Speeding ticket, 151 in a 100 zone [Archive] - Beyond.ca - Car Forums

yeahisaidit

03-01-2005, 08:34 PM

Hey me and my smart brain :banghead: got a ticket today on higway 21 in fort saskatchewan, the thing is the cop that pulled me over was a starthcona county cop and he had to call another officer, an actual rcmp officer to come and give me the ticket because apparently he has no jurisdication there,which basuically makes him a citzen, who can phone in a complaint but cant pull me over

The stratcona office didnt tell me this,but the cop kinda mentioned it,the rcmp officer that gave me the ticket advised i should dispute it,

I was going 151 in a 100 zone and the weirest part is the cop didnt pull me over untill like 5 mins later when i was on a completley different road

any suggestions???, and yes i called points but i cant talk to them untill tommorow, the guy was gone for the day.:banghead:

Audio_Rookie

03-01-2005, 08:52 PM

ouch, 151 in 100 zone,.

fight it, you can usually win 50% of them when it is your fault, nevermind when its not your fault.

Carfanman

03-01-2005, 09:56 PM

You deserve it, why are you complaining?

blueripper6

03-01-2005, 10:06 PM

because Carfanman, you dont have your license, a job or even go to school so you wouldnt understand the value of money/demerits.

88CRX

03-01-2005, 10:16 PM

Originally posted by blueripper6
because Carfanman, you dont have your license, a job or even go to school so you wouldnt understand the value of money/demerits.

he's actually right lol... he said it himself

I was going 151 in a 100 zone

BumpinTalon

03-01-2005, 10:28 PM

the cop has no case. fight it and you will win.

gpomp

03-01-2005, 10:31 PM

a guy speeding in a j-body, what else is new...

ninspeed

03-01-2005, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by Carfanman
You deserve it, why are you complaining?
have you ever driven through sask.? its fucking boring

pyro

03-01-2005, 10:58 PM

isnt any ticket over 150 a automatic court appearence :dunno:

illeagle

03-01-2005, 11:02 PM

I say Fight it.... does that mean you gotta go back to saskchewan?:burnout: Lets hope you don't have to drag your ass back out to the styx

JAYMEZ

03-01-2005, 11:29 PM

I would fight it , does it have a fine or is it court?

kenny

03-01-2005, 11:32 PM

If the RCMP officer that wrote the ticket told you to dispute it, thats a pretty non subtle hint that he will not show :) Just dispute it yourself without pointts.

cycosis

03-01-2005, 11:40 PM

definetly fight it

oddjob

03-01-2005, 11:47 PM

Originally posted by ninspeed

have you ever driven through sask.? its fucking boring

:werd: the limit should be at least 130.

TrevorK

03-02-2005, 09:58 AM

He said FORT SASKATCHEWAN guys - which is just outside of Edmonton.

And did the police officer use his lights to pull you over? I'd assume he isn't allowed since he's out of his jurisdiction, and there should be some sort of charge for him impersonating a police officer....

gorillam

03-02-2005, 10:06 AM

Originally posted by TrevorK
He said FORT SASKATCHEWAN guys - which is just outside of Edmonton.

And did the police officer use his lights to pull you over? I'd assume he isn't allowed since he's out of his jurisdiction, and there should be some sort of charge for him impersonating a police officer....

You have gotta be joking me, a charge? are you retarded or something, 150 in a 100 that's excessive speeding if you're driving that fast you know what's gunna happen, going beyond fighting the ticket will just make you look like a fool, like you already do.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 11:03 AM

yeah im no disbuting i was speeding but the cop that pulled me over had no more power than a citzen in this instance, so I will defiantley fight it and see what happens, as long as i get to keep my licenses thats all im worried about

Speeding in a jbody, oddly enough ,lol

sputnik

03-02-2005, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by Carfanman
You deserve it, why are you complaining?

wow... i agree with Carfanman!

hopefully the people in hell have parkas

Barking_Spidre

03-02-2005, 11:49 AM

Well, a real cop from the correct jurisdiction gave you the ticket right? It shouldn't matter who pulled you over. He managed to get you to stop, and you waited.

And yes, he'll have to go back whatever court is on the ticket, or wherever he has to pay.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 11:52 AM

haha sorry but not all of us drive like little grannies,and dont be mad at me because i can keep my car under control at those speeds, one day you too will be able to drive like a man

Keep in mind there is a huge difference between someone driving 150 and someone driving 150 and being able to control there car, but thx for your wonderful insite :drama:

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 11:58 AM

barking_spidre if we follow those rules that means i can do what is necessary to pull you over if i am a citzen (as is the officers capacity in this case), including impersenating a cop, smashing my car into yours, etc.. and the only reason the cop from the correct jurisdiciton was able to give me the ticket was a result of another cop overstepping his boundaries, but either way i guess we will see in about a month.

:nut:

QuasarCav

03-02-2005, 12:03 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

Keep in mind there is a huge difference between someone driving 150 and someone driving 150 and being able to control there car, but thx for your wonderful insite :drama:

Be sure to include this statement when you fight your ticket. The JP will appreicate your fine J-bod skills and he might let you off with a warning.

:rolleyes:

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 12:11 PM

haha yeah ill get on that, if i do that im sure to win

Barking_Spidre

03-02-2005, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit
barking_spidre if we follow those rules that means i can do what is necessary to pull you over if i am a citzen (as is the officers capacity in this case), including impersenating a cop, smashing my car into yours, etc..

Then I could sue your ass for those exact things, impersonating a cop, and hitting my car. You aren't actually a cop, but he was, so he wasn't impersonating. If you knew he couldn't keep ya there, just should've drove off.

Anyways, I had a friend who hit an off-duty cops car with a water balloon, and he lost it and called in an on-duty cop, and gave my friend a 400!! dollar stunting ticket. Looked like the cop was driving a brand new 'lude. He got it tossed though, just fought it. The off duty cop over exaggerated hardcore.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 12:32 PM

Originally posted by Barking_Spidre

Then I could sue your ass for those exact things, impersonating a cop, and hitting my car. You aren't actually a cop, but he was, so he wasn't impersonating. If you knew he couldn't keep ya there, just should've drove off.

Anyways, I had a friend who hit an off-duty cops car with a water balloon, and he lost it and called in an on-duty cop, and gave my friend a 400!! dollar stunting ticket. Looked like the cop was driving a brand new 'lude. He got it tossed though, just fought it. The off duty cop over exaggerated hardcore.

hah nice, yeah i didnt know he couldnt keep me there untill after the whole thing was over, or else i would have told him where to go.

BlueGoblin

03-02-2005, 12:32 PM

As far as I understand it, a peace officer - including any of the County Mounties- are peace officers for and in the province of Alberta. They probably have a standard operating agreement though with the RCMP to let the RCMP handle enforcement duties outside the county itself. The jurisdiction issue may not just be strictly legal in nature, but perhaps part of an agreement between the enforcement agencies.

So I don't think that he would be exactly in the category of 'citizen' here; moreover if he has the same speed enforcement training as a regular police officer, he could use that in court too, which a regular citizen would not have.

That doesn''t mean that its not worth fighting, but I suspect that the jurisdiction issue would probably be not your best line of defense.

