Traffic Laws & Enforcement Tactics

Kirstie_H · July 2006

No need to "read only" this one, given that I have a handy "delete message" tool. I will use it liberally. I will not even implement a camera. Citations will be issued and no one will be given his day in court.

Are there other traffic laws/enforcement tactics apart from red light cameras, or is this the only one? Just getting curious here...

snakeweasel · July 2006

Are there other traffic laws/enforcement tactics apart from red light cameras, or is this the only one? Just getting curious here...

Not sure if this is what you are looking for but I will put this out for a change of pace.

I used to date this girl in Wisconsin and going up to her place I drove through this "town" in the middle of farmland in southern Wisconsin. This "town" was nestled between two hills, had three or four buildings that looked abandoned (in over two years of driving past it I never saw a car or person there and nothing ever changed), a small dirt side road terminating at the main road and a speed limit of 40 MPH. All this in maybe 150 feet of roadway.

I always thought this was the perfect speed trap but never saw a police car there or anyone pulled over nearby.

redmaxx · July 2006

Are there other traffic laws/enforcement tactics apart from red light cameras, or is this the only one? Just getting curious here...

Oh, I've got more.

I'm going to put together a post on AZ's wacky school zone laws. It looks like someone could get out of almost any school zone ticket here. I want to see what everyone's opinion is.

xrunner2 · July 2006

Are there other traffic laws/enforcement tactics apart from red light cameras, or is this the only one? Just getting curious here...

Some years back was driving about 45 on a gravel road in a rural area in farm country. There was no traffic in either direction, no hills or curves, and the gravel surface was in very good shape. I would have slowed from 45 if there were any oncoming traffic. All of a sudden, and in the trail of dust I was creating, I could see flashing lights on a cop car in my mirror. I slow down immediately and move over to let the cop pass, but he stays on my bumper and pulls me over. The cop was very excited, kind of like foaming from the mouth. He said that I was going over the speed limit of 30 and on a gravel road no less. I said that there were no speed limit signs on the road and that therefore the state speed limit of 55 applied. He took me to the Justice of Peace in his patrol car and they told me there were local township road laws that stated that speed limit was 30 on the road that I was on. I politely stated that according to state Rules of the Road that the default was 55 on rural unless a lower limit was posted and there were no speed limit signs on the road. The Justice let me go and the cop drove me back to my car.

Do not know what the tactic was nor the motivation for the stop beyond harassment. I was driving a current model year red Firebird and was perhaps out of place. Maybe I might have not been stopped were I in an old Ford pickup.

redmaxx · July 2006

After that (and as long as there were no cars) I would have gone the limit of 55. :P

fintail · July 2006

They should be thankful a severe dose of legal action wasn't sent their way. Bankrupt the little place.

socala4 · July 2006

Do not know what the tactic was nor the motivation for the stop beyond harassment.

It comes down to revenue. These small towns have low populations, so one of the best forms of taxation comes from fining drivers from out of town who don't vote there and whose complaints won't matter. Fortunately, you mounted a good defense, but someone less knowledgable of the law than you would have gotten a ride to the ATM before being driven back to his car.

socala4 · July 2006

Here's an example of a speed trap run amuck. The articles make for great reading about how a village with a population of 60 could support a police force of 16 that issued almost 3,400 tickets in a single year along a stretch of road less than a quarter mile in length. The town has since been dissolved, but the corruption built around traffic enforcement is something to behold.

Wikipedia entry

Car & Driver: "Town Without Pity"

snakeweasel · July 2006

Watch out crossing from IL into WI.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/laney/cst-edt-laney01.html

redmaxx · July 2006

"'The cars all slowed down,' he told me. But it wasn't long before the police drove up the hill and issued him a $416 ticket for 'obstructing an officer.'"

