how do i beat a speeding ticket?

[boomerang]

Antisocial-Virge
Exactly right. Take responsibility for your own actions. What a novel concept.

cyclistca
I agree wholeheartedly. I was going 15mph over. 55 in a 40. I was up front with the officer and admitted I was speeding. He wrote me up for 5 over.

 

[Muadib]

at my usual speed... He said I was going 57 in a 35 mph zone
If this is true you're sol. Your best bet is to find out whether or not the cops show up to court in that area. If they do then you are better off just paying the thing. I went to court once and one of the cases was for speeding. The kid came with no lawyer, it was just him and his girlfriend. The prosecutor had a field day with him. Trust me, it's not worth it.

 

[Entity]

<< Entity, do you feel much better now that you got that off your chest? Consider we have tree huggers, I guess a cop hugger isn't too far fetched. Maybe, I'm wrong in thinking cops should spend their time busting crack houses and not harassing good citizens that are in a rush to do something very important... who are very careful not to bring harm to anyone while on their way. >>



Cops are here to serve and protect. If you were doing 57 in a 35, chances are it was a 35 zone for a reason; however, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here, and we'll pretend that it should have been a 50-zone (and believe me, I've been in some of those zones). Here's my point:

You called him a punk-ass-bitch cop. Why? Because he was doing his job. Whether or not he likes it, or you like it, he has a responsibility to his superiors; if he doesn't meet his &quot;quota,&quot; then he has problems as well. Nonetheless, you were speeding; you broke the law, now accept culpability for it, and go your merry way. Do it again if you wish, if you think the speed limit is unjust, etc., but remember: the law is there, and you broke it. He did his job, and should not be labeled a punk-ass-bitch for it.

I'm not trying to defend the cop here; what I'm doing is ranting about how I'm sick of people blaming others for what happens to them. You sped, you got caught; in our system, that's the way it's meant to work. Take responsibility for your actions.

Rob

PS - I'm a tree-hugger too.

 

[CliffC]

xyyz

I didn't read your thread or any replies I'm just going on the title and the one word answer is...

lawyer.

 

[Sluggo]

I agree with everything Entity said....except for that tree-hugging crap


The funniest part is that while you are typing this out, the punk-ass-bitch-cop as you so eloquently put it, is at home telling his buddies about the punk-ass-bitch-kid that was driving 22MPH over the posted speed limit in his Momma's car that he wrote a big fat ticket too.

Ohhh the irony.

 

[fir3wir3]

entity,

some people cant understand the things you're expecting them to until they grow up

 

[nippyjun]

What about just going to traffic school. Should be able to knock off a couple of points.

 

[erub]

defensive driving babyee - and no it isn't as bad as people say, just give up a few hours on a sat. (I went from 8:30 - 3, they threw in lunch for $27). And you get an insurance discount. You can take it online, or watch the video - but the class is much cheaper, I think.

 

[mosdef]

erub - how do you find out about defensive driving schools in your area? I live in Maryland, know any there?

-mosdef

 

[OS]

<< Cops are here to serve and protect. If you were doing 57 in a 35, chances are it was a 35 zone for a reason; however, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here, and we'll pretend that it should have been a 50-zone (and believe me, I've been in some of those zones). >>



So idealistic. You are sadly mistaken if you think the CHP is primarily interested in safety. People who are genuinely interested in other drivers' safety do not hide in bushes or match speeds with an offender with their lights off at night. Ever wonder why the CHP have nicer patrol cars than the LAPD? That ticket money goes straight back to them.



<< You called him a punk-ass-bitch cop. Why? Because he was doing his job. Whether or not he likes it, or you like it, he has a responsibility to his superiors; if he doesn't meet his &quot;quota,&quot; then he has problems as well. Nonetheless, you were speeding; you broke the law, now accept culpability for it, and go your merry way. Do it again if you wish, if you think the speed limit is unjust, etc., but remember: the law is there, and you broke it. He did his job, and should not be labeled a punk-ass-bitch for it. >>



He's a punk-ass-bitch because most CHP are. I've watched accused felons treated with more dignity than CHP officers have treat people they pull over. And &quot;doing his job&quot; somehow makes it ok to fine otherwise law abiding citizens several hundreds of dollars for minor violations? Prostitutes are also just &quot;doing their job.&quot; But that makes for terrible justification for what they do. Just as it does for the CHP. Just &quot;doing a job&quot; does not make it ok to fine people obscene amounts of money for violations that involve a minimal increase in risk.

But you're right, he's just doing his job alright, his job of robbing people who are otherwise going about their day to day lives. People who are otherwise law abiding and good citizens. And yet the CHP has no problem writing up a hardworking Joe a 100 dollar ticket for going 79 in a 70 zone.