BTW - being able to control your car at 150 does not give you increased capacity to predict unexpected road hazards. Being able to drive at such a speed when everything is jim-dandy is not the same as having a reasonable margin to deal with other dangers - deer, road debris, mechanical failures, etc. You obviously were not paying enough attention to pick up on the 16 foot long, 5 foot high Crown Vic.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by BlueGoblin
As far as I understand it, a peace officer - including any of the County Mounties- are peace officers for and in the province of Alberta. They probably have a standard operating agreement though with the RCMP to let the RCMP handle enforcement duties outside the county itself. The jurisdiction issue may not just be strictly legal in nature, but perhaps part of an agreement between the enforcement agencies.

So I don't think that he would be exactly in the category of 'citizen' here; moreover if he has the same speed enforcement training as a regular police officer, he could use that in court too, which a regular citizen would not have.

That doesn''t mean that its not worth fighting, but I suspect that the jurisdiction issue would probably be not your best line of defense.

BTW - being able to control your car at 150 does not give you increased capacity to predict unexpected road hazards. Being able to drive at such a speed when everything is jim-dandy is not the same as having a reasonable margin to deal with other dangers - deer, road debris, mechanical failures, etc. You obviously were not paying enough attention to pick up on the 16 foot long, 5 foot high Crown Vic.

haha fair enough on the vic, see the thing is the origional cop who pulled me wont even be at the court house, im sure, i agree you can never predict meh failures, but as far as the road debris is concerend its straight highway with nothing around for miles in either direction so no chance of hitting any animals, whihc is why i find it very unlikely that this cop clocked me as there was no where for him to hide and he didnt pull me over untill like 5 mins from where he said i he caught me, but thx for your info, it helps :clap:

lastprodigy

03-02-2005, 01:09 PM

Originally posted by TrevorK

there should be some sort of charge for him impersonating a police officer....

bahahahah :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rolleyes:

ehos

03-02-2005, 01:37 PM

You better fight it. 50+ over is a 1 month suspension, and a HUGE fine.

You won't win, but you could try.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by ehos
You better fight it. 50+ over is a 1 month suspension, and a HUGE fine.

You won't win, but you could try.

i will try, i have to fight it in sherwood park so hopefully there a little nicer,lol, speaking from experience are you?

kenny

03-02-2005, 01:49 PM

A quick lesson in traffic court (yes I've been there)

1. It doesn't matter if the cop that pulled you over clocked you or not, they all have training in speed estimation and the judge will take whatever estimate they provide.

2. The judge will not care if the road is perfectly paved and there is no debris, if you are travelling over the posted limit, then you were travelling over the limit.

3. You don't have any valid defence against this ticket in any way, your only recourse if you want is to reach an agreement and have it lowered to 3 demerits. 51+ over the limit is usually suspension, 50 over is 6 demerits, so they will usually ask for you to agree with 3 demerits.

The ticket issuing officer suggested you should dispute the ticket, which means he probably wont show. Why else would he tell you to dispute the ticket? The officer that pulled you over is not involved in the matter and would only be used to answer questions if the ticket issuing officer were to go to court, which I repeat, will probably not happen.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by kenny
A quick lesson in traffic court (yes I've been there)

1. It doesn't matter if the cop that pulled you over clocked you or not, they all have training in speed estimation and the judge will take whatever estimate they provide.

2. The judge will not care if the road is perfectly paved and there is no debris, if you are travelling over the posted limit, then you were travelling over the limit.

3. You don't have any valid defence against this ticket in any way, your only recourse if you want is to reach an agreement and have it lowered to 3 demerits. 51+ over the limit is usually suspension, 50 over is 6 demerits, so they will usually ask for you to agree with 3 demerits.

The ticket issuing officer suggested you should dispute the ticket, which means he probably wont show. Why else would he tell you to dispute the ticket? The officer that pulled you over is not involved in the matter and would only be used to answer questions if the ticket issuing officer were to go to court, which I repeat, will probably not happen.

thats some great info, thx I sure hope he dosent show up,lol, that would be a nice bit of luck, and like i was saying i dont expect to get out of the ticket, i just want to keep my license unsuspended

Rockski

03-02-2005, 02:25 PM

man, as soon as he said "strathcona county" and you wernt in sherwood park, shoulda just left... wrong thing to do, but im prtty sure thats as far as thier juristiction goes. what the hell was he doing out in fort sask?

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by Rockski
man, as soon as he said "strathcona county" and you wernt in sherwood park, shoulda just left... wrong thing to do, but im prtty sure thats as far as thier juristiction goes. what the hell was he doing out in fort sask?

yeah see he didnt even tell me the only way i know is when i saw his car drive by me after the other officer showed up, i just got off the phone with points and they say there no way the would suspend my licenese for 1km over the max, he said to talk to the crown and see what they can do

gran turismo

03-02-2005, 03:53 PM

Why is anybody even giving advice to this asshat? He's admitted to going 51 KM/hour over the posted limit. Then he brags about how a real "man" drives fast and under control. Really, you're only inflating his ignorance.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by gran turismo
Why is anybody even giving advice to this asshat? He's admitted to going 51 KM/hour over the posted limit. Then he brags about how a real "man" drives fast and under control. Really, you're only inflating his ignorance.

ha,thx for your insightfulness, at least i can admit i was speeding, but thx for your wonderful view of the situation :whocares:

gran turismo

03-02-2005, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

at least i can admit i was speeding

So? Are you trying to imply that I wouldn't admit to speeding or that admitting makes it OK? I don't get it.

If it's any consolation, I really hope you lose in court, lose your license and your insurance is raised a lot.

As far as insightfulness goes, SLOW the **** down mullet.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by gran turismo

So? Are you trying to imply that I wouldn't admit to speeding or that admitting makes it OK? I don't get it.

If it's any consolation, I really hope you lose in court, lose your license and your insurance is raised a lot.

As far as insightfulness goes, SLOW the **** down mullet.

yes i was implying speeding is okay , and thx for your hopes :nut: if it makes you feel better my insurance will go up , but not untill next year seeing as how i just renewed a month ago, but come next jan my insurance should make a nice jump, thank god i make the big bucks,lol :rofl:

Carfanman

03-02-2005, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by blueripper6
because Carfanman, you dont have your license, a job or even go to school so you wouldnt understand the value of money/demerits.

Your right, I dont understand the value of demerits, Although I do understand the value of money, because I pay for most of my stuff myself.

But I hope that if I ever do something so fuking stupid like go 50 above the speed limit (Im not saying Ill never speed,but 50+ is pretty high), Ill be mature enough to realize I was a fuking dumbass and should take some responsibility. Its not the cops fault he did 51 over the limit.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 04:57 PM

Originally posted by Carfanman

Your right, I dont understand the value of demerits, Although I do understand the value of money, because I pay for most of my stuff myself.

But I hope that if I ever do something so fuking stupid like go 50 above the speed limit (Im not saying Ill never speed,but 50+ is pretty high), Ill be mature enough to realize I was a fuking dumbass and should take some responsibility. Its not the cops fault he did 51 over the limit.

i think your missing the point here cheif, i never said i wasnt dumb or that it was the cops fault, i simple asked if i should fight it or not, and i never once claimed to not be a dumbass,hahaha

Tyler883

03-02-2005, 05:21 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

.... i never once claimed to not be a dumbass,.......