This logic of this one boggles the mind. How can you obstruct an officer when no crime is being committed? Makes no sense. Oh, wait...$$$, now it makes sense.

redmaxx · July 2006

/\
/  \
/    \
/      \
/        \
/LONG \
/ POST  \
/ AHEAD  \
___________

Around here, we have those portable school zone signs. They say School Zone, 15MPH, no passing. Problem is: Nowhere is there ever an end zone sign. Talking with a traffic instructor, he said that the 15 MPH sign on the OTHER SIDE of the zone (which, btw, is only printed in the direction of the traffic it is for) is the "end zone" sign. So I did a little digging and here is what I found:

" 28-641. Traffic control device manual and specifications

The director shall adopt a manual and specifications for a uniform system of traffic control devices for use on highways in this state. Except as provided in section 28-2416, the uniform system shall correlate with and as far as possible conform to the system set forth in the most recent edition of the manual on uniform traffic control devices for streets and highways prepared by the national joint committee on uniform traffic control devices."

And:

" 28-644. Obedience to and required traffic control devices

A. Unless otherwise directed by a traffic or police officer and subject to the exemptions granted the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle in this chapter, the driver of a vehicle shall:

1. Obey the instructions of an official traffic control device applicable to the driver that is placed in accordance with this chapter.

B. Any provision of this chapter that requires signs shall not be enforced against an alleged violator if at the time and place of the alleged violation an official sign is not in proper position and sufficiently legible to be seen by an ordinarily observant person. If a particular section of law does not state that signs are required, that section is effective even though no signs are erected or in place."

Note the bolded item, it will come into play later. Next, from the MUTCD:

"Section 7B.13 END SCHOOL ZONE Sign (S5-2)

Standard:
The end of an authorized and posted school speed zone shall be marked with a standard Speed Limit sign showing the speed limit for the section of highway that follows or with an END SCHOOL ZONE (S5-2) sign (see Figure 7B-1)."

So, does this mean that all school zones following this format (of portable signs with no "end zone" sign) are illegal? I have seen a few around here that have "END ZONE" put up, but those are permanent on major roads and are 35 MPH at all times.

Also:

" 28-797. School crossings; definition

C. The manual prescribed in section 28-641 shall provide for yellow marking of the school crossing, yellow marking of the center line of the roadway and the erection of portable signs indicating that vehicles must stop when persons are in the crossing. The manual shall also provide the type and wording of portable signs indicating that school is in session and permanent signs that warn of the approach to school crossings."

Well, the MUTCD actually says:

"Section 7C.03 Crosswalk Markings

Standard:
When transverse crosswalk lines are used, they shall be solid white, marking both edges of the crosswalk, except as noted in the Option. They shall be not less than 150 mm (6 in) nor greater than 600 mm (24 in) in width."

Not to mention the fact that there is one school around here that has school crosswalk signs up (with a square 15 MPH sign below it), but no striping.

I can't believe that our laws are so lax on something as important as a school zone!

What do you think? Is there something I've overlooked?

snakeweasel · July 2006

Yeah but if you read further the ticket was taken away a few hours later.

xrunner2 · July 2006

"'The cars all slowed down,' he told me. But it wasn't long before the police drove up the hill and issued him a $416 ticket for 'obstructing an officer.'"

This logic of this one boggles the mind. How can you obstruct an officer when no crime is being committed? Makes no sense. Oh, wait...$$$, now it makes sense.

Would imagine that states and counties have laws on the books specifically covering this situation that a person cannot warn about a speed trap ahead. Now, if the guy from Madison county displayed a sign that said, "OBEY SPEED LIMIT", would that be legally OK?

But still, you have to consider that the cop could probably get the guy from Madison County some other way, such as loitering, being a vagrant, posing a hazard on the side of the road, etc. Remember the cop in Rambo I.

If they can't get you for speeding, might be something else such as a defective brake light, tail light, license plate light, etc. Never know when a cop might start following you, even if you are going under speed limit. So important and critical to make sure everything on and in vehicle you are driving is legal and in working order.

