I'll go out and purchase a radar and take you out for a "mock" enforcement patrol. If I prove correct and 70% or more of the vehicles we measure the speed of are "speeding" on the freeway (absent rush hour traffic which in LA is 24/7; so San Diego it'll be) then you will pay me $100/hour for my time + expenses (fuel, mileage, radar).
If you turn out to be correct, I'll pay you the same.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I have never needed to brake check anyone, nor ever really had the desire to do so. I have however, tailgated someone to teach them a lesson of what the left lane is for.
I used to be more militant about that in the past, but I gave up. Nowadays, if I see a left lane camper, I just pass on the right once I'm able to. Sometimes if I'm in a mood, I'll roll down the window, stick my hand out, and motion them to move to the right. It actually works about half the time.
And now, when I say "left lane camper" I mean camper in the truest sense of the word...hanging out in that lane and being the slowest vehicle on the road. If they're in the left lane, but at least passing slower traffic on the right, that's fine with me.
I vote that we get rid of traffic fines and just LOCK up all the offenders! Put them in jail and throw away the key! I hope I get a good public defendant! :P Get rid of fines all together now!
Pros in CA from doing this:
Regain the right to a professional defense! Regain the right to face a Prosecutor (this is often an argument used by judges wrongfully to deny other rights since there's no DA to oppose you in court). Regain the right to a trial by jury (I know I'd rather have a jury than a judge anyday of the week!).
Cons:
Police might fail to adjust correctly immediately, and put too many people in jail. Laws might take a while to catch up with reality. Prisons would be even more overcrowded. More innocent people would be in jail and therefore earn/win the right to sue for false imprisonment later on.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
...on the subject of speed limits because I live part of the year in Arizona and part of it in New Hampshire. NH likes to think of it self as a libertarian state but speed limits are set artificially low and seemingly rather haphazardly, particularly on non-urban Interstates and turnpikes.
As far as I can tell Arizona limits are based on the 85th percentile of speed and are usually appropriate to the type of road. For this reason I seldom find myself more than 5mph over the limit and don't bother using my radar detector when I'm there, yet I've never been stopped.
I wouldn't drive anywhere in NH (or the Northeast) without a detector, every road seems to be posted 5 or 10 miles to low and if you really kept to the posted limits you would impede traffic which always moves according to the 85th percentile rule (i.e. the inherent natural speed at which most drivers are comfortable) regardless of legal limits.
"...I sometimes creep a bit over the speed limit..."
I think almost everyone does. That's what makes these "zero tolerance" tactics so infuriating. As humans we can never maintain perfect driving behavior even if we intend to. Having a cop behind every bush to catch you at that moment of inattention just seems unfair.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Well I have to admit those motorcycle cops earn their living in the Seattle rains I suppose - and a cycle allows for a much better profit margin than a cop car!
Bellevue and Kirkland - those areas have sure changed over the past few decades. The I-80 pontoon bridge always made me feel like I was in Florida...well OK, not in the winter.
Other than in a school zone or something, it's money. Luckily the Bellevue motorcycle based revenue enforcers are less than sneaky, so most of the time it is little more than inattention that enables a ticket.
I don't know about earning money - recent story that 1 in 5 city of Seattle employees makes 6 figures, and a good amount were cops with gigantic OT compensation. Seems pretty generous for ticket writers.
I don't know really. Most of it appears to float right above the surface, but I'm sure its anchored somehow. Go out there and drive it, Seattle is a nice place, as is most of the Pacific Northwest (but I'd wait until summer when there isn't much rain). You've got mountains, water everywhere, usually mild temps, the neat beaches in Oregon and the Columbia River Gorge east of Portland. Seattle and Portland are only around 3 hours apart down I-5.
I don't buy the it's both argument. Safety just doesn't have anything to do with traffic enforcement. Zero. Zip. Zilch.
If safety was a concern for Police Departments, they would have properly opposed video cam cops for traffic citations from the beginning of time such as those for red lights because a red light runner could run one instersection and get a video cam cop ticket in the mail, but have already killed someone at the NEXT intersection by running that next red light as well.
With a physical cop, he'd of been pulled over already and detained from running that next red light! Safety! Possibly save a life. The camera does neither.
Some police departments have only recently begun to oppose video cam cops and ONLY due to the fact that in appropriately lawfully set intersections (where the yellows are the right length of time) they lose money on the program! They thought they'd make millions, but if the yellow lights are not rigged, they don't tend to make money, but lose it.
That is why you see the system coming down, like in LA recently.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
There should be serious punishment for our overpaid underworked public sector set and the corrupt so-called entrepreneurs who manipulate light timing for profit. Up to capital punishment if the deterrent needs to be strong. Seriously.
