If presumably the speed limit is a device to make roads safer, why do they have the same limit during crowded rush hour and empty roads at night? Roads are designed to allow cars to travel a lot faster than we are allowed to go. But traveling I75 through Ohio at 5 over in the middle of the night can get you a ticket and a discussion with a snotty trooper.
I’ll just note that the police having been issuing speeding tickets for much longer than radar gun technology has been available.
So it sounds like we need more speeders to drive up the “clogged courts” factor which will in turn increase the “write a ticket” limit.
C’mon drivers, step it up, do your part!
Right, but what that court case made clear is that officers don’t need any objective, mechanical measurements at all, ever. The fact that they say you were speeding is enough to convict. In fact, the fact that they say you were speeding cannot even be challenged in court; their word is infallible.
Honestly, that’s not how I read that decision.
The majority said:
To me, that says that you cannot challenge the police officer’s estimation in court simply by saying “it’s a visual estimation.”
That doesn’t mean the officer’s word is infallible. You can still challenge the word of the officer on other grounds - were you eating a donut at the time, wasn’t the sun behind the vehicle obstructing your view, were you wearing your glasses, isn’t the defendant the man who has been plowing your wife for the last 6 months etc.
Are there actually any such places?
I think all the US states have a system that divides up revenue from traffic tickets between the arresting agency, the prosecuting authority, the judicial system, and sometimes others. And the arresting agency always got a sizable share of it – probably not the individual officer, but the agency that he worked for got a share.
When I served on a Legislative Commission dealing with non-felony crimes, the splitting of this ticket revenue was considered an untouchable item – very complicated, covered in many laws (sometimes rather contradictory), and very volatile – there were many influential parties who would get very upset if they thought a proposed change would affect their share of this revenue.
The whole point of a “reasonable and prudent” law is that what constitutes “reasonable” depends on the conditions. If it was a long, straight, flat road, with no other traffic, and you were in a vehicle that could still handle controllably at those speeds, 95 might have been “reasonable and prudent”.
In most cases, where the “reasonable and prudent” comes up is at speeds below the posted limits. In most states, you could be going 40 in a 55 zone, with that fact uncontested, and still be found to be speeding, if the conditions were bad (raining, poor visibility, etc.).
I’ve never been pulled over and I consistently speed and live right next to a police station. I don’t know if anyone has ever had the same experience but, I think if you aren’t recklessly driving cops will leave you alone.
Kinda sorta. It has to do with being able to make the case stand up in court. If I write a ticket for +1 over, the driver can make an argument that it was speedometer error. But if I write a ticket for at least +10% over the posted limit, that argument goes out the window; the judge ain’t gonna buy it.
In Wisconsin it’s called Conditions requiring reduced speed (SS#346.57(3) ) and I’ve written a zillion of these cites, but almost always after an accident. Rarely did I stop someone for going below the speed limit just because it was raining/snowing. My post had to do with Montana, specifically. I mean, really! What was he looking for? I was going 96. Why was he wasting his time running radar if he wasn’t going to at least pull me over to see if i had a warrant. Those of you in L.E. will understand my point.
In Milwaukee County when someone brings this argument up the judge says “Guilty of having defective equipment!!” Same fine as the speeding ticket but only 2 points instead of 3 or 4. The motorist walks out of court thinking they “won”.
Here in Israel, the money just goes to the government. It doesn’t have any effect on police budgets.
Of course, the Israeli police is organized very differently than in the U.S. - it’s a unified, national body, with a single police commissioner for the entire country, and with resources allocated from the top down.
The New Zealand and Singapore models are both the same as this also
Idem for France, although we really have two police forces - or, more accurately, we have one police, and the military police (the gendarmerie) who handle the policing on highways, out in the sticks and so forth whereas the police handles cities large enough to require their own station. But all traffic tickets money goes right into the State treasury no matter who issued the ticket, nor is police/army funding tied in any way to these (or any sort of) fines AFAIK.
Which is not to say that enforcement of speed limits is equal everywhere, that there’re no bullshit tickets and speed traps, or that the policemen/gendarmes don’t have ticket & arrest quotas suggested to them from on high. Speed limits are just another tax, neh ? 
in an ideal setting (less centralized, where there is a relationship between police officers as people and the citizens) there would not need to be a defined limit. In this scenario, you would trust the police and allow them to make discretionary decisions, where you are stopped if you are acting in an unsafe or dangerous manner. Abuse and unfairness would lead to a public backlash and loss of respect for the law enforcement and they would be voted out.