Have to make sure to use turn signals and in advance of legal distance required before turning if cop following. Years ago was stopped by cop following me and he claimed that I did not signal within the required number of feet of intersection. I was in my new red Firebird and politely said that I thought that I was. He was going to write me up, but then I asked him if he knew my cousin, a cop in the city with the same last name. He said that he did and only gave me a verbal warning and let me go.

socala4 · July 2006

I'm not a lawyer and I don't know AZ law, but you might want to start by finding out the legal definition of a "schoool zone." The "end of zone" sign might not be legally required if there are other ways to identify what one is, and therefore when you are no longer within it.

I cannot believe that it would be based upon the sign that controls the opposite direction of traffic, for the obvious reasons as identified in the statute that you quoted (not properly positioned or legible).

If you want to really know this stuff, also look at the case law related to these statutes. The cases will often provide clarity when the verbage seems vague.

redmaxx · July 2006

It's good that it was taken away, but it shouldn't have been issued in the first place. They issued it in the first place because someone stopped their $ stream.

redmaxx · July 2006

I'm not a lawyer and I don't know AZ law, but you might want to start by finding out the legal definition of a "schoool zone." The "end of zone" sign might not be legally required if there are other ways to identify what one is, and therefore when you are no longer within it.

I'm not either, but I've scoured the AZ statutes and did find this:

"28-797. School crossings; definition
E. A vehicle approaching the crosswalk shall not proceed at a speed of more than fifteen miles per hour between the portable signs placed on the highway indicating 'school in session' and 'stop when children are in crosswalk'."

These are EXACTLY the signs that are being put out and they are being put out for much longer than the crosswalk. I can't believe that they actually expect people to guess where the other one is. But maybe it should be clear if the schools were following the law, but they don't. They put up several within the zone making the driver guess which one is the last one.

If you want to really know this stuff, also look at the case law related to these statutes. The cases will often provide clarity when the verbage seems vague.

Do you know where I could find that information? I would like to read it. It seems vague, but there is no other definition within our statutes for a school zone, so it would (IMHO) be based on the MUTCD's definition. I really with they would just follow that since it is clear and precise as to where the zone begins and ends.

snakeweasel · July 2006

A while back the state police just parked a car just past a bridge on the Ronald Reagan Memorial Tollway (I-88). It slowed traffic for a short time until people got wise. Then they put a dummy in it and it again slowed traffic for a short while until people wised up.

Its long since gone.

socala4 · July 2006

I don't think that a "school zone" is necessarily the same as a "school crossing". (The former is probably an area surrounding the school grounds, while the latter appears to be just the crosswalk.)

I can't believe that they actually expect people to guess where the other one is.

You'd be surprised what's missing in the law. For example, in my state, there's no right-of-way as to who has the right of way at a four-way stop if two people opposite of one another arrive at the same time. (Yes, the rule defers to the car on the right, but this doesn't help you if the vehicles are facing each other.)

Based upon a quick review of the code, it sounds as if the speed restriction is just for the "school crossing" (which has a limit of 15 mph statewide per the statute that you provided), and not a "school zone". I couldn't find anything that addresses "school zones" in your law, so the speed limit in a school zone may not be a matter of statute, but may simply be restricted to the lower of either the usual prima facie limit or else whatever is posted at that location. But again, I don't know.

Do you know where I could find that information?

You need to find what is called an "annotated code". If you can't find that online, you should be able to find it at a public library or law library.