Honestly, I've always felt excess laws accomplish little. Rather, white collar crooks should be put in the joint just like bank robbers. No more country club minimum security pads for them, no more just fines and probabtion. Real jail time is a much bigger deterrent to white collar crime than a bunch of more laws and regulations. I think someone who decides to be a white collar crook is generally smart enough to evaluate the probability of getting caught and the consequences. Its the latter that is lacking for executives and congressmen.
Laws aren't really worth anything, what is on paper is a joke. What actually happens is what matters - whether in criminal law or in traffic enforcement.
I certainly won't argue against harsher conditions for white collar criminals. They should be put on the worst kind of chain gang possible - many of them are little more than traitors with their dealings which very much threaten the stability and well being of their nation - hold them accountable. Not just small fry sacrificial lambs like Madoff either.
And then when they get out, let them be broke - going to jail means seizure of all assets.
I saw something today that I've never seen before, an unmarked silver Dodge Caravan, with cop lights flashing, by the side of the road with it's prey parked in front of it.
Can you imagine being pulled over by a minivan? :sick:
Back in the 90s a tiny town out in the sticks near where my mother lives had a new Pathfinder, of all things, as the patrol car (pretty sure the town only had one active police car). It was very subtly marked, 90% of its time spent on speed trap duty of course - all in the name of safety, not revenue, dontcha know.
Alter the traffic enforcment system from a system of revenue generated by fines, to one of safety with a system to re-educate and improve driving skills.
Instead of fines how about traffic school. And no, they shouldn't be able to charge a $50 administrative fee for the priviledge (bribery?) of attending traffic school. The way they do it in CA is I basically feel like I'm handing the judge $50 for the favor of him not reporting this comedic situation to my insurance company. A buy-off if you will. They charge more than the traffic school itself!
Just get rid of all fines for traffic enforcment. This would solve 100 big problems. It is remedial education and jail time only as penalties! I guarantee that 24 hours in jail would be a better deterrent for many than the $150 cell phone fine.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
These plain wrapper tricked out vehicles seem fun, but you know what - the taxpayers are subsidizing these higher priced things and I very much doubt the extra revenue they may trick in will offset their higher initial cost and their operating cost increases.
Most of our small departments get their cars from the RENU (regional enforcement narcotics unit)... They help with investigations, and get some of the swag from the confiscation of drug dealer assets...
It's a life saver, economically, for some of those sub-10 member departments....
Reminds me of the La Mesa PD officer who rearended my back bumper with his Harley trying to catch up to a "red-light violator" on the freeway to cite them. When I made my claim with the city for repairs of $667 (and the rental for the week ended up being $200 more), I joked with the City's financial guy that all the officer has to do is write about 3 more tickets to make up for his mistake.
It kinda bothers me that he laughed.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I was lasered locally by state employee while driving >>55 in 55 zone where people routinely drive 80. No detention resulted, but I did quickly brake & turn off the warp-drive to get back to impulse-power only. being in rightlane of 3 lanes surely helped... and maybe it helps that my chevy Cruze is black, thus minimizing the range of the state employee's laser rangefinder.
there's no traffic school in most of the states where I drive lately but I've done extensive post-graduate work in other states' traffic schools and might have a PhD after just one more citation.
I seriously doubt whether the color of your vehicle affects the laser; they take aim at your license plate. Being in the right lane probably helped more than your paint job.
there's no traffic school in most of the states where I drive lately but I've done extensive post-graduate work in other states' traffic schools and might have a PhD after just one more citation.
You'll probably be valedictorian too.
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
regarding color-of-car & distance, the darker color reduces the laser range, end of story - this is not up for debate, it's easy to measure, and the automags have done it.
as for aiming for the license-plate, that is often not what the over-eager laser operator hits. realistically that is the only way to avoid the laser detector: when it is not operated optimally by the peace officer. if they do properly hit the plate/paint, or headlight on first try, no way to avoid them getting a good reading. in my case above, maybe cop had locked on and just didn't care since i was slower than the usual 80 mph traffic in that location. however there was significant parallax angle and i was 2 lanes from where he expected the fastest car to be, after emerging from blind-spot/bridge. (a classic speed trap - legal for cops to do on east coast - illegal in CA.)
Two words. Vee One. Two more. Right Lane. Be there when it's available. oh, and someone will say to stay below 55 mph, which is quite dangerous - some drivers insist on doing 55 in the middle with traffic zipping by at 79.99 to their left and right. (that's me on the right, trying to keep the speed delta closer to 10 or 15 mph rather than >>25 mph as i use the right-lane to pass the MLCs.)
there's no traffic school in most of the states where I drive lately but I've done extensive post-graduate work in other states' traffic schools and might have a PhD after just one more citation.
