Fight Your Speeding Ticket With Simple Math
December 10th, 2007 Posted in Speed Limits, Traffic Tickets Many speeding tickets are issued as the result of motorists being clocked with devices that measure how fast a vehicle covers a known distance. Because some judges and district attorneys are not comfortable with mathematical calculations it is important for the well-prepared defendant to present mathematical based arguments in the simplest of terms. We will [...]Fight Your Speeding Ticket With Simple Math
Not an NMA member yet? Join Today & Get These Great Benefits!
Other Related Articles
- What Everyone Should Know About Laser Guns
- Utah Speed Limit Increase Has No Effect On Speed Or Safety
- Reinstating "55," Are They Crazy?!
- Do Speeding Tickets Deter Drivers From Speeding?
- The Effect Of A National Speed Limit On Traffic Safety & Fuel Prices
NMA Blog Commenters:
To change the picture next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com. Each picture is associated with a particular email address. (This is a third-party service not affiliated with NMA.)
To change the picture next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com. Each picture is associated with a particular email address. (This is a third-party service not affiliated with NMA.)
Eric writes:
{For the liberal James Young:
The failure of people to obey a law intended for all people is a prime example of the break down in our society. The same arrogant people who speed believe that they are above the law. That do not possess the moral values and principles of law abiding citizens and are more apt to break more than just motor vehicle laws such as speeding.}
First, I thank you for the label. I haven’t been called a liberal in a while and it’s rather like I am home again. Greater men than I have already addressed a contemptuous law:
“An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so.”
Mohandas Gandhi
“If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law.”
Henry David Thoreau
“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.”
Thomas Jefferson
“Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced.”
Albert Einstein
“There is a higher law than the law of government. That’s the law of conscience.”
Stokely Carmichael
“The good of the people is the greatest law.”
Marcus Tullius Cicero
{The same arrogant people . . .} narrows it down to about 150,000,000 people since virtually the entire population of drivers ignore the law because the law is stupid on its face, dangerous in its structure and random in its application, in short, violating every philosophical principle of law known to civilization.
Darren writes:
Since when is speeding a legal right? Personally, I wish there were more cops on the road taking you folks down. Speeding is dangerous. I can’t count the number of times A-holes jump into the right lane (where I always drive because I cruise control at 60) because 70 or 75 is not fast enough. When are these folks going to realize they’re not the only ones on the road and that life is more precious than saving a few minutes (or seconds in even shorter drives)?
Do I have to mention the savings in gas and money by driving a sane speed?
Get over your self-righteousness, folks.”
Yeah, your the kind of guy I go out of my way to avoid because your an accident waiting to happen. Your the kind of guy I see driving down the road going 10-15 mph under the speed limit with both hands on the wheel at 10 and 2 with a death grip with your seat all pushed up within inches of the steering wheel, your head and eyes locked on the road like you think its going to disappear at any second.
You my friend are scared to death of driving and will most likely kill someone at the slightest unusual occurance that takes place in front of you because you will freak out and flip your vehicle out of panic. What you need is a better understanding of how to operate a motor vehicle.
We need to make it harder for people to get a drivers license and require them to go through a driving course of some type at their expense in order to drive on American roads, and then we need to abolish speed limits on the Interstate all together, and take a serious look at highway speed limits.
All the time and effort states spend on tracking down speeders could be much better spent cruising neighborhood streets. I would much rather see a cop occasionaly passing through my neighborhood making himself visible than to have to find them all pulling over speeders. A very low percentage of accidents are caused by speed alone.
Thanks for the case citation Mr. Young (BELL V. BURSON, 402 U. S. 535 (1971)). I looked it up and was a very interesting read. As I was only 7 at the time I didn’t actually remember the ruling back then. However, since it has been determined in this court case that for the suspension of a driver’s license requires due process under the 14th Amendment, I really don’t think there are a lot of violations by the States on this issue. And if a State can still suspend a license, after following due process of course, then it really isn’t much of a constitutional right which most people equate with “rights” as we know it. (Plus there is nothing written in the Constitution, unless it si an individual State Constitution, giving anyone the right to drive a car). A right is somehting that cannot be taken away (free speech, press, religion), however, even some rights do have limitations. I mean, we don’t want to have a religion that canabalizes little children or lets someone scream “FIRE” in a crowded theatre. The courts have set some limitation on “rights” and have also stated that he rights of one person does not supercede the rights of another person, but then again, due process will have to figure out a mess like that as well.
