If it were me, like many others, I'd just pay the fine, do traffic school and let it go at that. Hell, if you drive a Porsche and don't get a speeding ticket once in a while, you oughta be ashamed of yourself!

Plus, you gotta have stories to tell when you're hangin' with your homies!

 

Bigs, That is too funny.... AND True! Styln can verify a few stories in our younger years. You know, when you thought you were immortal. I probably will pay it if I can do the traffic school.

 

Sorry to hear Joe but you did the perfect thing. Good job.

 

Sorry Joe, I was responding to Kevin with that other post. In your case, I'd look at the ticket. In VA they have to visually observe you obviously exceding the speed limit, get you twice with the radar/lidar, and have an exact speed. Maryland and New Jersey also require an exact speed. (Gee, can you guess which states I've gotten speeding tickets in?) If you're ticket says 70+, I think you're home free, but you ought to check with a California lawyer first.

 

From MUCH experience, I think we've just come upon one of the hand-picked few sane speed cops out there. Were it I, this would be my view. Sadly we all know that it is a) inconsistent county-to-county and state-to-state and b) not at all standard practice, for a man such as yourself to do the right thing. NORMALLY, I expect the moment I am approached, to be pulled over .... and I expect the moment I am pulled over, to receive a traveller's tax. Speed is just one factor, I think that is the point to your post. I'd gladly call you friend. BUT you are alone in your profession my friend.
Heinrich

 

Joe,
"70+ in a 65" is not a good charging instrument and probably beatable. And the trooper might not show, not wanting to explain why he was speeding without lights and siren. But ... you were in the right lane passing at a 30+ mph differential, "playing" with another car. That's dangerous behavior. In Germany passing on the right on the ABahn is a felony. Perhaps your judgement was impaired by your fatigue. Maybe the trooper had an attitude because he'd noticed both of you in his mirrors. Suck it up and go to traffic school as penance.

Garrett, you sound like a good and rational trooper. I particularly like your awareness that the "rolling roadblock" aspect of your cruiser makes it dangerous for the traffic behind and that you understand the meaning of prima facie presumption when it comes to speed limits.

Two observations though:

I thought speed limits were supposed to be set by engineering studies that determined the 85th %'ile speed on the uncontrolled highway, not by some dtermination of driver skill. If it were the latter we should be able to get "master driver" licenses that amounted to get-out-of-jail-free cards.

When's the last time you saw an engineering study done on an uncontrolled highway? The ~70mph speed limits on interstates were mostly established in the fifties, for American cars of that era, with that era's suspension, steering and brakes. It's time to do some new ones. 70mph in almost any econobox today is safer than it would have been in a Cadillac in 1955.

Three cheesr for street level prosecutorial discretion.

 

Garrett, welcome to the very small club of active and retired LEO's here, and I wish you the best trying to explain what the problems on the roads are. People don't seem to get the idea that, after years of getting "hands on" experience with the results of driver error, and having to deliver the news of many a death in a family resulting from an auto crash, we get a bit less easygoing in our response to the idea that people that say they are good drivers should get better treatment.
My department has, and has had for years, a written policy about not writting "trivial" citations, and, as a supervisor for 20 years, have made sure my folks adhered to that policy. Even so, you know what sort of response we often got, one of the tests that I had my folks use was "Would you feel this ticket would be justified if it was written to you?" .
Another thing that always amused me was when folks in a neighborhood would call the mayor or chief, asking for strict enforcement in their neighborhood. Guess what, I'd send my folks out and 80% of the citations would be written to people living nearby.
Oh, well, I've stayed off my soapbox really well for the recent past, knowing that the good on the list far outweighs the bad, and, that most of the folks here drive in a safe and sane manner.
But let me leave you with this idea... I look at fast driving as a selection from a menu...how much can I afford and how much do I want it. An example, several weeks ago I was passed by a Boxer, no wave, just a glance over and off he went. Well, the road was pretty clear, and I figured I could catch up with a steady 90mph with a quick burst up to 3 digits when I got near, I really wanted to pass him with a big smile and wave. Since I haven't had a ticket for a while I decided I could handle a 80 in 65, which would probably be the charge after I slowed from the detector beep. OK, did it, had fun, didn't get caught, and will save it for the next time I really want to have fun. Had I been stopped, there would have been no hard feeling, hope that it would be light, but, what the hell, it was my decision.

 

This was an easy decision-- I was driving a car that there were not likely to be more of. The jurisdiction is/was podunk, and the idea of getting a fair shake without a series of appeals is foriegn there. I had a vacation home there, but my DL showed a SoCal address. Obviously well to do becuase of the ride, in a place that needed the money.