You are going to win alot of arguements with comments like that!
:rofl:

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 05:26 PM

Originally posted by Tyler883

You are going to win alot of arguements with comments like that!
:rofl:

i dont recal there being an argument to win

Godfuader

03-02-2005, 05:29 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

i think your missing the point here cheif, i never said i wasnt dumb or that it was the cops fault, i simple asked if i should fight it or not, and i never once claimed to not be a dumbass,hahaha

The guy is admittin he was an idiot for driving real fast. too many posts callin him that...get over it. :whocares: He was asking for suggestions about court procedures, not your prayers for him to smack into a pole or get insurance raise. Yeah, hes a complete idiot for claiming to be a man by driving 151 km/h. But dont criticize. Most drivers on here hit that once in a while. I do that if im running late for a midterm. Give him some creative court advice like "Kenny". I've been to traffic court a couple times (10km/h over and 5km/h over in a construction zone) I would like to think that if i came on the forum to ask someone for reduction advice...some of you idiots would just STFU (stop making beyond so hostile). He claimed his error...let him be. I would like to know how this turns out. my 2c

Carfanman

03-02-2005, 05:35 PM

If you have to ask wether or not you should fight it, obviously you don't realize how dumb you were/are. And if you make "the big bucks" then thats one more reason for you to take the fuking responsibility and not sue/press charges on some fuking cop for a technicality. He wasn't impersonating an officer just because he was out of his jurisdiction.

Originally posted by yeahisaidit
one day you too will be able to drive like a man
If your such a "man" then suck it up instead of trying to defend you idiocy by blaming a cop. And driving like an ass doesn't make you a man, it makes you a fuktard.

As for getting your license suspended, you deserve to be kept off the roads. Did you read melindas thread about her friend that was ki11ed by a drunk driver? You may not have been drunk, but you drive like you were, so it doesn't matter. And It doesn't matter if its extremely unlikely that you'll hit someone, if you do, it wont be any less horrible because it was so unlikely. Same goes for ki11ing yourself.

I'm not saying that I'm perfect or that I won't do anything stupid when I get my license, but I hope to G-d I'll be more mature about any punishment I get than you are being.

DayGlow

03-02-2005, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by Godfuader

The guy is admittin he was an idiot for driving real fast. too many posts callin him that...get over it. :whocares: He was asking for suggestions about court procedures, not your prayers for him to smack into a pole or get insurance raise. Yeah, hes a complete idiot for claiming to be a man by driving 151 km/h. But dont criticize. Most drivers on here hit that once in a while. I do that if im running late for a midterm. Give him some creative court advice like "Kenny". I've been to traffic court a couple times (10km/h over and 5km/h over in a construction zone) I would like to think that if i came on the forum to ask someone for reduction advice...some of you idiots would just STFU (stop making beyond so hostile). He claimed his error...let him be. I would like to know how this turns out. my 2c

The difference IMHO is that he isn't asking advice because he thinks the ticket is unjust, but because he doesn't want to face the conciquences of his actions.

Big difference.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by Carfanman
If you have to ask wether or not you should fight it, obviously you don't realize how dumb you were/are. And if you make "the big bucks" then thats one more reason for you to take the fuking responsibility and not sue/press charges on some fuking cop for a technicality. He wasn't impersonating an officer just because he was out of his jurisdiction.

If your such a "man" then suck it up instead of trying to defend you idiocy by blaming a cop. And driving like an ass doesn't make you a man, it makes you a fuktard.

As for getting your license suspended, you deserve to be kept off the roads. Did you read melindas thread about her friend that was ki11ed by a drunk driver? You may not have been drunk, but you drive like you were, so it doesn't matter. And It doesn't matter if its extremely unlikely that you'll hit someone, if you do, it wont be any less horrible because it was so unlikely. Same goes for ki11ing yourself.

I'm not saying that I'm perfect or that I won't do anything stupid when I get my license, but I hope to G-d I'll be more mature about any punishment I get than you are being.

thx for laugh, anyway if you read the posts, i am not saying i dont want to pay the ticket, I am saying i dont want to have my licenses suspended, and im not sure what your talking about in regards to suing or pressing charges against the cop, as i have never said i would do anyhting like that,nor would there be a point.

"You may not have been drunk, but you drive like you were," ,no i was driving like a sober person who drives fast, big difference, and my friend was killed by a drunk driver in an suv not along ago, by a drunk teacher who was on her way home from a party,so dont give me the drunk driver lecture, but once again thank you for you ever insightfull always appreciated opinon. :clap:

Carfanman

03-02-2005, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

i dont want to have my licenses suspended

So you don't want the consequences of your stupid actions?
Why shouldn't you get your license suspended if thats the punishment for what you did.
Just because you don't want to?
Cry me a river, yeah it suks, but you deserve it. What if you did hurt yourself or someone else?
At least its not getting taken away permanently.

Z_Fan

03-02-2005, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit
Hey me and my smart brain :banghead: got a ticket today on higway 21 in fort saskatchewan

...

the rcmp officer that gave me the ticket advised i should dispute it...

I was going 151 in a 100 zone...

OK - well, don't pay your ticket. Go to court and defend yourself. (Or hire a lawyer to do so on your behalf.)

Firstly, you are 1KM over. Now I'm not sure how your speed was calculated - but certainly if it was clocked, at the very least, you will get a reduced ticket so that you will be avoiding the mandatory suspension not defending yourself will automatically yield.

So, obviously, fight the ticket.

Originally posted by kenny
The ticket issuing officer suggested you should dispute the ticket, which means he probably wont show. Why else would he tell you to dispute the ticket? The officer that pulled you over is not involved in the matter and would only be used to answer questions if the ticket issuing officer were to go to court, which I repeat, will probably not happen.

Yup. This is the big clue here - and really helps your case. Most likely the officer who gave you the ticket isn't going to go to court anyhow - and while that's not overly important because he didn't witness the infringement (at least I think he doesn't HAVE to be there in this case because he is not the witness) - what must happen in order to convict you is to have the presence of the guy who did witness the event. Likely he's not going to go either - unless he's really hell bent on getting you in particular. You see, far as I know, he MUST show up - and now normally cops write tickets and the appearance date is a date specific to their schedule - on that day, their job is to go to court for all the summons they've issued. It is unlikely that the ticket matches the witnesses schedule. He's going to have to go out of his way to put the screws to you. He may think you'll just plead guilty...

I think this is a no-brainer - you've got to defend yourself. There is a very good chance that it will get thrown right out of court. I wouldn't even plea-bargain with them before a trial. (Because then you're guilty no matter what, even if it is a lesser charge) Mostly because even if this goes to court, the judge will be severely hard pressed to find a clocking was accurate to within 1KM/H. So you're going to get a reduced ticket anyhow, and if you actually force it to go to a trial, you may actually get off completely!

Fight it. Oh, and of course, in the future you might want to keep the significance of 50 over in mind. Keep it under that, and then it's only money and demerits. No big deal.

