2 Sides of a Speeding Ticket

[sbkline]

I see there's no point in arguing this point. I see it one way and the rest of you see it another. That's okay, I guess...differing opinions are what make the world go around. And how boring would it be if we all agreed all the time? :lol:

All I can say is that I'm surprised to see how many Barney Fife fans we have on this board. Coincidentally, that's what's playing on TV right now in the other room, so I'll be thinking of y'all while I'm in there watching fearless Fife on TV. :ROFLOL:

 

[Monty]

I see there's no point in arguing this point. I see it one way and the rest of you see it another. That's okay, I guess...differing opinions are what make the world go around. And how boring would it be if we all agreed all the time? :lol:

All I can say is that I'm surprised to see how many Barney Fife fans we have on this board. Coincidentally, that's what's playing on TV right now in the other room, so I'll be thinking of y'all while I'm in there watching fearless Fife on TV. :ROFLOL:

:brick: :brick:

 

[sbkline]

:brick: :brick:

Ya, that's how I felt about it, too.

 

[TwoTigersMom]

I see there's no point in arguing this point. I see it one way and the rest of you see it another. That's okay, I guess...differing opinions are what make the world go around. And how boring would it be if we all agreed all the time? :lol:

All I can say is that I'm surprised to see how many Barney Fife fans we have on this board. Coincidentally, that's what's playing on TV right now in the other room, so I'll be thinking of y'all while I'm in there watching fearless Fife on TV. :ROFLOL:

:ROFLOL: You are 100% right, there is no point in arguing about this. A law is not going to be changed just because of one person's "opinion". Our opinions don't matter one bit. If you want your opinion to be heard and taken with a little more than a grain of salt you would need to take it to your congressmen and senators, not a Disney discussion board.

I wouldn't neccesarily call myself a Barney Fife fan, I prefer Gomer. However, I am a fan of anyone who puts his or her life on the line for myself and my family and I have always and will always show great respect for them.

 

[sbkline]

:ROFLOL: You are 100% right, there is no point in arguing about this. A law is not going to be changed just because of one person's "opinion". Our opinions don't matter one bit. If you want your opinion to be heard and taken with a little more than a grain of salt you would need to take it to your congressmen and senators, not a Disney discussion board.

I wouldn't neccesarily call myself a Barney Fife fan, I prefer Gomer. However, I am a fan of anyone who puts his or her life on the line for myself and my family and I have always and will always show great respect for them.

I'm not attempting nor desiring to see a law changed and there is no need to write my congressman...because as a general practice, it is my opinion which is practiced by the police. As I have stated before, it seems that most jurisdictions are in the practice of giving a little leeway when it comes to enforcing the speed limit. I don't think it's a common practice to be pulling people over for going 56 in a 55 zone, for example. I don't think this should happen and apparently most cops agree with me, because it doesn't generally happy. Sure, every now and then you get some Barney Fife with an overzelousness to whip out the old ticket book anytime he sees even the most minor infraction. But generally cops operate with a little common sense and discernment and don't go strutting around hassling people over petty nonsense.

I don't have a problem with having a speed limit, nor do I have a problem with it being enforced. And, although I personally would like to see Illinois raise the speed limit a little, raising it isn't the issue I'm talking about. Because no matter what the speed limit is set at, there's always going to be the issue of the most dilligent driver inevitably going over it by a few mph. Maybe he doesn't have his cruise control set and his speed fluctuates slightly as his foot inevitably moves as he drives. His speed remains constantly in the neighborhood of 55, but can vary from 53 to 58, for example. Or maybe he sets the cruise at 55, but the needle sets in at 56...sometimes with those kind of speedomoters, it's hard to tell exactly which number it's on. Or maybe he's going 55, but the radar gun picks him up just as he goes down a little incline, before he has a chace to correct his speed. Or maybe he's just passed another vehicle and he is in the process of slowing back down. Passing is legal in most jurisdictions and unless the vehicle you're going is going VERY slow, it's almost impossible to pass without exceeding the speed limit for a bried period.

No, I'm not talking about changing the law or writing my congressman. Because the law has to be WRITTEN as black and white as possible because you can't possibly include every mitigating circumstance in legislation. That's why it's the job of thinking human beings to use their judgement and common sense on when to apply the law and not just look at the letter of the law and start writing tickets. Pulling over and ticketing someone for going 56 or even 60 in a 55 zone isn't using good judgement...it's being a Barney Fife (or a Warren, the deputy from the color episodes LOL) And thankfully, most cops agree with me, because this just doesn't happen on a regular basis.

