 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Chrysler Cars / February 2005Out-ofState Speeding Ticket
From: "Ralf" <xstream@highstream.net> Subject: Out-of-State Speeding Ticket Date: Thursday, February 10, 2005 11:18 AM This week I had to make a rush trip to Virginia to visit a dear Uncle who had a heart attack. Had to speed up to pass a slow moving truck and just as I got around him, coming the other way was a State Trooper.. at the time I was doing 65 MPH,, sadly I found out I was in a 55MPH area. The trooper ticketed me and did not want to hear any excuses. Now I have the option of sending the fine or going back to Virginia and trying to plead my case. I do need all advice, good and bad.. first ticket in over 15 years. big concern is the possibility of increased insurance premiums. What happens if I just ignore the ticket, does the traffic court automatically judge me guilty,, etc. Any and all advice appreciated. thanks. RG >From: "Ralf" <xstream@highstream.net> >Subject: Out-of-State Speeding Ticket [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >guilty,, etc. >Any and all advice appreciated. thanks. RG If you just ignore the ticket you will be judged guilty. Also, most states share databases of traffic violators. If your state has such an agreement with VA, your own state will suspend your driver's license for failure to respond to the VA ticket. It will probably affect your insurance until you appear in court and are lucky enough to get it dismissed or have the charges reduced to, for example, "violation of state traffic signs". I'd bet your odds of achieving that in court are less than 50/50. If you are very lucky, your insurance company may allow one moving violation per each three years. Mine does but fewer and fewer companies do these days. Doug > From: "Ralf" <xstream@highstream.net> > Subject: Out-of-State Speeding Ticket [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > guilty,, etc. > Any and all advice appreciated. thanks. RG You got a ticket for doing 65mph in a 55mph zone and you admit you were speeding. It's hard for the judge to find you not guilty when you admit to being guilty. > From: "Ralf" <xstream@highstream.net> > Subject: Out-of-State Speeding Ticket [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > guilty,, etc. > Any and all advice appreciated. thanks. RG Pay the fine you were guilty of speeding. You will loose more money if you try and fight it, also some states do not transfer points back to the state you live in, they just want the money. If you don't pay then they will possibly go after you and access the points on your license. Going to work at 4:45am last Dec I stopped and then went thru a red late in VA, I was the only car on the road, except the state trooper that got me for running it, It cost me 156.00. I live in a neighboring state, instead of fighting and loosing I payed it.... no points were transferred to the DMV My opinion only Glenn Beasley Chrysler Tech > From: "Ralf" <xstream@highstream.net> > Subject: Out-of-State Speeding Ticket [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > guilty,, etc. > Any and all advice appreciated. thanks. RG As a resident of VA, I can tell you that it will do you absolutely no good to go to court - and that's if you live here. They don't cut any slack in the last coupla years. Pay it and move on. If you haven't gotten a ticket in 15 years, you ought to have points in the bank, so your ins. co. shouldn't bug you. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x') Do insurance companies (in the US) automatically get "feedback" from the cops when you get a ticket (for moving violations) ?? I don't think that happens in Ontario. Besides, don't you have a right to privacy? What right does insurance companies have to info like that? I'm not arguing that they naturally have an interest in that information - but isin't your right to privacy more important? As for going to court and fighting it - you've got to remember the huge gov't debt in the US is putting increasing pressure on the states to cut services and raise taxes / revenues. Speeding tickets are nothing more than taxation in another form. (and I still haven't paid a 6 year old speeding ticket in CT...) PS: Aren't radar detectors "illegal" in VA? > Do insurance companies (in the US) automatically get "feedback" from > the cops when you get a ticket (for moving violations) ?? > > I don't think that happens in Ontario. Normally only at renewal time.... or if you give them a reason such as an accident. > Besides, don't you have a right to privacy? What right does insurance > companies have to info like that? Your right of privacy.. their right not to sell you insurance............ besides... driving records are actually public information.. with the right forms anyone can get that info I beleive under FOI or something like that... at least I been told..... Yes they are illegal > Do insurance companies (in the US) automatically get "feedback" from > the cops when you get a ticket (for moving violations) ?? [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > PS: Aren't radar detectors "illegal" in VA? > Do insurance companies (in the US) automatically get "feedback" from > the cops when you get a ticket (for moving violations) ?? Yes, in many, if not most, states. > I don't think that happens in Ontario. > > Besides, don't you have a right to privacy? What right does insurance > companies have to info like that? Privacy rights have been eroding in the US for 200+ years now... > I'm not arguing that they naturally have an interest in that > information - but isin't your right to privacy more important? It depends on whom you ask. Matt > > Do insurance companies (in the US) automatically get "feedback" > > from the cops when you get a ticket (for moving violations) ?? > > Yes, in many, if not most, states. Do the police keep in (their) records the details of who your insurance provider is? When stopped for a violation, and when they ask to see your insurance certificate, do they do more than check to see if it's current? Do they take the details of who the insurance company is so that they can inform them of your ticket at some point? Is the onus on the police to tell the insurance company of your ticket (after it's been processed) or is the onus on the insurance company to periodically (or otherwise at their discretion) check your ticket records? >>>Do insurance companies (in the US) automatically get "feedback" >>>from the cops when you get a ticket (for moving violations) ?? