[spencerhut]

How many of you got angry at an LEO for giving you a ticket back when the speed limit was 55? A fair number of you I am sure. Was it the LEOs fault you were breaking the law? No. Were you driving in a dangerous manner endangering your fellow citizens? I doubt it. More than likly you were trying to get from point A to point B before you died of old age. So where is the problem with this? You, the LEO or the law?

Drug enforcement gone too far? We need to change laws.
Militarization of the Police? - We need to change the laws.
Restrictions on what you can or can not buy(certain guns come to mind)? We need to change the laws.

See a trend here? We, citizens of this country, need to do our part. We need toget off our lazy, non participating butts and get involved in local, county, state and national politics. If we don't, one day we will wake up and yet another right we took for granted will be gone.

[DKSuddeth]

stand up, state your pro gun views, state your anti-law and order views, and watch your impending villification. Doing such will never gain you office, only ridicule and scorn from the sheeply populace. Most people nowadays know only one thing and that is that the government runs things the way they run things...that they know whats best and most all of the populace is happy with that arrangement.

[salvador31c]

Its The Perfect Storm :uhoh:

We, citizens of this country, need to do our part.

I Agree that we should all do our part by being active in our commuity and by voting

We need toget off our lazy, non participating butts and get involved in local, county, state and national politics

I may be lazy but i do paticipate in matters that relate to me but i wont be out there protesting every law that i do not agree with it would be a waste of time Just My Opinon

[cropcirclewalker]

<nop-signal sarcasm removed by Art>
:p

There was no correct answer for me to vote on the poll. I set my cruise at 5 over. Established leo protocol is not to ticket for 5 over.

[cbsbyte]

spencerhut you are completely missing the point of the threads about abusive police powers. No one here is complaning about getting speeding tickets, or bashing cops for doing their jobs. We don't even mind the LEO enforcing the current laws. It is the way that they have decided to enforce the laws that happens to be a problem. What many of us are concerned about is the over use of SWAT teams, for non violent offenses by many LE agencies across the country. This problem is a major issue, and can lead to more abuses. You are right we have to all stand up togther to make our voices know to the LEO community that we will not tolerate any more over use SWAT teams. Yes, we should all write our local offical and remind them that the problem exists, and something has to be done about it. Though, at this time it does not seem to be important enough issue for most Americans to act on. Until that happens all we can do is bring it up on boards like this to get people's attention.

[mp510]

It's your fault you broke the law. To my knowledge there is no constitutional protection for those who enjoy traveling fast, so the law is valuid. You broke it, you have to suffer the consequences. Write your reps if your angry.

[DRMMR02]

Something I have noticed from most people who blame the police, is that they are not angry that the police are catching criminals, they are angry that the police caught THEM. They are the first ones to call 911 when something goes wrong. Some yuppie or psycho chick talking on a cell phone gets sooo pissed off that they got caught. "Why don't you go catch REAL criminals?!?!". Of course if some other speeder collided with them, they would be their first to call the police and even press charges.

In nearly every case, blaming the police = thinking that the law applies to everyone but them.

You want someone to show up and make you feel safe when your door is smashed in at 3 am, then stop whining when you're endangering other people on the road because you think where you need to go is more important than anything else.


Now I know that most on THR rely on the police less than most people. But most Americans don't know how to do anything but call the police when something makes things inconvenient for them. Of course when they are the ones breaking the law, it all of a sudden becomes the Police's fault.

[Doug.38PR]

This poll really isn't clear. The question is so subjective it really makes it hard to give a definate answer. Some times one or all of the answers apply. It depends on what kind of an area, how much traffic, how fast everyone else is going.
For instance, if you are on a freeway in Houston and go 55 in a 55 you are going to be in or cause an accident. It's not safe to go the speed limit because everyone else is going 65-75.
Yes the law should be reasonable and should be updated. A policeman should take that into account. If he cannot because of supervisors and politicians who just want to rob people and take money then it is their fault. If the policeman is just doing it to be difficult then he is a jerk.
If on the other hand you are flying through a small town with a 45 mph zone and are goin 60-70 then obviously it is your fault.

[Green Lantern]

Without knowing full details, I'm gonna vote "The Law" - as most speed limits, IMO, are unreasonably low.

It's STILL your fault for speeding, but tempting when everyone else is doing it and 65 IS a safe speed for the area.

But at NO point is it the LEO's fault in this situaion, last time I checked they didn't CHOOSE what the speed limit was! :scrutiny:

[DKSuddeth]

the only time that I feel any bashing would be deserved is when there is an 'I'm better than you' attitude. Case in point, the Illinois LEO with an unauthorized machine gun getting a ruling of 'unconstitutionally vague, as it applies to him'. When did LEO's become super valued citizens, more worthy of rights than us regular old americans? I value the LEO's who faithfully perform their jobs, I have zero respect for those that confuse their having a badge with being given some upper class status.

[salvador31c]

if you are on a freeway in Houston and go 55 in a 55 you are going to be in or cause an accident. It's not safe to go the speed limit because everyone else is going 65-75.


very true i generally try to keep up with traffic but if i'm on the road by my self i keep to the speed limit i leave with plenty of time to allow me to get where i'm going on time

[pcosmar]

I don't want start Cop Bashing. If I am speeding write the ticket, I'll pay it. I have never been stoped for speeding.
A Cop kicking in the door of an inocent civilian is different. Incompetence and Poor Police Work at best. Criminal in fact.
Abuse of Police Powers, and Military response is just wrong.
If you are givin an order to violate the rights of a United States Citizen It had better be absolutly nessisary. If not you are breaking the LAW.
I would like to see more good Peace Officers refuse to carry out illegal warents and arrests.
Just stop it. Or quit, or tell. Say out loud, on camera this is Wrong.

[spencerhut]

"spencerhut you are completely missing the point of the threads about abusive police powers" Now you know I don't agree with that!:uhoh:

I thought I was making a point most folks would understand. People give LEOs grief, including SWAT and the LEO giving you a ticket, for doing their jobs. LEOs are supposed to serve and protect. How do they do that? In many ways, most of which relate to the enforcement of one or more of our many laws. We need to make sure they have good laws to enforce, it’s our duty to participate and help to give them good laws.

[Gordon Fink]

Actually, speed laws are a great example. They are an attempt to force an objective standard onto something that is inherently situational and subjective. Sometimes, driving at 100 miles per hour can be perfectly safe, while at others, driving at even 40 miles per hour can be dangerously fast. Most unjust legislation flows from the same flawed logic as speed-limit laws.