And, in case anyone wonders, for the past several pages, it's not the original story linked by the OP that we're talking about. In that case, the woman admitted to making a practice of willfully going 10 MPH over the speed limit, and therefore I don't have too much sympathy for her in this particular case. But I'm talking about principles here, such as giving a little leeway for going down steep hills where it is almost impossible to keep from speeding at that point.

 

[JustPlainBill]

No, I'm not talking about changing the law or writing my congressman. Because the law has to be WRITTEN as black and white as possible because you can't possibly include every mitigating circumstance in legislation. That's why it's the job of thinking human beings to use their judgement and common sense on when to apply the law and not just look at the letter of the law and start writing tickets. Pulling over and ticketing someone for going 56 or even 60 in a 55 zone isn't using good judgement...it's being a Barney Fife (or a Warren, the deputy from the color episodes LOL) And thankfully, most cops agree with me, because this just doesn't happen on a regular basis.

I understand the point you're driving at, putting aside the OPs example.
As a supervisor at a factory I used to work for the HR manager had formally been a police officer in a large Illinois city. He told me once when I had a difficult employee to write the employee up three times for the same occurance and terminate him, to be rid of the problem. I responded that the employee wasn't breaking any of the company rules. He scoffed at me and told me that everybody breaks the rules at one time or another and you just have wait until they do, everybody isn't 100%. He said that when he was a cop he knew every car on the road had something on it that would be in violation of at least one municipal code. He said he could write a ticket anytime he wanted and he did. Maybe that's why he wasn't a cop anymore. :shrug: I didn't agree with his methods but I certainly became wiser as to how some cops can give other cops a bad name in general. I had a lead foot when I was a kid and I got my share of tickets and paid them knowing I broke the law. I have been ticket free now for over 20 years, until just 2 years ago. I had started a new job and I was driving an unfamiliar road to work through a city, that was not my hometown. Traffic was heavy and bumper to bumper. There were railroad tracks ahead with a traffic signal 200 yards beyond. The light turned red, the cars ahead of me still had room to cross and clear the tracks. When I approached the tracks I was careful to stop before and look beyond the cars ahead to make sure I would be able to clear the tracks as well. I saw that there was plenty of room so I advanced. Unfortunately the car ahead of me had just cleared the tracks then stopped suddenly to let 7 or 8 cars in ahead of him from a side street, causing me to be get stuck on the tracks momentarily. Knowing instantly that I couldn't stay on the tracks, I moved forward and pulled my car into the median aside the car infront of me to clear the tracks. There was a city police officer standing on the shoulder of the street waiting for this to happen and he wrote me a $500 ticket for parking on the railroad tracks! I tried to explain in good faith to the officer the circumstance, but he wouldn't hear any input from me. The violation was a court mandatory appearance, I had to take a day off work to appear before a judge, 1st time in my life. I told the officer that I pulled off the tracks, that I didn't "park" on them as he suggested, at the very least he could maybe cite me for a lesser charge of stopping on a median. I called the county courthouse and spoke with the clerk. She told me that they had received a rash of the same cases as mine from the same city I got the ticket from, she sounded almost disgusted by the practice. Since I had no witnesses I was forced to plea to a lesser charge and pay half the fine including court costs. The only positive thing was I was able to get supervision on the ticket seeing as I had such a clean record. I felt I had been fleeced by not only the city, but the court system as well.

 

[Erika]

Granted you'll always find a few bad apples in any profession, but overall...

I am a fan of anyone who puts his or her life on the line for myself and my family and I have always and will always show great respect for them.

 

[DMC-12]

If I get busted for speeding... its generally cause I was an @$$ and WAS speeding.

The most recent ticket I got happened just East of Columbus, OH. I was tired and irritated.. and had a 6hr drive back to Chicago ahead of me. I got on some Interstate that was new and unfamiliar to me, and I was in the left lane. The left lane was ending (abruptly) and there was long line of semi trucks in the center lane. The semi to the right of me speed up... not letting me in... so I punched it to get ahead of him, so I could merge... as the lane ended. I got in front of him... and next thing I know I was being pulled over.