This just gave me an idea… i think the hiring process for police officers is probably fine, but perhaps they should be hired for short term contracts and be subject to public approval to receive extensions.
instead of a legalized system of racketeering and highway robbery we might actually have some interest in public safety.
FWIW, in Germany there are no speed limits on most of the freeways (except for some types of vehicules, like trailer trucks or buses), only a “recommended speed”. I’m sure there is still Polizei around to deal with DUIs and accidents, but other than that they simply trust their citizen to drive responsibly.
It seems to work for them, as they don’t appear to have more traffic accidents than any other country.
[QUOTE=jayalphatech;13725266This just gave me an idea… i think the hiring process for police officers is probably fine, but perhaps they should be hired for short term contracts and be subject to public approval to receive extensions.[/QUOTE]
I don’t think that would work out. People with political clout, or media stars with public access, could start an organized campaign against any cop audacious enough to give them a ticket. And with a fair chance to succeed, given the likely limited resources of the cop to organize a political campaign in response.
Remember the retribution that Republicans organized when Geo. Bush’s daughters were caught drunk in a bar? Those people just did their job, and treated them just like any other drunk, with no special treatment because of their father being President – and they suffered significant attacks because of it. Now imagine a similar situation in a small backwater county, without the media coverage this got. The cop would be out of a job quickly.
To say nothing of the expense of holding elections for this ‘public approval’.
I once had a cop acquaintance tell me her primary duty was to “maintain public order and safety.” That mandate pretty much dictated how she would respond to any given situation from deciding how to handle a speeder (ticket, warning, nevermind–get the next one) to how much intervention was required in a parking lot argument (break it up and send everyone home, whip out the taser–everyone’s going downtown).
Seems like a simple enough answer to me, and it accounts for the vast majority of police activity I’ve seen.
Texas passed a law several years ago to cut down on the number of “speed trap towns” that use poorly visible speed limit signs to trap passing motorists into funding their town. The gist of the law is that any speeding ticket revenue that exceeds 30% of the city’s previous year’s budget goes directly to the state.
This has led to a few towns stopping the most extreme examples of speed trapping and to a couple towns basically losing most of their city services from loss of revenue. And to other towns being sued by the state for underreporting ticket revenue.
On the other hand, there are still a few towns that have kept their speed traps and have indeed sent the surplus to the state. They truly are concerned about motorists blowing past through town at dangerous speeds. If the extra revenue isn’t having a budget outcome, I can respect the fact that it’s out of a sincere desire to reduce speeds.
My own town has a zero tolerance policy for speeding in school zones. Even 1 mph over the limit gets ticketed. Consequently, I’ve rarely seen such safe school zones for pedestrians.
I was specifically told that there was a 4/5 rule. The cops are to let you have 4 miles over the posted speed limit, but they can pull you over for 5 or more miles over. I wouldn’t try to argue that with the big guy in the uniform standing outside my car door. After all, he has the gun.
Spouse was specifically told to drive faster one time, because Spouse was causing a traffic hazard by driving the speed limit. (huh? but that what Spouse said)
Do you know how to beat the tickets? Don’t speed. Pay attention to the speed limit signs. I got my one and only speeding ticket out on I-10 in west Texas back in the 1970s. What a waste of my money. Guess what? Don’t speed, don’t get tickets. Simple.
A friend of mine got a speeding ticket for going 80 in the middle of Texas in the middle of the night with no other car even close. But I guess some people are just unlucky.
On highways, unless there is some sort of enforcement effort to try to slow down traffic, I’ve observed that outliers get stopped. I try to never be the fastest car, and I haven’t gotten a speeding ticket in almost 40 years. In towns there is often an effort to slow down through traffic, which is helped by giving tickets to people who are not residents. The little town I lived in in NJ was on the way to the interstate, and the small police force gave lots of tickets. I did get stopped once, for good reason, but the cop, on seeing that I was a local, apologized and explained this. I didn’t even get a warning, though I did apologize for going too fast. I voted for mayor - the people headed for I95 didn’t.