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > see if it's current? Do they take the details of who the insurance > company is so that they can inform them of your ticket at some point? I can only speak for PA, but we have to provide our insurance information (company, policy number and expiration date) at every annual registration renewal. > Is the onus on the police to tell the insurance company of your ticket > (after it's been processed) or is the onus on the insurance company to > periodically (or otherwise at their discretion) check your ticket > records? I'm not sure of the details. Matt >> > Do insurance companies (in the US) automatically get "feedback" >> > from the cops when you get a ticket (for moving violations) ?? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > periodically (or otherwise at their discretion) check your ticket > records? In Texas at least, the burden is on the insurance company to check with the state for your records. If you'll recall, you gave them your drivers license number before they wrote the policy. They can't sell insurance to you without it. > Do insurance companies (in the US) automatically get "feedback" from > the cops when you get a ticket (for moving violations) ?? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Besides, don't you have a right to privacy? What right does insurance > companies have to info like that? In New York, as long as someone pays their fine for a moving traffic violation, their insurance company find out about their ticket only if they do a check on the policy holder's license number with the DMV. Insurance companies are not "informed" by the DMV when xomeone gets a ticket, they (insurance company) have to seek that information. I've received a few speeding tickets and none have ever affected my insurance premiums. In Alberta, If you do not pay your tickets, you cannot renew your registration, for your vehicle. Well It also includes any fine, not just driving ie( deadbeat dads, etc.) In BC Canada, Your screwed, as your insurance for the vehicle is with the government. Your liability insurance part is automatically included with your car registration. Expensive! And they automatically know when you get hit with a ticket. > Do insurance companies (in the US) automatically get "feedback" from > the cops when you get a ticket (for moving violations) ?? [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > PS: Aren't radar detectors "illegal" in VA? > As for going to court and fighting it - you've got to remember the > huge gov't debt in the US is putting increasing pressure on the states > to cut services and raise taxes / revenues. Speeding tickets are > nothing more than taxation in another form. I almost mentioned that in my previous post as a big part of the recent motivation I've seen in VA. Localities are making up for lost revenue from persoanl property tax tweaks by the state that have affected localities' revenue. The town I live in did a survey on fines cahrged by localities and is significantly raising all their parking and other fines - even started requiring cats to be licensed (there's about 100 jokes you can make out of that one). Cat license is $25, dogs are $5. What's up with that? Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x') > I almost mentioned that in my previous post as a big part of the recent > motivation I've seen in VA. Localities are making up for lost revenue [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > jokes you can make out of that one). Cat license is $25, dogs are $5. > What's up with that? C: A license for my pet fish, Eric. S: How did you know my name was Eric? C: No no no, my fish's name is Eric, Eric the fish. He's an halibut. S: What? C: He is...an...halibut. S: You've got a pet halibut? C: Yes. I chose him out of thousands. I didn't like the others, they were all too flat. S: You must be a looney. C: I am not a looney! Why should I be attired with the epithet looney merely because I have a pet halibut? I've heard tell that Sir Gerald Nabardo has a pet prawn called Simon (you wouldn't call him a looney); furthermore, Dawn Pailthorpe, the lady show-jumper, had a clam, called Stafford, after the late Chancellor, Allan Bullock has two pikes, both called Chris, and Marcel Proust had an haddock! So, if you're calling the author of 'A la recherche du temps perdu' a looney, I shall have to ask you to step outside! S: Alright, alright, alright. A license. C: Yes. S: For a fish. C: Yes. S: You are a looney. C: Look, it's a bleeding pet, isn't it? I've got a license for me pet dog Eric, and I've got a license for me pet cat Eric... S: You don't need a license for your cat. C: I bleeding well do and I got one. He can't be called Eric without it-- S: There's no such thing as a bloody cat license. C: Yes there is! S: Isn't! C: Is! S: Isn't! C: I bleeding got one, look! What's that then? S: This is a dog license with the word 'dog' crossed out and 'cat' written in in crayon. C: The man didn't have the right form. S: What man? C: The man from the cat detector van. S: The looney detector van, you mean. C: Look, it's people like you what cause unrest. S: What cat detector van? C: The cat detector van from the Ministry of Housinge. S: Housinge? C: It was spelt like that on the van (I'm very observant!). I never seen so many bleeding aerials. The man said that their equipment could pinpoint a purr at four hundred yards! And Eric, being such a happy cat, was a piece of cake. S: How much did you pay for this? C: Sixty quid, and eight for the fruit-bat. S: What fruit-bat? C: Eric the fruit-bat. S: Are all your pets called Eric? C: There's nothing so odd about that: Kemal Ataturk had an entire menagerie called Abdul! S: No he didn't! C: Did! S: Didn't! C: Did, did, did, did, did and did! S: Oh, all right. C: Spoken like a gentleman, sir. Now, are you going to give me a fish license? S: I promise you that there is no such thing: you don't need one. C: In that case, give me a bee license. S: A license for your pet bee? C: Yes. S: Called Eric? Eric the Bee? C: No. S: No? C: No, Eric the Half-Bee. He had an accident. S: You're off your chump. C: Look, if you intend by that utilization of an obscure colloquiallism to imply that my sanity is not up to scratch, or indeed to deny the semi-existence of my little chum Eric the Half-Bee, I shall have to ask you to listen to this! Take it away, Eric the orchestra leader!....... A one... two.... A one.. two.. three..four... [piano intro] Half a bee, philosophically, must, ipso facto, half not be. But half the bee has got to be, vis a vis its entity - do you see? But can a bee be said to be or not to be an entire bee when