The website findlaw.com can also be good for research. Go to the section meant for legal professionals, as opposed to consumers, and you may find some of the specific cases, etc. But you'll probably need to take a trip to the library if you're really interested.

socala4 · July 2006

OK, here's your school zone statute. As it turns out, it's a matter of local, not state law:

28-703. Alteration of speed limits by local authority

A. If a local authority determines on the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation that the maximum speed permitted under this article is greater or less than is reasonable or safe under the conditions found to exist on any part of a street or highway in its jurisdiction, the local authority may determine and declare a reasonable and safe maximum speed limit at the location and, based on the investigation, may:

1. Decrease the limit at intersections.

2. Increase the limit within any business or residence district to not more than sixty-five miles per hour.

3. Decrease the limit outside any business or residence district.

4. Increase or decrease the limit on streets adjacent to school grounds

So you'll need to look at the city or county laws of the area in question. I'd guess that in the absence of a local law that says otherwise, the next speed limit that you see once you've passed a "school zone" speed limit is the speed restriction that applies.

redmaxx · July 2006

4. Increase or decrease the limit on streets adjacent to school grounds

They're still required to comply with State law, which prescribes the MUTCD, which prescribes an end zone sign, right? :sick: Going to have to find that annotated code document.

You'd be surprised what's missing in the law. For example, in my state, there's no right-of-way as to who has the right of way at a four-way stop if two people opposite of one another arrive at the same time. (Yes, the rule defers to the car on the right, but this doesn't help you if the vehicles are facing each other.)

AZ doesn't either, but it's not really a hole. If both cars are going straight, then they can both go at once. If one car is turning, then the normal laws apply for vehicles turning having to yeild to traffic going straight and traffic turning left has to yield to traffic turning right.

socala4 · July 2006

They're still required to comply with State law, which prescribes the MUTCD, which prescribes an end zone sign, right?

Depends. State law generally supercedes local law, but it sounds as if the locality has some flexibility here. It could be a matter of case law, or debatable.

smittynyc · July 2006

I searched for a better place to ask this question and couldn't find it. I apologize in advance for that.

Anyway, the wife took the car to work last week and her garage was full and she had to park on the street. We'd forgotten to have our annual state inspection done (no reminder/warning letter or e-mail in NY, which is irritating), and sure enough, she came back to find an expired inspection sticker. $65.

Here's the thing, though. Somehow, the cop who wrote the ticket got one letter in our plate # wrong, although all the rest of the identifying info is correct. Does anyone think this is contestable, just on a procedural basis? I'm sure the car that has the actual plate number on the ticket isn't the same make or model as ours and it wasn't in the general vicinity at the time the ticket was written, but still . . .

socala4 · July 2006

Somehow, the cop who wrote the ticket got one letter in our plate # wrong, although all the rest of the identifying info is correct. Does anyone think this is contestable, just on a procedural basis?

There could be some variation from state to state, and again, I'm not a lawyer -- I just play one on Inside Line -- but generally speaking, technicalities of that sort don't tend to help get cases tossed. As far as the court is concerned, the issue isn't your exact license plate number, but whether a connection can be made between the alleged offense and your car, and there is probably enough other identifying information to create a linkage between your car and the alleged violation.

But don't just take it from me. You can begin by reading the statute that you are accused of violating, and then working your way through the law to review for procedural matters related to your case. Honestly, though, I wouldn't get your hopes up, I highly doubt that you'll find a way out based upon a technical error when the evidence otherwise makes it clear that this car belongs to you and the sticker had expired.

snakeweasel · July 2006

Not sure how NY does it but I have had stuff like that thrown out due to the wrong number being on the ticket. There have actually been some stories of people getting notices for parking tickets from towns they never been in simply because the wrong plate number was written down. I know one person who got off on a speeding ticket because the cop transposed two numbers in the persons license number.

Now if the inspection sticker has a unique number and thats correct on the ticket that may be another story.

I would fight it based on the wrong number on the ticket. The plate number is the unique identifier here and you can point to it and say, thats not my car.

smittynyc · July 2006

It looks like you might be right, snakeweasel (hopefully).

The New York City parking laws site is hard to wade through, but I finally found something that suggests a "defective ticket" can be thrown out just on the basis of being defective, even if you were completely in the wrong and couldn't possibly contest the ticket from any other angle.

If it gets tossed, I'll take it. I was in the wrong and can accept that, but if the ticket writer can't meet a minimal requirement of dotting i's and crossing t's, it's the city's Finance Department's loss (and boy, do they ever extract a pound of flesh from us every paycheck anyway).