I am also not as learned as you are or some others on this site, however, I do think I am smart enough to know that I do not want a 16, 17 or sometimes even 55 year old person driving any way they want based on what they deem their own abilities to be. (Usually people overrate thier own abilities drastically.) Unfotunately, that would also mean that I know a lot of police officers that should have some major restrictions placed on their driving, and even in some cases the ability to carry a gun. We just don’t afford the normal, everyday driver the level of training that you have gone thorugh or someone over in Europe, and then again, personal abilities will be limiting on an individual basis (and let’s not even get into the limitations of ones own mental faculties as well). Basically from what I have seen from most people on these sites is that they have had a bad experience in their driving by having run in’s with the police and don’t want to accept responsibility for breaking the traffic laws that are established at the present time. Saying all cops are crooked, anyone who disagrees with you is a moron gets nothing done. If anyone wants something done, do things the right way, contact your local and State Representatives. If the research is as you and other state that it is, then changes will be made. But I can guarantee you that others will have the same amount of research as you do that states the opposite of what you or anyone will say in favor of doing away with traffic laws and such. Me? I don’t care. I don’t write tickets. But I investigate crimes and it is never the suspects fault, it’s societies fault that he stole from someone else, murdered someones father, robbed the bank or committed a fraud against an elderly individual depleted their life savings. It’s my fault he is in jail somply becasue I investigated his crime. It’s always the same whether it’s a traffic offense or a criminal offense. At least I won’t care until someone who thinks that they are above the legal requirements that are set now that they may violate and that well meaning individual that overestimated his own abilities to control a 3500 pound rolling metal missile hits my wife, again, and claims they had the “right” to run the red light because she got to the intersection first before my wife did. Only problem was that my wife had the green light and she is the one that got sent to the hospital in an ambulance while 2 of my three children had to ride in the back seat of a police car as they were crying for their mother. Yeah, traffic laws make no difference in society.
Texas Cop writes:
{ However, since it has been determined in this court case that for the suspension of a driver’s license requires due process under the 14th Amendment, I really don’t think there are a lot of violations by the States on this issue. And if a State can still suspend a license, after following due process of course, then it really isn’t much of a constitutional right which most people equate with “rights” as we know it.}
Actually, there are many violations of this court ruling, certainly in spirit if not in letter. How many drivers have obtained their license, thus entitling them to pilot vehicles on public roadways, but then had that license revoked because of some specious reasoning? We now revoke licenses for many things completely unrelated to the ability for which the license was issued.
We revoke licenses for debts, child support, drug convictions, failure to properly trim trees, unpaid library fines, or not shoveling snow promptly enough.
I did not, with the original issuance of my licenses (OK & TX), explicitly allow the DMV to rescind my license just because they don’t like my unshoveled driveway. I did not then and have not ever implied that they could assign such permission to revoke my license. Yet, they now say that we have all implicitly signed over that authority to them and that that implicit permission constitutes “due process.” Is there any wonder why people resent and distrust government so much?
{Plus there is nothing written in the Constitution, unless it si an individual State Constitution, giving anyone the right to drive a car}
The Constitution did not foresee the invention of the automobile but the right to travel is well established in common law and court precedent. It is also a fundamental human right that does not need enumeration by the Constitution to be valid. That we need to travel by automobile for the execution of our everyday lives, our commerce and our liberty is hardly arguable. To me, the only factor that should lead to a revocation of a license is when the holder is no longer capable of piloting a car. Of course, the states see this restriction on them as a threat so they treat licenses as de facto if not de jure privileges.
{I am also not as learned as you are or some others on this site, however, I do think I am smart enough to know that I do not want a 16, 17 or sometimes even 55 year old person driving any way they want based on what they deem their own abilities to be.}
I used to think the same thing many years ago but the proof that we do handle our cars very well is in your statistics: the lowest fatality and injury rates in our history. Somehow, all those drivers make all those judgments pretty well.
Never seen a license suspended for something that didn’t happen in a car. I guess it’s possible thought, jsut never seen one. But I have made an arrest ona warrant for a library fine violation once. Unfortunately we don’t know what the arrest warrants are for until they are confirmed then we really don’t have much choice if the warrant was issued by a judge. Would like to see that paperwork. If that is the case, then something is wrong where that happened. I never said our system is perfect, but it is the one we have, for now.
Low fatality and injury rates can also be attributed to the better manufacturing of cars, not neccessarlily the better driving skills of individuals. Statistics can be skewed in any number of ways. I’ve seen it done in city governemnt for many years to accomplish a wanted desire by certain individuals on both sides of an issue. I don’t necessarily rely on stats very much. I tend to go off my own observations in what I see. Maybe I just live in an area where certain groups of individuals can’t drive.
Also, the granting of Due Process does not equate to a constitutional right. It affords certain procedures afforded to a person befor certain actions can be taken. Due process is involved in everything from driver’s licenses to human resources and insurance payment problems.
We can go back and forth all day long and it won’t accomplish anything. I imagine all States have laws in the Transportations Codes dealing with the issuance and revocation of licenses and describe the Due Process required. Talking on these forums is pointless and I have really discovered a complete waste of time, unless you ahve an axe to grind. If you really want to make a difference and have the support of yoru statistics, research and whatever else you want ot pull out of your hat, take it to the people that set the rules of the game and do something constructive in your lives and try to get the rules changed. Crying about it on the internet does nothing but to feed and fuel others who have personal grievances because they can’t seem to play by the rules that are in place now. (Waahh, I’ll just take my ball and go home!)
Good luck in your fight for whatever cause you take up. I’m going back to life and my family. It’s been real, but not real fun.
{I never said our system is perfect, but it is the one we have, for now.}
Our system for designing and implementing laws is far from perfect and is getting worse every day because it has been subjugated by special interests who use their wealth and influence to direct legislation that helps them but often with the price being paid by many others. Cash has replaced the ballot box as the currency of modern democracy and until that is removed, the situation will continue to deteriorate.