And you're bragging about this? Wow, good for you! (Sarcasm fully intended)
as for aiming for the license-plate, that is often not what the over-eager laser operator hits.
Obviously, you've never been to NY. State Troopers are taught from Day One to aim for the license plate (or the headlight, if needed). If you've got a cover blocking the plate, they'll pull you over and cite you for that. Just be thankful you were in the right lane.
Two words. Vee One.
One word: unreliable.
I just love people that sit there and worship their detector, thinking they've got everyone beat. You may have an advantage with radar, but once the detector beeps for laser, they've already clocked you, and are pulling out to pull you over. Let me also add that if they clock two cars speeding, guess which one they'll pull over? That's right, the one with the black box suctioned to the windshield.
Oh, and passing on the right = win! (Again, sarcasm fully intended)
Some fo these "tricked out" vehicles are drug bust cars converted to police cars. In SC, they love to put the words "Donated by a drug dealer" on the back of them.
I just love people that sit there and worship their detector, thinking they've got everyone beat. You may have an advantage with radar, but once the detector beeps for laser, they've already clocked you, and are pulling out to pull you over.
Not always. They might not be absolutey sure which car they've clocked the first time at long range if there are two cars close together. So they might reclock one of you when you get closer to be "sure." If you have a radar/laser detector, you'll have already slowed down or exited the freeway by that time (elusiveness pays dividends).
Hiding is a great technique if your lucky enough to be by a good hiding spot after the beeps go off. It takes a long LONG time if they are radaring you coming in the opposite direction. They have to slow down, turn around, u-turn, and then re-accelerate to catch up to you. Some instances allow more time than others.
If you drive a common car in a common color, I feel sorry for the sucker that's driving the same color car combo as you 1/2 mile in front of your "hiding" spot. :P
The fact that the officer lasered him wheile he was doing 55 in a 55 zone further proves that EVERY officer out there routinely perjurs themselves in court when they state that they can estimate vehicle speed reliably and accurately even at great distance (over 1,000 feet).
The absurdity and ludicrousness of the claims is only met with unwavering acceptance in the courtroom, however.. In reality, I've been radared at 65 in a 65 zone, so if they really could estimate speeds reliably, why do they bother to POP their radar or laser on for cars that are clearly not speeding?
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
In aviation this is the point where you're commited to takeoff. The point of no return so to speak where an aborted takeoff becomes extremely risky. So I suppose in a manner of speaking in this topic it may be the point where the cop just nailed you!
Hiding is a great technique if your lucky enough to be by a good hiding spot after the beeps go off. It takes a long LONG time if they are radaring you coming in the opposite direction. They have to slow down, turn around, u-turn, and then re-accelerate to catch up to you. Some instances allow more time than others.
Another thing that doesn't happen in NY state. If the Troopers are clocking cars on the highway, chances are the gun car is either hidden in a median, close to a bridge abutment, or even on top of an overpass. They don't have to move anywhere, they only have to radio to the other "chase" cars parked/waiting on the shoulder of the highway with the description of the vehicle that's in violation. In turn, the "chase" car usually sees you coming at him, before you even see them sometimes, and all he/she has to do is pull you over.
If it's a single Trooper, they usually find a section of highway with good sight lines and no easy exits, and since they're at a standstill, idling, clocking cars approaching them, they usually have it in gear before you even pass them, and they're behind you within seconds.
Either way, there's no escape routes, or places to "hide".
They don't have to move anywhere, they only have to radio to the other "chase" cars parked/waiting on the shoulder of the highway with the description of the vehicle that's in violation. In turn, the "chase" car usually sees you coming at him, before you even see them sometimes, and all he/she has to do is pull you over.
That really is a bad way to do traffic enforcement. It is highly defensible in court. First, both officers will have to appear in court or CASE is dismissed. Second, to be good beyond a reasonable doubt, they'd of had to have eyes on you the whole time, with no lapse (but overlap) in the time he first sees and clocks you, to the time the 2nd officer receives the message to find you, locate you, and then pull you over. If they lose sight of you for 1 second, that brings in reasonable doubt unless you happen to be driving a collector's item that is one of a kind.
The first officer has never really ID'd the driver so he has to testify to the alleged violation with an unknown driver.. The second officer never witnessed any violations (100% if you have a detector; not so if you are oblivious to the 1st officer clocking you), so he has to testify that he ID'd you and your car matched the description from officer #1.
If an officer is camping and hiding out themselves, that is hard to run/hide from. If an officer is conducting roaming/moving patrols, that presents more obstacles for them.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
First, both officers will have to appear in court or CASE is dismissed.
