote

LEO, just spread the word that non res = no warnings, no breaks. Then you guys will be able to "stick it to theMan" :dude:

Click to expand...

As someone who drove here for about three years as a non-resident, while in the military, I can positively tell you that they already have "the word!" :X

imported post

Mr. Y wrote:

LEO, just spread the word that non res = no warnings, no breaks. Then you guys will be able to "stick it to theMan" :dude:

Click to expand...

Hey.. LEO needs to balance things out here I guess...

Still cannot figure out what the state decided not to "punish" those from out-of-state. I can only imagine they don't expect anyone drivers from other states to know the new civil fees exist.

imported post

That is bizarre to punish only in-staters. I wonder what the backstory is on this law...

imported post

We need to be bombarding our state legislators to get these stupid civil fines fixed!

imported post

roscoe13 wrote:

We need to be bombarding our state legislators to get these stupid civil fines fixed!

Click to expand...

I had already intended on doing so, beginning today. This legislation is horrible.

imported post

Why are the civil fines stupid?

imported post

bayboy42 wrote:

Why are the civil fines stupid?

Click to expand...

While I don't like the idea of taxing people in addition to fining them, for the same offense, what makes them stupid is they apply only to Virginia residents.

Not that anyone ever "needs" to be driving 20 miles over the limit, or driving without a license, or any of the offenses that would trigger a civil fine, but the idea that the fines only apply to Virginians is ludicrous.

imported post

Tess wrote:

bayboy42 wrote:

Why are the civil fines stupid?

Click to expand...

While I don't like the idea of taxing people in addition to fining them, for the same offense, what makes them stupid is they apply only to Virginia residents.

Not that anyone ever "needs" to be driving 20 miles over the limit, or driving without a license, or any of the offenses that would trigger a civil fine, but the idea that the fines only apply to Virginians is ludicrous.

Click to expand...

The fees should apply to all drivers... not just those that have a VA license.

On the news.. it was said.. "the people should not worry about the fees... if they obey the law.. they will not be assessed." Geezz!!

But Reckless driving is one that has a huge fee. If your in an accident and the VA State police work it.. If they do not have a valid state charge to fit your situation.. you will becharge with RECKLESS DRIVING!

Example would be... you rear end someone while giving your baby a bottle in the back seat. Your not really breaking any laws, right? There is no state law that says you have to watch the road ahead at all times. So the only option for the state boys is reckless.

imported post

bayboy42 wrote:

Why are the civil fines stupid?

Click to expand...

Personally I think they are stupid, and possibly unconstitutional, because the main purpose of these civil fines is to generate revenue, not punish the offender.

The purpose of fines for criminal offenses should be to punish the offender, while the main purpose of taxes should be to generate revenue. Therefore these fines are stupid because they are setup under the false pretense of punishment, whereas they are really a hidden form of taxation.

If the purpose of these fines were truly to punish the offender, then they would apply to EVERYONE, not just VA residents.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

But Reckless driving is one that has a huge fee. If your in an accident and the VA State police work it.. If they do not have a valid state charge to fit your situation.. you will becharge with RECKLESS DRIVING!

Click to expand...

Agreed. I sat in on a similar "reckless driving" case in PW county a few months ago. A dump truck had malfunctioned and damaged a traffic signal. The officer arriving on the scene was not sure what to charge the driver with, as he testified in court, and therefore went with the "default" reckless driving.

The driver plead guilty to the reckless driving and then offered his side of the story to the judge. The driver said that he had already paid the county for the replacement of the traffic signal (a couple of grand there), and implied that he just wanted to pay his fine and be on his way.

After questioning the driver and officer for a decent amount of time, the Judge ruled that even though the driver plead guilty to the reckless driving, he (the Judge) felt that the driver was not reckless and found him guilty of an equipment malfunction.

The thing I found disturbing was that when the officer openly admitted that he was not sure what to charge the driver with and defaulted with reckless, no one in the court room found this out of the ordinary (Judge, prosecutor, other officers, etc.). The driver was lucky that the Judge felt it more important to find out all of the facts and not just accept the reckless plea, than to just take an early lunch!

imported post

BTW, a new topic dedicated to the "civil fines" has been started here:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=3241&forum_id=54&msg=3

imported post

AbNo wrote:

They are all unloaded of course."

Click to expand...

So why not have at least one loaded:question:

imported post

TEX1N wrote:

... Snip

After questioning the driver and officer for a decent amount of time, the Judge ruled that even though the driver plead guilty to the reckless driving, he (the Judge) felt that the driver was not reckless and found him guilty of an equipment malfunction.

The thing I found disturbing was that when the officer openly admitted that he was not sure what to charge the driver with and defaulted with reckless, no one in the court room found this out of the ordinary (Judge, prosecutor, other officers, etc.). The driver was lucky that the Judge felt it more important to find out all of the facts and not just accept the reckless plea, than to just take an early lunch!

Click to expand...

Ya... Judges will often lower charges to something minor. I have seen a few that made your head spin and do a double take. :shock:

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

It is the LEOs discretion if he wants backup. They do not know you and that your law abiding people. You admitted to having guns and it was not required. The law does not require a notification.

Ya...  more often than not...  Mail in proof you took care of the expired item immediately and the Judge will get it with the ticket.

Click to expand...

openryan wrote:

AbNo, sounds like a positive experience, glad to hear everything went well after the firearms entered the situation, and kudos to the officers for acting responsibly.

Click to expand...

You know, all in all, I think that, for a first semi-armed run-in with any PD, this one could've only gone better if he'd commented on his favorite piece. :lol:

And as far as Shayne's tags, well, that's his business.

Although... shyte, my inspection is about to expire. :banghead:

It's funny.... I'm from the Southern Midwest, and we did away with vehicle inspections about 20 years ago, as they were found to be too crude and barbaric. :cuss:

imported post

vrwmiller wrote:

roscoe13 wrote:

We need to be bombarding our state legislators to get these stupid civil fines fixed!

Click to expand...

I had already intended on doing so, beginning today.  This legislation is horrible.

Click to expand...

Link/Info?

imported post

AbNo wrote:

"...... So, where are you guys coming from?"

Click to expand...

The proper response being " Why do you ask?"

Think about it. Of what relevance is it to the purpose of the traffic stop?

No need to be adversarial or confrontational, but keep the conversation on the "business" you have with the cop.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Ya.. somebody mentioned that too. People are going to get lawyers and your going to spend hours in court so the state can make more money.

Click to expand...

The legislator who initiated this bill (Dave Alby) is a DUI attorney. You surprised?
[line]