I got clocked at 85mph in a 65mph. I was so angry at myself, I havent gotten a ticket in a few years, and my record was clean. It was a dumb move.. and I tried explaining to the State Trooper why I did what I did. He didnt wanna hear it... and kept being rude and very hostile towards me.

Then he wanted to give me a ticket for not wearing my seat belt. I said: Excuse me?! I took my belt off when you came up to my window.. right after you asked for my vehicle papers, as I had to dig into my glove box to get them! YOU STOOD THERE AND WATCHED ME TAKE IT OFF! He tried to call me liar and kept saying I wasnt wearing my seat belt... but I refused to accept that... and he finally backed off. [I always wear my seat belt, BTW]

I sucked it up and took my speeding ticket... cause I know that was a dummy move on my part. And the sad thing... this is exactly how I got my last speeding ticket 3 years prior to this one... even down to the 85mph. Thats why I was so angry with myself. :lol:

 

[k.hunter30]

I definitely have respect for people who put their lives on the line for my own... until they do something to LOOSE that respect, and I think that's perfectly fair.

I couldn't imagine being a policewoman. Not knowing if the person you just pulled over is "having a bad day" and may have a weapon in the car would definitely keep me paranoid. They put themselves at risk every day. It's noble. But a few of them have absolutlely terrible attitudes and really enjoy the "power trip" they think they are entitled to. It is at that point--after noticing their poor attitudes and rude behavior--that I DO loose respect for a certain policeman/woman.

I was just pulled over on Sunday. I was coming home from church with a trunk FULL of food left over from an event we had. I didn't want all that food to topple in my trunk and create a sloppy mess, so I was driving a good deal below the speed limit. Because of that I put my hazard lights on. A cop in front of me noticed, pulled over, waited for me to pass him, got RIGHT on my tail (not a smart thing to do right behind someone with their hazard lights on), gets on his phone/radio for some reason, then puts his lights on. My first thought was, "Oh, how nice, he wants to see if I'm okay." Nope. He gets out of the car and rudely asks me why I have my hazard lights on. I explain. He tells me how I was holding up traffic. He says that I need to turn off my hazard lights--"people only use them when they need to drive fast." :lookaroun:shrug: He didn't give me a ticket. He couldn't have, I did nothing wrong. But he was beyond rude. There was no need for that. The icing on the cake is, he's our neighbor! But that was why I was even less surprised to receive the treatment I did. Many people don't like his attitude.

All that to say, I do have respect for law enforcement; but it's not blind, unconditional respect. Unfortunately, it's those policemen and women like my neighbor who give the others a bad name.

 

[JustPlainBill]

All that to say, I do have respect for law enforcement; but it's not blind, unconditional respect. Unfortunately, it's those policemen and women like my neighbor who give the others a bad name.

I agree and feel the same as you...In my case the city prosecuter actually became the hero in my eyes by allowing me to plead to the lesser charge and saving me a little $$$. The cop however will always be remembered as the villain, this particuliar one, not all of course. It did sour me against this particuliar municipality as well, I make it a point not to spend any money there. Unfortunately, I still have to drive through there to and from work.

 

[MouseMadness]

I'm not attempting nor desiring to see a law changed and there is no need to write my congressman...because as a general practice, it is my opinion which is practiced by the police. As I have stated before, it seems that most jurisdictions are in the practice of giving a little leeway when it comes to enforcing the speed limit. I don't think it's a common practice to be pulling people over for going 56 in a 55 zone, for example. I don't think this should happen and apparently most cops agree with me, because it doesn't generally happy. Sure, every now and then you get some Barney Fife with an overzelousness to whip out the old ticket book anytime he sees even the most minor infraction. But generally cops operate with a little common sense and discernment and don't go strutting around hassling people over petty nonsense.

I don't have a problem with having a speed limit, nor do I have a problem with it being enforced. And, although I personally would like to see Illinois raise the speed limit a little, raising it isn't the issue I'm talking about. Because no matter what the speed limit is set at, there's always going to be the issue of the most dilligent driver inevitably going over it by a few mph. Maybe he doesn't have his cruise control set and his speed fluctuates slightly as his foot inevitably moves as he drives. His speed remains constantly in the neighborhood of 55, but can vary from 53 to 58, for example. Or maybe he sets the cruise at 55, but the needle sets in at 56...sometimes with those kind of speedomoters, it's hard to tell exactly which number it's on. Or maybe he's going 55, but the radar gun picks him up just as he goes down a little incline, before he has a chace to correct his speed. Or maybe he's just passed another vehicle and he is in the process of slowing back down. Passing is legal in most jurisdictions and unless the vehicle you're going is going VERY slow, it's almost impossible to pass without exceeding the speed limit for a bried period.