Nope. Not in NY. If it's from a speedtrap, all they need is the ticketing officer to be at court, and that he/she was part of a speedtrap that was set up that day. Usually, the vast amount of tickets from a certain time of a certain day is a good indicator of that.
Second, to be good beyond a reasonable doubt, they'd of had to have eyes on you the whole time, with no lapse (but overlap) in the time he first sees and clocks you, to the time the 2nd officer receives the message to find you, locate you, and then pull you over. If they lose sight of you for 1 second, that brings in reasonable doubt unless you happen to be driving a collector's item that is one of a kind.
It's not like the "chase" cars are two miles down the road. If there's a patrol car that's in the median, there's usually one or two other cars that are either right next to it, or maybe sitting off the shoulder on the other side of the highway. In some cases, there's a patrol car that's clocking off the top of a bridge offramp, with a few "chase" cars waiting just beyond the bridge on the on-ramp to the highway. In all cases, the "chase" cars are literally "right there", and there's a set of eye on you all the time.
And on a two-lane or three-lane highway, how often are there two matching "silver fords" or "red chevys" running right next to each other?
As much as you wish to not believe it, cops do know the law, and will take every precaution to eliminate "reasonable doubt", whether it's a speeding ticket or a murder investigation.
I dunno - traffic court just seems like a revenue factory to me. Magistrates going through the motions and collecting the cash. No argument from me on that one.
thanks for the sarcasm, folks. try that with the peace officer next time YOU get detained.
it's all about the facts. i'm neither boasting nor apologizing.
travelling in the rightmost available lane is required in most states where i drive, but 99% of drivers ignore that particular statute, as well as the 55 mph highway speed pseudo-limit. whatev!
cops usually enjoy my attitude/respect/honesty/zero-sarcasm while detained. more than half of them comment positively on it and we end up having a nice discussion about the redsox or how the officer used to have a Z28 himself and recognizes/likes the absurdly fast capability of my car, and how he sees through the "de-badging".
however, one time the state cop recognized that i just did not care whether he cited me or not, that it didn't affect me at all and on that particular day i did not respect anything about him - i was clearly apathetic in his face. and i was driving wrongly at the time - but also just within the letter of the law (except for the 80 mph in a 65) . He almost pulled me out of the car by my shoulders, after raising his fists at me, and gesturing/urging me to come at him, with the "come here, come here" motion. (meanwhile i bravely cowered/cringed away from him and his anger-management issues and took particular note of his unmarked ford expedition.)
anyone who drives in new england knows which state that angry-trooper worked in.
really not boasting nor apologizing. just telling what happened. i've got lots more traffic-enforcement to pass along, in case anyone enjoys them and has a spare 2G disk drive to store them on!
You should feel good though, as it is all about safety, not money, and traffic cops are held fully accountable for their actions, and are paragons of accountability and responsibility :shades:
Nope. Not in NY. If it's from a speedtrap, all they need is the ticketing officer to be at court, and that he/she was part of a speedtrap that was set up that day. Usually, the vast amount of tickets from a certain time of a certain day is a good indicator of that.
Your saying NY courts accept hearsay testimony? If the second officer didn't witness the violation personally, he can't testify against you as to the alleged violation. All he can do is say, well Officer so and so told me he did this (hearsay).
You have a right to face your accuser in a court of law. The accuser is Officer #1, no ifs, ands, or butts about it!
Now if you argue they are so close together that both witnessed a violation, well then, you have a problem. But if officer #1 has the time to pick up the radio, and tell officer #2 what to look at, and officer #2 goes from eating donuts and reading the newspaper to seeing you still "speeding" then maybe you deserve the ticket for not having slowed down by that time.
I've seen officer's punish "speeders" simply for obliviousness to their presence. You are supposed to slow down just like everyone else when a cop merges onto the freeway. If you are going 10 over, normally you get away with it, but if you take too long to recognize their's a cop bike in your blind spot 15' away from you, they will ticket you.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
As much as you wish to not believe it, cops do know the law, and will take every precaution to eliminate "reasonable doubt", whether it's a speeding ticket or a murder investigation.
I do agree the CHP is highly trained and normally follows that "eliminate all "reasonable doubt" procedure when citing motorists. Some city police departments lag far behind however.
Also, cops tend to get lazy from eating too many donuts. :P That laziness might lead them to taking "shortcuts" in the prosecution of a traffic infraction. Shortcuts might include perjury, altering facts, using boilerplate testimony despite an atypical situation and citation. Laziness is human nature; not just picking on cops, but they have a duty to not get lazy and do things right.