You can ignore Carfanman's advice of not fighting the ticket. This boy doesn't have a clue about the real world. When he's a bit older and actually has a car, and needs it to get to the McDonald's he'll be working at - you know, to put the fries down in the vat at the fry station - then he'll understand the significance of keeping your license in the active condition. Right now he's probably having trouble understanding why O.J. didn't just admit to multiple murders...uhm, but that worked out pretty good for him didn't it? A lot better than if he'd pleaded guilty.

yeahisaidit

03-02-2005, 08:57 PM

Originally posted by Z_Fan

OK - well, don't pay your ticket. Go to court and defend yourself. (Or hire a lawyer to do so on your behalf.)

Firstly, you are 1KM over. Now I'm not sure how your speed was calculated - but certainly if it was clocked, at the very least, you will get a reduced ticket so that you will be avoiding the mandatory suspension not defending yourself will automatically yield.

So, obviously, fight the ticket.

Yup. This is the big clue here - and really helps your case. Most likely the officer who gave you the ticket isn't going to go to court anyhow - and while that's not overly important because he didn't witness the infringement (at least I think he doesn't HAVE to be there in this case because he is not the witness) - what must happen in order to convict you is to have the presence of the guy who did witness the event. Likely he's not going to go either - unless he's really hell bent on getting you in particular. You see, far as I know, he MUST show up - and now normally cops write tickets and the appearance date is a date specific to their schedule - on that day, their job is to go to court for all the summons they've issued. It is unlikely that the ticket matches the witnesses schedule. He's going to have to go out of his way to put the screws to you. He may think you'll just plead guilty...

I think this is a no-brainer - you've got to defend yourself. There is a very good chance that it will get thrown right out of court. I wouldn't even plea-bargain with them before a trial. (Because then you're guilty no matter what, even if it is a lesser charge) Mostly because even if this goes to court, the judge will be severely hard pressed to find a clocking was accurate to within 1KM/H. So you're going to get a reduced ticket anyhow, and if you actually force it to go to a trial, you may actually get off completely!

Fight it. Oh, and of course, in the future you might want to keep the significance of 50 over in mind. Keep it under that, and then it's only money and demerits. No big deal.

You can ignore Carfanman's advice of not fighting the ticket. This boy doesn't have a clue about the real world. When he's a bit older and actually has a car, and needs it to get to the McDonald's he'll be working at - you know, to put the fries down in the vat at the fry station - then he'll understand the significance of keeping your license in the active condition. Right now he's probably having trouble understanding why O.J. didn't just admit to multiple murders...uhm, but that worked out pretty good for him didn't it? A lot better than if he'd pleaded guilty.

that is some good advice, i will be fighting it, and the ticket says laser, whats really funny is the gentelemn who pulled me over,didnt even give me his name or anything before he drove off in his cruiser, the second cop gave me the ticket, what i find odd is that its quite a coiencdence that i happened to be going just 1 over the max which (in some world of the strathcona cop) gives him some backing to pull me over. either way if i fight it the worst that could happen is i get the same fine,I think, knowing my luck though proabbly not, he might double it,hahah

Z_Fan

03-02-2005, 10:05 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

that is some good advice, i will be fighting it, and the ticket says laser, whats really funny is the gentelemn who pulled me over,didnt even give me his name or anything before he drove off in his cruiser, the second cop gave me the ticket, what i find odd is that its quite a coiencdence that i happened to be going just 1 over the max which (in some world of the strathcona cop) gives him some backing to pull me over. either way if i fight it the worst that could happen is i get the same fine,I think, knowing my luck though proabbly not, he might double it,hahah

Well, perhaps there is an officer reading this ... and if so, perhaps they could clarify that the witness MUST testify in order to convict. Since the officer who wrote the ticket didn't witness the offence, his presence alone isn't enough to convict you of anything.

Besides, when you get a ticket of this level of severity - you ALWAYS - under all circumstances - fight it. If money isn't a problem, just hire a lawyer. Probably just a few hundred bucks. They go and represent you...and if all the necessary elements aren't in place, you'll be completely off the hook. (I think you have a good chance of that...and at the very least, it'll be dropped to below the 50 over point, and you'll keep your licence!)

Also, I find it very strange that an officer would be shooting laser radar in an area out of his jurisdiction. I wonder what implications that has in a court of law. Oh, and, if you see a vehicle stopped on the side of the road, uhm, you might want to reconsider passing or approaching it at such a high rate of speed...

Godfuader

03-02-2005, 10:40 PM

Originally posted by DayGlow

The difference IMHO is that he isn't asking advice because he thinks the ticket is unjust, but because he doesn't want to face the conciquences of his actions.

Big difference.

Hes trying to get minimal consequences from his action. He admitted that he was in fact 51km/h over. Now he just wants the lesser/cheaper punishment.
I will admit guilt when i get a ticket, but i will spend my time to get reduction in demerits/fines. You dont prove anything by paying the maximum penalty, it doesnt make u a better citizen.
something like parking tickets i will plead not guilty forever and remain ambivalent about wasting the courts time for $40

lastprodigy

03-03-2005, 12:01 AM

cuz none of you would ever fight a ticket....:rolleyes:

baronsamedi

03-03-2005, 12:39 AM

Haha some of your guys are hilarious, everyone speeds at least once. I know I do. Get over it, he just asking for advise on reducing the consequences.

I think speeding is actually safer than driving like a jerk and weaving through traffic. The road he was on was probably practically empty.

Just stating my opinion.

DayGlow

03-03-2005, 01:20 AM

Originally posted by baronsamedi
Haha some of your guys are hilarious, everyone speeds at least once. I know I do. Get over it, he just asking for advise on reducing the consequences.

I think speeding is actually safer than driving like a jerk and weaving through traffic. The road he was on was probably practically empty.

Just stating my opinion.

1) he's going 50 over the limit. That isn't speeding. That's being stupid

2) for someone who brags about being in control and aware of his surroundings, he some how missed a police cruiser. That says something about his preception of being in control. If he missed a police cruiser that means he could have very well missed a car pulling onto the road. That's how people die. It happens a few times a year on the back roads where someone pulls infront of someone driving down the road, pretty much every time speed is a major factor in the collision.

Why should he get a break in the law? He was going 50 over. 50. That's a huge amount. He wasn't cruising 20 over on an empty steet. He was going balls out and was caught. Losing his license would be a major learning experience. There are consiquences for your actions. He is learning it the hard way.

yeahisaidit

03-03-2005, 02:43 AM

Originally posted by DayGlow

1) he's going 50 over the limit. That isn't speeding. That's being stupid

2) for someone who brags about being in control and aware of his surroundings, he some how missed a police cruiser. That says something about his preception of being in control. If he missed a police cruiser that means he could have very well missed a car pulling onto the road. That's how people die. It happens a few times a year on the back roads where someone pulls infront of someone driving down the road, pretty much every time speed is a major factor in the collision.

Why should he get a break in the law? He was going 50 over. 50. That's a huge amount. He wasn't cruising 20 over on an empty steet. He was going balls out and was caught. Losing his license would be a major learning experience. There are consiquences for your actions. He is learning it the hard way.

see this is wear you are wrong i am positive i didnt miss him, becuase im sure he wasnt on the road he supposedly lasered me on, but i will fight it and see what happens

Audio_Rookie

03-03-2005, 02:48 AM

Originally posted by Carfanman

So you don't want the consequences of your stupid actions?
Why shouldn't you get your license suspended if thats the punishment for what you did.
Just because you don't want to?
Cry me a river, yeah it suks, but you deserve it. What if you did hurt yourself or someone else?
At least its not getting taken away permanently.

