Speeding - Court Supervision "costs" extra $103
04-26-2006, 11:44 AM
#1
Racer
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speeding - Court Supervision "costs" extra $103
Got a speeding ticket (79 in a 65) on I-55 going from Chicago to St. Louis a few weeks ago (about 3 1/2 hours from my home). Was clearly a speed trap, but I was also clearly going fast too.
Decided to plead "guilty with a request for supervision" since my driving record is clean so far. Mailed in the $75 for the ticket with the supervision request. I received a letter back saying that "Court Supervision in Montgomery County costs a total of $178 on this ticket."
Last time I had a speeding ticket it was in suburban Chicago. I just showed up in court, pleaded guilty, requested supervision (granted), and paid the fine ($75) and there was no extra fee for supervision.
What is going on here? Just another attempt to extract as much money as possible from out of town drivers??
Decided to plead "guilty with a request for supervision" since my driving record is clean so far. Mailed in the $75 for the ticket with the supervision request. I received a letter back saying that "Court Supervision in Montgomery County costs a total of $178 on this ticket."
Last time I had a speeding ticket it was in suburban Chicago. I just showed up in court, pleaded guilty, requested supervision (granted), and paid the fine ($75) and there was no extra fee for supervision.
What is going on here? Just another attempt to extract as much money as possible from out of town drivers??
04-26-2006, 11:57 AM
#5
Race Car
Another way for the county to bring revenue, which is just another rip off they know you cannot fight your way out of. Its the main reason for speeding tickets.
04-26-2006, 01:21 PM
#7
Nordschleife Master
Traffic fines have gotten ridiculous as governments try to raise money without raising taxes.
I'm not in the camp that "all tickets are for the money" but some places obviously do it. I've had my share and fight the ones that smell. So far I've won 1, lost 1 and tied 1 in court. A "tie" is having the fine and violation reduced.
I'm not in the camp that "all tickets are for the money" but some places obviously do it. I've had my share and fight the ones that smell. So far I've won 1, lost 1 and tied 1 in court. A "tie" is having the fine and violation reduced.
Trending Topics
04-26-2006, 01:30 PM
#8
Jane Bond 007
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile
WTF is "supervision"?
04-26-2006, 01:33 PM
#9
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: In self-imposed exile.
Posts: 14,072
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
99% of tickets are for money. 1% is because an officer sees someone do something so reckless/stupid they can't help but intervene in the interest of public safety.
If the powers-that-be were REALLY concerned about safety, they'd make licensing a helluva lot more stringent. Problem now is any such initiative would be decried by too many strong lobbies. Also, governments make too much money as it is by encouraging people to own & drive cars so there's little financial incentive for them to actually discourage or prevent it or offer alternatives. This is a problem that isn't going away anytime soon.
If the powers-that-be were REALLY concerned about safety, they'd make licensing a helluva lot more stringent. Problem now is any such initiative would be decried by too many strong lobbies. Also, governments make too much money as it is by encouraging people to own & drive cars so there's little financial incentive for them to actually discourage or prevent it or offer alternatives. This is a problem that isn't going away anytime soon.
04-26-2006, 01:47 PM
#10
Nordschleife Master
Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile
99% of tickets are for money.
04-26-2006, 02:12 PM
#11
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: In self-imposed exile.
Posts: 14,072
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
Was your speed unreasonable or just over some arbitrary number artificially dumbed down to provide a mechanism of revnue generation?
Look, you can look at it black&white and say "I broke the law" and that's fine. Fair enough. I'm asking the bigger question of WHY the law exists? Is it REALLY to protect public safety? C'mon. Again, I'd say 99% of this stuff is REALLY about making money and 1% is about public safety. Of course, that's not how it's sold to the public and cops are brainwashed in the academy into actually believing it. . .
Most of this stuff still gets back to the fact that governments basically rubber-stamp what's in the interest of very powerful and wealthy lobbies - automakers, insurance companies, oil & gas producers & suppliers, dealerships, etc. They love to say "driving is a privilege" but for all practical intents and purposes, it's treated as a right. If you have a pulse and 50 bucks, you can get a license. That's about all it takes. The skills tests and even the written tests are a joke - they're simply designed to create X% of failures in order to justify calling it a good test. The people that fail go back and retest anyway, so nothing meaningful is accomplished.