In CA the boiler plate testimony goes like this:
"I saw the suspect's vehicle approach at a high rate of speed, I then estimated it's speed at approximately 75 MPH (probably a bold faced lie and ridiculously impossible to estimate the speed that quickly anyway to any degree of accuracy at the range he probably is testifying to). After estimating the speed, I then turned on my radar which measured a reading of 70 MPH. the speed limit is 55 so I initiated a stop of the suspect's vehicle, identified him as "name here," the defendant standing here today, and issued the speeding violation citation accordingly.
In cross examination you might be able to pull this out if you ask the questions in the right order:
1) I took my radar reading when you were at a range of 1,000 feet.
2) Then I must of been how much further when you estimated my speed? He'll probably say something insane like he can simulatneously look at you, identify your vehicle, estimate your speed, turn on his radar and push a button all at the same time almost simultaneously instantaneously while also turning on his emergency lights and speeding up to get behind you. LOL. You might get him to admit it took a second or two if your lucky and that puts you at a mathematically calculable distance from him further than 1,000 feet depending on what speed he says he clocked you at.
3) What probably really happened? He was reading the newspaper, had his radar set to beep an alarm anytime someone goes by its line of sight at over a set speed; say 15 over so 70 or more. He hears the alarm, looks up from his newspaper, sees you, sees 70 on the dash, then if there is other traffic beside, behind, in front of you, quickly decides who the culprit is since at 1,000 feet the radar is reading across more than 4 lanes of traffic in both directions (if you are all alone its easier, although it could be rustling leaves that trigger the radar too; that's another discussion). And then pulls you over.
4) His testimony follows the way enforcement should be done, covers the law, and leads to convictions the right way to get them. His actions in real life leads to errors and innocent people being convicted of speeding.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Your saying NY courts accept hearsay testimony? If the second officer didn't witness the violation personally, he can't testify against you as to the alleged violation. All he can do is say, well Officer so and so told me he did this (hearsay).
You have a right to face your accuser in a court of law. The accuser is Officer #1, no ifs, ands, or butts about it!
You are facing your accuser, it's called the New York State Police.
Hearsay? You mean the electronically documented speed gun readout? Go ahead and try that "hearsay" argument in court, and I'll guarantee that the DA will decide NOT to allow you to talk down to a lesser charge, and will throw the book at you.
Also, cops tend to get lazy from eating too many donuts. That laziness might lead them to taking "shortcuts" in the prosecution of a traffic infraction. Shortcuts might include perjury, altering facts, using boilerplate testimony despite an atypical situation and citation. Laziness is human nature; not just picking on cops, but they have a duty to not get lazy and do things right.
Umm, most cops I know DO get things right are are NOT lazy. This includes my neighbor, who is a decorated State Trooper with 20 years experience, as well as an Uncle that has been a Sheriff for over 40 years. Not to mention the dozens of local, county and state law-enforcement officers I know that happen to be some of the most dedicated, outstanding people I know.
When you're done holding grudges and bad-mouthing law-enforcement for doing their job and making you take an extra 30 seconds to get from A to B, then let me know. Otherwise, I'm done.
Comments
If you turn out to be correct, I'll pay you the same.
I used to be more militant about that in the past, but I gave up. Nowadays, if I see a left lane camper, I just pass on the right once I'm able to. Sometimes if I'm in a mood, I'll roll down the window, stick my hand out, and motion them to move to the right. It actually works about half the time.
And now, when I say "left lane camper" I mean camper in the truest sense of the word...hanging out in that lane and being the slowest vehicle on the road. If they're in the left lane, but at least passing slower traffic on the right, that's fine with me.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Pros in CA from doing this:
Regain the right to a professional defense!
Regain the right to face a Prosecutor (this is often an argument used by judges wrongfully to deny other rights since there's no DA to oppose you in court).
Regain the right to a trial by jury (I know I'd rather have a jury than a judge anyday of the week!).
Cons:
Police might fail to adjust correctly immediately, and put too many people in jail.
Laws might take a while to catch up with reality.
Prisons would be even more overcrowded.
More innocent people would be in jail and therefore earn/win the right to sue for false imprisonment later on.
As far as I can tell Arizona limits are based on the 85th percentile of speed and are usually appropriate to the type of road. For this reason I seldom find myself more than 5mph over the limit and don't bother using my radar detector when I'm there, yet I've never been stopped.
I wouldn't drive anywhere in NH (or the Northeast) without a detector, every road seems to be posted 5 or 10 miles to low and if you really kept to the posted limits you would impede traffic which always moves according to the 85th percentile rule (i.e. the inherent natural speed at which most drivers are comfortable) regardless of legal limits.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I think almost everyone does. That's what makes these "zero tolerance" tactics so infuriating. As humans we can never maintain perfect driving behavior even if we intend to. Having a cop behind every bush to catch you at that moment of inattention just seems unfair.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Motorcycle cops are there for one reason and Bellevue is LOADED with them!