{Low fatality and injury rates can also be attributed to the better manufacturing of cars, not neccessarlily the better driving skills of individuals. Statistics can be skewed in any number of ways. I’ve seen it done in city governemnt for many years to accomplish a wanted desire by certain individuals on both sides of an issue. I don’t necessarily rely on stats very much. I tend to go off my own observations in what I see. Maybe I just live in an area where certain groups of individuals can’t drive.}
Statistics are a tool and must be used with care. However, to refuse to use a tool because you don’t like the results that it yields is reprehensible, especially for a public agency that must use scientifically defensible methodology. One insight that they can offer is that since crash, injury and fatality rates keep falling, we can afford to increase our productivity by increasing our speeds. Speed limits are not benign creatures without costs or consequences; when we set limits too low, the price that we the driving public and you the enforcers pay is huge.
{If you really want to make a difference and have the support of [your] statistics, research and whatever else you want ot pull out of your hat, take it to the people that set the rules of the game and do something constructive in your lives and try to get the rules changed.}
See above. The people that set the rules are the ones accepting all that cash from all those special interests. It is amazing how votes in committees and chambers correlate so directly with special interest contributions and how the needs of the public are virtually ignored. I have been denied access to state legislators in OK and CA because I did not contribute to their particular reelection campaigns. They are not interested in changing the rules or in making life better for the public, but rather only in perpetuating their careers.
{Crying about it on the internet does nothing but to feed and fuel others who have personal grievances because they can’t seem to play by the rules that are in place now.{
No, it’s because the rules are manipulated so that they can’t play by them.
I have juxtaposed your own words so that they now make more sense:
{Good luck in your fight for whatever cause you take up. I’m going back to life and my family. It’s been real, but not real fun. (Waahh, I’ll just take my ball and go home!)}
In response to Darren’s comment January 4, 2008 about speeding. If you look back in 1974 the speed limit doesn’t have anything to do with ‘ saving lives ‘. The national maximum speed limit law was passed in 1974 by the Nixion administration and it’s sole purpose was to conserve fuel. It is a fact that driving “55″ saves fuel. If you remember back that far, we were in a midst of an alleged fuel shortage. But, gues what folks? Crisis is over! Many years later we still have the 55 m.p.h. speed limit. The government wants you to belive that “55 saves lives.” The real reason, sadly is that it provides the government (and insurance companies) with HUGE revenue: speeding tickets. A Federal Highway Administration study by transportation engineers Samuel C Tignor and Davey Warren concluded of all drivers studied, the SLOWEST 5% had the highest accident rate. Does that surprise you? Guess what else they found. Those drivers whose speeds were 10-15 m.p.h. ABOVE the speed limit had the lowest accident rate. That means (if you think about it for a minute) you are safer exceeding our current speed limit that obeying it. If you do not believe it, you are the unfortunate victim of brainwashing. Facts show that HALF of all accidents are due to slow drivers. 70% of all motorists exceed the speed limit and that most speed limits are set 10 m.p.h. below the average speed of traffic. Author: Alex Carroll “Beat the Cop”
Thats a good point to remember. The 55 MPH thing was nothing more than a way to conserve gas. It wasn’t until later that they decided the money was just too good to give up so they adopted that 55 stay alive crap. Then after enough public uproar they started bumping it up to 65 and even 70 in some states, and here we are, STILL ALIVE.
It’s no surprise that motorists that consistently drive under the speed limits are the ones causing all the accidents. I’ve said it before, those that have those kinds of driving habits are just masking their insecurities behind the wheel with the illusion of being the safer driver. In reality they just aren’t comfortable behind the wheel for whatever reason and eventually cause an accident when they over react to something simple that others would just steer clear of or calmly break away from. Same situation, one driver reacts and forgets about it within a few seconds, the other driver runs his vehicle off the road or into the other lane causing havoc.
Of course there are those exceptions where you have drivers who are just careless and like to bob and weave out of traffic running others off the road trying to make a light or something. They are the ones who ruin it for others and end up being the poster children for the state and an excuse to rape us all for dollars. Ive had one accident in my entire life and that was when I was 17 years old and and older man crossed into my lane in front of me and I couldn’t stop in time. I’ve been driving for 21 years and although I haven’t had a ticket until recently in about 12 years, I probably have accumulated several dozen tickets over the years and contributed thousands of dollars to the state and insurance companies. I feel very comfortable driving fast and I consider myself to be an extremely alert driver because of it. I use all my mirrors and am always watching for that other driver who may not be paying attention. Meaning that I’m not reckless even though I do drive fast. All of this doesn’t mean I am immune to an accident, but forcing me to drive at an insanely slow speed isn’t going to make me any safer. If anything it will make me get into an accident quicker simply because of my own stress level.
Wondering why I have seen and trailed a few cops in more than 1 state that think it’s okay for them to speed, but no one else. I understand there are a few situations that they need the lights and sirens off, ie when they are close to a crime in progress that will get someone hurt, but for them to go 10 to 20 plus mph over on the highway with no lights on is wrong. I have been driving for over 17 years and have seen this several times. When there lights are off they should obey the posted speed as we have to ???
Bye the way from what I have heard it is easier for someone to get out of a D.U.I. than a speeding ticket. What is up with that?
The simple answer is because they can. Which is a big reason why a lot of cops will let other cops off with a warning when they pull them over in their civilian vehicles, because they know how hard of a habit it is to break. The state would tell you that its a part of their job and when they are speeding they are safer than the average joe public because they are trained for high speed driving. Which again goes back to my original thought of making it mandatory for new drivers to get that kind of training until you finally have converted the majority of America over thus eliminating any real need for speed limits in most areas like Interstates. That will never happen though, because its not about being safer, its about the money. As for me, I would be willing to have my taxes raised a bit to pay for the things they say they need rather than have to deal with their speed traps and a constant feeling of having to look over my shoulder and down at my speedometer to make sure I’m not breaking some law by accident.
james young wrote,
Is there any wonder why people resent and distrust government so much?