Man some of you guys are just being asses to him...
So how long have you been driving?
A stupid driver is more of a hazard then a driver that speeds. Take for example my step mother, travels the speed limit everywhere on the dot, but she is a dumbass when she weves in and out of traffic and then has huge speed fluxuations, hard gas, hard brake....she has been in 3 accidents over past year, all her fault.

I on many occasions travel 150 on the highway and I have yet to be in a accident.And my step mother pays alot more money in insurance and "stunting" tickets than I do on speeding tickets.

You know some time ago there was an experiment going on with US government where they lowered all the speed limits. Guess what, there was more accidents and chaos than ever before, people were spending more time on the road, and they were more eager to get to where there going, because there going there so damn slow....more weaving through travic, running red lights, and they would speed to there old current speed on highway anyway.

Cop should not of been able to pull you over and then just show the RCMP officer the speed he clocked you at and make him right you a ticket for that speed. I mean COME ON!. I estimate you have 85-90% success rate on this one...he probobly wont even show up.

good luck!!

DayGlow

03-03-2005, 09:12 AM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

see this is wear you are wrong i am positive i didnt miss him, becuase im sure he wasnt on the road he supposedly lasered me on, but i will fight it and see what happens

So you completely missed a car and yet you say you were in control :rolleyes:

Be glad it was a cop car and not someone who also drives that road everyday and not paying attention. Again what are there? 2? 3? fatalities on roads like this every year? All it takes is one time.

Going 50 over isn't speeding. It's being reckless.

yeahisaidit

03-03-2005, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Audio_Rookie

Man some of you guys are just being asses to him...
So how long have you been driving?
A stupid driver is more of a hazard then a driver that speeds. Take for example my step mother, travels the speed limit everywhere on the dot, but she is a dumbass when she weves in and out of traffic and then has huge speed fluxuations, hard gas, hard brake....she has been in 3 accidents over past year, all her fault.

I on many occasions travel 150 on the highway and I have yet to be in a accident.And my step mother pays alot more money in insurance and "stunting" tickets than I do on speeding tickets.

You know some time ago there was an experiment going on with US government where they lowered all the speed limits. Guess what, there was more accidents and chaos than ever before, people were spending more time on the road, and they were more eager to get to where there going, because there going there so damn slow....more weaving through travic, running red lights, and they would speed to there old current speed on highway anyway.

Cop should not of been able to pull you over and then just show the RCMP officer the speed he clocked you at and make him right you a ticket for that speed. I mean COME ON!. I estimate you have 85-90% success rate on this one...he probobly wont even show up.

good luck!!

I have been driving since i was 16 so that would give me 6 yrs i havent had any tickets up untill the i go my new car,lol, damn car,ha

Superesc

03-03-2005, 10:20 AM

Originally posted by DayGlow

So you completely missed a car and yet you say you were in control :rolleyes:

Be glad it was a cop car and not someone who also drives that road everyday and not paying attention. Again what are there? 2? 3? fatalities on roads like this every year? All it takes is one time.

Going 50 over isn't speeding. It's being reckless.

Totally agree. It only takes ONE TIME. It don't matter if you were driving well for 6 years. You went over, you got CAUGHT. And hopefully this will CHANGE your driving habit. I got caught last year for doing double by an off duty officer, eventhough it was kinda sketchy, it taught me a lesson. I changed my driving habit and I think that did me and everyone on the road some good.

Z_Fan

03-03-2005, 11:25 AM

We live in a society that has a court system - and also he's innocent of any crime until proven guilty by the court. So, unless he confesses to the crown, he has the RIGHT to defend himself. Throwing this right away would be the pinnacle of daftness.

The fact that he got caught should help shape his character and alter his driving habits. He shouldn't have been going that fast, but I'd be a hypocrit to stand here and shake my finger at him! It was wreckless, stupid, etc. You can't deny those things. He'll grow from the experience for sure - BUT - Learning from his actions - and taking the opportunity to defend himself in court are two distinctly different things.

You guys clearly don't understand your personal rights and freedoms granted to you by this democratic monarchy!

Edited to...

Mr. Heatley *KILLED* another human being by an act of speeding and gross negligence. Do you see him stepping up and taking any responsibility for his actions. Hell no - he's gotten off with the most leniency I've ever seen for manslaughter or vehicular homocide. That is disgusting. Simple as that! But he used the legal system to plea for the least amount of punishment possible - and he got it. So, everyone here thinks that Heatley should have sucked it up, pleaded guilty to everything and ASKED for the maximum penalty allowable under that state's law? Uhm, not many people will be taking that course of action - and you can't blame Heatley for using the system either. He makes an excellent case for why the system should be used to reduce the punishment of any 'stupid' thing you might do...

So why you guys think that our 151 in a 100 zone speeder should just automatically accept the maximum penalty for his actions is really beyond me. It's also totally hypocritical. I know that pretty much everyone here, if they were faced with this same situation [specifally the loss of the license] would fight this ticket simply because of circumstance and the fact that it is only marginally into the classification of a major offence whereby the license will be suspended.

Despite anything you might read in this thread - fight your ticket. If you are going to attempt to plea with the crown, absolutely do not accept anything that will see you lose your license. Personally, I'd just see them in court...unless they give you a reduction via plea and you can live with that...

gran turismo

03-03-2005, 11:49 AM

Originally posted by Z_Fan
We live in a society that has a court system - and also he's innocent of any crime until proven guilty by the court. So, unless he confesses to the crown, he has the RIGHT to defend himself. Throwing this right away would be the pinnacle of daftness.

The fact that he got caught should help shape his character and alter his driving habits. He shouldn't have been going that fast, but I'd be a hypocrit to stand here and shake my finger at him! It was wreckless, stupid, etc. You can't deny those things. He'll grow from the experience for sure - BUT - Learning from his actions - and taking the opportunity to defend himself in court are two distinctly different things.

You guys clearly don't understand your personal rights and freedoms granted to you by this democratic monarchy!

Mr. Heatley *KILLED* another human being by an act of speeding and gross negligence. Do you see him stepping up and taking any responsibility for his actions. Hell no - he's gotten off with the most leniency I've ever seen for manslaughter or vehicular homocide. That is disgusting. I don't care if he didn't mean for it to happen - because he definitely MEANT to be driving fast and the rich little punk couldn't handle his car! Simple as that! But he used the legal system to plea for the least amount of punishment possible - and he got it. So, everyone here thinks that Heatley should have sucked it up, pleaded guilty to everything and ASKED for the maximum penalty allowable under that state's law? Uhm, not many people will be taking that course of action - and you can't blame Heatley for using the system either. He makes an excellent case for why the system should be used to reduce the punishment of any 'stupid' thing you might do...