<< I'm not trying to defend the cop here; what I'm doing is ranting about how I'm sick of people blaming others for what happens to them. You sped, you got caught; in our system, that's the way it's meant to work. Take responsibility for your actions. >>



And I'm sick of self righteous people who need the government to tell them what's safe and what isn't. They assume that if our legislators think it's ok, then it must be right. This a similar mentality that powers the authority figure model. Ever heard of Milgram's electrical shock studies? Read up. Legislators are human beings. They can be misguided, misinformed and ignorant. Just because a legislator passes a law, does not mean that they have society's best interests in mind. But you seem to think otherwise. Having a law in a book that tells people what they can and cannot do does not necessarily mean that it is the best way to have things. But you assume otherwise. Your views are a mere reaction to your perceived belief that this situation is about replacing blame. This has nothing to do with blame. It has everything to do with the CHP extorting money from people who must drive to live their lives.

Do you really think driving 50-ish in a 35 zone is any more dangerous than keeping an unsecure bottle of lysol near a newborn? But guess which one is legal and which one isn't? Flat out, the laws are unjust and try to &quot;protect&quot; people from a risk that is minimal relative to the other risks we encounter on a daily basis. Once upon a time, these laws and the system was genuinely interested in the safety of the driving population. But today, when CHP hide in the bushes, use unmarked patrol cars, and use radar guns to catch people speeding ~5-10 mph over the limit on a freeway, that no longer holds true.

 

[OS]

xyyz,

The short, go to your local library and search for books on how to fight a ticket.

 

[xyyz]

outersquare,

you get a standing ovation for that one... i agree, I was not endangering anyone, I was very aware of my surroundings, but it doesn't matter, i'm sure this cop gets a big end-of-the-year bonus for how many people he busts for speeding.

 

[GoldenBear]

I'm not completely sure of this, but I'm sure somewhere in a cop's description it says that if someone is speeding, they should get a ticket. You were speeding, so he gave you a ticket.

What further explanation do you need?

 

[OS]

Does a description or an explanation make something ok or justifiable? No.

 

[Yo Ma Ma]

Strangely enough, this lovely tidbit just rolled in... I wouldn't exactly recommend it, but it looks mildly interesting (use at your own peril) - (BTW don't you just love to get an e-mail that's been forwarded a zillion times, each time leaving all the original header info in? )

>
> <<
> ~
> If You Get A Traffic Ticket, This has been tried
> and it works..... I
> tried to send this to everyone I know. I know that
> for a fact this works so
> if you ever get in this situation, you have an out.
> We discovered that this
> procedure works in every state. Read it and try it,
> you have nothing to lose
> but the points on your license.
>
> This is how it works:
>
> If you get a speeding ticket or went through a red
> light or whatever the
> case may be, and you are going to get points on your
> license, then there is
> a method to ensure that you DO NOT get any points.
> When you get your fine,
> send in the check to pay for it and if the fine is
> say, $79, then make the
> check out for $82 or some small amount over the
> fine. The system will then
> have to send you back a check for the difference,
> but here is the trick!
>
> ***DO NOT CASH THE REFUND CHECK!!!***
>
> Throw it away!! Points are not assessed to your
> license until all
> financial transactions are complete. If you do not
> cash the check, then
> the transactions are NOT complete. However, the
> system has gotten its money
> and is happy and will not bother you any more.
> This information came to
> our attention from an very reliable computer
> company that sets up the
> standard database used by each states' DMV. Good
> luck and share this with
> all your friends and other family members. >>
>
>

 

[GoldenBear]

<< Does a description or an explanation make something ok or justifiable? >>

&quot;ok&quot; is one thing and arguable, but justifiable is another, and that it is.

He broke the law, he should suffer the consequences. He knew the law, he knew the consequence. There's no excuse to call the cop a &quot;punk-ass bitch&quot;.

Laws are set up for a reason. Sure he didn't hurt anyone by speeding, but someone else driving nearly 60 mph is just asking for trouble.

If you weren't so selfish as to only care about yourself in this case, and look at it from an open-mind such as from the cop's perspective, you might learn something. I'm guessing you're still a teenager in this case? If ANYONE is a &quot;punk-ass bitch&quot; in this case, it's certainly not the cop.

 

[dopcombo]

mosdef : go to your local DMV and inquire
otherwise your insurance agent should be able to provide some information as well.
I did mine under my insurance agent. best 60 bucks i spent
got so much deducted off my insurance (i'm 22, male and have one accident)

xyyz: just pay the thing. face it. we do wrong things once in a while and just take the punishment as it is. It's part of being responsible for oneself.
I am amazed your mother didn't say anything to you about it. I hope she wants you to pay the fine and be responsible.

btw, the fact that you didn't notice any signs doesn't mean that there are no signs.
and if he says u did 57 in a 35 mph zone, you coulda killed someone at that speed

now what would u do if u had hit someone? try and get out of it the same way u r doing? after all... u din see the signs....

 

[Diffusion]

I'm sorry you don't live in germany or montana, but maybe if you understood that most laws are there for a reason (protection of the general populace), you might have a better opinion on this whole situation. However, living in a country with a couple hundred million other people, we have to have laws which regulate traffic etc.. Or, we could go the system on the autobahn in Germany where there is no speed limit, but a wreck gets your license pulled (You crashed, therefore, you were driving recklessly), but then you wouldn't have a license at all for your previous accident. Sorry, but I have NO sympathy for you =P.