I think Mr. young understands that this goes deeper than any traffic offences.
speaking for myself, the reason for my SLIGHT mistrust of the government is that, i just cant prove that its ever officially, spoken the truth , certainly not to me.
and to officer Tex, I hear you and as the Bible states that laws and rules must be followed, even if you know, or believe the law to be wrong, or unjust, and thats what i do, but what happens when they outlaw driving around in your cruiser while wearing pink panties???
then what cha gonna do?
maybe consider that my mother is still alive, marijuana didnt make me kill her, like uncle sam said years back. another thing i know, is that the bill of rights states that no one be put in jepordy of life or limb twice over the same offence, but before my failure to maintain insurance no longer haunts me, ill pay,
1) the ticket(less than $200.00 i think)
2) $260.00to the state this year
3) $260.00to the state next year
4) $260.00to the state for a third year
the latter three are being called a surchrge on the drivers license. Id say thats alot of extra work that someone had to do over my ticket ; $780.00 worth of overtime!! OK i know its not for overtime for someone to process my ticket, so surely $780.00 per/ each no insurance, weather an accident occoured or not, and $780.00 for each accident with one of the parties lacking insurance. I would think this just about affords the huge yearly loss by people struck by uninsured motorists, you know , the same way that the only leagle gambling, sponsored by the state(texas lotto) or (the idiot tax), was supposed to fix everything wrong with the public school system. well i can assure any of you that the money will not be used to help fix your car, but aparently used to pay for continuing to protect and defend the constitutional rights of every Americam citizen. well minus that one part i just mentioned.
ill finish up with the brutal honesty thats my moral weapon of choice. Im in the construction industry and while ive spoken untruths in the past, ive never been required to lie or use dishonesty every day just to complete the duties of my work.law enforcement cant say that nor can most if not all policy makers. I love this country, i love God, and I love my fellow man. This government scares the hell out of me. the last i checked about a year ago 1 out of every 134 American citizens are in prison long term many im sure for chosing to smoke pot instead of becoming a number in a class action law suit when the new man-made drug starts to kill folks tring to improve thier health. DONT DO DRUGS ,SMOKE POT INSTEAD.
It doesnt impair your ability to drive.
pot will make you kill your mother wrote,
“DONT DO DRUGS ,SMOKE POT INSTEAD.
It doesnt impair your ability to drive.”
Don’t know about you, Mate, but I consider that last statement to be complete rubbish. I’ve smoked a LOT of pot over the past 30 years and very early on came to the conclusion that IT DOES IMPAIR YOUR ABILITY TO DRIVE.
Personal case in point: Years ago I was living in Florida. A friend and I were driving to a state park that I had been to several times, so I knew the route very well. We were smoking pot on the way and got very f’d up. Eventually we came upon a draw bridge and I had to pull over to check a map as I didn’t recall ever crossing that bridge on the way to this state park. Upon checking said map I found we had PASSED the clearly marked entrance to the state park and driven about 15 more miles further. I honestly could not recall the previous 15-20 minutes of the trip, let alone passing the state park entrance! That bloody well scared the hell out of me as I like to be in complete control whenever I’m driving and I realized that, because of the pot, I was not. From that day on I have never driven after smoking pot because of how it impaired my ability to drive.
The moral is, in my opinion, if you’re going to smoke pot either stay home or have a designated driver.
drive wrote, that he/she believes that pot does impair your ability to drive, but as far as i know its very rare to be charged only with driving while under the influance of pot. but ,i supose that being in a strange hood 15 or so miles past where your going, in the direction your traveling, could arouse the suspicions of local police officers, but as long as you can refrain from staring in disbelief at the bridge and simply move on, youd most likely be alright.(;-v).
in keeping with the basic page topic, you should be aware, in the intrest of personal enlightenment, that you were going 15 mph or slower. i wonder if you had a couple of drinks before the trip? case smokin’ and drinkin together is like peeing into a stiff wind, somethings liable to blow opposite of the way you want it to blow.
I love James Young’s Attitude. I love driving fast safely and even sometimes unsafely. Just got my first ticket in 10 years doing 80 in a 70. Where I live the speed limits change so abrubtly, it drives me crazy, 45 miles an hour is stupid through some tiny insignifacant blip for a town with no people on the HIGHWAY. Except for the occasional drunk Indian teenager.
Just had to vent my rediculous ticket.
P.S. Should have hit the brakes when I saw the hwy-pig.
Know the difference between a drunk driver and a stoner driver ?
Drunk driver will run a red light, stoner will sit through 10 green lights.
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics, even if you win you are still RETARDED!!!
I love the arguments given by JY. Basically speeding tickets is a way to make money for the government when they have practical means to limit the speed. I would say why doesn’t the government ask the manufacturers to stop making cars which go over 80 or 100 mph better they install speed governors. We have emission standards, why don’t we have speed standards so that manufacturers dont make cars which can go above 80 mph as I don’t know of any highway which allows for a speed more than this.
