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.
In downtown cores you may be right. Perhaps there should be lower limits during the day and higher limits in the wee hours of the morning.
Again you ignore the fact that outside the downtown cores, on secondary roads, the limits really should be higher.
They don't even try for the dangerous ones. I have rarely been passed at 85 mph on the Hutchinson Parkway (speed limit 50 or 55 depending on where) and seen the person pulled over. When I see a police car pull out to grab someone that person is usually going about 10-15 miles over the limit, or around 65 mph to 70 mph, which happens to be the flow speed of traffic.
No, secondary roads do not need to be higher speeds, it isn't hard for someone to drive the speed limit unless they are a reckless and impatient person.
Perhaps they instead saw your other posts where you cried about cell phone use while driving laws?
But how does someone fight the claim that they used their cell phone? It isn't like speeding where maybe the officer writes in the wrong speed or doesn't write in a speed. Or perhaps signage isn't clear and covered by overgrowth. It is basically trying to prove a negative.
Arizona don't really have a state-owned ban. It is under distracted driving but I've never seen drivers pulled over for it despite seeing a LOT of cell phones used while driving. Perhaps you should move her rather than moan about being busted on the Hutchinson Parkway in New York...
If you receive a ticket for cell phone use but weren't using it, it should be easy enough to prove in court. Just bring your itemized cell phone bill and show that you weren't on the phone at the time.
If you receive a ticket for cell phone use but weren't using it, it should be easy enough to prove in court. Just bring your itemized cell phone bill and show that you weren't on the phone at the time.
How would it show that? For instance say you get pulled over while using an app that don't use WiFi or G's like a media player to change from one file to the next, for a downloaded/uploaded file, would a bill not show that because it don't pop up? There's no proof except the cop that caught you. Now who does the judge take at their word or does the judge offer a plea? This is the grey area I was talking about that there is no hard proof.
How would it show that? For instance say you get pulled over while using an app that don't use WiFi or G's like a media player to change from one file to the next, for a downloaded/uploaded file, would a bill not show that because it don't pop up? There's no proof except the cop that caught you. Now who does the judge take at their word or does the judge offer a plea? This is the grey area I was talking about that there is no hard proof.
So were you using your phone when the cop pulled you over? Looking down at your phone while the vehicle is moving is extremely dangerous and leaves you open to getting into an accident.
So were you using your phone when the cop pulled you over? Looking down at your phone while the vehicle is moving is extremely dangerous and leaves you open to getting into an accident.
I am not sure where you got that I did this... This is more so to prove a point of a way that you can't prove a negative that you did or didn't use your phone and it is then on the judge to believe the cop's side of the story for the ruling rather than showing that you didn't text or were in the middle of making or taking a call. This was to the OP's proposal of fighting the ticket enough that the states reverse the laws. Ok?
I am not sure where you got that I did this... This is more so to prove a point of a way that you can't prove a negative that you did or didn't use your phone and it is then on the judge to believe the cop's side of the story for the ruling rather than showing that you didn't text or were in the middle of making or taking a call. This was to the OP's proposal of fighting the ticket enough that the states reverse the laws. Ok?
Sorry, your post made it sound like you had gotten a ticket for this. Though if someone is being pulled over for this, more than likely, they were using their phone when they shouldn't be.
I guess you chose not to read my post. I didn't "cry" on here. I suggested that most people should plead not guilty to these offenses, decline to settle at the pretrial conference and force a trial.
If the system were tied into knots in enough jurisdictions hopefully the legislature would backpedal from these counterproductive laws. Similar to the example I gave as to what undid the national 55 mph speed limit.
I think just about every state has a law similar to Maryland's. What I think would make sense would be to make distracting activities such as texting, use of hand-held cellphones or similar activities secondary offenses, creating additional points or fines if caught in conjunction with speeding, running a red light, weaving, other violative activities or an accident.
" or similar activities secondary offenses,"
In other words you are against he current laws about speeding, "ridiculous low speed limits" but, you WANT people to be charges TWICE for the a single offense.
Sorry, I don't by your brand of "common sense".
You asked so I will answer, your "ideas" are ridiculous B.S.
Snarky remarks like that show that some people just don't understand the issue. The problem is speed limits that are deliberately set extremely low so as to allow "shooting fish in a barrel" type of ticketing. Chasing down and stopping a teen daredevil going 100 mph on a secondary road is hard and dangerous work. Someone was killed that way on Christmas 2000 in my area. But for revenue generation it's far easier to nail someone on a road that's really designed for 45 mph travel but the limit is set at 30 or even in a few places 25.
Ditto texting and other distracted drving. Pulling over someone weaving through three lanes of traffic while they play Pokemon Go behind the wheel is a challenge. Pulling over a random motorist who hits a speed-dial pre-set button or hits the forward arrow on a playlist is easy and financially rewarding.
And, what makes YOU the EXPERT on what speed limit should be?
The sign is POSTED. Disobey it and face the consequences.
If you live in the are and don't like it, petition your neighbors to get it changed.
The problem is the severe five-point penalties. That makes it risky to defend even when you're not violating the law. The pressure to plead is enormous. I think that the laws should be secondary, where if you're texting while committing some other violation or when you get into an accident creates additional penalties.
What YOU think the laws should be is irrelevant. It's what the majority thinks - that's how our system works.
Seems like no one is really up in arms over the same things you are. Pity.
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.