half the bee is not a bee due to some ancient injury? Singing... La dee dee, 1 2 3, Eric the half a bee. A B C D E F G, Eric the half a bee. Is this retched demi-bee, half asleep upon my knee, some freak from a menagerie? No! It's Eric the half a bee. Fiddle dee dum, Fiddle dee dee, Eric the half bee. Ho ho ho, Tee hee hee, Eric the half a bee. I love this hive employee-ee-ee [with buzzing in background] bisected accidentally one summer afternoon by me I love him carnally. He loves him carnally... [together] ...semi-carnally [spoken] The end "Cyril Connelly?" No! "Semi-carnally" Oh! Cyril Connelly [sung softly and slowly] . Just another tax on driving. Drive textbook style on the open highways. Even that's suspicious sometimes if you do. Go with flow in big cities for safety's sake. The mail in is not a fine; its bail. Pay it. When you don't show your bail is forfeited as a fine and a guilty is entered. Its a beautiful system. >This week I had to make a rush trip to Virginia to visit a dear Uncle who >had a heart attack. Had to speed up to pass a slow moving truck and just as [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >guilty,, etc. >Any and all advice appreciated. thanks. RG You won't be sending in a fine. You're sending in BAIL. If you don't appear, the judge will rule you forfeit your bail and in essence it becomes the fine at that point. If you don't send in your bail, he will issue a WARRANT. If you go back to Virginia you will be hauled into jail, so I advise you to pay your bail by mail and forget about it. Getting a ticket for 10mph over is chickenshit, but chalk that up to the cost of driving. It is just like another tax, that's how I look at it. I haven't gotten a ticket in a long time because I get a kick out of driving textbook style. I am so legal when I drive, its suspicious. The only time I deviate is when I find myself in the big city and then I go with the flow, otherwise driving according to the law is downright dangerous. There is no justice when it comes to traffic tickets. Pay the ticket ! ! ! I can't tell you how many out of state people I have had in my taxi here in La. who had to fly in to pay a ticket that they got on a visit here and didn't pay. When you go to renew your driver's license, auto registration, proffessional license, etc., the computer spits out an attachment from an out of state court and bang! you'r dead in the water. mike > From: "Ralf" <xstream@highstream.net> > Subject: Out-of-State Speeding Ticket [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > guilty,, etc. > Any and all advice appreciated. thanks. RG > From: "Ralf" <xstream@highstream.net> > Subject: Out-of-State Speeding Ticket [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > guilty,, etc. > Any and all advice appreciated. thanks. RG Lucky for you, I have a brother-in-law that does stuff like this all the time, and in Virginia too! So I know the answer for sure. The answer is....... You will go to jail. Maybe in Virginia, maybe not. Depends on how the computers are working that day. But they will get you eventually. I find it very funny that you think you could hide it by not paying the money.If you become a wanted criminal in several states, then your insurance company has a much better chance of finding out, don't they? Couldn't you figure this out on your own?Your best bet is to mail them their dough and forget it. If you don't live in Virginia, your insurance company may not even find out. Remember, I speak from real life family experience. Not conjecture. As an attorney I got a real chill down my back reading some of the suggestions posted here. While I can't give specific legal advise in gerneral: 1. Never a good idea to ignore a moving violation. 2. Some states exchange information and with your insurance carrier. 3. Never plead guilty unless you really really want to. 4. Send in your ticket in a timely manner with a not guilty plea. 5. Call the court and ask if you can enter a plea to a lesser charge over the phone. If not consider taking on the services of a local attorney. The money you will save in insurance costs and possible points may well we worth it to you. I am currently representing a fellow from Canada caught doing 98 mph heading south toward Albany, NY and 6 month later doing 92 mph heading north toward Albany. NY exchanges information with Quebec. He will pay huge fines, about $800.00 but I will keep the points low so that he does not lose his driving rights in New York and Quebec. He also picked up another non-speed related violation in NYC. Last year we had a client clocked doing 146 mph on the Northway (I-88) heading toward the border. He was driving one of those nice German 2 seaters some of us lust after. The police were nice, they only wrote him up for doing 99 mph. Richard. > As an attorney I got a real chill down my back reading some of the > suggestions posted here. While I can't give specific legal advise in [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Richard. The OP has a clean record and was exceeding the speed limit by a modest amount. Your clients are repeat offenders who were driving to endanger. I understand why your clients would need a lawyer, frankly I think they belong in jail especially the guy who was caught doing 146. The OP is going to end up with a reasonable fine and points on his license for the next five years or so. As long as he doesn't get another ticket in that time the bump in his insurance rate isn't going to be that much, certainly not enough to justify the cost of going to court. > As an attorney I got a real chill down my back reading some of the > suggestions posted here. While I can't give specific legal advise in [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > rights in New York and Quebec. He also picked up another non-speed related > violation in NYC. This is the thing about attorneys that I really despise. Someone driving like this is just a moment away from wiping out some innocent family. He SHOULD lose his license, at least for some enough to let him think about his driving habits. Matt This is the thing about attorneys that I really despise. Someone driving like this is just a moment away from wiping out some innocent family. He SHOULD lose his license, at least for some enough to let him think about his driving habits. > Matt Well, my current client has lost his driving rights in NYS. Based upon the fine and the time that has passed and the fact that he is a Canadian licensed driver there is a need to answer the tickets and to pay the fines and to reach an agreement on the points. It is not my job to