No, I'm not talking about changing the law or writing my congressman. Because the law has to be WRITTEN as black and white as possible because you can't possibly include every mitigating circumstance in legislation. That's why it's the job of thinking human beings to use their judgement and common sense on when to apply the law and not just look at the letter of the law and start writing tickets. Pulling over and ticketing someone for going 56 or even 60 in a 55 zone isn't using good judgement...it's being a Barney Fife (or a Warren, the deputy from the color episodes LOL) And thankfully, most cops agree with me, because this just doesn't happen on a regular basis.

And, in case anyone wonders, for the past several pages, it's not the original story linked by the OP that we're talking about. In that case, the woman admitted to making a practice of willfully going 10 MPH over the speed limit, and therefore I don't have too much sympathy for her in this particular case. But I'm talking about principles here, such as giving a little leeway for going down steep hills where it is almost impossible to keep from speeding at that point.

Holy crap man, I thought you said you were done :ROFLOL:

:lookaroun

 

[Timmay]

such as giving a little leeway for going down steep hills where it is almost impossible to keep from speeding at that point.

In 18 years of experience, I have yet to see this "excuse" ever once hold water in court. I even heard a judge tell one guy that used this excuse he had no business being behind the wheel of a car if he didn't know how to control the speed of a vehicle going down a hill. I tend to agree with that opinion.

A cop in front of me noticed, pulled over, waited for me to pass him, got RIGHT on my tail (not a smart thing to do right behind someone with their hazard lights on), gets on his phone/radio for some reason, then puts his lights on.

The area I bolded is a perfect example of how people get upset at a cop for something they know nothing about. Look, if what you said about this officer's behavior was correct, then he was out of line...but does him using his radio really bother you, or are you so mad about the situation you're trying to convince us, and yourself, every single thing he did out of line.

Just so you know, the dumbest thing a cop can do is not to call in to dispatch with vehcile information (make, model, license number) on a traffic stop they are making. Think for a moment why they do this.

 

[k.hunter30]

The area I bolded is a perfect example of how people get upset at a cop for something they know nothing about. Look, if what you said about this officer's behavior was correct, then he was out of line...but does him using his radio really bother you, or are you so mad about the situation you're trying to convince us, and yourself, every single thing he did out of line.

Just so you know, the dumbest thing a cop can do is not to call in to dispatch with vehcile information (make, model, license number) on a traffic stop they are making. Think for a moment why they do this.

Wow buddy...

First of all, what I said about his behavior was correct. No need for an "if."

Second, I never said him getting on the radio was out of line--no idea where you got that from. I just mentioned it as part of the story. And I am fully aware that they make that call to get the information you refer to. I simply thought it was interesting to note that he did so and he was my neighbor. I would guess he might then have information on my home address, letting him know that we live right next to each other.

I really think my post was very respectful, and I'd venture to say that most would agree. I was more voicing my opinion on one particular man (not only a cop, but my neighbor) who, I could see, would give other cops a "bad name."

 

[MouseMadness]

Just so you know, the dumbest thing a cop can do is not to call in to dispatch with vehcile information (make, model, license number) on a traffic stop they are making. Think for a moment why they do this.

It seems fairly obvious :shrug: I think people in general have a problem with authority figures anymore, and question every move they make. I really couldn't care less... I am so rarely on the wrong side of the law :lookaroun that it just isn't an issue. Apparently I'm in the minority on this one :lol:

 

[Timmay]

Wow buddy...
First of all, what I said about his behavior was correct. No need for an "if."

There is always need for an if, because there are two sides to every story...always.

Second, I never said him getting on the radio was out of line--no idea where you got that from. I just mentioned it as part of the story. And I am fully aware that they make that call to get the information you refer to.

If you know, then why did you say, "for some reason?"