Thanks for the quick feedback -- I'll post again when it's resolved one way or another.

snakeweasel · July 2006

Hey convicted murderers have gotten off because of something as trivial, why not you?

socala4 · July 2006

Well, it looks as if you may be in luck. The statute makes it pretty clear that your ticket should get dismissed:
________________
§39-02 Notice of Violation (Summons).

(a) Contents.

(1) The notice of violation (summons) shall be in such form as may be prescribed by the Director and shall contain the registration plate number, the type of registration, the state of registration, the date of expiration, a description of the vehicle, a general statement of the violation alleged, including a reference to section 4-08 of title 34 of the official compilation of Rules of the City of New York or applicable provision of the Vehicle and Traffic Law or of the Administrative Code of the City of New York or any other law or rule, information as to the days and hours the applicable rule or provision is in effect, unless always in effect pursuant to the rule or provision and where appropriate the word "all" when the days and/or hours in effect are every day and/or twenty-hour hours a day, the date, time and place of occurrence, and, if a meter violation, the meter number.
A mere listing of a meter number in cases of charged meter violations shall not be a sufficient description of a particular place of occurrence of the charged violation.

(2) Where the plate type or the expiration date are not shown on either the registration plates or sticker of a vehicle or where the registration sticker of a vehicle is
covered, faded, defaced or mutilated so that it is unreadable, the plate type or the expiration date may be omitted from the notice of violation, provided that such condition is so described and inserted on the notice of violation.

(3) If any information that is required to be inserted in a notice of violation is omitted from the notice of violation, misdescribed, or illegible, the violation shall be dismissed upon application of the person charged with the violation.
________________

Good luck with your ticket.

NYC parking info
More parking laws (PDF file)

nonjth13 · July 2006

Not sure how they do it in NYC but in upstate NY all you generally have to do is show up in court with proof that the inspection has been performed and you will get off the hook. It is a waste of time trying to get off on a technicality. Had a trooper write a ticket for the wrong car one time as I gave him the wrong registration by mistake. Still had to pay up.

nonjth13 · July 2006

online brain surgery next?

snakeweasel · July 2006

http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_254132645.html

stickguy · July 2006

you may not have to do anything. If the only identifier on the ticket is your plate number, that is how they are going to enter it into the computer. Well, guess what they won't find? You!

The ticket will either get charged to another driver, who will then have to go through hoops to prove it wasn't their car, or (ideally) that plate won't exist and it will go into the cyber circular file.

snakeweasel · July 2006

I see they changed the forums format.

There was this one guy who had a vanity plate that was identical to what was on a novelty plate sold around Chicago. Well this guy started getting notices galore about parking violations. Seems like people bought these novelty plates (they look just like state issued license plates) and put them on the front of their cars. Well guess what? The cops looked at the front wrote down that number (well series of letters) and this poor guy was getting all these other peoples tickets.

socala4 · July 2006

In 1979 a Los Angeles man named Robert Barbour found this out the hard way when he sent an application to the California Department of Motor Vehicles requesting personalized license plates for his car. The DMV form asked applicants to list three choices in case one or two of their desired selections had already been assigned. Barbour, a sailing enthusiast, wrote down "SAILING" and "BOATING" as his first two choices; when he couldn't think of a third option, he wrote "NO PLATE," meaning that if neither of his two choices was available, he did not want personalized plates.

Plates reading "BOATING" and "SAILING" had indeed already been assigned, so the DMV, following Barbour's instructions literally, sent him license plates reading "NO PLATE." Barbour was not thrilled that the DMV had misunderstood his intent, but he opted to keep the plates because of their uniqueness.

Four weeks later he received his first notice for an overdue parking fine, from faraway San Francisco, and within days he began receiving dozens of overdue notices from all over the state on a daily basis. Why? Because when law enforcement officers ticketed illegally parked cars that bore no license plates, they had been writing "NO PLATE" in the license plate field. Now that Barbour had plates bearing that phrase, the DMV computers were matching every unpaid citation issued to a car with missing plates to him.