~G. Fink

[Doug.38PR]

on the side, what I REALLY hate is when I am going 3-5 miles over the speed limit, people around me going the same or even slower (the speed limit more or less) freak out and slam on their breaks down to 5-10 miles under the speed limit.

I always lock my cruise control at 73 or 75 and leave it. If I pass a police car parked on the shoulder, move over to the left lane to give him a wide birth and maintain my speed. I see do this all the time and about 50% of my job is driving on the highways and backroads of rural Texas

[lamazza]

There are good and bad in every profession. Bashing LEOs is non productive-as stated earlier use your vote and community voice to get the good ones in.
I once recieved a speeding ticket on a highway for going 2 miles over?!

[NineseveN]

Bashing would imply you were wrong, i.e. complaining without cause. If you had cause to complain, it would be criticizing or complaining, not bashing.

[Panthera Tigris]

on the side, what I REALLY hate is when I am going 3-5 miles over the speed limit, people around me going the same or even slower (the speed limit more or less) freak out and slam on their breaks down to 5-10 miles under the speed limit.

Well, 3 to 5 miles over the speed limit isn't that bad, but some of us have painful, crippling injuries from being hit from behind by people who were driving over the speed limit.

We don't want to be paralyzed for life by someone doing it again, so we tend to be a little timid at times.

I've gotten to where I absolutely despise having to drive on the interstate due to everyone going 20 miles over the speed limit. I rarely see anyone only going 5 miles over the limit.

[gezzer]

Never had a ticket in over38 years of driving, so it does not apply to me. However you broke the speed limit eat the ticket like a man not a sissy.

[Brian Williams]

Phenom, you have not met very many LEO's on the good side of a ticket then.
Tis mostly the Thread starters fault, for greaking the Law in the first place, some laws should be changed or removed if they are bad or worthless.

Keep it kool folks or it will close.

[Big Calhoun]

To the OP's original post; no, bashing police officers doesn't make sense. When I get a ticket, I'm mad at the fact I got caught, not the fact that the officer caught me. S/he's doing their job.

But, does that mean we should let them off for blindly following inane policies? I don't think so. IMO, it's the whole root of the problem in this country...LEGISLATION. Don't like welfare, create legislation. Crime is up in your hood, add new legislation. Too many drug addicts on your corner, lets propose more legislation. When does someone say, "Stop! What we are doing is not working." and address the root-causes?

The ones ones that enforce this legislation are the ones with first hand knowledge of what works and what doesn't. But IMO, that is rarely shared upwards. So the end result, one bad publicity story after another. So no, I for one don't place blame on officers for being part of the 'system', but I do feel they share the blame when the system doesn't improve from obvious failings.

[CornCod]

I didn't answer the poll because there were too few alternatives. In cities with high crime rates a ticket of 65mph in a 55mph zone is a waste of taxpayers money. The police should be working on crimes and not traffic enforcement. In areas where there are few crime problems the driver should get the ticket.

[DRMMR02]

I didn't answer the poll because there were too few alternatives. In cities with high crime rates a ticket of 65mph in a 55mph zone is a waste of taxpayers money. The police should be working on crimes and not traffic enforcement. In areas where there are few crime problems the driver should get the ticket.

While I agree, that really has nothing to do with the question. The premise is that you did get pulled over for speeding. If the cop ignores your speeding to go after a bank robber, you're still breaking the law and you're still in the wrong, even if you got away. And if he does pull you over, even if there are other criminals out there, that doesn't absolve you of guilt in your crime.

But I do agree that police should(and I think most do this) pick who they pull over based on safety and such. If I turn right at a red light at 2 am and there are no other cars around, even if there is a posted "no turn on red sign", I would hope I don't get pulled over. Why? Because I am clearly not endangering anyone. However, if I do get pulled over, I still deserve it because I did break the posted law in order to get where I wanted to be faster.

[Spreadfire Arms]

i think on THR there appears to be a rather outspoken anti-LEO faction, although i think on the most part here the board members are pro-LEO.

for the example of 65 in a 55 zone, personally, i think thats a chicken sh*t ticket. but good probable cause to stop a car to check the occupants out. and yes, its a violation....but probably not one that deserves a ticket.

[JohnBT]

You have to be really unlucky to get a ticket for 65 in a 55 around here because they're looking for the real speeders.

Ever been on the Interstate in Virginia?

http://static.flickr.com/51/170043315_81c2f972ea_m.jpg

Edited to add: BTW, these are real signs.

[FTF]

It's not bashing when you bring to light the fact that the "blue line" enables sworn police officers to break laws at will as a matter of professional courtesty.

/whine My job is so hard, you don't know what we go through /whine off.

You don't see garbage men leaving their garbage in their front yard for weeks on end because they pick enough of it up at work.

Oh... but it's so less dangerous to be a garbage-man. They sure deal with more crap than the cops do lol. Hence the term "Cop-out".

I voted that cops are to blame. They are the ones that enforce BS laws... but ONLY when it's not them. They make exemptions for other cops therefore, they are to blame. Only time cops get in trouble is when there is no possible way around it... FYI ramming a police checkpoint or something.

[10-Ring]

Uh, no. Dad taught me to never argue w/ the man w/ the shootin' iron on his hip. Arguin' is for what court is for ;)

[thexrayboy]

This is one of those no win type of polls. The kind that the media circus like to use to get an outcome they like and then beat it to death. Try phrasing the question a bit differently.

[Optical Serenity]

FTF, your post is very indicative of hearsay and not actual fact. The notion that Police Officers get special treatment is very often a false one. As an LEO I can tell you that there are plenty of times I can think of that other Officers I knew received tickets or what not, regardless of who they were.

Now, you want to talk about special treatment...thing is, many get it. Out of the thousands of traffic stops I've made, probably 90% or so of them resulted in a verbal warning. So, is everyone who gets a warning guilty of some sort of professional courtesy? No...it is simply me, doing my job, and having the option to use my judgement. Unfortunately, ignorance leads to people who want to take away judgement and discretion from law enforcement.

If you, FTF, really want us to do our jobs without discretion...aka: black & white...then so be it. I personally think that the vast majority of properly informed individuals would much rather LEOs have discretion.

As for enforcing BS laws...It is not up to me what laws are bs or not. The only time an LEO or anyone else for that matter has any say so on laws and whether they should or should not exist is when it comes time to vote. Elect people into office who you support and who you think will change law to be more to your liking, rather than to slap the enforcement branch on the wrist when it goes out and enforces a law, that YOUR elected reps made.