Bottom line: I negotiated with the officer after his blood pressure came down a few notches. Told him that if he wrote it for 70 there would be no contest. More than that and there would be a fight, especially considering that he had not clocked me (thank goodness...) and that he had lost sight of me without ever geeting a good lock or even a plate number. While he was writing the ticket for about half the speed I'd been going, the engine in his cruiser spit a rod through the oil pan. I got away with a <$50 ticket, and blew up a CHP cruiser in the process.

Had I decided to fight it, it would have involved at least two less-than-convenient trips to Mammoth (they NEVER schedule arraignments or trials for Mondays or Fridays) plus the judge and the trooper are still married to the same woman. It just wasn't worth the risk. Plus I was in fact guilty as hell, and should have been hauled directly to jail. The ticket was a bargain.

Joe's situation is similar. Fight it and the officer has the right to revise his speed estimate UP at any time. If his notes say that Joe was passing the pack, on the right/slow-lane side, at a large differential, then there's a possible 'careless driving' or even a reckless thrown in there. Reckless is a Big Red Flag on a driving record as far as insurance co's are concerned, since many DUI's get negotiated down to that. I'm sure that there's still a passing-on-the-right rule on the books someplace, and they can dig it out just for you. Remember, the DA can add to the original charges at any time, based on the officer's testimony. Trust Me on this. They will give you the courtesy of having the added charges tried separately at a later time, so there's another day or two trashed while you fight those added charges.

Suddenly, paying a tiny little fine for a +5 violation doesn't sound so bad, eh?

My too sense...

 

Y'know, I've had my share of speeding tickets (although I'm a little overdue and feeling somewhat ashamed of myself). Like Bill's post above, I figure that it doesn't really matter whether or not I agree with the posted limit. In this country, if enough of us don't like a law, we can change it at the ballot box. It is what it is, and I, as a single individual, can't change it.

So, speeding is a conscious decision on my part, and when I do it, I understand the risk of receiving a citation. So I don't moan, groan or complain. In the eternal scheme of things, a speeding ticket just isn't that big a deal! I fess up, and, in fact, I generally have a fun, genial time with the officer. I just say, "Y'know, officer, it's pretty darn hard to drive slow in this car! Bet you'd have the same problem if you were driving it!"

That usually breaks the ice, and we often end up sitting back in his car talking about either my ride or his. I've met some pretty cool cops that way.

So, at age 57, I've had probably a dozen tickets over the course of my driving life. Can't see that it's left any permanent marks.

 

I was cruising along one day minding my own business, etc. at 85 mph. Without getting into the details, a CHP pulled me over and told me he was writing me up for 75mph in a 65 mph zone (highway 101). He told me at that speed I had the option of traffic school to delete the points...any more speed on the ticket would have negated that option.
Now there's approved traffic schools that you can take online in the comfort of your home. The online exam is trivial and you can sip a cold brewski as you do it.
I think I went to http://www.gototrafficschool.com/ and now I'm a graduate!!!

later, mojo

 

Bigs, I must disagree that as an individual you can do nothing to change the situation. Please give that statement some thought and break out your history books if necessary. I think with thought you will change that attitude. Of course there is always a cost. But an individual can change the entire world and the course of history.

Fogey:

You are correct. The speed limits are set by federal regulation by engineering studies that include 85th percentile freeflowing traffic observation. The definition of "freeflowing" is critical. Examine the engineering study and raw data used to compile it, and you will find variation of the practices of each study when defining freeflowing. Freeflowing means traffic moving without awareness of: a)speed limit signs or regulations; b)hazards apparent to the drivers; c)police or other authorities present ; d)workers or maintenance personnel in sight on the roadway; e)obstructions to vision or hearing; e) weather conditions less than ideal (clear, bright, etc.); f) no curves or constrictions that would cause drivers to slow their pace. Obviously, the intent is to give motorists the choice to drive at their own COMFORTABLE speed unimpeded and unafraid of detection or hazard. Then the speeds, with due regard for a defined headway, are measured and the 85th percentile of driver's speeds are recorded over a suitable period of time. And, in absence of other hazardous conditions on that section of roadway,the speed is then rounded up to the next even 5 mph increment (if it is 62, then to 65, etc).
Also, a "safe for conditions" speed is defined in the study and available for your review if you obtain a copy of it. This safe for conditions speed can be significantly higher than the 85th percentile speed, and can and should be mentioned in court. As cars get better engineering, and components such as brakes and steering improve over time, speeds tend to raise if studies are performed by engineers scientifically because drivers feel more comfortable driving at higher speeds. And studies are to be performed every 5 years or so(check the MUTCD latest edition for frequency). Of course they seldom are, and are often not performed by traffic engineers, though this is obviously illegal. And speed surveys are often performed along stretches of roadways that have curves or other constrictions so as to obtain a lower reading and set limits lower. Or police can be visible and thus affect drivers' comfort levels. Then the limits are set to insure the bears have free reign on motorists for another 5 years: shooting fish in a barrel anytime the city needs money. For this reason you should always obtain the "latest study" for the section of roadway on which you were cited and inspect it thoroughly.

