Was there a sign that said:
SPEED LIMIT
70
EXCEPT ON CHRISTMAS DAY, WHEN IT’S 95
Really? This is another one that I want to be sitting in the courtroom when someone tries it.
“Well Your Honor, I know that the posted speed limit says 70MPH, but it was a nice day, and I have a hot car, so I feel that my decision to drive 95MPH was reasonable and prudent and should override the posted speed.”
Right.:dubious:
In one sense yes, but not in the other sense: If the speed limit sign says “65”, then going 64 (or even less) in a blizzard will get you a ticket. But I see no grounds to say that 66 might be legal just because it is sunny with no traffic.
I’ll concede that a sympathetic jury might let you off, but I don’t think that changes the law.
You left out the fact that it was Christmas. That’s gonna tip the scales right there.
The Basic Speed Law, at least in California, is primarily invoked to demonstrate you were going too fast for the conditions – i.e., doing 55 in a 70 zone during a blinding dust storm will definitely earn you a ticket. While theoretically it’s possible to argue it was safe to exceed the speed limit (clear & sunny day, high visibility, no trafficexceptforthecop, etc.) that virtually never works. Remember, the court’s sole motivation is to find you guilty and assess a fine, if only to use your money to offset the ongoing state budget crisis…especially in California.
I think it would have a reasonable chance of working if it were argued correctly. The speed limit is only a presumption. All legal presumptions can be rebutted.
if you can’t safely drive 95 in what was then a 1 year old new sportscar then you shouldn’t be allowed to drive. I didn’t feel very safe going 100 in my old Ford Explorer. It rattled/wobbled from the wind and clearly wasn’t meant to safely go that fast. My 350Z goes 100 and you wouldn’t even realize it without looking at the speedometer.
I’m also talking about a big, wide texas freeway. Texas is a fucked up place in many situations but we have the best highways in the country. We spend the most on them, apparently. TxDOT spends more on roads than most small countries. The highway I was on is a very nice road. Not a single pothole, nice wide lanes, very smooth. The speed limit is currently 80 on most stretches there now, which means 95 is just 15mph over the limit. Everyone routinely goes 15mph over the speed limit without much thought. I’d argue that the reasonable and prudent speed is always 15mph over the posted limit, because the otherwise reasonable limit is artificially deflated to accommodate incompetent morons and old fucktards who shouldn’t be allowed to drive in the first place.
But out society isn’t mature enough to even have an adult conversation about having drivers’ licenses automatically expire when you turn, say, 70 years old. Maybe some over 70 in unusually good health could apply for an exception renewable every 2-3 years. But no, because YOUR 3-foot tall great grandmother is a “really good driver” according to you, and because she baked cookies during WWII, all old people should be able to endanger the public and suggesting otherwise means you hate all old people and want to stick them all in concentration camps. But I digress…
You are free to think whatever you want…but since this is General Questions and not IMHO I would ask that you provide a cite that shows that it will actually work.
Fortunately, the Highway Patrol of every state as well as the court systems disagree.
Well, my own (admittedly weak) cite comes from a Traffic School class I took more than 20 years ago, in which the instructor told us the CA Basic Speed Law trumps all other state laws, including speed limits. The sole exception was the Federal Speed Limit, which at the time was 55mph, but now no longer exists. There may have been other laws passed since then, or interpretations made vis-a-vis existing laws, that render our claims moot, though it’s common practice for cops to only issue tickets when you’re exceeding the limit by 10mph or more, since it’s much harder to argue your way out of that one.
That being said, once you’ve been ticketed, invoking the B.S.L. to claim innocence is a fool’s errand, because the judge has sole discretion on whether or not to interpret the law that way, and has every motivation in the world to find you guilty and take your money. Again…budget.
While things can change quite quickly, the state of California does not currently have a budget crisis. The budget is, in fact, in surplus to the tune of over $2 billion, and the Legislative Analyst predicts a surplus of over $4 billion by the middle of 2014.
