Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, I can find websites that describe prima facie speed law as "You're not necessarily guilty if you exceed the number on the sign - you have the right to try to prove to a judge or jury that you were driving safely."
My question is simple: is this statement REAL in any way? Texas has prima facie speed law, but every officer I have ever encountered completely behaves as though the law is absolute - that number on the sign is the end all and be all. Realistically speaking, can one ever successfully prove that that their speed was safe if it was above the number? How would one argue this? Would any judge ever listen? Are officers trained about the "not necessarily guilty" thing, or do they actually believe that the number is the only thing that matters?
This just seems like empty words to me - if officers in the field aren't prepared to actually make effective judgements, then what's the point? I've been cited for driving 8 over on a wide open, empty country road, on a beautiful day with absolutely no hazards anywhere in sight, in a sports car that is ABSOLUTELY capable of operating safely at that speed.
Which raises a related point. If safety is the primary criterion for guilt, then different vehicles are safe at different speeds. A huge bubba pickup truck can't operate safely at as high a speed as say a Porsche Cayman or a Corvette. Those vehicles are designed to operate at higher speeds.
What do you all think?
I think dash cams are the only defense to use Prima facie in court. Thats the only way to prove you were driving safely above the speed limit. If the camera shows you in a thick of cars doing the same speed, right before getting pulled over, thats the only way. Ive never heard of this, but now I want to try it.
Like the above poster said, speed limits should be set based on average traffic speed, not by what some snowflake city council or residents living along that road who don't like the noise want to see done with the speed limit.
I have to agree. The standard process for setting a road's speed limit should be to spend a few days measuring how fast people drive (all of them - fast and slow), and then set the speed limit to the average speed plus one standard deviation, or maybe 1.5 standard deviations. Choose a number that makes the top 5% or 10% of the drivers speeders. And honestly they should have a minimum speed set the same way - the bottom 5% or 10% would be violators.
It's a rational process, which is always better than government fiat. Feel free to debate the suitability of my exact numbers - it's the general method I'm advocating.
It seems they're in place in certain states to make it legal to go above the speed limit if it's safe and prudent to do so. I'm thinking it's probably in place when there are certain roads where nearly everyone speeds and someone driving at the speed limit would pose a hazard - in that case they'd be fine going with the speed of traffic. Conversely, that person who is doing the speed limit on a road where traffic flow is 10 mph above the speed limit can be ticketed for posing a danger.
i don't think what you are describing is a prima facie speed limit. A prima facie speed limit is generally one that is not posted, but is still the law. An example would be a 25 mph speed limit in all residential areas, or a reduction from 55 to 35 when one is on a highway and the road crosses a city/town border.
I think you can be cited for exceeding the speed limit at any time. Whether or not the law is enforced, how it is enforced, whether it is legal in a state to exceed limits when passing, or other exigent circumstances, are different issues.
So, I can find websites that describe prima facie speed law as "You're not necessarily guilty if you exceed the number on the sign - you have the right to try to prove to a judge or jury that you were driving safely."
My question is simple: is this statement REAL in any way? Texas has prima facie speed law, but every officer I have ever encountered completely behaves as though the law is absolute - that number on the sign is the end all and be all. Realistically speaking, can one ever successfully prove that that their speed was safe if it was above the number? How would one argue this? Would any judge ever listen? Are officers trained about the "not necessarily guilty" thing, or do they actually believe that the number is the only thing that matters?
This just seems like empty words to me - if officers in the field aren't prepared to actually make effective judgements, then what's the point? I've been cited for driving 8 over on a wide open, empty country road, on a beautiful day with absolutely no hazards anywhere in sight, in a sports car that is ABSOLUTELY capable of operating safely at that speed.
Which raises a related point. If safety is the primary criterion for guilt, then different vehicles are safe at different speeds. A huge bubba pickup truck can't operate safely at as high a speed as say a Porsche Cayman or a Corvette. Those vehicles are designed to operate at higher speeds.
What do you all think?
Modern trucks handle quite well and do 100 mph all day if you want them to.