So why you guys think that our 151 in a 100 zone speeder should just automatically accept the maximum penalty for his actions is really beyond me. It's also totally hypocritical. I know that pretty much everyone here, if they were faced with this same situation [specifally the loss of the license] would fight this ticket simply because of circumstance and the fact that it is only marginally into the classification of a major offence whereby the license will be suspended.

Despite anything you might read in this thread - fight your ticket. If you are going to attempt to plea with the crown, absolutely do not accept anything that will see you lose your license. Personally, I'd just see them in court...unless they give you a reduction via plea and you can live with that...

I totally agree with your point of defending yourself when you're charged with anything. It's your right and to some extent, responsibility.

What I've got a problem with is the speeder's arrogance and sheer stupidity. From his responses like, "speeding is OK", "only a real man can drive his car fast" etc. this implies to me that he won't learn from this experience. He goes on to say that he makes a lot of money so money isn't much of an issue. So what is? Losing his license, right. Wow. What an inconvenience for him. He does 50 over the limit and then asks for advice on a car board on how to beat the ticket. WOW.

How come everyone jumps on someone who asks for advice on beating a "stunting" ticket (like doing doghnuts in a parking lot) but defends someone doing 50 km over the posted limit?

BTW, I've driven for 12 years, had 3 speeding tickets (most was a 20 km over in a 110) and I'm not a hypocrite for calling this guy out. A hypocrite would be me saying my tickets were unjust and my speeding justifiable, but this guys actions are not. When in fact I accept responsibility for those actions and heed to their consequences. Neither of which I've witnessed thus far from mullet man.

yeahisaidit

03-03-2005, 11:56 AM

Z_Fan

03-03-2005, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by gran turismo
I totally agree with your point of defending yourself when you're charged with anything. It's your right and to some extent, responsibility.

So this excludes you from the hypocrite list IMO. I was specifically referring to people who are saying for this guy to just automatically admit guilt if they were in his shoes - because I know no rational person would do that under his circumstances. It really doesn't have much to do with his speeding habits. (Although there will be those type of hypocrites too - those who speed yet frown up this guy for getting caught!)

Originally posted by gran turismo
What I've got a problem with is the speeder's arrogance and sheer stupidity. From his responses like, "speeding is OK", "only a real man can drive his car fast" etc. this implies to me that he won't learn from this experience. He goes on to say that he makes a lot of money so money isn't much of an issue. So what is? Losing his license, right. Wow. What an inconvenience for him. He does 50 over the limit and then asks for advice on a car board on how to beat the ticket. WOW.

His "arrogance and sheer stupidity" don't play a role in his right to defend himself in court. Both of those attributes characterize most young guys who are in their late-teens, early twenties driving a Z24 P.O.S. thinking it's fast and that they know how to drive. Right?

Originally posted by gran turismo
I'm not a hypocrite for calling this guy out.

A hypocrite would be someone who is professing opinions which they don't really possess. In this case, it is just those who are saying they'd fess up and just pay the piper. Perhaps some think they'd do that, but if they were faced with the situation in their reality they'd be better educated to formulate an opinion. If that makes them a hypocrite because they lack empathy, so be it. But experiencing this in reality would lead them to defend themselves and hope for a reduction of the penalty.

DayGlow

03-03-2005, 12:28 PM

Z_Fan I think there is a huge difference between pleading not guilty because you believe the ticket is unjust and fighting it just because you don't want to face the consiquences of your actions.

Is his right to defend himself in court based on trying to argue that 50 over isn't that bad, or will he be arguing that he wasn't going 50 over?

If he wasn't going 50 over and got the ticket, then by all means, yes, he should fight the ticket because it unjust. But it makes a mockery of our court system to fight something for the sole purpose of not wanting to face up for your actions.

Last thing we should start doing is celibrating the lack of character many people show today. It's sad.

Godfuader

03-03-2005, 01:08 PM

The guy is fessing up to his actions. Hes still unsure of his speed. He said he is stupid for what he did. I am an idiot when i park sideways across a handi-bus stall right next to a fire hydrant on top of a meter maid, but i still will take the time to minimize the punishment. I've been to courts many times and admitted complete guilt and the judge has given me a significant reduction.

Let him have his time in court. The judge is there for a reason. If he (defendant) tries to use some BS excuse to cop out of the ticket, I hope the judge would be smart enough to catch him. If the judge does not see thru his story vs. reality then blame the legal system.

Dont call the cop a fool for pulling u over. u sped and now show up and plead ur case. Minimize ur punishment. By luckily not killing someone on the highway does not make u guilty of predictive-criminal-intent, it just makes u a lucky idiot. Fight the case and minimize the punishment.

If this was in calgary, i would be at the court with a bag of popcorn.

Z_Fan

03-03-2005, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by DayGlow
Z_Fan I think there is a huge difference between pleading not guilty because you believe the ticket is unjust and fighting it just because you don't want to face the consiquences of your actions.

Well, I would agree with you that there is a difference. However, the court doesn't care why you are defending yourself. They don't care if you are fighting it because you believe it is unjust or if you just don't like the penalty. The only thing they should inherently believe is that the defendant is defending himself because it is his constitutional right to do so. Even if the ticket is unjust, the court won't automatically align its beliefs with the defendant and dismiss the case. They want and require proof of either guilt or innocence. It's just the way it is...

Originally posted by DayGlow
But it makes a mockery of our court system to fight something for the sole purpose of not wanting to face up for your actions.

I think you are very unclear on the concept of court. Most would argue that in reality, the exact purpose of court is the opposite of your statement. The reason the courts are packed is specifically because people don't want to face up to their actions. It is that exact premise...surely you must see that...because I know you are not so naive to think that court is flooded completely with people who are innocent. After all, one of our basic freedoms in a democracy is freedom from arbitrary arrest. Do you honestly believe that the entire court system is full of people who are mocking the system?

There would be no requirement for court if everyone just said, yup, I did it and plead guilty and was sentenced to the maximum penalty allowable by law. [which would then be a fixed penalty] There would be no variance in penalty based upon circumstance which is a fundamental necessity of the court system. It is that element of the court system that allows society to handle each case on an individual basis and to hand out punishment accordingly.

It is necessary to utilize the court system so that society can continue to modify its view of acceptable punishments for crimes or other violations of law. The punishment for various activities changes from case to case - it is dynamic - and can only be continually developed if people use the system. Society needs the ability to punish certain individuals harsher for the same crime because the circumstances of the crime are always variable. In a democratic society, the judicial system can not simply paint everyone with a single brush. We need people to go to court so we can adjust the acceptable penalties [either increase or decrease] based on societies current views.

If this is the first offence for our speeder, I would expect some leniency to be shown and the ticket to be reduced. If, however, this is his third offence of 50+, then I would expect punishment to the fullest extent of the law. If people didn't defend themselves in court, the more lenient punishments could not be issued and the extreme and repeat offenders would be treated as harshly as the first time offender.

Each case is different, each individual is different, each circumstance is different, each punishment is different. Never, under any circumstance, throw away your right [in fact responsibility] to defend yourself in court. UNLESS....

In some cases, the punishment is viewed as acceptable by the individual who has carried out the deed. In that case, they acknowlege the punishment and are OK with it. They plead guilty. This only happens when the punishment or penalty doesn't completely remove the principle freedoms they wish to retain. If it did, they'd fight for their freedoms.