As for the poll, I think it is perfectly fine. I know when in life I do right and wrong. What is "right" and what is "wrong" in this situation refers to law. "Wrong" is when we do something that is forbidden by law.

And yes, unfortunately there is a high wave of LEO-bashers here. Although, I disagree that most of them are pro-LEO to any extent. I'd say only a small fraction of the board is Pro-LEO. I personally see the RKBA and 2nd Amendment causes tainted by those who would rather have an anarchy than a Republic. Having the right to bear arms is awesome and fantastic. I love it and defend it. However, it does not mean I have the Right to no law.I think many here see it as synonymous when comparing RKBA and Law. Remember, law is what gives us the RKBA. I don't want to live in a society that lets people do whatever they want. I love our society where we get to elect people into office who create laws to keep our society healthy.

Good post.

[Old Dog]

It's not bashing when you bring to light the fact that the "blue line" enables sworn police officers to break laws at will as a matter of professional courtesty.
This is a "fact?" Hoo boy. The only fact I discern here is that it's quite sad that anyone could make a statement such as that. Sadder still if one actually believes that cops are allowed to "break laws at will."
I voted that cops are to blame.
Precisely the sort of attitude that enables bad laws to be created and stay on the books ... blaming those who are charged with enforcing law, rather than those who create -- or allow to be created -- the laws. The same attitude displayed by those who cry and moan about the curriculum their children are taught in the public schools -- who would blame the teachers -- yet never attend school board meetings, PTA meetings or even deign to communicate with school officials ...

[Zoogster]

Leo's are just people. Of course the types attracted to said profession can be
a. Person that really wants to help community and give back
b. Person that likes the feeling of authority and wants a career that allows them to weild it,
C. Person that was victimized or had family etc victimized and want to be in charge of getting rid of BG
d. Was in a similar cut and dry black and white institution and it seems a natural transition, such as prior military work
e. Person that just likes guns and chasing people down and being a hero for doing it
f. something not covered
You have to look at what attracts said individual to said position and as a result how likely they are to be abusive of such power. Someone has to fill the position, they are put in danger every day so that your wife and kids have someone to call if in trouble. Respect them, understand they like feeling in control of situations and others in general and don't infringe on thier feeling of being completely in control unless they violate your rights.
They really are just doing thier job, whatever they are enforcing was something someone else made a law. Of course we expect they use thier discretion to keep themselves safe and protect our rights. The better they balance the two at once the better our society.

[Low-Sci]

"Remember, law is what gives us the RKBA."

I have to disagree with this. Not because I object to your larger argument, but as a matter of course.

The right to keep and bear arms isn't given to us, its ours. It belongs to us. The government exists to protect our rights, but it does not give us our rights. That's an important distinction because it means the difference between the government being able to disarm people when they get too uppity (or just for the hell of it) and the government having to jump through a ridiculous amount of hoops to even consider taking away the tools that promote liberty.

I had to say it. Now that its out of the way...

Maybe it is a bad law. If you think it should be 65 instead of 55, work to get it changed and you might well get what you want. To contrast, speeding will get you two things: a ticket, and angry. But you have nobody to blame but yourself.

You knew it was 55, you chose to go faster. Just like you choose not to use your turn signals or your headlights when you know damn well that you should. You can debate the quality of the ticket all day long, but you knew exactly what you were doing when you were doing it. Your fault. The cop didn't choose to be on that road that day, he was assigned to it in all likelihood, which makes it not his fault that he caught you speeding.

Bottom line is, there's nobody to blame for your violation of the law but you. If you don't like it, work to get it changed. That will not be accomplished by traveling 10 over.

[hammer4nc]

Ahhh, another one of those "don't blame the police, they only enforce the law":barf: threads. What a joke.

Police are complicit in these freedom-robbing "bad" laws, in at least two aspects:

1. Police, through their unions and organizations, actively lobby for creation of new "bad" laws. Look at how these laws are created. Gun control, for example. Every one of these bills has a endless supply of police organizations backing them: Example (look at credits): http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5924266304855628015&q=california+poochigian+50+caliber
Why is it that virtually every signing ceremony for gun control laws has a sea of blue uniforms in the background photo-op?

2. Police create "command priorities", enforcing these stupid laws. Of course, the apologists will claim these arise from legit safety concerns. Yes, safety demands that we have license checkpoints, and require night vision seatbelt squads. I wasn't born yesterday.

I keep waiting for the honest cops to rise up against these situations; for example, to speak out against the next gun control measure...to refuse the federal grants that come with freedom robbing strings attached. Instead, they're much more concerned with getting that holiday overtime. Conflict of interest; police profiting from asset forfeiture? Don't even get me started on that one!:banghead:

[JohnBT]

If you do a little looking you can find many supporters of gun ownership over the years. Here's the first one I turned up with a Google search of 'police against gun control'.

From the Cato Institute site:

"A 1986 questionnaire sent to every major police official in the country produced the following results: 97 percent believed that a firearms ownership ban would not reduce crime or keep criminals from using guns; 89 percent believed that gun control laws such as those in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and New York City had no effect on criminals; and 90 percent believed that if firearms ownership was banned, ordinary citizens would be more likely to be targets of armed violence.[23] "

[superhornet]

Optical Serenity-----------not a basher, just a question. Tell us about traffic ticket quota's ?? The claim is that setting "quotas" is illegal ?? Here in Clay County, Fl it is illegal, but the set is 30 per day per traffic patrolman...At the end of the month, they play catch up in the last week with more police on the street than is seen all month..???:confused:

[buzz_knox]

Bashing anyone or anything, whether they be LEO or non-LEO, in a serious manner (as opposed to good natured ribbing) is a waste of time. Having a rationale discussion about actual events or trends is very worthwhile and beneficial. Unfortunately, neither side wants to do that at times.

[ilbob]

And BTW, traffic ticket quotas are illegal everywhere

You can call them what you want to call them, but a quota is still a quota, even if it is called a goal, a metric, or whatever. The bottom line is if the boss cop gives you grief for not writing "enough" tickets, its a quota.

[buzz_knox]

And BTW, traffic ticket quotas are illegal everywhere

A couple years back, the Governor of TN announced a safe driving campaign, and part of the campaign was requiring Highway Patrol troopers to issue a certain number of tickets a month. So, someone should tell him his publicly announced actions were illegal.

We've also discussed this before. Various officers came out and said there was no quota . . . but their performance was judged on the number of tickets they issued. So, as ilbob says, changing the lingo doesn't change the underlying substance of the issue at hand.