do anything else but assist him so that the courts adequately administer his cases. Don't let your bias show so overtly against attorneys. It is the statutes and the courts that control, not the attorney who is doing his best to help someone thorough the system, especially someone who does not speak English or know anything about our civil law system. Richard. > This is the thing about attorneys that I really despise. Someone driving > like this is just a moment away from wiping out some innocent family. He [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Richard. It's very important that we all separate our feelings about Richard's clients from our feelings about him. Everyone deserves a competant defense, even gangsters and terrorists not just minor miscreats. Our legal system is predicatated on the idea that you are innocent until proven guilty. It's terribly important that the government be kept honest by lawyers like Richard who force the state to prove their case. That said when you get down to individual cases you look at the tradeoffs and you do what is appropriate. In the cases that Richard was talking about where the accused are looking at the loss of their licenses and maybe worse it's very important to have a lawyer. But for a case like the OP's where all he is looking at is a fine and a small bump in his insurance rates the cost in time and money to fight it far exceeds the cost of pleading guilty and mailing in his fine. What hasn't been discussed here, that I've seen anyway, is what the violators HOME state is. For example, here in New York, exceptiing really serious violations (DWI, etc), our DMV does NOT track or record information from any other U.S. State (although, as was pointed out, they DO exchange records with Ontario and Quebec!) While I'm sure that insurance companies differ, mine allows one speeding ticket a year, as long as it's 14 MPH or less "over", as a "gimmee" Rick > > This is the thing about attorneys that I really despise. Someone driving > > like this is just a moment away from wiping out some innocent family. He [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > in time and money to fight it far exceeds the cost of pleading guilty and > mailing in his fine. >>This is the thing about attorneys that I really despise. Someone driving >>like this is just a moment away from wiping out some innocent family. He [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > in time and money to fight it far exceeds the cost of pleading guilty and > mailing in his fine. I never stated a feeling abourt Richard, I stated a feeling about an action he seems to be taking. It sounded like he knew that his client was guilty and should pay a certain penalty (loss of license). It also sounded like he was trying to get that just and reasonably penalty reduced to a point that allowed his client to continue to drive dangerously on roads in NYS. There is nothing virtuous about that. When this man kills someone, I hope that Richard gets to sit across the table from the victim's family and explain how he helped get this man back on the road so he can continue to drive at 30+ over the speed limit... Matt I never stated a feeling abourt Richard, I stated a feeling about an action he seems to be taking. [If a client is just going to enter a plea of Guilty, and not have any discussions with the prosecutor or the Judge about the sentence then the client does not need an attorney. But it seems you object to the right of a client to obtain legal services to represent the client in such discussions and the entry of a plea so that the cost and time of a trial can be avoided; that is your right, but our state constitutions give us due process rights to seek and obtain representation. A lawyer is more than a "ham sandwich" passively serving the whim of the courts or the prosecutors. If a client wants to fight a ticket or the offered fine and penalty that is his right. The lawyer's job is to represent the interent of the client, if the lawyer did anything else he should be disbarred.] It sounded like he knew that his client was guilty and should pay a certain penalty (loss of license). [Just how would I know if my client is guilty? I was not there, I did not see him drive, nor did I observe the actions of the police]. It also sounded like he was trying to get that just and reasonably penalty reduced to a point that allowed his client to continue to drive dangerously on roads in NYS. There is nothing virtuous about that. [And YOU know what is JUST and REASONABLE. And who said virtue had anthing to do with this. In NYS the points were raised by the state agency at the behest of the insurance companies who were then allowed to raise their insurance rates based upon the points accumulated. The insurance lobby got what it wanted by passing around contributions to elected officials. We do not live in Utopia where all crimes are solved, all criminals are punished and where the Courts always hand out justice with an even hand]. When this man kills someone, I hope that Richard gets to sit across the table from the victim's family and explain how he helped get this man back on the road so he can continue to drive at 30+ over the speed limit... [Some high horse you have there. You assume that driving at speed is a significant issues. Yet nationally, the accident rate has fallen significantly on all interstates and state roads where the speed limit has been risen from the previous 55 mph limit, up to 85 mph in some states, with no exception anywhere. The autoban does not suffer from a significantly higher accident rate than typical US interstates. And you also assume that an individual without valid driving privilages are not on the road. You also assume that a mere attorney representing a client is responsible for all unintended consequences, and the rights of due process, and the discretion of the police, prosecuror, and the judge applying laws and procedures adopted by the legislatures and signed by governors have nothing to do with the outcome. In your world it is only the big bad lawyer that is doing his best to shake up your preception of right and wrong.] Richard. > [Some high horse you have there. You assume that driving at speed is a > significant issues. Yet nationally, the accident rate has fallen [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the outcome. In your world it is only the big bad lawyer that is doing his > best to shake up your preception of right and wrong.] You may want to read: http://www.benefitcost.its.dot.gov/ITS/benecost.nsf/ID/D4BB2D877DDD955885256BB90 05C472C