 

[OS]

<< Laws are set up for a reason. >>



Oh really? Educate me. What reason might that law be in place? Safety? Speed limits are very often arbitrarily defined. There is no systematic method in place for defining speed limits in most areas. It is guess work by legislators. Guess work which can end up costing people hundreds of dollars in tickets. Safety shouldn't be done by guess work, but in the case of a lot of speed limits, it is. But that's right, everyone has to follow the law, because the law is always right and defines our morality. Abortion is perfectly legal in the first trimester. So is it ok to be a baby killer then?





<< someone else driving nearly 60 mph is just asking for trouble. >>



You weren't even present at the incident and you are already judging him of being a trouble maker. How fair and &quot;open-minded&quot; is that? How do you know the situation wasn't an empty, clear street in broad daylight. The fact is, you don't. The fact is, you have already judged him, and probably me, of being bad people, because we think the laws are unjust and do not reflect that there is almost no risk in driving faster in some situations, than the posted arbitrary speed limit. I don't care one bit for your flavor of &quot;open-mindedness.&quot;



<< If you weren't so selfish as to only care about yourself in this case, and look at it from an open-mind such as from the cop's perspective, you might learn something. I'm guessing you're still a teenager in this case? If ANYONE is a &quot;punk-ass bitch&quot; in this case, it's certainly not the cop. >>



People who are winning an argument don't need to resort to personal attacks. When one cannot successfully attack the message, attack the messenger. I'll take this as a sign of your desperation.



&quot;They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.&quot;
- Ben Franklin

 

[searcher]

OuterSquare:

You are kidding right?

I could get behind &quot;some&quot; of your arguments in relation to &quot;some&quot; other laws but, speed limits?

If you had chosen to attack the selective enforcement of traffic laws you would have grounds to stand on but, speed limits?



<< &quot;They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.&quot;
- Ben Franklin >>



That you would invoke this wonderful quote in this instance, speaks volumes.

Michael

 

[Jugernot]

The best way to beat em is to keep asking for extensions for the court date. After a half dozen or so reschedule dates, they will just drop the ticket because the officer who issued the ticket won't be able to appear. This has worked for me every time.

 

[Pastore]

I dont feel like reading all of the previous posts, so if someone mentioned this already, I am sorry. One of my friends got a speeding ticket (41 in a 30), and she pleaded not guilty in court. According to state law if you plead not guilty, you get 10 MPH dropped from the ticket right there. So, since she pleaded not guilty, the ticket ended up being 31 MPH and she paid like 2 dollars for it...

EDIT, OK, NOW IM A LITTLE UPSET. YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE EXITING A RESIDENTIAL AREA GOING 57 MPH???? WHAT ARE YOU PSYCHO? I AM SORRY BUT THAT IS WAY TO FAST. DO YOU REALIZE WHAT YOU COULD HAVE DONE TO A KID RUNNING ACROSSED THE STREET AT THAT SPEED?? DUDE, THAT IS WAY TOO FAST, AND THERE IS NOT REASON FOR IT, LATE OR NOT...

 

[OS]

<< I could get behind &quot;some&quot; of your arguments in relation to &quot;some&quot; other laws but, speed limits? >>



What, are speed limits sacred now? If one can question more serious laws like abortion, why should one not be able to question lesser laws? But anyways, it's not just the fact that it's a speed limit law. I'm not totally against speed limits, but more so the ticket system. Sometime during the mid 20th century, a new class of crime was created just for traffic law violations. This new class of crime was called the &quot;infraction&quot;, it removes the jury, prosecutor, lawyer, and &quot;innocent until proven guilty&quot; aspect of the trial.

In short, it became a quick system for milking motorists of money and finding them automatically guilty. Much of the money which eventually goes back to funding the CHP system. To buy more equipment and patrol cars, to catch more people. That strikes me as appalling, and is in fact shows the beginning of a police state, when they accuse someone of a crime and he is automatically assumed to be guilty.




<< That you would invoke this wonderful quote in this instance, speaks volumes. >>




Convictions by judge only trials are much higher than jury trials. Some cities are beginning to use the infraction system to also directly punish the accused, who otherwise would have been aquitted by a jury trial. For example, recently the city of Berkeley has considered moving public nudity from a misdemeanor to an infraction violation, because juries were often aquitting the accused.

So what next? Change shoplifting into an infraction? How about battery and assault? Maybe throw in extortion and fraud? Then maybe manslaughter? What the heck, let's just make murder and rape an infraction, with automatic lifetime jail sentence.

Say what you want, but I can see when our rights are slowly being stripped away from the other wise good people who need to drive to live.

 

[searcher]

OuterSquare:

Your extreme position makes you appear... well, extreme. Glad to see you're not totally against speed limits, wtf? How do you feel about stoplights?

What system would you suggest be used to enforce traffic law? Trial by jury for traffic tickets? That is insane.

Michael

 

[OS]

Man, you people sure do like to resort to personal attacks and labels when you can't win the argument any other way. I guess you feel the need to call me an extremist and label my views as &quot;insane&quot;? It's ok, it's a very common diversion tactic used by people who can't successfully argue any other way.