[pcosmar]

I posted a while ago on Generalities, http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=228757&highlight=generalities

I don't think "bashing" helps any. I would hope that those good Officers would make it harder for the poor ones to stay around, and speak out on protecting the rights of those they serve.

[TexasRifleman]

"Bashing" is pointless.

However, pointing out issues where public servants (cops, politicians, postal workers, etc) abuse the system is fine.

Public airing of that sort of thing hopefully makes those that might "act up" think twice.

[superhornet]

Medula O--oops, 30 per day with three men, 12 hour shifts. Last ticket I got was in Walthill, NE which is about 75 miles north of Omaha... There are towns in Fl. where half of their operating budget comes from speeding tickets.....Lawtey.........hows the pheasant hunting this year....???

[Double Naught Spy]

Getting stopped for speeding means I failed in one of two manners while exceeding the speed limit.
1. I missed a sign (rare event, but has happened)
2. I knew I was speeding but was careless enough to get tagged, hence stopped (too common).

Basically, I see getting caught speeding as a failure of situational awareness. Granted, cops can plan their setups such that response time to drop speed is little or none before a driver gets tagged, just like bad guys plan some of their attacks.

There are lessons to be learned from speeding that are very valuable in real life and situational awareness is just one of them. I tend to be more careful before I crest a big hill where I can't see what is on the other side or round a corner/bend in the road.

[buzz_knox]

The campaign was widely publicized and the memorandum concerning the quota was leaked to the media. You'll forgive me for not having a copy at hand. It wasn't exactly news, as this crap has gone on for years around here.

As for quotas not existing and lazy cops, be sure to tell your fellow LEO members on THR that they are lazy and/or liars.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=211252&highlight=quotas

[buzz_knox]

Getting stopped for speeding means I failed in one of two manners while exceeding the speed limit.
1. I missed a sign (rare event, but has happened)
2. I knew I was speeding but was careless enough to get tagged, hence stopped (too common).

In Clinton, TN (and other areas), there is a third option: it was effectively impossible to comply with the sign. There's a blind curve where the speed limit is 55 going into the curve, and 35 on the immediate other side. About once a month, the city cops park at the curve and issue tickets to those that can't slow down quick enough. Locals know about it (and can gauge about when the officers will be there) but if you don't know it's coming, you'd better hope it's not ticket day.

[ilbob]

Citizens that moan about getting a ticket because of a "quota" need look no further than their mirror for the cause...

Don't like the traffic laws? Vote out the politicians and put new one's in that agree with you. Don't like the way the law is being enforced? Scream at the Myor and City Council. THEY are the one's that tell the PD what "the citizens" damand...

MO definately has this one pegged.

[Art Eatman]

superhornet, you're citing only a small part of the story about speed-trap towns.

It's commonly a city government thing, not a cop thing. The locals hire that sort of person who will work the speed trap.

Then, the word gets out, and several things ensue. The AAA will sometimes reroute tourists around such a town. The economic impact can be devastating. When the AAA did that to Palmetto, Florida, decades back, it even impacted Tampa, Bradenton and Sarasota.

Ridicule shines an unhealthy light on such towns. Selma, Texas, on I-35 just north of San Antonio, even got legislative attention--which affected grants and such to the town. The city fathers then had a righteousness session, after they figured out that "SOB" didn't mean "Selma Official Bear".

I round-trip on I-10 from Tallahassee to San Antonio, several times a year. All the way across that 900 miles, if a cop wanted to, he could unendingly write very legitimate traffic tickets throughout his entire shift, with no pause for other actions. The idea of a quota is plumb foolish; it's not needed, given the number of volunteers who beg to be written up.

"Who am I gonna believe? You, or my own lying eyes?" :D

Art

[JohnBT]

Been to the Speed Trap Exchange?

www.speedtrap.org/index.html

[ilbob]

Been to the Speed Trap Exchange?

www.speedtrap.org/index.html

Interesting site but since the speed traps around my area get moved a lot, the information is not real useful. A lot of the traps listed seem to be a year or more old.

No speed trap around here lasts that long. Usually no more than a few months.

[50 Freak]

The key point here is...most of us on THR would not think of giving a LE a hard time for handing out a speeding ticket (65 in a 55 zone).

The members here have problems with the militarization of your local PD through the use of SWAT.

SWAT does not need to be sent out to bring in a loan shark with no priors (incident in which the alleged unarmed loan shark was shot to death).

The THR members also seem to have problems with the rising number of no-knocks and the resulting deaths associated with them. Many are the result of confessions/finger pointing by less than trust worthy informants, wrong addresses, moved tenants, bad police work etc.

I personally live in the constant fear of having my door kicked in and my house raided because maybe a neighbor saw me load some guns into my car (for a range trip) and then reported me to the San Francisco PD as a Jihadist terrorist. You get my point.

Living in the good ole USofA shouldn't mean you are afraid of the police kicking your door in the middle of night and pulling off to jail.

[Ryder]

I don't get mad, don't try to beg or lie my way out, nor am I intimidated. Tickets are membership dues into club freedom. I am lucky to have money for such a thing, I suppose?

I ask them to make it quick if they look slow (if you know what I mean). But in general I mainly speed on long lonely drives and I think it's nice to take time out to talk for a while. Such breaks refresh me so I can get back out there and haul ass some more.

I didn't vote on your poll. There was no "don't care" option.

[scurtis_34471]

There is no reason whatsoever for police to waste their time passing out tickets for minor speeding offenses in non-dangerous circumstances. Police are not revenue agents. We have a limited number of them and they have an important job to do: protecting the public. Writing $150 tickets all day to people cruising down wide open highways at 10-15 miles over the speed limit serves no purpose.

My wife got a ticket a few years ago on I-10 about halfway between Talahasse and I-75. It was 2:00 AM, we had been driving for 10 hours and she let her speed slip to 11 over the speed limit. A local yokel pulled her over and gave her a $150 fine. Her driving record was completely clean and she had not had a ticket in over 10 years. There was nobody else on the road. There is not a single state trooper I've encountered that would have given her that ticket, but leave it to some bored redneck punk with a badge to give her the largest financial penalty he could cook up. Sorry guys, there is no need for that kind of behavior.

[Gordon Fink]

I’ve gotten to where I absolutely despise having to drive on the interstate due to everyone going 20 miles over the speed limit.…

This rarely gets said on the High Road, but move to California! Then you can regularly drive 20 to 60 miles per hour below the speed limit. :p

~G. Fink

[scurtis_34471]

I’ve gotten to where I absolutely despise having to drive on the interstate due to everyone going 20 miles over the speed limit.…

I can understand that sentiment when the speed limit is 70+, but not when its 55. 55 is a completely stupid speed limit for limited access highways. Anyone who cannot safely drive 70 on an Interstate highway has no business driving.

