How likely is it you'd be prosecuted for warning motorists of a speed trap?

[blasto9000]

Saw this article this morning, about a guy that was flashing his headlights to warn other motorists of a nearby speed trap: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...ech-headlights

Agree or disagree with the guy's tactics or the outcome, I'm curious to know what the potential success rate for a prosecution/conviction if someone were to, say, discover speed traps, go one block away and wear a sandwich sign saying "THERE IS A POLICE SPEED TRAP AHEAD"? What would the legal arguments be for the prosecution and the defense?

[lost4life]

Out in the mountains of PA where we used to go, one of the small towns had a speed trap. One of the residents got tired of getting speeding tickets (I guess you only had to be a mile or two over) and also thought it gave people a negative impression of the town.
At his business, right before the speed trap area, he erected a sign that said "Charlie Says - Speed Trap Ahead." The sign was always visible, but when he noticed the trap was active, he would flip on the flashing lights that surrounded the sign.
This is totally anecdotal, but the sign was there for at least a decade.

[robert_columbia]

My WAG would be that a prosecutor might try an "obstruction of justice" charge. I don't know if it would really-and-truly-o succeed if you had a good defense lawyer though.

[Paul in Qatar]

You have freedom of speech to comment on the operation of the government. The state could claim you were endangering the lives of the policemen, but most likely the First Amendment would trump that play.

[Colophon]

Originally Posted by Paul in Qatar

You have freedom of speech to comment on the operation of the government. The state could claim you were endangering the lives of the policemen, but most likely the First Amendment would trump that play.

How could they claim that? Surely if people are warned of a speed trap, they slow down and pay attention, and are less likely to injure policemen. Net result, slower, safer traffic, which is surely what is intended? Unless, of course, it's all about revenue generation from speeding fines, but surely that can't be the case, right?

[Spare Me]

It's funny how many times I've heard this question. From a prosecutorial point of view, I can't even imagine what charge would be appropriate here. By warning people of a speed trap, you are effectively achieving the same end as the police operating the trap: getting people to slow down.

There are a group of indignant mouth-breathers in my jurisdiction who routinely stand on the boulevards by stationary and mobile radar ticketing sites with signs saying "radar trap ahead", because they think they're getting one over on The Man. The fact that slower, more attentive driving is the point seems rather lost on them.

[John DiFool]

Originally Posted by Spare Me

It's funny how many times I've heard this question. From a prosecutorial point of view, I can't even imagine what charge would be appropriate here. By warning people of a speed trap, you are effectively achieving the same end as the police operating the trap: getting people to slow down.

That of course is the official reason. But hard to rake in the clams from drivers, esp. those juicy out-of-towners, if everyone is doing the limit.

[Dallas Jones]

Speed trap? There's an app for that;

http://trapster.com/inthenews.php

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by John DiFool

That of course is the official reason. But hard to rake in the clams from drivers, esp. those juicy out-of-towners, if everyone is doing the limit.

That's a likely reason. In addition it may just cut into the ticket quotas some cops have to meet (even though the PDs deny there are such quotes despite handing out 90% of the speeding tickets on the last day of the month).

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

That's a likely reason. In addition it may just cut into the ticket quotas some cops have to meet (even though the PDs deny there are such quotes despite handing out 90% of the speeding tickets on the last day of the month).

Cite?

[drachillix]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

That's a likely reason. In addition it may just cut into the ticket quotas some cops have to meet (even though the PDs deny there are such quotes despite handing out 90% of the speeding tickets on the last day of the month).

The way I had it explained to me by my California Highway patrol buddy is, finding violations is easy, if you are not coming in with 20 or so tickets at the end of the shift they start asking what tree you were napping under all day. Its not a quota, because it is very easy to get wrapped up in other duties. Think of it like punishing the lowest performing sales rep. regardless of his actual numbers. If the average cop is writing 20 tickets a day and you average 10....they question if you are really trying.