Want to increase road safety? Stop the witch hunt against speeding and go after people operating vehicles in unsafe, poorly-maintained condition (like they do in the ROW). Start going after trucks that are overloaded or carrying crap piled WAY too high without protective tie-downs or tarps (like they do in the ROW). Start going after reckless/aggressive drivers, or better still start coming up with traffic plans that alleviate the congestion that drives people to act in aggressive or reckless manners. Start ticketing people from plopping their asses in the left lane and making people feel they need to pass on the right. Stuff like that. The system as it exists is idiotic and simply panders to a status-quo mentality and to those that benefit financially from it. If there needs to be heavy-handed enforcement of stupidity out there in order to whack people into line and get them to realize that certain driving behaviors really ARE in the benefit of everyone, so be it. Simply giving out $200 speeding tickets for being 10 over a dumbed-down artificial limit is ridiculous.
I have a hard time thinking of a better example of government sucking up to wealthy special interests than when it comes to automobiles and transportation. . .
Look, you can look at it black&white and say "I broke the law" and that's fine. Fair enough. I'm asking the bigger question of WHY the law exists? Is it REALLY to protect public safety? C'mon. Again, I'd say 99% of this stuff is REALLY about making money and 1% is about public safety. Of course, that's not how it's sold to the public and cops are brainwashed in the academy into actually believing it. . .
Most of this stuff still gets back to the fact that governments basically rubber-stamp what's in the interest of very powerful and wealthy lobbies - automakers, insurance companies, oil & gas producers & suppliers, dealerships, etc. They love to say "driving is a privilege" but for all practical intents and purposes, it's treated as a right. If you have a pulse and 50 bucks, you can get a license. That's about all it takes. The skills tests and even the written tests are a joke - they're simply designed to create X% of failures in order to justify calling it a good test. The people that fail go back and retest anyway, so nothing meaningful is accomplished.
Want to increase road safety? Stop the witch hunt against speeding and go after people operating vehicles in unsafe, poorly-maintained condition (like they do in the ROW). Start going after trucks that are overloaded or carrying crap piled WAY too high without protective tie-downs or tarps (like they do in the ROW). Start going after reckless/aggressive drivers, or better still start coming up with traffic plans that alleviate the congestion that drives people to act in aggressive or reckless manners. Start ticketing people from plopping their asses in the left lane and making people feel they need to pass on the right. Stuff like that. The system as it exists is idiotic and simply panders to a status-quo mentality and to those that benefit financially from it. If there needs to be heavy-handed enforcement of stupidity out there in order to whack people into line and get them to realize that certain driving behaviors really ARE in the benefit of everyone, so be it. Simply giving out $200 speeding tickets for being 10 over a dumbed-down artificial limit is ridiculous.
I have a hard time thinking of a better example of government sucking up to wealthy special interests than when it comes to automobiles and transportation. . .
04-26-2006, 02:29 PM
#12
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Scales Bump, IlliNOIZE
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile
Was your speed unreasonable or just over some arbitrary number artificially dumbed down to provide a mechanism of revnue generation?
Look, you can look at it black&white and say "I broke the law" and that's fine. Fair enough. I'm asking the bigger question of WHY the law exists? Is it REALLY to protect public safety? C'mon. Again, I'd say 99% of this stuff is REALLY about making money and 1% is about public safety. Of course, that's not how it's sold to the public and cops are brainwashed in the academy into actually believing it. . .
Most of this stuff still gets back to the fact that governments basically rubber-stamp what's in the interest of very powerful and wealthy lobbies - automakers, insurance companies, oil & gas producers & suppliers, dealerships, etc. They love to say "driving is a privilege" but for all practical intents and purposes, it's treated as a right. If you have a pulse and 50 bucks, you can get a license. That's about all it takes. The skills tests and even the written tests are a joke - they're simply designed to create X% of failures in order to justify calling it a good test. The people that fail go back and retest anyway, so nothing meaningful is accomplished.
Want to increase road safety? Stop the witch hunt against speeding and go after people operating vehicles in unsafe, poorly-maintained condition (like they do in the ROW). Start going after trucks that are overloaded or carrying crap piled WAY too high without protective tie-downs or tarps (like they do in the ROW). Start going after reckless/aggressive drivers, or better still start coming up with traffic plans that alleviate the congestion that drives people to act in aggressive or reckless manners. Start ticketing people from plopping their asses in the left lane and making people feel they need to pass on the right. Stuff like that. The system as it exists is idiotic and simply panders to a status-quo mentality and to those that benefit financially from it. If there needs to be heavy-handed enforcement of stupidity out there in order to whack people into line and get them to realize that certain driving behaviors really ARE in the benefit of everyone, so be it. Simply giving out $200 speeding tickets for being 10 over a dumbed-down artificial limit is ridiculous.
I have a hard time thinking of a better example of government sucking up to wealthy special interests than when it comes to automobiles and transportation. . .
Look, you can look at it black&white and say "I broke the law" and that's fine. Fair enough. I'm asking the bigger question of WHY the law exists? Is it REALLY to protect public safety? C'mon. Again, I'd say 99% of this stuff is REALLY about making money and 1% is about public safety. Of course, that's not how it's sold to the public and cops are brainwashed in the academy into actually believing it. . .
Most of this stuff still gets back to the fact that governments basically rubber-stamp what's in the interest of very powerful and wealthy lobbies - automakers, insurance companies, oil & gas producers & suppliers, dealerships, etc. They love to say "driving is a privilege" but for all practical intents and purposes, it's treated as a right. If you have a pulse and 50 bucks, you can get a license. That's about all it takes. The skills tests and even the written tests are a joke - they're simply designed to create X% of failures in order to justify calling it a good test. The people that fail go back and retest anyway, so nothing meaningful is accomplished.
Want to increase road safety? Stop the witch hunt against speeding and go after people operating vehicles in unsafe, poorly-maintained condition (like they do in the ROW). Start going after trucks that are overloaded or carrying crap piled WAY too high without protective tie-downs or tarps (like they do in the ROW). Start going after reckless/aggressive drivers, or better still start coming up with traffic plans that alleviate the congestion that drives people to act in aggressive or reckless manners. Start ticketing people from plopping their asses in the left lane and making people feel they need to pass on the right. Stuff like that. The system as it exists is idiotic and simply panders to a status-quo mentality and to those that benefit financially from it. If there needs to be heavy-handed enforcement of stupidity out there in order to whack people into line and get them to realize that certain driving behaviors really ARE in the benefit of everyone, so be it. Simply giving out $200 speeding tickets for being 10 over a dumbed-down artificial limit is ridiculous.
I have a hard time thinking of a better example of government sucking up to wealthy special interests than when it comes to automobiles and transportation. . .
I couldn't have said it better.
04-26-2006, 02:55 PM
#13
Drifting
I can see how running red lights is revenue generation. So is 68 in a school zone through crosswalks. Then there is the nasty act of revenue generation through the requirements of having a valid license and insurance. Sneaky bastards. Over 90% of our traffic citations last month were for red lights, stop signs, valid plates, licenses, and insurance, and "careless driving". Don't make blanket statements.
On an Interstate, 55 is too low. 65 is better, but although SOME of the people have the vehicle and skills to drive 85+, most don't. I have found 85 on a wide straight open hiway is safe an attainable. I wouldn't say go faster for the masses, regardless of the fact I know I can do it. Cocky? No, I have been to professional driving schools and have 10+ years experience of pursuit driving. That's driving fast and being bewildered at all the idiots that don't know how to pull to the right. It's like an auto-x around cars with people inside instead of cones. As for the masses, I have seen people reading the newspaper on the steering wheel at 80+.
On an Interstate, 55 is too low. 65 is better, but although SOME of the people have the vehicle and skills to drive 85+, most don't. I have found 85 on a wide straight open hiway is safe an attainable. I wouldn't say go faster for the masses, regardless of the fact I know I can do it. Cocky? No, I have been to professional driving schools and have 10+ years experience of pursuit driving. That's driving fast and being bewildered at all the idiots that don't know how to pull to the right. It's like an auto-x around cars with people inside instead of cones. As for the masses, I have seen people reading the newspaper on the steering wheel at 80+.
04-26-2006, 03:00 PM
#14
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
San Francisco had a memo go out two years ago by the Dept of Parking and Traffic to their employees to do whatever it takes to make their ticket quota (or "goal" as they call it). After that news came out, the traffic courts have been backlogged for 12 months.
Take advantage of every legal loophole you can use. They are in it for the money.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...sn=001&sc=1000
Take advantage of every legal loophole you can use. They are in it for the money.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...sn=001&sc=1000
04-26-2006, 03:09 PM
#15
Advanced
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Brandon, MS
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello tt9714,
We have a similiar court system here in Jackson, MS. You can either send in your payment before the appointed court date which you assume a guilty plea or go to court on the date of the ticket. If you are found guilty or plea guilty at court, you then have to pay the addtional court cost which is around $50. Could you just of paid the ticket before court so the supervision fine couldn't tacked on?
Lee
We have a similiar court system here in Jackson, MS. You can either send in your payment before the appointed court date which you assume a guilty plea or go to court on the date of the ticket. If you are found guilty or plea guilty at court, you then have to pay the addtional court cost which is around $50. Could you just of paid the ticket before court so the supervision fine couldn't tacked on?
Lee