DayGlow

03-03-2005, 01:21 PM

I think we are getting caught up in semantics. For me to go to court to fight a ticket means you are pleading not guilty. If you are pleading not guilty you have to have a defense. That's difference than going before the courts looking for leniency based on circumstances. Nothing wrong with that and yes, it's very one's righ to do so and should.

Z_Fan

03-03-2005, 01:30 PM

I can agree with that. :D

yeahisaidit

03-03-2005, 02:56 PM

wow thx for all the info regarding this, i will definatley let all of you know how this turns out, and this is my first 50+ ticket, and yes i am in my early 20s and like to drive my P.O.S z24 real fast thank you very much,lol :poosie:

Rakinishu

03-04-2005, 03:04 AM

I've had my speeding ticket reduced from not even 30 seconds talking to the crown. He reduced it from 4 points to 2 points and over $100 off the fine value. It went from Speeding to Failure to Obey a sign. They basically reward you for taking the time out of your day to try and help yourself.

Super_Geo

03-04-2005, 04:11 AM

max_boost

03-04-2005, 04:31 AM

Some of you guys are taking the hard line approach here, I'm not saying it is acceptable to go 50kms over the limit but it does happen and depending on the situation, some discretion should be applied.

My gf got busted for 50kms over, falling into a construction speed trap. Deerfoot south, must turn off on Glenmore Trail, the time was 12:30am. There were no men working, the work was performed way ahead on Deerfoot south, closer to Southland Dr, back when they were working on the Deerfoot Meadows lanes. They set the speed limit sign 50kms so far back on Deerfoot where on a normal day if you were travelling 100kms, motorists will probably speed up and pass you. Even though she was going 50 over, there were no other cars on this stretch of road. At the speed of 100 in the far right lane, even if she waited until the actual exit before slowing down, by no means is it reckless. But the law is the law, and 50 over is 50 over. We pleaded with the CP and got let off with a 50% reduction in fine and 2 demerits. No way I was going to settle for the maximum penalty, that's just ridiculous.

As for carfanman's comments, who the hell is going to listen to a 14 year old rant and actually give two shits about it. :rofl:

max_boost

03-04-2005, 04:37 AM

This thread is hilarious. I'm sure those of you who break the law will go straight to the judge and say, give me the MAXIMUM PENALTY for what I did, because it is only right and I need to own up to my mistakes. :rofl: :rofl: Please, I don't want any special treatment, no reductions, nothing, who cares about the circumstance surrounding the infraction.:nut:

If the next time you guys get a ticket, for anything, and instead of going down to talk to the CP which is the loophole and pay the fine and have the ticket removed from your record, otherwise opt to pay the fine through the mail and accept the demerits, I'm not sure if you are responsible or just plain stupid. :rofl: :eek: ;)

yeahisaidit

03-04-2005, 10:30 AM

DayGlow

03-04-2005, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by max_boost
This thread is hilarious. I'm sure those of you who break the law will go straight to the judge and say, give me the MAXIMUM PENALTY for what I did, because it is only right and I need to own up to my mistakes. :rofl: :rofl: Please, I don't want any special treatment, no reductions, nothing, who cares about the circumstance surrounding the infraction.:nut:

If the next time you guys get a ticket, for anything, and instead of going down to talk to the CP which is the loophole and pay the fine and have the ticket removed from your record, otherwise opt to pay the fine through the mail and accept the demerits, I'm not sure if you are responsible or just plain stupid. :rofl: :eek: ;)

Well he has a 50+ ticket, so he gets to see a judge no matter what. I have no issue with that. What I think is sad is the people saying 'fight it' ie plead not guilty just because it has a large penalty. My response is what is their defence? Is it because the ticket unjust, or because they don't to face the consiquences of their actions.

I have no problem with people trying to find a way to get a reduction in the penalty, I do think it's a major lack of character to go and make something up in defense to try to get off.

BTW there is a huge difference in your GF doing 100 on a 100 road that has a temp speed reduction for construction where the people forgot to put their signs down for the night and someone going 150+ on a 100 highway. I hope the judge shows leniency in her situation, while I feel this guy is reckless, esp with his attitude throughout the the thread and losing his license would be no lose. He's the type that causes accidents and has the potential to kill people.

baronsamedi

03-04-2005, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by Carfanman

If your such a "man" then suck it up instead of trying to defend you idiocy by blaming a cop. And driving like an ass doesn't make you a man, it makes you a fuktard.

This is coming from a guy who doesn't even drive. :rofl:

yeahisaidit

03-04-2005, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by DayGlow

Well he has a 50+ ticket, so he gets to see a judge no matter what. I have no issue with that. What I think is sad is the people saying 'fight it' ie plead not guilty just because it has a large penalty. My response is what is their defence? Is it because the ticket unjust, or because they don't to face the consiquences of their actions.

I have no problem with people trying to find a way to get a reduction in the penalty, I do think it's a major lack of character to go and make something up in defense to try to get off.

BTW there is a huge difference in your GF doing 100 on a 100 road that has a temp speed reduction for construction where the people forgot to put their signs down for the night and someone going 150+ on a 100 highway. I hope the judge shows leniency in her situation, while I feel this guy is reckless, esp with his attitude throughout the the thread and losing his license would be no lose. He's the type that causes accidents and has the potential to kill people.

listen to yourself, how am I any more reckless then this girl driving 100 in a temp constructions zone where the speed is 50, I don’t consider doing 150 on a 100 highway with no one around reckless, the worst that could have happened is I would have killed my self and it would have been my own damn fault, I do not consider it the smartest thing to do and I am not justifying going that fast, but its the way I drive on an open highway, I am not speeding through school zones doing 70.

I’m not sure what attitude you are talking about, I have admitted I was going fast, and that it wasn't the smartest thing to do, simple as that. I do have a problem with people telling me I should get the max penalty, if anyone of them were in the same position they would do the exact same thing :)

Superesc

03-04-2005, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

I’m not sure what attitude you are talking about,

Originally posted by yeahisaidit
haha sorry but not all of us drive like little grannies,and dont be mad at me because i can keep my car under control at those speeds, one day you too will be able to drive like a man

DayGlow

03-04-2005, 02:38 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

listen to yourself, how am I any more reckless then this girl driving 100 in a temp constructions zone where the speed is 50, I don’t consider doing 150 on a 100 highway with no one around reckless, the worst that could have happened is I would have killed my self and it would have been my own damn fault, I do not consider it the smartest thing to do and I am not justifying going that fast, but its the way I drive on an open highway, I am not speeding through school zones doing 70.

again with the no one around. The fact that the cop dinged you hasn't sunk in that you were not aware of everything around you.

Doing 50 over is exactly how those country road fatalities happen. You think those people involved thought they weren't in control?

This is the attitude that I am talking about. 50 over is reckless. A person on the road isn't expecting the car they see down the road is doing 150 down the road. What they think is a large gap for them to merge onto the road or cross quickly dissapears because they glanced at you and thought you were far away.

THe worst thing would not being killing yourself, but taking someone with you in your inability to grasp what sort of situation you were in.

Again, there is a huge differnce between someone travelling down a 100 road at 100 at 12:00 in the morning with signs the construction crew forgot to take down and someone travelling down a road 50+ of the regular posted limit.