No Ferrari’s should be imported into US of A as legally you cannot enjoy the pleasure of driving it at 100 mph ;-)
I would like to see roads rated with a useablity factor. Various factors such as speed limits, enforcement and congestion would be factored in. The lower the factor the less user friendly the highway would be considered starting with a comparison with Germany’s autobahn at a 100%.
A useablity factor would give a visitor or traveler a instant easy to understand way of determining the best route to take. This factor could be integrated into GPS maps. It might also give a municipally an incentive to increase it’s rating to encourage more tourism and business activity. A low rating would not look good.
James Young wrote “Remember that when you can drive 80 mph legally through west Texas, you can thanks the likes of me and my group.”
I do thank you. I must say when I was stationed in Texas a few years ago, it was by far the most pleasant driving experience I have had in any state. It felt weird driving down a two lane road with the speed limit was 70mph. I couldn’t believe they were actually that relaxed about the speed because most states see two lane roads, regardless of how remote or desolate/isolated from the public they are, as money pits to exploit. Texas seems a little more relaxed in that regard, and their roads are much better maintained that most states I have had the privilege of driving in.
Again thanks for all you do. You do seem very well educated you I like the way your present your case on here backed up with facts, while others just seem to dance around your words feverishly trying to label you a nut case with a need to kill people while speeding. Even that CO police officer ended up sounding like he had nothing to offer but the idea that 55 saves lives. Thanks again, and I would love to help out the cause in any way I can.
I would also like to add my own numbers, Ive been driving for 20 years, have probably 2 dozen tickets over those years, 1 accident which wasn’t my fault. I encourage everyone here to drive safely and within your own limits for the conditions, use all your mirrors and remain alert to what other drivers may be getting ready to do. Those things will save you quicker and more often than any posted speed limit will, or any fine by a traffic cop.
Hmmmm, 2 Joes’s. OK I’ll be JOE (caps)
To James Young;
Looks like you are a real patriot, learned & self-informing. Excellent to know that others are out there taking another angle fighting the power elite who use well meaning but ill-informed beat cops to write extortionate citations which serve the purpose only to economically injur the working class, while generating unneeded funds for corrupt politicians to line their pockets.
I have recently received what I call an extortion ticket from an officer accusing me of traveling 10 mph above the posted “limit” during which the conditions for driving were sunny, excellent visibility & dry road. The posted was 60, the citation states I was doing 70 or thereabouts. Do you (anyone is welcome to advise) have any advice for my upcoming trial as I am proceeding with a trial and refusing to admit guilt or plead no contest. Do you advise a jury trial or a trial by judge? I know the game is rigged but what would be the wisest choice? I live in Texas.
James is the Lou Dobbs of traffic control. James Young for president!
I thank everybody for the kind words.
Lisa: when you go the NMA website (www.motorists.org), instead of clicking on the BLOG link, click on the “Fight Your Ticket” icon in the left side. Follow their advice. I urge you to join NMA, rent the “Legal Defense Kit” and use it religiously. Logistically, the more you can delay the trial, the better your chances are of winning. In any case, if a jury trial is available, I would use that. Go to the courtroom where the trial will take place and observe several trials in which you have no vested interest, i.e., just a third party observer. You will learn their procedure and how the prosecutor approaches his/her case.
Define your argument clearly and write it down. Outline your cross examination questions and expected responses – this is stuff that is in the Legal Defense Kit – and proper follow up questions.
Know the exact law that you have been accused of violating. Just Google “Texas Transportation Code Title 7 Section 545 Speed Limit” Print it out. It should be listed right on the face of the ticket.
If you have an attorney friend, ask their advice.
What county are you in? Travis County (Austin) is home for me although I’m in California right now working at a couple of hugely fun jobs.
Keep us informed.
To James Young;
My citation was received in Harris County, but I live in Montgomery. I am originally from California.
What do you think about common law default strategies for fighting tickets?
I have never heard of such a defense before. Traffic law is statutory rather than common so I’m guessing that a common law defense would be met with skepticism.
First things first. Call, write or personally visit the court clerk to get a continuance in order to give you time to build your defense. The longer you can delay it the better off you are. I was once cited near Fremont, CA, delayed it for about 3 months and when I was about to ask for another continuance, the DA told me it had been dropped. I learned later from a wannabe Chippie that the original Chippie was on forced administrative leave because she was in a mental hospital.
One other key to your defense is to request a copy of the COPS ticket and the notes he has made. You will then see the evidence the cop has against you and you can plan to counter that, or even defeat it if it is wrong.
My wife got a ticket in that shit-dump Morrison, 47 in a 30. She swears up and down she wasn’t speeding, and was angry at the cop…..She questioned, not very nicely, how he could clock her when both were coming around a sharp bend in the road, and she coming up a hill and he down.
He said “I have movable radar…I can move the gun like this”…and he panned his hand sideways.
Well, right there can result in a panning error, but we got the copy of the ticket and he noted that he first locked on at 20′, then observed her speed decrease from 47 to 54 to 43.
Now, using that MATH…. of 1.47 FPS per mph, she was past him in 1/2 a second, so it was impossible for his gun to give second and third reading. He was also at such an angle off he had a serious cosine error.
But alas…in all the years I waited to fight a non-deserved radar ticket, this was it…and my wife wouldn’t go to court as the city attorney plea bargained it down from 4 points to 2, but the fine remained $73…and he threatened in his plea that going to court COULD result in a fine of up to $200.