Barbour received about 2,500 notices over the next several months. He alerted the DMV to the problem, and they responded in a typically bureaucratic way by instructing him to change his license plates. But Barbour had grown too fond of his plates by then to want to change them, so he instead began mailing out a form letter in response to each citation. That method usually worked, although occasionally he had to appear before a judge and demonstrate that the car described on the citation was not his.

A couple of years later, the DMV finally caught on and sent a notice to law enforcement agencies requesting that they use the word NONE rather than NO PLATE to indicate a cited vehicle was missing its plates. This change slowed the flow of overdue notices Barbour received to a trickle, about five or six a month, but it also had an unintended side effect: Officers sometimes wrote MISSING instead of NONE to indicate cars with missing license plates, and suddenly a man named Andrew Burg in Marina del Rey started receiving parking tickets from places he hadn't visited either. Burg, of course, was the owner of a car with personalized plates reading "MISSING."

One reason not to get a personalized plate

redmaxx · July 2006

You need to find what is called an "annotated code". If you can't find that online, you should be able to find it at a public library or law library.

I found some:

AZ Annotated Revised Statutes

:sick:

I think I'll be going to the library.

EDIT: Well, so much for that idea. Phoenix has them, from 1956! :mad:

redmaxx · July 2006

When you are in Arizona. Another legal oddity of our state's driving laws:

28-771. Vehicle at intersection; exception; entering freeway

C. Intersecting road crossings between the main roadway of a freeway and acceleration lanes, ramps or any other approach roads are not intersections as defined in section 28-601, and subsection A of this section does not control questions of right-of-way at the crossings. A vehicle entering a freeway from an acceleration lane, a ramp or any other approach road shall yield the right-of-way to a vehicle on the main roadway of the freeway entering the merging area at the same time. "

euphonium · July 2006

Placing a dummy in a police car offers the logic that would be acceptable to place a dummy in the passenger seat so as to be legal to use the HOV lane!

snakeweasel · July 2006

I would be happy if there were less dummies in drives seats, but thats a topic for the inconsiderate drivers forum.

xrunner2 · July 2006

Was listening to a talk show this morning out of a Chicago radio station. Lady co-host named Linda said that she drove to a restaurant in Chicago last May to meet a friend for lunch. As she drove up, there was an open parking space on the street in front of the restaurant. All of the parking spaces on the street had meters. She noticed that there was a meter maid standing on the sidewalk nearby. She backed her car into the space, noticed that the meter flag was up, and was fully prepared to walk up to the meter and feed in coins from her purse. As she was taking key out of ignition, gathering up purse and ready to get out of car, the meter maid started writing a parking violation ticket for her car. Linda tried to explain that she just parked the car and without delay, was going to walk up to meter and put in coins. Meter maid would not change her mind and still issued the ticket. Linda later chose to not pay ticket and instead went to court. Judge heard her story but would not dismiss the ticket and Linda was forced to pay the fine. Justice?

When visiting/vacation in Chicago (Frank Sinatra's kind of town), be wary about pulling into parking spot with meter flag up and meter maid lurking nearby.

snakeweasel · July 2006

She should have done what everyone in Chicago does with a parking ticket. Not pay it.

euphonium · July 2006

The parking meter industry has invented and marketing a meter that automatically goes to Zero when you pull out of the spot. No more lucky finds of left over 20 minutes. :mad:

snakeweasel · July 2006

One time I ran late and got back to my car long after the meter ran out. I wasn't the only one as every car along the block got a ticket. Everyone that is except for me. I like to think that I didn't get a ticket because of my plates (they are Veterans plates and at that time had the state name very small but a huge U.S. on the side and are distinct from regular IL plates) but its more likely that my meter was the last to expire and still had time on it when the meter maid went by.

