Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MNBoxster
Hi,
To be sure, it's a complex issue with many gray areas. But, I do think that the Police should not have many of the things available to them at the moment, including this technology. For one thing, what's next? Legislation which prohibits manufacturers to produce a car which will exceed the speed limit or some arbitrary upper limit? This technology is also already on the shelf, but wait, then the State could not profit or produce revenue from scofflaws... I guess that one's safe for now. A Free Society cannot impose so much constraint on it's Citizens that it effectively ceases to be a Free Society - no one thing accomplishes this, but every little thing, such as these technologies, inch us closer to that day.
And let's face it, exceeding the speed limit is not the only way a motorist can break the law. Much more revenue could be had were the Police to crack down on those not signalling turns, driving with burnt out bulbs, rolling stopsigns, not using seatbelts, using cell phones, driving on bald tires, and any number of other infractions, which in sum may impose a greater threat than a few speeders. But these are much more difficult to catch (there'd need to be more Police actually doing their jobs rather than waiting for a Radio Call to action).
And, for OHBoxster, I was able to successfully argue that the speed trap which caught me doing 34MPH in a 30MPH zone was entrapment as the Motorcycle Officer used a Radar Gun at the bottom of a steep hill. A nearly blind curve leads to this decline and I was driving my wife's late Lincoln Continental. I argued that the car travelling the proper limit would pick up speed naturally on this decline and that even if the motorist saw/felt the increase in speed and attempted to apply the brakes, that the car could have easily increased 4MPH in speed and that the Officer would have no indication whatever from in front of the car whether the Driver was attempting to limit his speed as the brake lights would not have been visible. The Judge asked if I was an Attorney, when I said I wasn't, he said I should be, that I had clearly made my case and ruled the Officer acted inappropriately in selecting the sight for the trap and in issuing me the citation, despite protests from the Officer, and the citation was dismissed. There were however over a dozen citations given on this day at that sight and they were not dismissed, most I assume were simply paid...
Happy Motoring!... Jim'99
|
I'm far too pissed with some of you right now to delve too deeply into this issue, but I at least have to address Jim's successful court case. (OHBoxster, I'm with you. The doughnut cracks, pork smell, etc. are completely uncalled for. We're talking about a speeding ticket for Christ's sake)
Jim was successful in court because the judge was an idiot. Plain and simple. The speed limit in this case was 30 mph, not 30 mph unless you were going down hill...not 34 until you get it slowed down to 30. 30. Period. Whether the driver was attempting to limit his speed or not was of no consequence. The fact of the matter is that the driver
did not limit his speed and was clocked in excess of the legal limit.
Guilty. Should Jim have expanded his argument to contend that he was unable to limit his speed, though he was on the brakes, he should have received additional citations and equipment repair orders for his faulty brakes.
I find it very interesting that Jim feels that the Police have a lot of equipment available to them that they shouldn't have. Why? 'Cause they might catch him f**cking up? Should someone break into his home, steal his property and scare his family, would he be pissed when the Evidence Unit showed up with every modern method available to them to solve the crime, arrest the criminals and safely return his property? Would he be pissed that the same camera he complains about above caught a useable picture of the mopes who did the crime? No, he wouldn't. He would expect it. In fact, he would scream and holler and jump up and down at the inefficiency and injustice should it turn out any differently. But, should the Police use the latest technology to catch him speeding, well then they've just gone too damn far. You can't have it both ways. The Police have to enforce all the laws. Yes, they should certainly put more effort into the pursuit of of say homicide suspects than they do traffic violators, but if the Police let the rules of the road get out of hand, how long before your children begin getting mowed down in the street while riding their bikes or walking home from school.
Rail26 was speeding and got caught. It sucks, but it happens. As for a sign Rail, I hate to tell you dude, but the warning sign is posted about every quarter mile. It says "Speed Limit 65".