I felt we surely could have one as i have more knowledge about radar in my little finger than any podunk small town cop would ever know.
I just thought I would thank the author of this site I just got busted on base for supposedly doing 32 in a 25, I was watching my speed when this happened I was at 23, On base a ticket does not cost money nor does it go on your record, but it goes up the chain of command. I was ticketed by the same officer twice in 5 days, once for 31 and now for 32. I really feel that this individual is new and inexpierienced. I have been a firefighter for 12 years and have always treated fellow public servents with respect but this guy is headhunting me for some reason. The base is only 1 1/2 sq. miles so I cannot avoid him any ideas.
Wow,
Lively thread, with valid points from “both” sides of this issue.
If you are cited for a ticket (in the US), pay careful attention to the *COLOR* of the “speed limit” sign. That’s right, the color!
Here is why: Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations specifies Traffic Sign Colors and Class. Here is a breakdown:
Red sign with White Letters: Compulsory;
White Sign with Black Letters: Compulsory;
Yellow Sign with Black Letters: Advisory;
Orange Sign with Black Letters: Construction..may be Advisory or Compulsory depending on context;
Blue Sign with White Letters: Information on Services;
Green Sign with White Letters: Information on Travel Directions;
Illuminated Signs (signs that turned on or programmed at certain times or for certain conditions): Advisory or Compulsory, depending on context;
So, why do we care? Because if you are ticketed for “exceeding the posted limit”, and the sign is Advisory, the ticket is invalid. The correct citation, in this case, would be “excessive speed for conditions”, which is harder to prove.
Many Police Operatives do not know this, and often issue “sloppy” tickets, or, they *DO* know this and are betting that *YOU* don’t, so pay attention, and take pictures (after he or she leaves).
Also, watch out for sly officials that will write the higher citation, even if it is obscure.
Here is an example:
In Alaska (your state probably varies, but the concept applies):
1) Traveling 65mph in a 60mph zone is a 2 point offense, with punitive fine applied in concordance with a published schedule.
2) Traveling 70mph in a 60mph zone is a 4 point offense, with a higher punitive fine applied in concordance with the same schedule.
So, here is the kicker: In case 1) above, if the Officer wants a higher Revenue Extraction (from you), he can cite you for “Failure to Obey a Traffic Control Device”, which is the same as running a red-light (and your insurance company is likely to interpret the same)…that’s 4 points, and a higher punitive fine that either 1) or 2), above, due to its implied “Safety Violation” exacerbation.
So, watch out for this. An intelligent Judge or Magistrate will see right through what the Officer did and dismiss or reduce the ticket.
For those that care, I advocate safe driving…not just me being safe for me, but me being safe for those driving near me.
However, I don’t support the Collection of Revenue hiding behind a Veil of “Safety” that can be applied arbitrarily.
So, I requested by mail a trial by jury, & the trial date is set for September 15th, 2008. Why was it set for so long into the future, & when that date nears, will I still be able to get a continuance if I do not have all the materials ready that I will need for my case?
Lisa,
The reason that your trial date is set so far in advance is because this is how backlogged the traffic courts are right now. When the date nears you should be able to get at least one more continuance if you can provide some type of reason to the court clerk, however with the case this far away you should be pretty well off and they may not grant you a continuance on that fact alone.
Lisa,
You might want to check into the time limit for the trial. They only have a certain amount of time to take you to court.
If every one went to court they would have to throw out 90% of the tickets. The Dallas news paper did an article on speeding tickets. They said that if a lawyer that handles speeding tickets demanded a jury trial for all of his clients it totally screw up the court system. Just one lawyer is all it would take.
My husband got a speeding ticket for going “84 in a 70 zone” yesterday. He was driving a government vehicle that has an 80mph governor on it, in the middle lane while cars passed him on the right. PS he was also towing a boat and a 1,000 water aid. How ’bout that math?
Sarah, read my post on 25 Mar as well as those earlier if this was a RADAR ticket. If so, the cop most likely clocked one of the cars passing him. Our doppler radar in the F-4 was programmed to pick up the fastest target when multiple targets are in the area. I’d bet police doppler does the same…and probably the same for lasar.
To “Beat a Speeding Ticket” & “Steve”
Thanks so much, very useful info. I love to hear that courts are backlogged! It gives me a sweet, sweet pleasure deep down inside!
Have court in 3 hours for speeding 150mph in a 45 zone…
Interesting debate. Thanks for the read.
What on earth could you have been driving that could go 150mph, JJ??
In response to LynnB on Apr 16.
The precision of the laser makes it very difficult to argue that a laser was picking up more than one target.
The best case scenario to argue that another driver was likely the perp and your were nabbed by mistake is to argue that a larger and faster vehicle was moving ahead of you (or behind you if the cop is clocking from the front) and the cop was actually picking up the larger truck, SUV or rig and not your car.
I think it would be wise to talk about our own observations.
My own observations show evidence that the correlation between speed and accident occurrence is inverse. That in fact, accidents are far more likely caused at slow speeds and speeding never even enters the equation for either party.
For starters, I drive a reasonable and prudent speed regularly, and it just so happens to be over the speed limit usually.
There have been two accidents for me and BOTH occurred while my car was STOPPED. One was in a parking lot when a lady backed into my car, the other I was stopped at a yield sign and a driver behind me was probably looking at oncoming traffic and rear-ended me.