Engineering studies include more than "speed surveys". Also studied are accident records over a period of months or years preceeding the study, hazards in the area, changes in roadway conditions, etc. All of this can affect an engineering study. If you are getting the idea that this study is meant to prevent an ARBITRARY setting of speed limits, you win first prize. It is meant to be performed by engineers scientifically. It often is not, if it is done at all. The entire state of Oregon has not one engineering study for any road except Interstate 5. Think about that for a minute.

Garret, this is the time I must say, sir, that you are a thinking man and bear. You realize that freeflowing traffic is safer than impeded traffic.
In Montana, when the limits were lifted entirely, fatalities and accidents went down drastically. When they were re-instated, the rates skyrocketed. We all should know why if we were honest with ourselves. It is an insult to our intelligence to say that a car that is driven at three times our national maximum speed limit all year around and designed to do it, is unsafe at speeds above 75 mph. I'll say it again: Do we all appear to be morons? Sheessh!!

Enforce the left lane rule, enforce the left lane rule, enforce the left lane rule.
Demand stricter licensing laws and more driver education on vehicle dynamics.
Enforce the DUI laws for alcoholic drivers rather than occasional drinkers. (Alcoholics are not aware that they are impaired when they get into a vehicle, unlike the driver who stops for an occasional beer and knows he is impaired and drives accordingly.)
Give attention to the vehicle and conditions.

Etch this in your mind: speed, in and of itself is not dangerous. All things are relative. Blaming speed is NOT PLACING RESPONSIBILITY where it belongs, like everything else in this irresponsible and infantile society. As Smokey the Bear says: Only YOU can prevent forest fires!!

 

Ron, well-said. Isn't it so sad that you'll say something so logical and so LEGAL, and the response will be something like: "I did evil, I deserve to pay" or "It's the LAW Buddy, live with it".

After 6 years of law school I can say this (no I am not an attorney but I do have a degree with the word "law" in it):

The LAW is not an ***. Nothing that is written in black and white is hard-and-fast. Everything in the Law is dependent on circumstances. Period.

 

Joe, sorry about your ticket.

Garret and any other officers viewing,
Of course most here know you are not alone

Last year I was pulled over just south of Cleveland on the fare road doing 95 mph, no ticket. About 6 months late I was pulled over doing close to 80 in a 55 mph, no ticket. Like Bigs I take responsibility for my actions, and it shows in the way I treat the officer and so maybe I get lucky once in awhile.
I have 2 inlaws who are cops and therefore are invovled with traffic stops, chases etc. The things I have seen these guys go through, driving related, is heart breaking. I know there are a few here who won't cut cops a break but I am relieved to see the majority are.

 

Well, Ron, there is much in what you say, and I will be the first to agree with you about the safety of 928's and similar cars. And, if we didn't have to share the roads with the other 75% of the drivers who either can't drive or have cars that shouldn't be on the road, I would jump right on your bandwagon advocating the right to drive just as fast as you like. However, life isn't always as we would like it, and, since a lot of people can't be trusted to keep their cars up to snuff and get good instruction before venturing out onto the highway, we who can and do must pay the price.
AND, I agree that speed doesn't kill, but it sure inhances the trauma level in the human body when it comes to a sudden stop against another object. Again, in the best of all possible worlds we wouldn't have ladders in the roads, possums wandering across them (hell to hit at about 120, BTDT), unlicenced drivers with no insurance changing lanes suddenly in front of you or any of those other fun happenstances we run into from time to time.
OK, I promise to quit beating this dead horse, for the time being, anyway.

 

There are many factors that come into play when thinking about fighting a ticket in court with trivial nuances that you feel matter. There are few things uglier or annoying (and sometimes amusing) than watching a person get slapped down in front of a packed room of citizens who'd rather be somewhere else, cops who'd rather be somewhere else, legal personnel who've heard it all before and a judge who is just not going to undermine and belittle the law enforcement sitting in his or her court day in and day out. Over the years I've heard so many stories about some individual putting the law enforcement officer in his place with some trivial fact in front of a packed courtroom and for all the times I've been in court for tickets I HAVE NEVER SEEN IT HAPPEN. Not in 15+ years of high speed roadtrips and courtrooms across a half a dozen or more states. Consequently I've gotten out of more big tickets at triple digit speeds than you can shake a stick at, even when I could see the cop/trooper was going to be tough. It's called disarming them with your absolutely unwavering upbeat attitude in the face of impending doom with absolutely zero fear. You're not trying to get punked either, just out of a ticket. From what I've experienced and in stories I can actually verify, you don't beat a ticket in court, you beat it in the actual pull over.