http://www.benefitcost.its.dot.gov/ITS/benecost.nsf/ID/908E1267499C4322852569610 051E27E http://www.americasdebate.com/forums/simple/index.php/t6599.html The issue isn't always absolute speed, it is the variance among cars on the road (as I made clear in my first post on this topic). If you can lobby NYS to raise its speed limits to 90 MPH, then I'm all for that. However, as long as the limit is 65 and most are driving at or near that speed, someone driving at 90 is a clear and present hazard to others on the road. You can rationalize all you want, but it doesn't change that. The autobahn is designed for higher speeds than are American interstates so that comparison is bogus at the most basic level. And even on the autobahn, it has been shown that lower speeds result in fewer accidents and fatalities. Matt And even on the autobahn, it has been shown that lower speeds result in fewer accidents and fatalities. > Matt You have obliviously never driven on the autobahn. Our NYS Northway is much better designed for speed, with wider lanes, physical divisions between traffic moving in different directions, and better marked and planned exits. It was designed with an assumed posted speed of 75 mph and a designed enforcement limit of 85 mph. But I agree that it is best to have traffic all moving in the same direction at about the same speed and would not like to see the limits removed from our roads; except for me of course. Richard. > And even on the autobahn, it has been shown that lower speeds result in > fewer accidents and fatalities. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > It was designed with an assumed posted speed of 75 mph and a designed > enforcement limit of 85 mph. That is true, but I have driven in both England (lived there for 4 months) and France. Their highways were in much better shape than almost anything in NY or PA. I live in PA and work in NY and drive extensively in both states. > But I agree that it is best to have traffic all moving in the same direction > at about the same speed and would not like to see the limits removed from > our roads; except for me of course. I wouldn't mind higher limits as long as they would strictly enforce the limits, both too fast and too slow. It is the differential that kills more so than the absolute speeds. Matt >> And even on the autobahn, it has been shown that lower speeds result in >> fewer accidents and fatalities. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Matt Objectively speaking, people exceeding the speed limit in their vehicles are not a major reason for accidents and deaths on the highway. Number 1 is likely falling asleep at the wheel, followed by lack of full attention to the road [including having sex or eating or both, while driving], following too close, driving too fast for environmental conditions [rain, snow, ice and lack of adequate sight distances], and last but not least, legal and illegal drug and mood enhancement substances and beverages that impact attention and reaction times. But out of all this it is the enforcement of speeding that is most easy for the police and it is a major revenue enhancement for state and local government. When was the last time you hear of someone getting a ticket for following too close? [It is easy to pick off a speeder on a nearly empty road than a driver following too close in heavy traffic]. Richard. Some European police forces promise to enforce this but I wonder how many people are actually prosecuted... I hate tail-gating, especially at 90+ mph... DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > following too close [...] > When was the last time you hear of someone getting a ticket for following > too close? [It is easy to pick off a speeder on a nearly empty road than a > driver following too close in heavy traffic]. > > Richard. > Some European police forces promise to enforce this but I wonder how many > people are actually prosecuted... > > I hate tail-gating, especially at 90+ mph... But drafting is MUCH more effective if you are within a car length of the car ahead! :-) Matt >>>And even on the autobahn, it has been shown that lower speeds result in >>>fewer accidents and fatalities. [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > illegal drug and mood enhancement substances and beverages that impact > attention and reaction times. I don't doubt that a bit. I think all of these should be addressed to the extent possible. However, I don't think that ignoring a chronic speeder just because "there are worse things out there" is the answer. Does that mean we shouldn't look at cures for the flu just because that more people die from cancer and heart disease? Matt >>>> And even on the autobahn, it has been shown that lower speeds result >>>> in fewer accidents and fatalities. [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Matt Speed generally isn't a problem *at all* - it's not a matter of prioritizing, it's a matter of some things being problems and other things not being problems. nate  Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel Does that mean we shouldn't look at cures for the flu just because that more people die from cancer and heart disease? > Matt Not at all. I just though that people who take a black and white position on penalty and repentance issues should have a bit of understanding that enforcement is often based upon a priority system that has less to do with protecting the public's safety than with the politics of collecting revenue via law enforcement. Speeders are the easy target so they get the enforcement priority. But I bet our honest law enforcement officers feel that they had a good day at the office when the get a truly stoned or drunk driver off the road. Richard. > Does that mean we shouldn't look at cures for the flu just because that > more people die from cancer and heart disease? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > that they had a good day at the office when the get a truly stoned or drunk > driver off the road. That may well be true, however, you are missing the point. This is completely avoidable. If your client had been driving 65 (or even 69 in most places), the police would have not ticketed him. I'm amazed that even an attorney will go to such great lengths to justify illegal behavior. As I said before, if you don't like the law, lobby to get it changed. That is what motorcyclists in PA did recently. They got a long-standing helmet law repealed. I personally think helmets are a good idea and always wear mine and I didn't have any problem with the law that required them, however, I have a lot of respect for the people who took this issue on. Rather than just being outlaws, they fought for what they believed in and made a difference. But that takes a lot more work than just being an outlas... Matt > > Does that mean we shouldn't look at cures for the flu just because that > > more people die from cancer and heart disease? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > long-standing helmet law repealed. I personally think helmets are a > good idea and always wear mine and I didn't have any problem with the > law that required them, however, I have a lot of respect for the people > who took this issue on. Rather than just being outlaws, they fought for > what they believed in and made a difference. But that takes a lot more > work than just being an outlas... > > Matt If he were driving 69 MPH in many places, he would have been the slowest driver on the road, and at serious risk of getting PITed. I've found myself doing 80 MPH in the slow lane before during off-peak hours, and being close to the slowest driver on the road. But of course the IIHS et. al. keep lobbying for keeping speed limits low... nate > This is the thing about attorneys that I really despise. Someone driving > like this is just a moment away from wiping out some innocent family. He [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > someone thorough the system, especially someone who does not speak English > or know anything about our civil law system. My bias isn't against attorneys, it is against some of the things they do. Helping your client understand the law and deal with a foreign language is great. However, you should also help him understand that driving 90 MPH on roads designed for 70 and with most other traffic traveling slower is DANGEROUS and could result in someone getting killed. And you should help him understand that if he does this he should lose his license to drive in the USA. Don't attorneys take an oath as an officer of the court which obligates them to uphold the law? Matt > My bias isn't against attorneys, it is against some of the things > they do. How do you feel about the doctors or paramedics that administer first aid and medical care to, say, felons/criminals that get caught by police after a shootout, a car chase, a bank robbery, - where bystanders are killed? >>My bias isn't against attorneys, it is against some of the things >>they do. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > police after a shootout, a car chase, a bank robbery, - where > bystanders are killed? Heh heh! Reminds me of the story my mother has told many times about when she was growing up on Long Island. The cops had some big shootout with some big-time gangster of the day - they revived him and put him up in the Mineola hospital for many months to recuperate at taxpayer expense, then, when he was well enough, they tried him and executed him. Can't tell you how many times I've heard my mother tell that story, and every time, infuriated over the taxpayer money they spent on fixing the guy up. There's got to be a Far Side™ cartoon in there somewhere. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x') >>> My bias isn't against attorneys, it is against some of the things >>> they do. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > adddress with the letter 'x') Interesting story, but it misses the point. Innocent until proven guilty. that's like why do they use alcohol to sterilize the spot on the arm of a prisoner that they are admistering the fatal injection to? (man, that was very bad grammer).. >>>My bias isn't against attorneys, it is against some of the things >>>they do. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > adddress with the letter 'x') >>My bias isn't against attorneys, it is against some of the things >>they do. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > police after a shootout, a car chase, a bank robbery, - where > bystanders are killed? I feel just fine about it. Why do you ask? Matt Very high-minded, I'm sure. Totally unrealistic. Simple example: British motorways have a 70 mph limit. I have often been in situations where just about everyone around me is travelling at c. 85 mph. Plus, a 70-mph motorway is not designed to be negotiated at a max of 70 mph, but at a higher limit for safety reasons. Many sections of UK motorways are safe at 100 mph. I am sure that sections of German Autobahn where speed is unlimited will have a slightly different design to the UK motorways, e.g. fewer bends. Also, a UK motorway might not show an 85 mph limit where it might be extra 'curvaceous', whereas a German motorway might. But that's hardly making UK motorways safe at only 70 mph. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [... > However, you should also help him understand that driving 90 MPH on roads > designed for 70 and with most other traffic traveling slower is DANGEROUS > and could result in someone getting killed. And you should help him > understand that if he does this he should lose his license to drive in the > USA. [...] > This is the thing about attorneys that I really despise. Someone driving > like this is just a moment away from wiping out some innocent family. He [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Richard. That is IMHO an absurd response...even from an attorney. First, your clients 'ignorance' of the law is no excuse. If he can not speak English, what is he doing driving in a country where traffic control signs are in English? suppose the numbers on that speed limit sign were in a different language in Canada! Not!! That is IMHO an absurd response...even from an attorney. First, your clients 'ignorance' of the law is no excuse. [When did I say that?] If he can not speak English, what is he doing driving in a country where traffic control signs are in English? [My reference to being a foreign language speaker was in the context of needing assistance negotiating the court system, not in reference to being able to read road signs; do I now detect that it is not just lawyers that draw your ire?] Suppose the numbers on that speed limit sign were in a different language in Canada! Not!! [Well, actually the numbers in Canada with reference to speed limits are metric and Canadian vehicles apparently do not display mph as well as kmp. Most US cars still do even though Ronald Regan's team eliminated that mandate one week after he took office; not that that would be an excuse, mind you]. Richard. > [Well, actually the numbers in Canada with reference to speed limits are > metric and Canadian vehicles apparently do not display mph as well as kmp. > Most US cars still do