And on the freeway the only close call that comes to mind was a case where I was going the speed limit in the far-right lane late at night when a car entering the freeway pulled right in front of me going about 30mph. It is no public service when police are used as an extortion racket when they could be doing neighborhood patrols in marked cars acting as a preventive force to deter home invasion, robbery etc.
I got pulled over last night For Running a redlight, when I know for a fact it was Yellow, and my buddy in the car with me backs me on it.
A white SUV next to me pinned it as the light was in mid length of being yellow so he wouldnt have to stop, but I turned right during that yellow lightbeing that I was already over the breaker Line ( that white line to stop at) knowing I still have the right away.
How good is my chance in court fighting this as not guilty the whole way thru. After the cop asked me if he knew why he pulled me over, I told him..It must be my headlight still doesnt work even tho I replaced it today.
He said, no You ran that redlight..I said..the Yellow light you mean..Thats when he told me he was going to let me go but now that I want to Argue with him, hes giving me some tickets…Hes got me on NOTHING..
I was clocked doing 84 in a 55. I was clocked by laser LIDAR. The ticket said the speed was read while the cop was 569 feet behind me. I have no idea what the distance was when the cop first saw me while he was hiding on the right side of the expressway and then he traveled 5 lanes over to the HOV and then he went in a straight line toward me. If i ask him these questions during my trial, is he required to have this information. Do any NY State laws mandate the time frame and distance traveled by the cop to record me to be recorded anywhere? It felt like he got to me 5 minutes after i sped past him on the expressway. I thought I was home free until vroom.
Quite often I drive past cops while exceeding the speed limit. Despite this, I haven’t been pulled over in more than 10 years. Why? Because cops admit that speeding by itself is not dangerous — driving outside the flow of traffic is.
If you want to obey the letter of the law and drive at the posted limit, that’s entirely up to you. But I beg all of you to follow the law that states that you must travel in the far right lane unless passing. People failing to keep right is the reason we see so much weaving in and out of traffic.
{Because cops admit that speeding by itself is not dangerous — driving outside the flow of traffic is.}
Cops may well know that but how and why they enforce what they do is predicated not on how dangerous a particular activity is but on many other factors, some more legitimate than others. It may due to a quota or a performance standard, a whim, a pet peeve or commonly just the desire for money for their jurisdiction.
Agreed, JY. In fact that leads me to my single biggest complaint — that we’re playing a game in which we aren’t told the rules! A cop might ignore me driving 75 today, but then has every legal right to pull me over tomorrow for driving 70? How fair a game is that?
Clearly the posted limits mean nothing. If people want to make the claim that driving at the posted limit is for safety reasons, then how about we file a suit against the police for failing to enforce the law, for allowing 95% of motorists to drive in an unsafe manner. How do you think that would turn out?
Here’s something that everyone should consider. Except for the abolition of the national 55 MPH limit, when was the last time anyone ever saw a speed limit raised? Yeah, almost never. So we are basically driving on the freeways at the same 55/65/maybe 70 MPH limits that have been in place at least since the 60’s if not the 50’s or earlier.
Yet wouldn’t it be safer to travel faster in safer cars? Aren’t cars now WAY safer than they were then?
Today’s cars are engineered with much tighter tolerances, better steering, WAY better tires, better handling and suspensions, not to mention many, many safety features like anti-lock brakes (which benefit those outside the car as well) that make them much safer, more stable, more reliable, and much safer to drive at higher speeds.
Yet the speed limits remain largely unchanged. This seems to suggest that speed limits are set not for reasons of safety, but for other reasons. And revenue for local jurisdictions are definitely one of the obvious reasons.
Does the above argument support raising speed limits in school zones? Definitely not. But on the freeway? Sure.
I’d also like to remind people, that this organization supports setting speed limits at the 85th percentile as a safety measure. If traffic surveys were done here in the Boston metro area on the freeway, I think we’d find that that 85Th percentile is probably somewhere around 70/75 MPH. And the freeways are signed at 55 MPH and sometimes even 45MPH.
Writing laws that make almost anyone a criminal is tyranny. I am relieved to find there’s a national organization dedicated to stopping that tyranny.
Regards,
Kim G
Boston, MA
Hey Derrick, take the driving test again. A yellow light does not mean to proceed with caution like most people think. It means to stop if it is safe to do so, therefore, it would still go through court if he would have issued you a citation.
In regards to Mr. James Young:
You know i find this funny. In an earlier comment from January 15th, you said:
“Yet, that was the intent of the law, to get drivers to move over to allow the smoother and faster flow of traffic around them. CSP should cite drivers for failing to move right for faster traffic without regard to the posted limit. IF I’M RUNNING 85 MPH AND SOME GUY WANTS TO RUN 95, IT IS UP TO ME TO MOVE OVER, without regard to the posted limit.”
And in that same statement you said:
Please explain how “speeding” affects other drivers. If I am running 80 mph on a 75 mph limit, I’m speeding. IF I THEN PASS SOME GUY RUNNING 50 MPH, HE NEED DO NOTHING, NO CHANGE OF COURSE OR SPEED. He continues on if I’m there or not.
Did you pay attention to your words that i put in CAPS for you? You are contradicting yourself when you say B.S. like this. You need to pay attention what your saying, then you won’t look so incapable when someone points this stuff out to you. You also said on Jan 6:
“a ferrari at 100mph stops faster than your SUV at 55mph. should we ban SUV. Should we require $15000 carbon ceramic brakes for every car.”