[dolphinboy]

Originally Posted by Paul in Qatar

You have freedom of speech to comment on the operation of the government. The state could claim you were endangering the lives of the policemen, but most likely the First Amendment would trump that play.

+1

[Colophon]

Originally Posted by dolphinboy

+1

Could someone please explain the "endangering the lives of policemen" part? "Endangering the ticket quota" part perhaps...

[AClockworkMelon]

Originally Posted by Colophon

Could someone please explain the "endangering the lives of policemen" part? "Endangering the ticket quota" part perhaps...

Well, you're exposing cops who are clearly in the middle of an important and highly-dangerous sting operation.

[robert_columbia]

Originally Posted by AClockworkMelon

Well, you're exposing cops who are clearly in the middle of an important and highly-dangerous sting operation.

When was the last time a cop died as part of a speed trap operation? Has it ever happened?

[Lanzy]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

When was the last time a cop died as part of a speed trap operation? Has it ever happened?

There has to have been at least one cop struck while radaring, but only by someone that did not know a speed trap was there.

[phreesh]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

When was the last time a cop died as part of a speed trap operation? Has it ever happened?

A simple Bing (Yeah, I use it) search turns up a few:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=officer...=0-8&sp=-1&sk=

I don't think it's uncommon. I don't know if letting drivers know there's a trap up ahead could further endanger an officer though. I'd argue it's quite the opposite. Almost like a playground zone sign or something warning you to watch out (in this case) for policemen.

The only argument I can think of - and it's a doozy - might be that anybody looking to kill a policemen now knows there's one ahead. However, if one were so inclined, there's, you know, police stations clearly marked.

[Procrustus]

Originally Posted by AClockworkMelon

Well, you're exposing cops who are clearly in the middle of an important and highly-dangerous sting operation.

I don't think we have a duty not to publicize police operations. Being a free country and all, I think we have a right to say "hey, there are some police ahead, slow down."

[Soylent Juicy]

Don't know if this is true or not but I think I read it in the Reader's Digest....

Apparently there was a cop doing a radar trap in an area that was notorious for speeders. After a while he didn't catch anybody and wondered why, so he went up the street and found a little kid with a sign that said "SPEED TRAP AHEAD" and down the street was another little kid with a bucket full of money and a sign that said "TIPS".

[Bricker]

Here's the deal: it varies by state.

Some states have ordinances regulating the use of high beams. In Alaska, for example, 13 AAC 04.020(e)(1) provides:

...when the driver of a vehicle approaches an oncoming vehicle within 500 feet, the driver shall use a distribution of light, or composite beam, so that the glaring or high-intensity portion of the light is not projected into the eyes of the oncoming driver...

In other words, there is a blanket prohibition against high beams used within 500 feet of an on-oncoming vehicle. There is no case law in Alaska pitting this provision against the First Amendment, but the First Amendment is the likely loser of such a challenge. The restriction is content-neutral and aimed at public safety; its chilling effect upon free expression is slight.

In other states, such as New York, it's a matter of caselaw that it's allowable to warn drivers by flashing headlights of police operations. See, e.g., People v. Lauber, 617 N.Y.S.2d 419 (2nd Dept. 1994).

[Czarcasm]

Very informative, Bricker-thank you. Is there anything in the law about hitting the hazard lights for a brief period as a warning?

[Procrustus]

Well, what is recommended if someone forgets to dim their high beams? A short flash, just like the speed trap warning.

Furthermore, many of these speed traps are during daylight hours. You don't have to flash high beams, just flash your regular headlights.

[Fourtyfold]

This news item is from the UK in 2004, but I'm sure will be of interest -

A pensioner who warned motorists of a police speed trap was convicted of wilfully obstructing a constable in the execution of his duty, banned from driving and ordered to pay £364 costs yesterday....

He wasn't even driving his car at the time.