Bellevue and Kirkland - those areas have sure changed over the past few decades. The I-80 pontoon bridge always made me feel like I was in Florida...well OK, not in the winter.
I don't know about earning money - recent story that 1 in 5 city of Seattle employees makes 6 figures, and a good amount were cops with gigantic OT compensation. Seems pretty generous for ticket writers.
Pontoons? It is on pontoons?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I don't buy the it's both argument. Safety just doesn't have anything to do with traffic enforcement. Zero. Zip. Zilch.
If safety was a concern for Police Departments, they would have properly opposed video cam cops for traffic citations from the beginning of time such as those for red lights because a red light runner could run one instersection and get a video cam cop ticket in the mail, but have already killed someone at the NEXT intersection by running that next red light as well.
With a physical cop, he'd of been pulled over already and detained from running that next red light! Safety! Possibly save a life. The camera does neither.
Some police departments have only recently begun to oppose video cam cops and ONLY due to the fact that in appropriately lawfully set intersections (where the yellows are the right length of time) they lose money on the program! They thought they'd make millions, but if the yellow lights are not rigged, they don't tend to make money, but lose it.
That is why you see the system coming down, like in LA recently.
I certainly won't argue against harsher conditions for white collar criminals. They should be put on the worst kind of chain gang possible - many of them are little more than traitors with their dealings which very much threaten the stability and well being of their nation - hold them accountable. Not just small fry sacrificial lambs like Madoff either.
And then when they get out, let them be broke - going to jail means seizure of all assets.
Can you imagine being pulled over by a minivan? :sick:
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Dark gray, Hemi engine, roof rack with lights built into it. Seriously bad [non-permissible content removed] looking.
Instead of fines how about traffic school. And no, they shouldn't be able to charge a $50 administrative fee for the priviledge (bribery?) of attending traffic school. The way they do it in CA is I basically feel like I'm handing the judge $50 for the favor of him not reporting this comedic situation to my insurance company. A buy-off if you will. They charge more than the traffic school itself!
Just get rid of all fines for traffic enforcment. This would solve 100 big problems. It is remedial education and jail time only as penalties! I guarantee that 24 hours in jail would be a better deterrent for many than the $150 cell phone fine.
It's a life saver, economically, for some of those sub-10 member departments....
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
The ultimate ignominy would be getting pulled over for speeding in my Quest by a cop in a Caravan.
It kinda bothers me that he laughed.
No detention resulted, but I did quickly brake & turn off the warp-drive to get back to impulse-power only.
being in rightlane of 3 lanes surely helped... and maybe it helps that my chevy Cruze is black, thus minimizing the range of the state employee's laser rangefinder.
there's no traffic school in most of the states where I drive lately but I've done extensive post-graduate work in other states' traffic schools and might have a PhD after just one more citation.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
You'll probably be valedictorian too.
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review
regarding color-of-car & distance, the darker color reduces the laser range, end of story - this is not up for debate, it's easy to measure, and the automags have done it.
as for aiming for the license-plate, that is often not what the over-eager laser operator hits. realistically that is the only way to avoid the laser detector: when it is not operated optimally by the peace officer. if they do properly hit the plate/paint, or headlight on first try, no way to avoid them getting a good reading.
in my case above, maybe cop had locked on and just didn't care since i was slower than the usual 80 mph traffic in that location.
however there was significant parallax angle and i was 2 lanes from where he expected the fastest car to be, after emerging from blind-spot/bridge. (a classic speed trap - legal for cops to do on east coast - illegal in CA.)
Two words. Vee One.
Two more. Right Lane. Be there when it's available.
oh, and someone will say to stay below 55 mph, which is quite dangerous - some drivers insist on doing 55 in the middle with traffic zipping by at 79.99 to their left and right. (that's me on the right, trying to keep the speed delta closer to 10 or 15 mph rather than >>25 mph as i use the right-lane to pass the MLCs.)
And you're bragging about this? Wow, good for you! (Sarcasm fully intended)
You know what's better? NOT getting caught.
Obviously, you've never been to NY. State Troopers are taught from Day One to aim for the license plate (or the headlight, if needed). If you've got a cover blocking the plate, they'll pull you over and cite you for that. Just be thankful you were in the right lane.
Two words. Vee One.
One word: unreliable.
I just love people that sit there and worship their detector, thinking they've got everyone beat. You may have an advantage with radar, but once the detector beeps for laser, they've already clocked you, and are pulling out to pull you over. Let me also add that if they clock two cars speeding, guess which one they'll pull over? That's right, the one with the black box suctioned to the windshield.