Modern trucks handle quite well and do 100 mph all day if you want them to.
Well, point accepted, but I guess my point was that a Vette or Cayman will handle safely at a higher speed than a large truck will. That boundary line might be at a quite high speed, but I'm sure there's a difference. Another factor might be brakes - high performance cars are often equipped with better brakes than lower end cars.
Of course the wild card in all of this is driver ability - a great driver in the truck could probably be safer at a higher speed than an amateur in the sports car. Makes you wonder if being able to show credentials in court of advanced driving training (say you're a licensed race car driver) would make a difference. Once again, if safety is the issue, it should - that guy would almost certainly be a more capable driver than I am.
Last edited by KipIngram; 07-11-2019 at 01:45 PM..
I just accept the reality of speed-limits being just a theoretical thing. So I am good with people going 80 in a 60. On the flip-side, Morons should not get too ticked-off if I am in the slow-lane actually doing the speed-limit.
I was in and out of Bakersfield for a few years. That place has speed-limits, in the city, through intersection, set to 55 mph in many areas.......and people are actually going faster than that. I saw quite a few smoldering accidents in the intersections of that city.
i don't think what you are describing is a prima facie speed limit. A prima facie speed limit is generally one that is not posted, but is still the law. An example would be a 25 mph speed limit in all residential areas, or a reduction from 55 to 35 when one is on a highway and the road crosses a city/town border.
I think you can be cited for exceeding the speed limit at any time. Whether or not the law is enforced, how it is enforced, whether it is legal in a state to exceed limits when passing, or other exigent circumstances, are different issues.
Prima Facie speed limits are posted speed limits. You can exceed a posted Prima Facie speed limit under the right conditions, but you may still get a ticket and have to go to court to prove your innocence. An Absolute speed limit can never be exceeded, per the letter of the law.
This is what Illinois drivers do when driving in WI.. rarely do you see them not going 85 darting from lane to lane like they are about to have a baby and need to get to the ER. Better that than someone doing 65 and causing a big traffic jam from everyone having to pass them. Slow drivers are not safer, they are more hazardous. If you are going slower than semi traffic and have semis all passing you, you should not be on the interstate unless it's for some specialized need (moving, hauling a mobile home, military, etc)
Like the above poster said, speed limits should be set based on average traffic speed, not by what some snowflake city council or residents living along that road who don't like the noise want to see done with the speed limit. You decide to move along a busy artery, deal with the noise. It would be like asking farmers not to have cattle when you decided to move next to a cattle farm. Driving through downtown Milwaukee which I'm not used too as I live in eastern South Dakota, it's bumper to bumper with a speed limit of 50 and everyone is going 65-70.. if you are going 50 you are going to get run off the road and make things quite dangerous. I go with the flow of traffic for the most part though where I live there often is no traffic. Aside from interstates the most common place I see people speed are county roads outside of city limits where they set the speed limit at 35 when it should be 45 and everyone including myself will go 50. The residents along these roads likely asked for it but I don't much care.. their choice to move there like I mentioned.
Speed limits are SUPPOSED to be set based on measured 85th percentile vehicle speeds, as measured by traffic engineers. Note this common sense approach does not occur in the US due to the lost revenue of higher, realistic speed limits significantly reducing the number of speeding tickets issued. Note the 55 speed limit was only supposed to last 1 year in 1974 until law enforcement and the insurance company lobbying kept the 55 limit around for 20 years for revenue generation purposes.
I heard something that does not make much sense.
Neighbor approached me for usual small talk. he likes to talk, that's for sure. We had deputy parked watching speeders few days ago close to his house, so apparently he went to talk to him and complain about racers we have here daily and nightly.
According to my neighbor, deputy told him that they can't pull over someone who is going over 75 mph (he was sitting in 40mph speed limit) because that is felony.
Say wha?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Aside from interstates the most common place I see people speed are county roads outside of city limits where they set the speed limit at 35 when it should be 45 and everyone including myself will go 50. The residents along these roads likely asked for it but I don't much care.. their choice to move there like I mentioned.