[vmfrantz]

No, 99 out of 100 are just doing their job. And as busy as they are they dont have time to run around messing with people for fun.

[Geronimo45]

JohnBT, seen the 'speed laws enforced by aircraft' on the Arkansas border, too. I guess they hit you with an air-to-ground missile if you go above that speed.

[Art Eatman]

"My wife got a ticket a few years ago on I-10 about halfway between Talahasse and I-75. It was 2:00 AM, we had been driving for 10 hours and she let her speed slip to 11 over the speed limit."

81 mph under those conditions? That's called working on having a wreck. Fatigue, road hypnosis, lessened reflexes. "...let her speeed slip..." is a good clue. All it takes is a startlement as from a deer, or livestock. There are times when that adrenalin hit from getting a ticket keeps you alive.

(And don't rag on me about speed. I've seen 200 mph in a race car; I've done the 77 miles from Alpine down to Study Butte in 44 minutes.)

Art

[scurtis_34471]

I should clarify that we were trading off every couple of hours in a crappy old Neon that was hard to maintain constant speed in and had no cruise control.

80 mph is NORMAL HIGHWAY SPEED in Florida and no FHP or State Trooper will ever both you for it. This was a local cop who had no business trolling for tickets in the Interstate. She should have gotten a warning AT WORST.

Go pick on the guys doing 110. That could arguably be considered dangerous. 81 on an empty three lane highway at night? Give me a break. A $150 fine to a driver with a clean record for an "offense" that minor is massively disproportionate, but I guess we should just be glad he didn't Tase her.

There are three speeds on any road: the posted speed, the enforced speed and the speed of traffic. The problem with some cops is that they are capricious and give out tickets to people driving the commonly accepted speed of traffic on a given road. At the same time, I have never heard of someone getting a ticket for driving too slow. I've got news for you. Speed does not kill. Variance in speed is what kills. The bozo driving 55 when everyone else is driving 80 is the guy who is dangerous and most likely to cause an accident. I've gotten stuck behind idiots driving 35 in a 55 for miles. Does anyone ever do anything about it? No. Why? Apparently, there is no money in it.

[ilbob]

There is not a single state trooper I've encountered that would have given her that ticket,

Come to Illinois. If you go 11 mph over the speed limit past an ISP car, they will likely ticket you, except on the Eisenhower expressway. For some reason the 55 mph speed limit signs there actually mean 85.

Seriously, you need to deal with this politically. Cops have to do something with their time and giving out tickets is one of the few things they can do where there is some kind of record that they did something.

Virtually every traffic cop will get flack from the boss cops if he does not produce at least some tickets. It is not his fault for doing what his bosses tell him to do.

Something I have noticed is there is some kind of unofficial acceptance of the stupidity of limiting trucks to 55, while cars can go 65 in Illinois. Most people drive 5-10 mph over the posted limit and the trucks drive about the same speed. If the cops wanted to, they could have a revenue bonanza stopping trucks for being 15-20 mph over the limit. I suspect there is pressure from higher ups to not make the situation in Illinois any worse for truckers, so cops rarely if ever pull them over. Taxes, fees, and tolls are already outrageous. Slowing them down to 55 would make travel through Illinois even more problematic for them.

[scurtis_34471]

Sorry, but I think passing out tickets to people going 5 mph over the speed limit is an idiotic use of public resources.

As for speed of traffic, I'll say this. If the speed limit is 55 and most of the cars are going 70, the SAFEST speed to travel is 70, not 55. 70 is not inherently more dangerous than 55. What is dangerous is the 15mph speed variance between the 3 cars going 55 and the 40 cars going 70.

I should clarify my complaint about slow drivers. I am not talking about people driving slow in the far left lane of a three lane limited access highway. I am talking about people driving slow on 2 lane roads. I have to drive 57 miles down two-lane secondary highways to get to my office. The posted speed limit is 55. I've gotten stuck behind idiots on motorcycles or in cars who insist on driving between 35 and 45 mph for MILES. Why is that OK? These public nuisances often end up with 20 cars piled up behind them with no way to pass. To me, that is a much bigger disruption to traffic and safety than someone driving 65 on the same road.

I had a long conversation with a Marion County sheriff about speeding. He flat-out told me that they don't bother pulling over anyone who is within 10 miles of the speed limit. According to him, FHP doesn't either. I usually put my car in cruise control at 9-10 over the speed limit and I drive by speed traps all the time without being bothered. Why? On the highway, I'm going 80 in the middle lane and people in the left lane are flying by me at 90+. Only a moron is going to grab a random car going speed of traffic at 10 over in the middle lane when there are bozos going nearly 100 in the left. On the secondary roads, most cops recognize that driving 60-65 in a 55 is not a danger to anyone.

Do you really think its a productive use of public resources to find a busy street and spend the entire day passing out speeding tickets for minor traffic infractions? If so, why? Speeding itself is not typically the cause of accidents. For example, I had some stupid redneck in a pickup truck towing a trailer make a left turn directly in front of my on a 55 mph road. I was going around 60 mph, but was still able to stop just short of hitting him. If I had hit him, speed may have been a contributing factor. That would not change the root cause of the accident, however, which would have been failure to yield right of way on his part.

I should also point out that research has shown that people who routinely speed at moderate levels (i.e. 5-15 over the limit) are actually safer drivers than the general population. There is no positive correlation between minor speeding tickets and accidents. This makes sense, because people who drive faster are often better, more alert drivers.

As for my wife, I don't think the punishment fit the crime. Would you give a $150 ticket to someone going 11 over on an empty highway when they have a completely clean driving record going back over 10 years and not so much as a warning? I honestly don't think a state trooper would have and I don't think that local cops should be speed trapping the Interstate for exactly that reason. The Interstate is not designed to be a revenue stream for podunk towns. Interstate highways should be patrolled by highway patrol and state police.

[scurtis_34471]

I will admit that the taser comment was uncalled for in the context of the conversation on speeding. That does not mean its not a serious problem in some places. A security camera video from an Orlando police department a couple months back showed a cop repeatedly tasing an old lady. Apparently, she and her daughter got into a loud argument and a neighbor complained. The police called her and asked her to come down to the police station to give a statement. She did and was told to sit in the waiting room. After awhile, a cop came out and said they were arresting her. She took out her cell phone to call her husband. The cop told her to drop the phone. She told the cop she needed to call her husband. They argued in the cop tased her. She fell on the floor and was tased two or three more times. She ended up in the hospital. At no time was she physically agressive. The police explanation was that she was verbally beligerent. Sorry, but that is not excuse for using that kind of force.