Oh, and passing on the right = win! (Again, sarcasm fully intended)
Not always. They might not be absolutey sure which car they've clocked the first time at long range if there are two cars close together. So they might reclock one of you when you get closer to be "sure." If you have a radar/laser detector, you'll have already slowed down or exited the freeway by that time (elusiveness pays dividends).
Hiding is a great technique if your lucky enough to be by a good hiding spot after the beeps go off. It takes a long LONG time if they are radaring you coming in the opposite direction. They have to slow down, turn around, u-turn, and then re-accelerate to catch up to you. Some instances allow more time than others.
If you drive a common car in a common color, I feel sorry for the sucker that's driving the same color car combo as you 1/2 mile in front of your "hiding" spot. :P
The fact that the officer lasered him wheile he was doing 55 in a 55 zone further proves that EVERY officer out there routinely perjurs themselves in court when they state that they can estimate vehicle speed reliably and accurately even at great distance (over 1,000 feet).
The absurdity and ludicrousness of the claims is only met with unwavering acceptance in the courtroom, however.. In reality, I've been radared at 65 in a 65 zone, so if they really could estimate speeds reliably, why do they bother to POP their radar or laser on for cars that are clearly not speeding?
In aviation this is the point where you're commited to takeoff. The point of no return so to speak where an aborted takeoff becomes extremely risky. So I suppose in a manner of speaking in this topic it may be the point where the cop just nailed you!
Another thing that doesn't happen in NY state. If the Troopers are clocking cars on the highway, chances are the gun car is either hidden in a median, close to a bridge abutment, or even on top of an overpass. They don't have to move anywhere, they only have to radio to the other "chase" cars parked/waiting on the shoulder of the highway with the description of the vehicle that's in violation. In turn, the "chase" car usually sees you coming at him, before you even see them sometimes, and all he/she has to do is pull you over.
If it's a single Trooper, they usually find a section of highway with good sight lines and no easy exits, and since they're at a standstill, idling, clocking cars approaching them, they usually have it in gear before you even pass them, and they're behind you within seconds.
Either way, there's no escape routes, or places to "hide".
That really is a bad way to do traffic enforcement. It is highly defensible in court. First, both officers will have to appear in court or CASE is dismissed. Second, to be good beyond a reasonable doubt, they'd of had to have eyes on you the whole time, with no lapse (but overlap) in the time he first sees and clocks you, to the time the 2nd officer receives the message to find you, locate you, and then pull you over. If they lose sight of you for 1 second, that brings in reasonable doubt unless you happen to be driving a collector's item that is one of a kind.
The first officer has never really ID'd the driver so he has to testify to the alleged violation with an unknown driver.. The second officer never witnessed any violations (100% if you have a detector; not so if you are oblivious to the 1st officer clocking you), so he has to testify that he ID'd you and your car matched the description from officer #1.
If an officer is camping and hiding out themselves, that is hard to run/hide from. If an officer is conducting roaming/moving patrols, that presents more obstacles for them.
Nope. Not in NY. If it's from a speedtrap, all they need is the ticketing officer to be at court, and that he/she was part of a speedtrap that was set up that day. Usually, the vast amount of tickets from a certain time of a certain day is a good indicator of that.
Second, to be good beyond a reasonable doubt, they'd of had to have eyes on you the whole time, with no lapse (but overlap) in the time he first sees and clocks you, to the time the 2nd officer receives the message to find you, locate you, and then pull you over. If they lose sight of you for 1 second, that brings in reasonable doubt unless you happen to be driving a collector's item that is one of a kind.
It's not like the "chase" cars are two miles down the road. If there's a patrol car that's in the median, there's usually one or two other cars that are either right next to it, or maybe sitting off the shoulder on the other side of the highway. In some cases, there's a patrol car that's clocking off the top of a bridge offramp, with a few "chase" cars waiting just beyond the bridge on the on-ramp to the highway. In all cases, the "chase" cars are literally "right there", and there's a set of eye on you all the time.
And on a two-lane or three-lane highway, how often are there two matching "silver fords" or "red chevys" running right next to each other?
As much as you wish to not believe it, cops do know the law, and will take every precaution to eliminate "reasonable doubt", whether it's a speeding ticket or a murder investigation.
No argument from me on that one.
it's all about the facts. i'm neither boasting nor apologizing.
travelling in the rightmost available lane is required in most states where i drive, but 99% of drivers ignore that particular statute, as well as the 55 mph highway speed pseudo-limit. whatev!
cops usually enjoy my attitude/respect/honesty/zero-sarcasm while detained.
more than half of them comment positively on it and we end up having a nice discussion about the redsox or how the officer used to have a Z28 himself and recognizes/likes the absurdly fast capability of my car, and how he sees through the "de-badging".
however, one time the state cop recognized that i just did not care whether he cited me or not, that it didn't affect me at all and on that particular day i did not respect anything about him - i was clearly apathetic in his face. and i was driving wrongly at the time - but also just within the letter of the law (except for the 80 mph in a 65) .