She went and pled her case and I agree with the reduction. But I'm stating my opinion that people like you who drive 50+ down a highway and think nothing of it do deserve to lose your license.

gran turismo

03-04-2005, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by yeahisaidit

I do not consider it the smartest thing to do and I am not justifying going that fast, but its the way I drive on an open highway

What does this mean? That you're going to continue to speed excessively on an open highway? And you want a reduction in the potential penalty so you don't lose your license? So now you don't lose your license but you continue to drive recklessly. That's great. If this is what you intend on doing, I thank everyone for giving him suggestions on how to beat this ticket.

Audio_Rookie

03-04-2005, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by gran turismo

What does this mean? That you're going to continue to speed excessively on an open highway? And you want a reduction in the potential penalty so you don't lose your license? So now you don't lose your license but you continue to drive recklessly. That's great. If this is what you intend on doing, I thank everyone for giving him suggestions on how to beat this ticket.

I do agree that if there was no one on the road he should have noticed the cop...

but driving fast does not mean driving recklessly. Driving stupid is more dangerous than driving fast. I speed on open highways to, I have yet to get a ticket for it....but i often go 150 or more..never been in accident.

he can only hurt himself and I dont think he should be punished for speeding because he could crash and injur himself, his injury will be his punishment next time he gets in an accident on an open road. He might be able to handle a car going that speed, many can! If he cant then he will injur himself, no one else (on open road).

geeze......I am sure there are more acciudents from stupidity then speeding. I am sure all of you guys being assholes to this guy have done something stupid while driving, or have passed the speed limit.....

DayGlow

03-04-2005, 03:50 PM

:banghead: 50 over the limit isn't stupid and reckless?

Yes he can hurt more than himself. Again, what are there? 2? 3? more fatalities a year out on country roads. Blasting down the road at that speed is dangerous. You say stupidy cause collisions? Well this is a form of stupidy.

This isn'ta discussion of someone who is speeding. This guy has blown through any reasonable idea of what speeding is. 50 over is not speeding. It's dangerous. I don't wish this guy to hurt himself, but his and its seems your attitude is what contributes to many collisions that people are hurt in.

gran turismo

03-04-2005, 04:26 PM

Originally posted by Audio_Rookie

but driving fast does not mean driving recklessly.

Actually, yes it does.

Originally posted by Audio_Rookie

Driving stupid is more dangerous than driving fast.

Well, that depends. I contend that driving fast is stupid.

Originally posted by Audio_Rookie

I speed on open highways to, I have yet to get a ticket for it....but i often go 150 or more..never been in accident.

Consider yourself lucky then.

Originally posted by Audio_Rookie

he can only hurt himself and I dont think he should be punished for speeding because he could crash and injur himself, his injury will be his punishment next time he gets in an accident on an open road. He might be able to handle a car going that speed, many can! If he cant then he will injur himself, no one else (on open road)..

You don't really believe this do you?

The attitude illustrated by this post is what drives me crazy. Too many people think they are excellent drivers who don't make costly mistakes. Road conditions change, the environment around you changes, other people around you do unexpected/stupid things ALL THE TIME. Now, if you're driving at the posted limit you have a MUCH better chance of compensating and avoiding scary situations than if you're speeding excessively.

I know many people who drink and drive continuously and haven't been in an accident or been caught. There's a very good chance that they never will be caught or have an accident either. But who wants to take that chance? I don't believe it's a stretch to transpose this argument to speeding. When something does happen and you're doing 150 km/hour and you hit someone doing 100 km/hour, there's a very good chance you are going to be seriously hurt. For what? The rush of burnin' down the highway or the hour you save on your trip?

BlueGoblin

03-04-2005, 04:30 PM

Its been my belief a long time that speed causes few accidents itself. Usually what causes collisions is inattention, impatience and the driving errors that stem from there.

What speed does is this though; Extra velocity means more energy to dissapate in a collision. Fender benders become minor injury collisions, minor injuries become major injuries or death.

People with more recent physics please correct me, but if I recall, energy increases as a square of the speed involved; What that extra 50 km/h does is expend double the energy of a collision that would have taken place at 100 km/h, or four times that of a collision at 50 km/h.

150+ km/h virtually ensures that serious injuries or death would result in a collision. It may not even be the speeding driver's fault exactly - an oncoming car could swerve or cross the median, a deer could launch across the road, a tyre could blow or a differential could seize (as happened to a friend of mine...). A highway is not a controlled environment, even if you think that there is nobody around. To truly believe that there is nobody else at risk is naive. The obvious hazard is probably not going to be the one that get you.

Singel

03-04-2005, 05:04 PM

I can't believe you people wasted 3 pages helping this asshat.

I hope you lose and your license gets revoked for being such a dumbass. Although I'm sure you'll be able to keep driving, I hope you end up upside down in some farmers field after one of your manly country drives, atleast you won't hurt anybody else. Maybe that'll give you the wake up call you need, you're stupider than a 14 yr. old.

yeahisaidit

03-05-2005, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by DayGlow
:banghead: 50 over the limit isn't stupid and reckless?

Yes he can hurt more than himself. Again, what are there? 2? 3? more fatalities a year out on country roads. Blasting down the road at that speed is dangerous. You say stupidy cause collisions? Well this is a form of stupidy.

This isn'ta discussion of someone who is speeding. This guy has blown through any reasonable idea of what speeding is. 50 over is not speeding. It's dangerous. I don't wish this guy to hurt himself, but his and its seems your attitude is what contributes to many collisions that people are hurt in.

learn to read this is not a COUNTRY road it is a 2 lane divided highway, thx :)

Originally posted by Singel
I can't believe you people wasted 3 pages helping this asshat.

I hope you lose and your license gets revoked for being such a dumbass. Although I'm sure you'll be able to keep driving, I hope you end up upside down in some farmers field after one of your manly country drives, atleast you won't hurt anybody else. Maybe that'll give you the wake up call you need, you're stupider than a 14 yr. old.

you as well, thx :)

Originally posted by Singel
I can't believe you people wasted 3 pages helping this asshat.

Oh and thank you too all of the people who DID help me by wasting three pages

DayGlow

03-05-2005, 11:32 PM

oh geeze, I'm sorry. 2 lane highway? And you were only doing 150 or so down it? Some man you are.

yeahisaidit

03-06-2005, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by DayGlow
oh geeze, I'm sorry. 2 lane highway? And you were only doing 150 or so down it? Some man you are.

yes as in no oncoming traffic :)

StupidWade

03-07-2005, 01:27 PM

The oncoming traffic is less than 100 feet worth of ditch away. At that speed, you'd cross the ditch in less than three seconds if you lost control. You want to rely on some grandpa in the oncoming lanes to make the right decision about which way to swerve to avoid you?

Not that I'm trying to be holier-than-thou. Everyone who gets a new car does a speed test at some point or another. Including cops in their younger days, whether they admit it or not.

You just have to remember, serious problems can crop up in a hell of a hurry at that speed and normal reactions to what seem like minor problems (ie a dog runs out in front of you or you notice a chunk of exhaust pipe on the road) can be enough to break your traction or overwhelm your brakes when you're at high speed.