[Giles]

Originally Posted by Fourtyfold

This news item is from the UK in 2004, but I'm sure will be of interest -

He wasn't even driving his car at the time.

There was a similar case in the UK about the same time, where a person warning of a speed trap had his conviction dismissed on appeal. Unfortunately, it was not because it's not an offense, but

... he was cleared in the Court of Appeal in October when the judge ruled that the police could not prove that any speeding motorists had slowed down as a result of his actions.

Fortunately, since that's going to be hard for the police to prove, the police may have stopped prosecuting such cases.

[Slithy Tove]

Heroin is illegal, too. Can I go make a citizen's arrest of Rachael Leigh Cook for warning us? (I'll use my fur-lined handcuffs)

[Loach]

I was going to give an answer but Bricker did it. It looks like the statute in Florida was not properly applied. In other states there are statutes that regulate the use of high beams. I have never heard of anyone being prosecuted for warning others about radar enforcement. I do know of a police officer that was fired for doing it. She had a lot of other problems too.

When the grants come down for the Click it or Ticket program the big stated talk radio channel gives updates as to where there is enforcement. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Originally Posted by drachillix

The way I had it explained to me by my California Highway patrol buddy is, finding violations is easy, if you are not coming in with 20 or so tickets at the end of the shift they start asking what tree you were napping under all day. Its not a quota, because it is very easy to get wrapped up in other duties. Think of it like punishing the lowest performing sales rep. regardless of his actual numbers. If the average cop is writing 20 tickets a day and you average 10....they question if you are really trying.

That is pretty accurate. I tried to explain it here before. I had mentioned that we had to write tickets and we could get in trouble if we didn't. Which was met with an "AHA! Quotas!" While I have no doubt that there are quotas in some departments, there is none in mine. But I don't think that it is too hard to understand that since it is a large part of the job (lets say 1/3), coming in with zero at the end of the month would be unacceptable. In my department it only takes about 10 a month to keep the higher-ups off your back. Some individuals place more importance on traffic enforcement and tend to be more aggresive. Some do the minimum needed to get by. Just like in any job really. It has never even been hinted to me to write tickets for the purpose of revenue. However our new traffic light cams are straight up fleecing the public.

[Loach]

Originally Posted by Czarcasm

Very informative, Bricker-thank you. Is there anything in the law about hitting the hazard lights for a brief period as a warning?

Sure go ahead. No one will know what the hell you are doing though.

[Fubaya]

Originally Posted by Bricker

Some states have ordinances regulating the use of high beams. In Alaska, for example, 13 AAC 04.020(e)(1) provides:

But the paragraph above that makes it clear that this applies "during the times specified in sec. 10." Section 10 defines when lights are to be used, which is basically around dark or when visibility is less than 1000 feet. I don't think anything could prevent a person from flashing their brights during the day, when I suspect most speed traps take place. You could also just flash your dim lights off and on if you're worried about getting a ticket for brights.

[DrDeth]

They arrested some clown (literally) in Santa Cruz CA for feeding the meters, but after a uproar of protest, backed down.

[CookingWithGas]

There was a case recently in DC where a local chef got fed up with a speed camera and publicized its location. I think he may have even hired a sign-holding guy. The DC police said it still accomplishes the goal of getting people to slow down, so they have no beef with the chef.

[Saint Cad]

Originally Posted by robert_columbia

When was the last time a cop died as part of a speed trap operation? Has it ever happened?

A speed trap van was shot at on an Arizona freeway a couple years ago and the cop inside died. IIRC, the defense was along the lines of "I didn't know a cop was in the van so not really my fault."

[Loach]

Originally Posted by CookingWithGas

There was a case recently in DC where a local chef got fed up with a speed camera and publicized its location. I think he may have even hired a sign-holding guy. The DC police said it still accomplishes the goal of getting people to slow down, so they have no beef with the chef.

If you follow the link you can see that the DC police publish a list of locations themselves. Its not a secret so it would be hard to complain about when someone else publishes it.