By the way, officers radio in to dispatch with vehcile info for another reason. In case the person they stoppped comes out of the car blazing away with a gun and blows the cop away, solving the crime is going to be a bit easier.

I simply thought it was interesting to note that he did so and he was my neighbor. I would guess he might then have information on my home address, letting him know that we live right next to each other.

Chances are good he would not be given the information about you until he got back to his vehicle after making contact with you. The information is not instant.

I really think my post was very respectful, and I'd venture to say that most would agree. I was more voicing my opinion on one particular man (not only a cop, but my neighbor) who, I could see, would give other cops a "bad name."

Why would this one officer give all the rest a bad name? I have never understood this type of reasoning. Does a teacher that molests a child give all teachers a bad name? Does a physician that performs a surgery while intoxicated give other physicians a bad name? Of course not...but someone has one bad experience with a law enforcement officer and things seem to be very different.

 

[k.hunter30]

There is always need for an if, because there are two sides to every story...always.


If you know, then why did you say, "for some reason?"

By the way, officers radio in to dispatch with vehcile info for another reason. In case the person they stoppped comes out of the car blazing away with a gun and blows the cop away, solving the crime is going to be a bit easier.



Chances are good he would not be given the information about you until he got back to his vehicle after making contact with you. The information is not instant.



Why would this one officer give all the rest a bad name? I have never understood this type of reasoning. Does a teacher that molests a child give all teachers a bad name? Does a physician that performs a surgery while intoxicated give other physicians a bad name? Of course not...but someone has one bad experience with a law enforcement officer and things seem to be very different.

:lookaroun

{{hugs}}

 

[Timmay]

:lookaroun

{{hugs}}

:ROFLOL::ROFLOL:

 

[Dukeblue1016]

Why would this one officer give all the rest a bad name? I have never understood this type of reasoning. Does a teacher that molests a child give all teachers a bad name? Does a physician that performs a surgery while intoxicated give other physicians a bad name? Of course not...but someone has one bad experience with a law enforcement officer and things seem to be very different.

you are absolutely 100% correct...

So... when a child gets molested by his teacher... I don't think the molested student should speakup... because clearly... by speaking up that this one teacher molested them would be speaking bad about all teachers...


because as I go back to the original post that started this I realize that... there was ONE COP who was rude... and therefore, that ONE RUDE COP immediately means the person is calling into question every law enforcement personell this side of the mississippi (don't worry about the other side... they're all corrupted...)

so... when, on this side of the mississippi (again... just don't trust the other side), a teacher molests a student... it would be entirely unfair to speak up of that instance because... well... CLEARLY without a shadow of a doubt... that person would be speaking about all teachers...

and... that person... i imagine would have zero issues with another teacher if another teacher came up to them and said "hi, would you like to stay after today for a personal lesson"

I'M SURE THE MOLESTED KID WOULD FEEL 100% OKAY WITH JUMPING BACK INTO THAT SITUATION... because as you so OBVIOUSLY pointed out... holy cow it's a different person... why should this one have a "bad name"

 

[Timmay]

you are absolutely 100% correct...

So... when a child gets molested by his teacher... I don't think the molested student should speakup... because clearly... by speaking up that this one teacher molested them would be speaking bad about all teachers...


because as I go back to the original post that started this I realize that... there was ONE COP who was rude... and therefore, that ONE RUDE COP immediately means the person is calling into question every law enforcement personell this side of the mississippi (don't worry about the other side... they're all corrupted...)

so... when, on this side of the mississippi (again... just don't trust the other side), a teacher molests a student... it would be entirely unfair to speak up of that instance because... well... CLEARLY without a shadow of a doubt... that person would be speaking about all teachers...

and... that person... i imagine would have zero issues with another teacher if another teacher came up to them and said "hi, would you like to stay after today for a personal lesson"

I'M SURE THE MOLESTED KID WOULD FEEL 100% OKAY WITH JUMPING BACK INTO THAT SITUATION... because as you so OBVIOUSLY pointed out... holy cow it's a different person... why should this one have a "bad name"

Wow...I don't even know where to begin. Try to understand what is being said before jumping in with both feet and looking silly.