This was a reply to a PM, and posed upon request.
(I) Forgot about this posting, and have been working a lot, so not much time for the SD.
To answer you directly what happened, my route took me past a single speed limit sign that I missed, the main route - most of the traffic gets a large ‘speed zone ahead’, and 2 large signs and the my small sign.
While driving on this alternate way to enter this route I missed the small sign, assumed the state speed limit - which seemed safe and reasonable given the road and conditions, even driving past the cop car radar timing cars the other direction (so plenty of time for me to slow down if I felt I had a reason), when I drove into their radar range she pulled out with lights, I assumed she had a emergency call. Was not expecting her to want me to pull over. She even apologized to me in court.
My main point though is it is impossible for humans to obey a posted limit all the time because we are human, and we should not be held to the standard of 100% compliance simply because we can not meet it - even when we try, which I was. Punishment does not equal correction, therefor is invalid as it does no good.
I must say that the mere fact that the police were there with a radar gun would be hint enough for me to slow the hell down, no matter what I assumed the speed limit to actually be.
At least Brown, having been wise enough to get the state back to this, well, state, will not be Wilson-Deukmejian stupid enough to mail $50 back to every resident.
This would indicate that you felt you were exceeding the speed limit, which is exactly contrary to my point that you were doing everything to obey it and have no reason to assume that there is any reason to change behavior just because there is a enforcer in the area.
Every time i have ever broken the speed limit, it was either done consciously, in the full knowledge that i was doing it, or it was a result of not paying sufficient attention to the signs. No excuse, either way.
I don’t think that a minor incident of speeding is the end of the world, but if you do it and get caught, at least have the integrity to cop to it, rather than constructing stupid and self-serving existential excuses.
Really?? That’s good to hear. My last ticket was right smack dab in the middle of the 2008-2009 Banking Apocalypse. I did argue that the cop had written down my D.O.B. incorrectly, which (I think) should have been enough to get the ticket thrown out on a technicality, but no-go. (And my half-assed backup plan of arguing the B.S.L. obviously didn’t work either.) I’m not bitter, though – well, maybe I still am.
It’s your responsibility to be aware of the laws of the road at all times. Now, if the sign had been obscured or non-existent, you could make a convincing case. (At that time…not years later.) Simply missing a small but legally compliant speed limit sign will not help you win your case. As for human fallibility…dude, please. We all make mistakes, the courts know this, and that’s why speeding tickets only cost some $$$ and a few points on your driving record, instead of hard labor at Riker’s Island. If we were all perfect, there’d be no need for cops or courts at all.
You should have asked her out for coffee afterwards. Who knows? You may have gotten laid. 
Your honour, I was driving 125 because I reasonably interpreted 95 as the temperature. On Christmas Day when I received the ticket, the temperature was 96!
kanicbird, I could see someone arguing your points at their hearing. Maybe they’d even get a reduced fine, who knows.
But how could you ever expect to re-argue a case from several years ago?
At that temperature, you’d have to be somewhere in the Southern Hemisphere, so few people would understand what a “mile” is. Just tell the judge you thought it said 70 K, which is 43.496 MPH. Even 95 K would be 59.0303 MPH. I think we’ve got a case here!
When I got a ticket a few years ago, the judge gave a speech where he gave a hypothetical example. Suppose you got a ticket for going 35 in a 30. But, you insist, the speedometer said 30! You take it to a mechanic who tests it out, and, sure enough, your speedometer was faulty and displays a speed 5mph less than you were actually going.
Well, that doesn’t matter. With traffic law, they don’t even have to prove intent - just that your car violated a traffic law. Come to think of it, this would apply to things you would have absolutely no control over - maybe you were driving a Toyota with a faulty engine controller, and the car went to full throttle until you somehow managed to get it under control. They could still write you a ticket, and it would in theory stick in court.