even though Ronald Regan's team eliminated that > mandate one week after he took office; not that that would be an excuse, > mind you]. Well, if your client had been driving 95 kph, he'd have had no trouble with speed in NYS! You do realize what 90+ mph is in kph, don't you? Hint, it is three digits. Matt >>snip [Well, actually the numbers in Canada with reference to speed limits are metric and Canadian vehicles apparently do not display mph as well as kmp. >>SNIP > Richard. All Canadian vehicle speedometers display both kilometers and miles, and all Canadians know that speed limits in US are posted in MPH. All Canadian can convert kilometers to miles in their heads in about 1 microsecond. Your client knew he was breaking the law in a big way. > [Well, actually the numbers in Canada with reference to speed limits are > metric and Canadian vehicles apparently do not display mph as well as > kmp. There is no such thing as "kmp". Kilometres per hour is abbreviated "KM/H". Canadian-market cars virtually all have both KM/H and MPH calibrations on the speedometers, as is the case in the US (though Canadian cars have the KM/H scale larger than the MPH scale, while in the US it's the other way round). "KMP" was an unintended mistype. Most if not all US cars still display both English and metric speed information even though the regulatory requirement has been eliminated. By the way, thanks for the tip on the GE Nighthawk bulbs; they work great in my Town & Country. How do they do that? Richard. > By the way, thanks for the tip on the GE Nighthawk bulbs; they work great > in my Town & Country. How do they do that? > > Richard. Sorry to get off topic, but please do tell me about these. My caravan head-lights SUCK! > > By the way, thanks for the tip on the GE Nighthawk bulbs > Sorry to get off topic, but please do tell me about these. My caravan > head-lights SUCK! There's no magic bulb that makes bad headlamps (e.g. Chrysler products) into good ones, but the GE Night Hawk bulbs are the best 9004 and 9007 bulbs currently available. Other products in the Night Hawk line are good, but not necessarily the best available. For general information on what this type of ultra high efficacy bulb does, click the first link on this page: http://www.candlepowerinc.com/products.pib.html DS To add to the pedantry.. :-) ... it is, actually, Km/h or km/h. In Britain we often write "kph". DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- > "KMP" was an unintended mistype. Most if not all US cars still display > both English and metric speed information even though the regulatory [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Richard. > To add to the pedantry.. :-) ... it is, actually, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > DAS Lower case "k" to be technically correct, according to the International System of Units (SI). 8^) Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x') Quite so! DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > Lower case "k" to be technically correct, according to the International > System of Units (SI). 8^) > > Bill Putney > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > adddress with the letter 'x') PS. Even more strictly: km h(to power of minus 1) :-) DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- > Quite so! > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my >> adddress with the letter 'x') You trying to out-anal me, Schmetterling!!? 8^) Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x') > PS. Even more strictly: > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >>>(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my >>>adddress with the letter 'x') :-)) DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- > You trying to out-anal me, Schmetterling!!? 8^) > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >>>>(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my >>>>adddress with the letter 'x') > That is IMHO an absurd response...even from an attorney. > > First, your clients 'ignorance' of the law is no excuse. > [When did I say that?] In fact, yes you implied such, though you chose to selectively quote in your reply. > If he can not speak English, what is he doing driving in a country where > traffic control signs [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > able to read road signs; do I now detect that it is not just lawyers that > draw your ire?] Not at all, but from someone that spent more than 20 years in upstate New York right near the border I can assure you unless your client is still in diapers his English is well enough to read the signs and follow the court system here. I'll bet he could even understand them all the way down here in Virginia! And lawyers do not draw my ire, only lawyers that spend there time wasting the courts time while their clients cop a plea to a lesser charge. Like DWI's reduced to unsafe lane change and that kind of crap! > Suppose the numbers on that speed limit sign were in a > different language in Canada! Not!! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > mandate one week after he took office; not that that would be an excuse, > mind you]. Yep, its all Ronnies fault (ROTFLMAO). Even a lawyer can come up with a better defense than that. Any Canadian I know (and I know plenty) are well aware of the conversion. Perhaps because it is required in their school systems. And all Canadian vehicles I am aware of show both Kph and Mph. Remember when you go before the judge with the 'Ronnie did it defense' that he was President of the U.S. and not Prime Minister of Canada. And your response confirms my suspicions. Your client deserved the ticket he got and should pay the price. >This week I had to make a rush trip to Virginia to visit a dear Uncle who >had a heart attack. Had to speed up to pass a slow moving truck and just as [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >guilty,, etc. >Any and all advice appreciated. thanks. RG I received my first ticket as well, 21 over the speed limit in a safe corrider (double fine!) in NJ. I was ready to just pay the bill online and everything but unfortunantely it required a court appearance. I had to wait in a loong line at traffic court to see the prosecutor who reduced my fine to 2 points and after all is said and done paid $200 out the door. Interestingly the prosecutor told everyone in line if they had a ticket for speeding 15 mph or under, they're willing to reduce the penalty down to zero points on your license if you agree to pay a $250 surcharge ON TOP of your fine!! > ...Interestingly the > prosecutor told everyone in line if they had a ticket for speeding 15 mph or > under, they're willing to reduce the penalty down to zero points on your > license if you agree to pay a $250 surcharge ON TOP of your fine!! Sounds like the very definition of conflict of interest/corruption. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my adddress with the letter 'x') >> ...Interestingly the >> prosecutor told everyone in line if they had a ticket for speeding 15 mph [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Sounds like the very definition of conflict of interest/corruption. Corruption in New Jersey.....who you expect would ever believe that!? :0) >>> ...Interestingly the >>> prosecutor told everyone in line if they had a ticket for speeding 15 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Corruption in New Jersey.....who you expect would ever believe that!? :0) Speed enforcement activities are fund raising activities and safety is not usually the priority. Richard. >>>>...Interestingly the >>>>prosecutor told everyone in line if they had a ticket for speeding 15 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Speed enforcement activities are fund raising activities and safety is not > usually the priority. I like such fund raising activities. The alternative would likely be to raise the gas taxes and then everyone has to pay. Speeding fines are elective "taxes" that I choose not to pay and others do. :-) It is kind of like the lottery. I prefer taxes that give me a choice as to whether or not to pay them! :-) Matt > I like such fund raising activities. The alternative would likely be to > raise the gas taxes and then everyone has to pay. Speeding fines are [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Matt Unfortunately, in Michigan, the proceeds from speeding tickets don't go to road repair or maintenance, but rather to places such as public libraries. Which is great, I guess, if you like books. --Geoff >> I like such fund raising activities. The alternative would likely be to >> raise the gas taxes and then everyone has to pay. Speeding fines are [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Which is great, I guess, if you like books. Public libraries are the best place to start preparing a defense for a speeding ticket. First thing you need to do is lookup the law you are being charged with breaking. ---------- Alex >>I like such fund raising activities. The alternative would likely be to >>raise the gas taxes and then everyone has to pay. Speeding fines are [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Which is great, I guess, if you like books. Well, still a pretty worthy cause. Matt > | On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 13:19:56 -0500, "Ralf" <xstream@highstream.net> wrote: > | >This week I had to make a rush trip to Virginia to visit a dear Uncle who [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > | under, they're willing to reduce the penalty down to zero points on your > | license if you agree to pay a $250 surcharge ON TOP of your fine!! Ya shoulda paid it. Wait until you see your insurance surcharge for the next three years for those two points. > Ya shoulda paid it. Wait until you see your insurance surcharge > for the next three years for those two points. Again - someone claiming that the insurance companies are automatically informed of moving violations by the cops. Even violations that happen out-of-state. What gives? Does this really happen - or not? > | Tom Miller wrote: > | [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > | > | What gives? Does this really happen - or not? I can only speak to the situation in New Jersey and my own problem around 14 years ago. The out-of-state ticket from Virginia was $85 + 2 points, but the insurance surcharges amounted to (if memory serves) around $2,000 over three years. So somebody told somebody. And no way out at that time by paying extra for the ticket, which was a Virginia ticket anyway. The two points were definitely on my license and the surcharge definitely began to appear on my next 6-month insurance renewal bill. Listed separately. Now after posting my original response, I did some surfing and did find a comment that the Whitman administration in NJ had eliminated or was trying to eliminate some sort of auto insurance surcharge -- but it was not clear if this had really happened or was at the time merely a plan. It was also not clear exactly which auto insurance surcharge they were talking about. So my experience might or might not be valid today. I just don't know. But the insurer was notified and I did pay a whopping surcharge. A clear day in spring, a newish 1989 turbocharged Mazda 626 touring sedan, a divided highway, no cars in sight in either direction except for me and the patrol car once I got over the crest of the little hill. Me trying to see how fast the car would go. Him snagging me fair and square on radar but citing me for 69 in a 55-zone instead of 100+. My only ticket in my entire life, and one of the few times I was significantly speeding. Back in 1968 a mechanic and I just finished getting his white 300SL Gullwing to work after 9 months in the shop. We took it out for a spin on a state road just outside of Oneonta, NY. Soon the State Police pulled us over. They had lots of questions about the car. They called ahead to another trooper with a "gun" and asked us to see how fast they could clock it. Would you believe 142 mph, on 12 year old tires. We were young and foolish. [But it sure was fun]. Sometimes you just need a "speeding" pass. Richard. > | > | Back in 1968 a mechanic and I just finished getting his white 300SL Gullwing [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > | > | Speaking of young and foolish: In 1959 I was on the then-new Kansas Turnpike in a friend's Jaguar XK 140 FHC. I was the passenger. We hit a little under 100 mph. As the car was reputed to go as high as 120, I urged my buddy to stomp on it to see if it were true. He just looked at me and said one word: "retreads." No worry about police cars or tickets, though, as there was no speed limit at all on the Turnpike then. No traffic either. I mean, at certain times of the day you could drive for miles without seeing another car. The big problem was guys like us who drove our cars like idiots until they virtually disintegrated and turned into long strips of parts cut out of the wheat fields. Just wondering......where did you get the ticket. If you ingnore you will be tired in your absence and the court will send you the fee throught the mail. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.