A couple months earlier, a 70 year-old grandfather got tased at Disney in front of his grandchildren. None of the bystanders who say the incident could understand why the cop was hassling the guy to being with. The guy got sick of arguing with the cop and asked if he was being charged with something. The cop said no and the guy turned around and walked away. The cop told him to stop. The man said that he was there to enjoy the day with his grandchildren and he was going to go do just that unless the cop was actually going to charge him and arrest him. He walked away. The cop started screaming about "lawful orders" and shot him with a Taser 7 times. The grandfather also ended up in the hospital.

There have been similar incidents all over the place. A cop stopped a woman on a remote road for speeding and told her to get out of the car. Many safety courses teach women to remain in the car with the door locked and the window cracked when dealing with police on isolated roads, because there have been cases of rape by police officers and its best to be safe. She refused to get out of the car. He broke her window with his tonfa and shot her with a taser while she was trying to call her husband on her cell phone. He continued to shoot her when she was down. This was all caught on the police car video camera.

Tasers should only be used in cases where you would otherwise feel justified shooting someone or beating them with a tonfa. They should not get used on people who are not physically threatening as a way of forcing immediate compliance. After all of the abuses I've seen, I don't think cops should have them at all.

[dfaugh]

Used to be a diehard street racer, many, many years ago when I was young and stupid. Mostly my butt got saved a few times by the fact that my cousin was a State Trooper, and well known (and we share pretty unique last name).

But nowadays, I stick fairly close to the speed limit, or "go with the flow" if its significantly faster than the limit. Haven't had a speeding ticket in almost 20 years. Most of the cops I know, don't really wanna do traffic patrol, but its their assignment, so they do it. They'd much rather be doing something "more important".

Now, for LEO-bashing in general (and I've been accused of it), people need to realize its usually (certainly in my case), bashing of certain individual(s) under specific circumstances. I have great respect for MOST LEOs, and I personally have never had any "bad" encounters with any of them (although my kids have.)

[scurtis_34471]

I went for 13 years without a single ticket and then got two in 5 weeks a few years ago. In one case, I was going speed of traffic and they basically pulled everyone over into a parking lot as part of a massive speed trap. In the other, I was driving home from work in the middle of a national forest a good 10 miles from the nearest anything and was going what had been the normal speed of traffic for that road when I got a ticket.

What made me irritated about it was this. You drive a road every day and the speed of traffic is X. Even the cops drive that speed. You drive in front of cops, behind cops and past cops at the same speed every day for a year. The bulk of traffic on the road is driving that speed and everything seems fine. That speed becomes the defacto enforced/observed speed on that road. Then one day, the cops radically change their behavior and start passing out bucket-loads of tickets. They ought to at least give out some warnings first if they are going to make such a radical shift in practice.

There are two fundamental problems with posted speed limits. The first is that many of them are unrealistically low. The second is that they are so inconsistently enforced as to put motorists in a constant dilema: do I drive the posted speed limit and get tailgated, flashed, honked, harrassed and constantly passed or do I drive the speed of traffic.

Another little point I should have brought up earlier. If you call the police and ask, of course they are going to tell you they have a zero tolerance policy. What else do you expect them to say? I don't think anyone will argue that there is a vast difference between what they say and what they actually do, however.

[Zen21Tao]

Yes if you are clearly breaking a law it is your fault and you should work to change the law. However, what is you are driving the speed limit and a cop in an unmarket car pulls up next to you and starts reving his motor? Even worse, he yells at you to speed up your going too slow and possibly has even change the road signs posted. Then when you do so thinking its ok he wips out his light, badge, and pulls you over. This is how the ATF operates. Also, picture a local LEO agency where there the standards to "prove" you were speeding is completely subjective. They can say, well judge he passed me so fast he must have been speeding. This is the ATF's standard for determining whether certain firearms are legal or illegal. :cuss: :banghead:

[scurtis_34471]

1. I never claimed that driving at dangerously high speeds was safe. I said that minor speeding (i.e. 65 in a 55) is not unsafe and that drivers who tend to drive slightly over the speed limit are less prone to accidents. In honesty, I think the reason why that is true is not because they are safer drivers. It is because elderly people typically don't speed, but do cause a ton of crashes. My gut feeling is that 5-10 mph makes less difference in accident avoidance than what kind of car you drive. I would never criticize a cop for nailing someone going 20mph over the speed limit. I just find it irritating that some cops waste time with minor speeding when there are so many people doing really dangerous things like running red lights, driving while drunk or driving aggressively (road rage).

2. Police were never intended to be revenue agents. If the police need more money, the money should come from taxes and not from traffic enforcement. Why? Policing as a revenue stream leads to abuses, such as speed trap towns that make most of their money by ticketing people. I actually know someone who got a ticket in one of those towns for driving the speed limit in a light rain. I have also seen towns that strategically place speed limit drops around blind corners where you can't possibly slow down fast enough if you don't know its there. Its just bad policy.

3. Tasers are not just a minor electrical shock. They kill people on a fairly regular basis. There is no excuse for using physical force just because someone is verball uncooperative. You are right about one thing, I suppose. Getting Tasered is better than what I say happen to a friend when I was in high school. My buddy was a really big guy in his twenties. He was coming out of a bar where I had another friend playing in a band. A cop walked up and asked if he'd been drinking. He answered politely (and truthfully) that he had two beers. The cop told him that he was clearly drunk and disorderly and he was going to jail (all B.S.). My buddy responded that he wasn't, meaning he wasn't drunk. The cop took that to mean that he wasn't coming to jail and decided he was resisting arrest. Two other cops grabbed him from behind and the three of them pounded his face into the hood of a nearby truck until they broke his nose and did a fair amount of damage to the truck. Then they took him in for drunk and disorderly and resisting arrest. There were a ton of witnesses who showed up in court. All of the charges were dropped against my friend, but all the cop got was a 30-day suspension.

I don't think all cops are like that. I don't even think most cops are like that. I do think that probably 10% of people with badges shouldn't have them and that those people abuse whatever power they are given. From what I have seen, police seldom get more than a slap on the wrist for things that should get them charged with assault. I am probably somewhat biased, based on the stupid crap that went on in the town I grew up in, but its a hard thing to get over.