 

[sbkline]

I understand the point you're driving at, putting aside the OPs example.
As a supervisor at a factory I used to work for the HR manager had formally been a police officer in a large Illinois city. He told me once when I had a difficult employee to write the employee up three times for the same occurance and terminate him, to be rid of the problem. I responded that the employee wasn't breaking any of the company rules. He scoffed at me and told me that everybody breaks the rules at one time or another and you just have wait until they do, everybody isn't 100%. He said that when he was a cop he knew every car on the road had something on it that would be in violation of at least one municipal code. He said he could write a ticket anytime he wanted and he did. Maybe that's why he wasn't a cop anymore. :shrug: I didn't agree with his methods but I certainly became wiser as to how some cops can give other cops a bad name in general. I had a lead foot when I was a kid and I got my share of tickets and paid them knowing I broke the law. I have been ticket free now for over 20 years, until just 2 years ago. I had started a new job and I was driving an unfamiliar road to work through a city, that was not my hometown. Traffic was heavy and bumper to bumper. There were railroad tracks ahead with a traffic signal 200 yards beyond. The light turned red, the cars ahead of me still had room to cross and clear the tracks. When I approached the tracks I was careful to stop before and look beyond the cars ahead to make sure I would be able to clear the tracks as well. I saw that there was plenty of room so I advanced. Unfortunately the car ahead of me had just cleared the tracks then stopped suddenly to let 7 or 8 cars in ahead of him from a side street, causing me to be get stuck on the tracks momentarily. Knowing instantly that I couldn't stay on the tracks, I moved forward and pulled my car into the median aside the car infront of me to clear the tracks. There was a city police officer standing on the shoulder of the street waiting for this to happen and he wrote me a $500 ticket for parking on the railroad tracks! I tried to explain in good faith to the officer the circumstance, but he wouldn't hear any input from me. The violation was a court mandatory appearance, I had to take a day off work to appear before a judge, 1st time in my life. I told the officer that I pulled off the tracks, that I didn't "park" on them as he suggested, at the very least he could maybe cite me for a lesser charge of stopping on a median. I called the county courthouse and spoke with the clerk. She told me that they had received a rash of the same cases as mine from the same city I got the ticket from, she sounded almost disgusted by the practice. Since I had no witnesses I was forced to plea to a lesser charge and pay half the fine including court costs. The only positive thing was I was able to get supervision on the ticket seeing as I had such a clean record. I felt I had been fleeced by not only the city, but the court system as well.

I'm glad to see that someone understands where I'm coming from here! And your example of that jackass at the railroad crossing is the perfect illustration of my point: brainless imbeciles who see nothing but the letter of the law and are so black and white in their application of it that they are totally unable to take the circumstances into account. If you were rushing your pregnant wife to the hospital to give birth that guy would probably escort you to the hospital and then give you a ticket for speeding once you got there. If a carload of thugs was trying to run you off the road or machine gun you through the window, and you floored the accelorator to get away, this guy would probably still throw the book at you because you broke the law...nothing else matters. This is the kind of Barney Fifeishness that I'm speaking of. Being so rigid that there is no room for mercy, compassion or just plain ol' common sense...just the letter of the law and the ticketbook.

This is why being black and white just doesn't work. It's not so simple as the black and white fact that a law was infracted. Other things need to be weighed and considered besides the fact that a rule was technically violated.

Here is a rough example to illustrate what I'm thinking. I recently had to politely ask my neighbor not to let her kids play in the empty lot next door, which belongs to me. It's technically a seperate lot from the one my house sits on, but since it's right next door, it's more or less just a part of my yard. But that's irrelevant I guess. Anyway, I saw all her kids all out there playing one night without my permission. They just moved in and I don't want to start this, so I figured I'd better nip it in the bud. So now they know that they aren't to play there because it's my property. If I see them playing in my yard, I'll tell them not to, or remind the mother of my wishes. However, if they kick their ball into my yard and run over to retrieve it, I wouldn't make an issue of it. Or if they're playing in their yard and they run slightly over my property line, I'm not gonna make an issue of it. That's petty stuff. Even though their feet may cross my property line in the process of running around their yard, and that's technically a violation of my property, I'm not gonna push that issue. To me, that's similar to going one MPH over the speed limit. Coming onto my lot and playing kickball would be more like flat out speeding. That's what I'm talking about here. Something may be technically a violation of the law, such as going 1-5 MPH over the speed limit, but that's so petty that anyone who would push that issue is just an idiot. Again, it all has to do with using a little discernment.