Guess what? Not everyone can afford $15,000 for brakes let alone $15,000 for anything… So quit criticizing us who can’t.
GPD writes:
{In regards to Mr. James Young:
You know [I] find this funny. In an earlier comment from January 15th, you said:
“Yet, that was the intent of the law, to get drivers to move over to allow the smoother and faster flow of traffic around them. CSP should cite drivers for failing to move right for faster traffic without regard to the posted limit. IF I’M RUNNING 85 MPH AND SOME GUY WANTS TO RUN 95, IT IS UP TO ME TO MOVE OVER, without regard to the posted limit.”
And in that same statement you said:
Please explain how “speeding” affects other drivers. If I am running 80 mph on a 75 mph limit, I’m speeding. IF I THEN PASS SOME GUY RUNNING 50 MPH, HE NEED DO NOTHING, NO CHANGE OF COURSE OR SPEED. He continues on if I’m there or not.
Did you pay attention to your words that [I] put in CAPS for you? You are contradicting yourself when you say B.S. like this. You need to pay attention what [you’re] saying, then you won’t look so incapable when someone points this stuff out to you.}
That is hardly a contradiction. The obligation to stay to the right – more harshly stated as the obligation to yield to faster traffic – remains with a given driver without regard to his speed. If one driver exceeds a posted limit AND a slower driver is in his proper rightmost lane, that slower driver is not affected in any way by the faster driver. No slower driver is obligated to ever do anything additional beyond their ordinary proscribed behavior as a result of being in the proximity of faster drivers. This is a subtle point but very important and was repeated several times throughout this thread.
{You also said on Jan 6:
“a ferrari at 100mph stops faster than your SUV at 55mph. should we ban SUV. Should we require $15000 carbon ceramic brakes for every car.”
Guess what? Not everyone can afford $15,000 for brakes let alone $15,000 for anything… So quit criticizing us who can’t.}
No, I didn’t write that. That poster was vvbvb.
I’ll be happy to let the other posters decide how capable I look.
The best way to avoid getting a ticket is to set your cruise control to the speed limit, and don’t drive with your head up your ass.
Most of our speed limits are well under-posted. Never mind being 85th percentile, which according to common traffic engineering knowledge and federal law (as stated in the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices) is the best way to set a speed limit if deemed necessary; they are barely 50th percentile, if that. The quote below is taken directly from the Florida DOT website.
How are speed limits established? It is common traffic engineering knowledge that about 85 percent of all drivers travel at reasonably safe speeds for the various roadway conditions they encounter, regardless of speed limit signs. This leaves 15 percent of drivers who must be reminded of the maximum speed limit. This reminder must be coupled with meaningful enforcement. Based on this knowledge, a traffic engineering study is conducted to establish speed limits on the state highway. The Department uses the “85th percentile” method of determining appropriate and safe posted speed limits in conjunction with the maximum statute based speeds.
Who sets speed limits on the state highways? The Florida Legislature authorized the Florida Department of Transportation to establish speed limits on state highways up to the following maximums: 70 mph on Interstates, 65 mph on a four-lane divided highway outside an urban area (with a population of 5,000 or more), and 60 mph on other state highways.
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/TrafficOperations/FAQs/SpeedLimitFAQ.htm
So the question still remains. Who sets speed limits on our roads, traffic engineers or bureaucrats? Is it any coincidence these limits are always maxed out? The legislature has essentially capped the ability of the DOT to set 85th percentile speed limits which according to “common traffic engineering knowledge” are “reasonably safe speeds.” Essentially, people who are driving “reasonably safe speeds” are being ticketed because the legislature is creating “speeders” out of reasonably safe drivers to generate revenue and/or present the image that they are politicians who are concerned for your safety. Funny how keeping you safe always involves the government making tons of money in the process.
State legislated speed limits are not based on established traffic engineering practices and usurp the authority of state Department of Transportation traffic engineers to set 85th percentile speed limits where speed limits are deemed necessary. If you don’t believe it contact your district traffic engineer and ask him off the record if speed limits are being set according to the accepted traffic engineering practices he or she learned in engineering school. I did and my traffic engineer said that they do not and cannot set 85th percentile speed limits because the legislature will not allow it. Legislatures have castrated the authority of their traffic engineers for the benefits of increased cash flow to pay for big government programs they promised people to get elected in the first place as well as to quench the fear that has been instilled in the public for so many years that “speed kills” to improve their image as a legislator that “cares” about the people. If you really believe that speed limits are being set in the best interests of the people, I respectfully say you are being played.
Many people will believe that there are too many crazies out there as they have been convinced, whether they know it or not, that we must endure this oppression because it is the only thing separating us from chaos and destruction. It is nothing more than a baseless paranoia that has permeated throughout our society fostered by government bureaucracies and insurance corporations to support their own interests.
Meanwhile, government bureaucracies and insurance companies (represented by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) are making money hand over fist while trying to convince people that it just so happens the same policies that maximize their cash flow also maximize our safety. In a country whose founding principles are to maximize freedom and self-government through personal responsibility and minimize government control, this will lead any American presented with the facts to question why we are not reevaluating the current system, especially since we are receiving none of the promised benefits.
Check out http://trafficsafety.meetup.com/12/
It’s a meetup group I just started. Everyone should try and start groups in their area to gain strength in numbers.