4. I am probably not being entirely fair to police and acknowledge that most are just doing a difficult job to the best of their abilities. I am NEVER rude to police when I get pulled over and my wife is downright meek to the point of her own detriment. I try very hard not to take it out on the honest patrolmen who pull me over, but do have a bit of an attitude toward police. I've been threatened with arrest for "public drunkeness" after having one beer. I've been threatened with arrest for "reckless driving" because I hit a patch of ice while driving 30 mph in a 30 mph zone and the back end of my car slide a couple feet to the left without hitting anything. I've had a gun stuck in my face while a cop called me a faggot and all kinds of other things, because I was sitting on a swingset in a park after sunset talking to some friends (no it was not posted that the park was closed at sunset). I've had friends get bones broken and teeth knocked out by police with no physical provocation. All but one of these incidents happened in one town when I was growing up though.

5. I go for years without getting stopped. I am not a high-speed, aggressive driver anymore. I have worked for years to resist tailgating and curb my speed. I live by cruise control. My wife and I have had a combined total of 3 tickets since around 1992, so this is not really about sour grapes as much as it is about what I think law enforcement officers should spend their time doing. I call drunk and aggressive drivers in on a regular basis. I even give money to police charities. Despite my emotional hangups to the contrary, I'm really not anti-LEO.

[scurtis_34471]

Every run-in I had with the police happened when I was under the age of 20, except the beer incident which happened when I was 21. I was not breaking any laws in any of these cases, which is why I was never arrested or charged. I have a squeeky clean record that was good enough to get approved for secret clearance when I joined the Army. I never used illegal drugs. I was not a heavy drinker. I never drove under the influence. I have not struck another human being in anger since I was a child. What I was guilty of was hanging around with my friends downtown late at night, cruising the main drag, hanging out at the pizza shop and playing football or ultmate frisbee in the park or in parking lots. I was a teenager with a beater car and I wasn't always in the nice parts of town.

The cops in my home town made a habit of harassing teenagers and young adults, pure and simple. If you were downtown at night, they assumed you were up to no good. I should also tell you that there was a small group of cops that wracked up quite a list of brutality complaints. It was bad enough that the newspaper did more than one story on it. I think you are discounting the idea that some police really are thugs and give the rest of you a bad name. Assuming that anyone who has a run-in with the police did something wrong is a really bad assumption.

I have not had a single problem with a police officer in over 15 years. I've gotten 2 traffic tickets in that time, but those were handled very professionally. I whined afterword, but I was polite when I got them and I paid up. My experience with police is that how well you are treated depends in part on how well you dress and what you drive. A 20 year-old driving a beat up car and wearing torn jeans and a T-Shirt will often be treated differently than a 35 year-old in business attire driving a nice car. This is not just true of police, this is true across the board. Our culture makes value judgements based on superficial things and police are human just like the rest of us. My father lives in a high-end gated community. When I drove a beat-up 95 Neon, I got the third-degree trying to get in. I now arrive in a late-model Acura or VW and get waved right in. I have had similar experiences with stores and car dealerships where the level of service I received was directly related to cars and clothing.

[scurtis_34471]

I think this guy is dead on the money:

http://www.allpar.com/ed/speeding.html

Safety, Speeding, and Selective Enforcement

by Curtis Redgap


First Part
As a well seasoned veteran Police "Patrol" officer, I will commit the ultimate heresy and plainly state that I did not "hunt" to "bag" speeders. In fact, I wish that we had more people on the roads that understood the concept of operation of a vehicle within the parameters of "speed appropriate for conditions". Before the entire law enforcement community starts screaming, let me digress a little.

So, here we are, on patrol, traveling about 10 miles above the posted limit. (Recommended patrol car procedure by the way, so we don't create a rolling roadblock keeping people behind us) Suddenly, out of the corner of our eyes (or eyes in the back of the head as we have been accused of having) comes a vehicle moving along at a speed greater than we are moving. Then probably about maybe 15 to 20 miles an hour above the limit. Rocket ship territory? Uh.....no, hardly that. So, for the sake of argument, I am in one of the sneaky pete interceptors (unmarked non stand out patrol vehicle for those that live in Yorba Linda California) and while the "speeder" is obviously alert, i.e.: head moving constantly surveying conditions, both hands on the wheel, good posture, and not playing bumper tag nor weaving between lanes, operating at assured clear distances by use of the accelerator pedal rather than the brake pedal, and his vehicle appears in good shape with decent tires......... well, guess what, since it is my discretion, that one did not get noticed by yours truly. Hey, it is MY discretion, little thing called "selective enforcement". We can't get all the speeders, so we pick out those that are available, hence, selective enforcement.

Why would I do that? Well, it is my observed contention that such a driver, male or female, even though they are "speeding" is probably more of an experienced and courteous operator than some of the idiots that the Motor Vehicle Department issues licenses to! I can tell you, that in the same sense if this individual were weaving, bobbing, braking, bumper tagging, they would get a real fast visit with me, especially the super stupid bumper tagger. Talk about road rage? Nothing made me angrier than some knot head riding on someone else's bumper, and I don't care what speed it is occurring at. Anyone that rides on someone else's bumper should be tied to a rear bumper for a week with a sign on their neck saying "I AM A BUMPER KISSER! COME GET YOURS". Speed? I think if we trained the drivers in this country to dynamics of vehicle operation rather than sloganeering things like "speed kills" (which it doesn't, otherwise we wouldn't have any airplanes in this world) we would have a real start on making things better on the roadways. That also means that they understand that the right lane is for traveling at or near the posted limit if you wish, and that the left lane is for those that desire, and can handle operation at a faster speed, as long as they are not interrupting the normal ebb and flow of traffic.

You can spot efficient operators when they move along in traffic changing with the flow by judicious use of their accelerator pedals and not heaving, jerking in and out by slapping the brakes and dodging rear bumpers at the last second prior to collision status.

Update
Let me make myself clear. Speed in and of itself does not kill! Knowing vehicle dynamics, handling characteristics, and operation within reasonable limits for the condtions present, are an equation that should set up for a higher rate of vehicle speed, safely above the posted limit. This takes into account the "left lane bandits" (50 in a 70 zone) cell phone talkers, coffee drinkers, newspaper readers, mascarea dabbers, yakty-yakkers, rolling child gymnasiums, poorly tuned vehicles, and assorted other "vehicle operators" that may be out there waiting to be the leading causes of collisions. It also takes into account the assertion put forth in the previous opinion page that "no one" can be a leading edge driver at all times because we are all lumped into one pot by the response of Mr. Applebee. Sorry Mr. A. Your assertion is exactly the one thing that I am referring to..... appropriate for condtions. So, do I drive fast and close when I see Ms. Mascarea Dabber within range. No sir, I do not. And thirty some years of high speed vehicle operation without a chargable accident is my testament.