[GreasyJack]

Originally Posted by Loach

When the grants come down for the Click it or Ticket program the big stated talk radio channel gives updates as to where there is enforcement. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.

If it's one where they stop and check everyone, I believe they're required to publicize it. At least that's the case with the DUI checkpoints in my state.

[Donnerwetter]

In Germany, speed trap warnings are a regular feature in traffic reports on the radio (sometimes even on public stations which are funded by license fees).

I always wondered how this could be legal, but it's been going on for many years.

[BigT]

The problem with the argument that it makes people slow down is that it makes them slow down temporarily. The idea of a hiddes speedtrap is that you don't know where they are, so, just to be sure, you'll have to drive under the speed limit all the time.

[Donnerwetter]

They arrested some clown (literally) in Santa Cruz CA for feeding the meters, but after a uproar of protest, backed down.

On what grounds was this man arrested? There can't possibly be a law against feeding parking meters (at least if you don't jam them by inserting too many coins).

[Floater]

Originally Posted by Donnerwetter

In Germany, speed trap warnings are a regular feature in traffic reports on the radio (sometimes even on public stations which are funded by license fees).

I always wondered how this could be legal, but it's been going on for many years.

Probably because in Germany, as in Sweden, the main reason for having speed traps at all is to slow the traffic down at crucial points.

[Loach]

Originally Posted by GreasyJack

If it's one where they stop and check everyone, I believe they're required to publicize it. At least that's the case with the DUI checkpoints in my state.

No they do not stop everyone. Just those not wearing seatbelts.

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by Donnerwetter

On what grounds was this man arrested? There can't possibly be a law against feeding parking meters (at least if you don't jam them by inserting too many coins).

There was a law, actaully. They cited him for $13, and were going to actually arrest him:

http://www.scruzwiki.org/Mr_Twister_the_Clown
http://techyum.com/2010/08/mr-twiste...feeding-clown/
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/apto...QVD8VQ4DRP9L1Q
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/localnews/ci_15705068
McDonald, who has Asperger syndrome, began performing as a clown when he was 10 years old. He had been at it for 16 years when, in September 1995, a "parking control deputy" saw him putting a quarter into an expired meter in front of the Santa Cruz Coffee Roasting Co. and issued him a $13 citation. A city ordinance in effect at the time prohibited anyone from feeding an expired parking meter without the owners' permission.

[CookingWithGas]

Originally Posted by Donnerwetter

On what grounds was this man arrested? There can't possibly be a law against feeding parking meters (at least if you don't jam them by inserting too many coins).

According to CNN

...in Santa Cruz, feeding your neighbor's meter is illegal unless you have permission from the car owner....

The law was later repealed after public outcry over the case.

On a related note, in most areas it is illegal to overstay the parking limit even if you continue to pay the meter.

[cmkeller]

CookingWithGas:

... so they have no beef with the chef.

Only fowl and seafood, then?

[Kevbo]

This from personal experience:

If you piss off a cop, they can find "legal" ways to make you wish hadn't. They can ticket you or arrest you on the flimsiest of charges and you will, at a minimum, suffer the inconvenience of a court appearance to have them dismissed. This may require the services of counsel, which do not come cheap. You can end up spending the night locked in jail even with no charges being filed. If you are driving at the time, your car may end up being towed. It will be expensive and inconvenient to get it back. They will bully and badger you and try to get you to take a swing at them...not sure what happens after that, as I am pretty good at controlling my temper.

[Quartz]

Originally Posted by blasto9000

Agree or disagree with the guy's tactics or the outcome, I'm curious to know what the potential success rate for a prosecution/conviction if someone were to, say, discover speed traps, go one block away and wear a sandwich sign saying "THERE IS A POLICE SPEED TRAP AHEAD"? What would the legal arguments be for the prosecution and the defense?

In the U.K., a pensioner got done for wilfully obstructing the police doing just that in 2004.