He almost pulled me out of the car by my shoulders, after raising his fists at me, and gesturing/urging me to come at him, with the "come here, come here" motion.
(meanwhile i bravely cowered/cringed away from him and his anger-management issues and took particular note of his unmarked ford expedition.)
anyone who drives in new england knows which state that angry-trooper worked in.
really not boasting nor apologizing. just telling what happened. i've got lots more traffic-enforcement to pass along, in case anyone enjoys them and has a spare 2G disk drive to store them on!
Your saying NY courts accept hearsay testimony? If the second officer didn't witness the violation personally, he can't testify against you as to the alleged violation. All he can do is say, well Officer so and so told me he did this (hearsay).
You have a right to face your accuser in a court of law. The accuser is Officer #1, no ifs, ands, or butts about it!
Now if you argue they are so close together that both witnessed a violation, well then, you have a problem. But if officer #1 has the time to pick up the radio, and tell officer #2 what to look at, and officer #2 goes from eating donuts and reading the newspaper to seeing you still "speeding" then maybe you deserve the ticket for not having slowed down by that time.
I've seen officer's punish "speeders" simply for obliviousness to their presence. You are supposed to slow down just like everyone else when a cop merges onto the freeway. If you are going 10 over, normally you get away with it, but if you take too long to recognize their's a cop bike in your blind spot 15' away from you, they will ticket you.
I do agree the CHP is highly trained and normally follows that "eliminate all "reasonable doubt" procedure when citing motorists. Some city police departments lag far behind however.
Also, cops tend to get lazy from eating too many donuts. :P That laziness might lead them to taking "shortcuts" in the prosecution of a traffic infraction. Shortcuts might include perjury, altering facts, using boilerplate testimony despite an atypical situation and citation. Laziness is human nature; not just picking on cops, but they have a duty to not get lazy and do things right.
In CA the boiler plate testimony goes like this:
"I saw the suspect's vehicle approach at a high rate of speed, I then estimated it's speed at approximately 75 MPH (probably a bold faced lie and ridiculously impossible to estimate the speed that quickly anyway to any degree of accuracy at the range he probably is testifying to). After estimating the speed, I then turned on my radar which measured a reading of 70 MPH. the speed limit is 55 so I initiated a stop of the suspect's vehicle, identified him as "name here," the defendant standing here today, and issued the speeding violation citation accordingly.
In cross examination you might be able to pull this out if you ask the questions in the right order:
1) I took my radar reading when you were at a range of 1,000 feet.
2) Then I must of been how much further when you estimated my speed? He'll probably say something insane like he can simulatneously look at you, identify your vehicle, estimate your speed, turn on his radar and push a button all at the same time almost simultaneously instantaneously while also turning on his emergency lights and speeding up to get behind you. LOL. You might get him to admit it took a second or two if your lucky and that puts you at a mathematically calculable distance from him further than 1,000 feet depending on what speed he says he clocked you at.
3) What probably really happened? He was reading the newspaper, had his radar set to beep an alarm anytime someone goes by its line of sight at over a set speed; say 15 over so 70 or more. He hears the alarm, looks up from his newspaper, sees you, sees 70 on the dash, then if there is other traffic beside, behind, in front of you, quickly decides who the culprit is since at 1,000 feet the radar is reading across more than 4 lanes of traffic in both directions (if you are all alone its easier, although it could be rustling leaves that trigger the radar too; that's another discussion). And then pulls you over.
4) His testimony follows the way enforcement should be done, covers the law, and leads to convictions the right way to get them. His actions in real life leads to errors and innocent people being convicted of speeding.
You have a right to face your accuser in a court of law. The accuser is Officer #1, no ifs, ands, or butts about it!
You are facing your accuser, it's called the New York State Police.
Hearsay? You mean the electronically documented speed gun readout? Go ahead and try that "hearsay" argument in court, and I'll guarantee that the DA will decide NOT to allow you to talk down to a lesser charge, and will throw the book at you.
Umm, most cops I know DO get things right are are NOT lazy. This includes my neighbor, who is a decorated State Trooper with 20 years experience, as well as an Uncle that has been a Sheriff for over 40 years. Not to mention the dozens of local, county and state law-enforcement officers I know that happen to be some of the most dedicated, outstanding people I know.
When you're done holding grudges and bad-mouthing law-enforcement for doing their job and making you take an extra 30 seconds to get from A to B, then let me know. Otherwise, I'm done.