I also resent that assertion that because YOU choose to adopt this sort of liberal interpretation to the equation you are infallibly correct. NOT! Part of being alert is the ability to spot the problem BEFORE you get to the situation. I always made it a habit to NEVER DRIVE INTO A SITUATION THAT I COULD NOT DRIVE OUT OF. When in doubt, don't. And it still works for me. No, I am not lucky, I am darn well trained. As well, I have a certain amount of inherited ability to "feel" situations and avoid them. There are some folks out there that can do that. I also know my limitations.

When I drive fast, it is when I am alert, the vehicle serviced, with above adequete equipment, no radio, no drinks nearby. Seat belt on, and 100 percent concentration on the road, in front, and in back of me. Otherwise, I crab along right amoungst the rest of the Applebee's and McGee's, only I am able to spot you before you spot me, and I have avoided you before you have even realized someone was there. That is driving for conditions, no matter what the rate of covering the ground may be.

[scurtis_34471]

Speeding Tickets: Public Safety or Public Plunder?

by Rick Gee

I was driving down a wide-open four-lane divided highway, cruising along at 61 mph. At least I was cruising along at 61 mph according to one of Santa Fe County's finest (talk about a misnomer). I found that out later, after experiencing that inevitable sinking feeling one suffers when one observes those menacing cherries in the rear view mirror. "Damn it!"

Now, I should preface the main body of my comments by saying that this particular enforcement functionary, whose salary comes out of my paycheck, was business-like and straightforward, exhibiting none of the superciliousness typical of his brethren.

Nevertheless, I was irked to be pulled over for speeding when I was merely traveling along with the flow of traffic. One of the best teachers I ever had in government school was Joe Sitko, revered Driver's Ed instructor. What does it say about government schools that my Driver's Ed teacher was my best teacher? Anyway, he taught me that if you travel at the same speed as the cars in front of you and the cars in back of you, it is not considered speeding, even if all cars are surpassing the speed limit by 10 or even 20 miles per hour. Apparently this was news to the young sheriff's deputy I encountered that day.

The area where this cop was sitting with his mighty radar gun was right before a traffic light-controlled intersection, speed limit 45. 200 yards beyond the intersection, the speed limit is 65. 400 yards beyond the intersection begins a significant hill. As you might imagine, drivers approaching this intersection, when blessed with a green light, speed up in anticipation of climbing the approaching hill. Yes, I know, you're way ahead of me: classic speed trap.

After Skippy dutifully handed me the speeding citation, I drove off, incensed at the indignity of it all. For the egregious offense of traveling with the flow of traffic at 61 mph in light traffic on a dry road on a perfectly clear day, I was expected to donate over $100 to the County. Outrageous!

Under the guise of protecting the public, cops routinely harass motorists who are posing no danger whatsoever to their fellow travelers. To be sure, slow drivers are a far greater menace on the roads than are speeders, particularly when everyone else is speeding. If the police are truly concerned about public safety, why are they not stationed at the major intersections and nailing all those people who habitually run red lights? And I'm not talking about the occasional driver who thinks he'll hit the intersection under yellow only to see the light change to red a split second too soon. I'm referring to the idiots who, when the light turns yellow when they're still a quarter-mile away, mash the accelerator to the floor and miss it by two or three seconds. These people have an inflated sense of their own importance: "Hey, I'm in a hurry and screw everyone else."

So if the traffic laws enacted by the state and enforced by the goons aren't really about safety, what are they for? Two things, as I see it. One, they simply want to exercise control over the populace. Two, they consider it a relatively simple and efficient way to fill the coffers with even more of our money.

I haven't yet paid this ticket. I'd love to be able to say that I just wanted to rebel against the state, but the truth is that I simply forgot about it by the end of the day and never thought about it again, much like a politician forgets about his oath to uphold the Constitution the minute he removes his hand from the bible.

My memory was jogged when I received a letter from the Secretary of State some six months later informing me that my driver's license had been suspended for failure to appear before the tribunal. Ah yes, the wheels of the state rotate just like those on a Ferrari, do they not? The state demands that I pay the original fine plus $25 to have my license reinstated. Legal extortion: great work if you can get it, I guess.

That was a couple of months ago. To this very day, I continue to drive as a scofflaw. Am I therefore a threat to all other motorists just because my legal right to drive my own vehicle to work has been suspended? As Rachael Anne Fajardo so lucidly explained, the answer is a resounding no. On the contrary, I remain, as I am wont to tell my friends, "The Best Damn Driver in Santa Fe County."

I have two options at this point. I can continue to defy the authorities and drive where I want, when I want. Eventually, I may be pulled over because I am unaware that a taillight bulb has burned out. This will no doubt earn me a chauffeured trip to the county lockup.

My second option is to report to the judge down at the Magistrate Court. If given the chance to speak in my own defense, I shall utter the following:

"Mr. Judge (I refuse to use the term "Your Honor." I honor myself, my wife and my mother, but most definitely NOT a lawyer-politician in a black robe.), this citation is contemptible. First of all, I am innocent. It is my legal right to travel with the flow of traffic, and everybody that day was traveling at roughly the same speed. Why I was singled out I cannot say. Nonetheless, this ticket should be unconditionally dismissed.

"But there is a larger issue, beyond my own fate in this matter, that screams to be addressed in this public forum. Why are we paying the police to sit behind a bush near the border of a higher speed limit to harass citizens who are merely going about their business, driving to work or church or the grocery store, who pose no threat to anyone? Are there not real crimes that need to be investigated? Are there not neighborhoods where crime runs rampant in which the presence of the police might actually have a deterrent effect? Why is my right, and the right of my fellow citizens, to travel freely, so long as I am not driving recklessly, being trampled upon?"

I have little doubt that the gavel will fall after a pronouncement of guilty, and that a contempt of court citation will be forthcoming. That will be fine with me, because contempt is exactly what I feel for the court, the state and all its agents and apologists.

[Art Eatman]

scurtis, I don't know if this will come as a shock to you, or not: I first heard all of this same argument in my high school daze. I graduated from high school in 1951.

IOW, you're wasting your time worrying about something that has not changed in over a half a century, and your complaining isn't gonna change it in the next half-century. Live with it, deal with it, cope with it.

Think positive: At least you don't have to have a person walk ahead of your horseless carriage with a lantern, if you drive at night. Laws have improved somewhat in the last 90 years.

:D, Art

[scurtis_34471]

I'm under no delusion that this will ever change. I just find it irritating.