snakeweasel · July 2006

The town of Naperville IL has a major north-south street going through its downtown area. Its two lanes in both directions with the right lane for parking (effectively makeing it one lane each way. However they ban parking during rush hours 7-9am and 4-7pm to allow for 4 lanes. Well right at 4pm the police are out there ticketing and towing cars from the street, I have even seen the writing tickets a few minutes prior to 4PM.

snakeweasel · July 2006

but I'd be even more upset if at 4 pm when I should be able to use the 2nd lane,

I have been down that road after 4pm when they were still clearing off cars, it does tend to back up and mess up traffic.

xrunner2 · July 2006

The town of Naperville IL has a major north-south street going through its downtown area. Its two lanes in both directions with the right lane for parking (effectively makeing it one lane each way. However they ban parking during rush hours 7-9am and 4-7pm to allow for 4 lanes.

Where do customers for any businesses along the north-south street park from 4-7 PM?

Enforcement of parking needs to shift to parking lots. Town of Naperville should buy up buildings in certain areas, tear them down and set up parking lots with meters. The parking lots should have more capacity then what is presently on the street. Then, the north-south street can be 4-lane all the time with signs posted, "No Parking at any Time". This should help everyone, businesses in the area and vehicular traffic. Seems that Naperville is a little backwards.

snakeweasel · July 2006

Where do customers for any businesses along the north-south street park from 4-7 PM?

There are other streets that have parking plus there are plenty of parking in a few municipal parking lots (all free).

Town of Naperville should buy up buildings in certain areas

As I said they do have municipal parking in a few lots. To buy more land to create more would be cost prohibitive as Naperville probably has the highest land value in the county.

Seems that Naperville is a little backwards.

No I think the system works pretty good. Having it one lane in the evenings during the day and on weekends is more than enough for the traffic they have and the additional spaces help bring more people to shop, eat and enjoy the downtown area (which has a real nice river walk area).

smittynyc · August 2006

Update -- I contested my parking ticket with the incorrect written-in plate number online, and it was thrown out. Whoot. I'll deposit an extra $65 in my son's 529 account this week.

stickguy, I considered ignoring the ticket for that same reason, but parking agents here also scan the barcode from your registration sticker and match it with the barcode on the ticket itself. So I think the ticket is linked to my vehicle anyway (which makes the ticket-writer's failure to correctly enter the plate number even worse somehow).

snakeweasel · August 2006

One was a speed limit sign that also had a date for which it was in effect... Sept 1st thru Mar 1st or something like that. Other than that there was no alternate limit posted.

Was there another sign posted along the road giving another speed limit? In the absence of SL signs most states have a law governing speeds when none are posted.

The 2nd thing I saw was yesterday on the way home and it was really odd. It was an '07 Tahoe that had a pole attatched to it's front end that stuck up about 15 ft.

Most likely it was a lead car for an oversized load. The pole having a height just higher than the truck that it is escorting. These poles have some sort of mechanism that when it hits an overpass the upper part bends to allow it to go under and gives some sort of notice to the driver. The driver then notifies the truck (maybe a few miles behind) that the overpass is to low for them.

oregonboy · August 2006

The date-range limit probably relates to the school year and speed limits in the vicinity of the school.

The "end speed zone" signs are quite common on rural secondary roads. They harken back to the era of Oregon's "Basic Rule 55" where unposted secondary road speed limits were 55 mph, or whatever speed was reasonable and prudent for existing conditions.

james

fintail · August 2006

Another of the endless failures of WSDOT and WSP

I'd laugh if it wasn't my money being burnt. File under "stupid".

rockylee · August 2006

Does anyone know if that "spray stuff" works that you spray on your license plate, to reflect those infrared light camera's that monitor traffic. Just curious if that stuff is a scam or not. I'm very much against the use of camera's to monitor traffic. This takes police officers off the street, which IMHO makes the streets less safe. :sick:

Rocky

Traffic Laws & Enforcement Tactics

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles