Got pulled over for going 7 MPH over.

[texaskdog]

Granted it was 82 in a 75 and I just got a warning.  So I went 79 after that and had people running me down.  This was west of Brackettville Texas two days ago.  NEVER been pulled over for speeding within 10 before.

[Roadgeekteen]

I've never seen anyone get pulled over for 7 over in Massachusetts. I suppose if the speed limit is higher, like 75 or 80, states might be more strict on speeding. Isn't 7 still almost within the margin of error for radars?

[PNWRoadgeek]

I've never seen anyone get pulled over for 7 over in Massachusetts. I suppose if the speed limit is higher, like 75 or 80, states might be more strict on speeding. Isn't 7 still almost within the margin of error for radars?

I'm pretty sure, yes. I've never seen anyone going 7 over in Oregon that got a ticket or pulled over. Though it makes sense considering our speed limits don't go above 70 on rural freeways and 65 on urban freeways.

[Rothman]

Meh.  Getting pulled over for single digits was a lot more common in the 1900s.  Interesting that it still happens from time-to-time.

[Flint1979]

In Michigan you generally can go within reason over the speed limit like 5 over is alright. I know the Michigan State Police don't start pulling people over until they are doing 11 or more mph over the speed limit. Saginaw Township Police will sit in school zones and pull people over, they generally don't start until about 7 or so over. 82 in a 75 here probably wouldn't have got you pulled over.

[Flint1979]

I've never seen anyone get pulled over for 7 over in Massachusetts. I suppose if the speed limit is higher, like 75 or 80, states might be more strict on speeding. Isn't 7 still almost within the margin of error for radars?

Michigan has 75 mph zones and they aren't that strict on going the speed limit. They did a sting in Detroit where the speed limit is 55 and 70 on the freeways and didn't pull anyone over for doing under 85 and got several people for going over a hundred. I even remember back in the day when Jack Morris got pulled over on I-75 and was doing a hundred and they let him go because he was Jack Morris.

[thspfc]

Driving marginally above the speed limit is a calculated risk that most people, myself included, frequently choose to take. The risk is that you get pulled over for blatantly breaking the law. 7 over is indeed blatantly breaking the law. 2 over? Maybe not so much, due to speedometer/radar gun inaccuracies.

The way I look at it is, the cops are not legally or morally doing anything wrong when they pull you over for driving above the speed limit. 7, 15, or 30 over, doesn't matter, you're breaking the law. 7 over is comfortably illegal, and you have to weigh the benefits of driving faster against the small chance that you encounter a cop that's bored, having a bad day, has an agenda, or all three.

[Bobby5280]

Granted it was 82 in a 75 and I just got a warning.  So I went 79 after that and had people running me down.  This was west of Brackettville Texas two days ago.  NEVER been pulled over for speeding within 10 before.

I always keep my speed within 5 of the limit when I'm driving through Montague County (Bowie, TX area) on US-287. Various other speed traps can be found around Texas.

Oklahoma has some bad speed traps too. A warning for anyone driving in the Lawton area: if you're visiting Medicine Park or the Wichita Mountains watch out for the zone on OK-49 just West of the Love's store near I-44. There are three different speed limits in short succession. Most times I drive out there I see someone pulled over by the local police.

[ElishaGOtis]

A couple people I knew allegedly got a ticket for 76 in the 70 zone on I-10 in FLORIDA... I've often seen cases where officers will give you a break by writing a lesser ticket (I.e. only writing for 76 when clocked at 87 or something), but these were both legit 76mph tickets.

Speed limit 75 plz  

[Max Rockatansky]

The last time I was pulled over was in January 2016 by Texas Highway Patrol.  It was apparently for "being within 500 feet of a vehicle at 70 MPH" on I-20.  The real reason was that I had Florida plates and wasn't on I-10 (the officer even said what the reason really was).  I got a warning ticket after I told the officer I was on a PCS move to California.

[vdeane]

I've heard of people getting pulled over for doing 85 in 80 zones in Wyoming.  IIRC, it even happened in the "I-90 Surge" video series on the Out of Spec Motoring YouTube channel (and also on another video on that channel).

I figure that at least some of the jurisdictions that post higher limits like 80 did so because they wanted the number on the sign to match the actual speed limit, and not because of wanting to allow people to go faster.

[Scott5114]

Growing up in Oklahoma, I was always told that the tolerance was only 5 mph.

[jeffandnicole]

"Margin of Error" is a made up cry by people who keep pushing for more and more leniency with speeding tickets.

There are ways to test your speedometer.

There are ways to test speed enforcement devices.

Most people doing a certain speed over the limit are doing it because they're comfortable doing that speed.  They're not going 82 in a 75 because they think their speedometer is broken and they believe their 82 is really 75, and everyone else they're passing are cautious drivers driving under the limit.

[jlam]

Not me, but a friend once got pulled over for going 49 in a 45. It really depends on the cop, though, as I've gone a higher continuous speed over the speed limit, with a cop right behind me, without getting pulled over. They might've just been finishing their shift, as it was pretty late into the evening.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

There's a part of me that thinks the cop's goal was achieved by this post - coming here and talking about it, so it gets people talking, or in other instances where anecdotes start to spread around in the community that Joe got stopped for 3-5 over and some people start to fret about it enough for (temporary) behavior changes. Making examples of people just because they can is part of the job, and the pain of this still lingers with me.

I don't know if you got picked out or if you were largely the only vehicle around, which while I don't speed excessively, you can't claim to go the speed of traffic very easily if there is none so I typically am more careful when there are few/no other cars around.

[Scott5114]

There's a part of me that thinks the cop's goal was achieved by this post - coming here and talking about it, so it gets people talking, or in other instances where anecdotes start to spread around in the community that Joe got stopped for 3-5 over and some people start to fret about it enough for (temporary) behavior changes. Making examples of people just because they can is part of the job, and the pain of this still lingers with me.

This generously presupposes that speed enforcement is done for the purpose of modifying behavior.

[TXtoNJ]

7 over is indeed blatantly breaking the law

Depends on the jurisdiction. In prima facie states, it explicitly is not.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

There's a part of me that thinks the cop's goal was achieved by this post - coming here and talking about it, so it gets people talking, or in other instances where anecdotes start to spread around in the community that Joe got stopped for 3-5 over and some people start to fret about it enough for (temporary) behavior changes. Making examples of people just because they can is part of the job, and the pain of this still lingers with me.

This generously presupposes that speed enforcement is done for the purpose of modifying behavior.

I mean, I can't disagree with that, although I think it got lost in my post that the "behavior modification" is meant through intimidation and not being your friendly neighborhood cop looking out for you.

The point is to make an example out of someone so people go "there is no safe speeding, 1 over and they might come fuck me up."

[texaskdog]

There's a part of me that thinks the cop's goal was achieved by this post - coming here and talking about it, so it gets people talking, or in other instances where anecdotes start to spread around in the community that Joe got stopped for 3-5 over and some people start to fret about it enough for (temporary) behavior changes. Making examples of people just because they can is part of the job, and the pain of this still lingers with me.

I don't know if you got picked out or if you were largely the only vehicle around, which while I don't speed excessively, you can't claim to go the speed of traffic very easily if there is none so I typically am more careful when there are few/no other cars around.

Generally I'm one of many but not in this stretch.  We had a 4 day trip to go see her dad who was in the hospital.  Of course two days later we break up, only real break we got all week was the warning. 

[mgk920]

Unless it is something really egregious (ie, an active school zone) or if it is due to neighborhood complaints, the City of Appleton's (WI) PD won't touch anyone for below 15 over.  They have many more important things to worry about.

Mike

[jeffandnicole]

7 over is indeed blatantly breaking the law

Depends on the jurisdiction. In prima facie states, it explicitly is not.

You are explicitly not understanding what prima facie means.  And it's certainly not a numeric number of the miles per hour you're allowed to go over a signed limit.

In states with prima facie speed laws, such as Texas, laws are written such as "all speed limits are considered 'prima facie' limits. Prima facie limits are those limits which on the face of it, are reasonable and prudent under normal conditions."

Note "Normal Conditions".  What Prima Facie is referencing is that the limit is what one should be driving at or under when conditions are proper for such driving.  What it means is when there's a rainstorm or snowstorm and someone is driving 75 in a 75, a cop has the right to pull them over for driving an unsafe speed or cite "unsafe speed" in a police report after the person was in a crash.  The cop can't write a ticket for X over the limit because he/she can't make up a temporary limit on the spot.  They can use an all-encompassing "unsafe speed" or "careless driving" statute to write a ticket though.

Does the "prima facie" definition translate to allowing motorists to drive above the limit without penalty?  While the NMA and the Internet will like you to think that, it's not necessarily true.  Let's say, again, in Texas, you were stopped and ticketed for doing 82 in a 75. A cop has the absolute authority to write that ticket. You would then need to go to court and convince the judge that Texas law and engineering practices were incorrect and that doing 82 was a safe and prudent speed at the time.  If you were on a highway with great sightlines and light traffic, maybe the judge will grant you your argument. If you were doing 82 and zipping around heavy traffic, you probably aren't going to win your argument.  You may also want to bring documentation, pictures, etc to support your position.

Texas' Administrative Code on Prima Facia Speed Limits (And again, note, nowhere does it say driving faster than the limit at X mph is Prima Facia permitted):

https://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_rloc=&p_tloc=&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=43&pt=1&ch=25&rl=21

[Rothman]

Dagnabbit.  That "hey, you can't post since a new post came in" seems to have swallowed up my own "Huh?" response to the prima facie nonsense.

[wxfree]

Americans have an interesting relationship with the law.  We love ideals, but we hate rules.  I believe that we have a societal obligation to obey the laws.  To me, it's a matter of personal discipline.  Traffic laws not only limit speeds, but also remind us that everyone else has an equal right to the use of the roads, that impeding or endangering someone else in order to get ahead, or for personal enjoyment, is not an entitlement.  Obeying the law is also an act of patriotism.  Complying with speed limits and even paying your taxes are recognitions of the importance of doing what's necessary to make your country better.  Trying to get away with misconduct is unpatriotic.  This obligation to obey the law also applies to legislators and administrators.  In our system of law, limits on personal conduct must be the least restrictive necessary in order to bring about the objective, such as public safety or the administration of justice.

Americans, not unreasonably, are described as ungovernable.  Even when they want to perform their patriotic duty and contribute to a just and secure society, they don't like being told that they have to.  We like laws that we can ignore because they don't work.  We often set speed limits that are too low, and then don't take them seriously because they're not reasonable.  We set limits on immigration that are too low, and then when that brings about illegal immigration we don't take it seriously because our laws don't work.  We ban drugs and gambling because having a good time is a sin, and then don't take those laws seriously because the harm in enforcing the law is greater than the harm the law was meant to prevent.  I've been to a festival in Austin that was heavily patrolled by local law enforcement, and people were openly and obviously smoking illegal stuff.  As long as they behaved themselves, nobody cared.  It was like a sample of what living in a place with reasonable laws would be like.  Of course, there are drugs that are much worse, just like there are places where it's truly necessary to go slow, but the disrespect we have for the law, and the disrespect that the law teaches us by being too strict, makes getting away with crime into a game, makes law enforcement and their protectees see each other as enemies, and takes away from the idea that you should make good decisions because it's good for you and for your country rather than because someone is forcing you to.

I'm legalistic.  I believe that laws should be enforced strictly.  Enforcement is strict, but the same strictness applies to those who write the statutes, the written will of the legislature, which determines how the principles of law are to be carried out in the area subject to that legislature's jurisdiction.  They're required to write them in the least restrictive way necessary to accomplish the objective, such that strict enforcement is not unreasonable or unworkable.  Our duty is not to ignore badly written laws, but to replace the legislators who write them and to demand better.

[Max Rockatansky]

As I've gotten older I've found myself having less respect for stringent adherence to speed limits.  I'm far less of a target for being stopped now that I'm not really all that young anymore and typically have my wife with me.  Societal norms around here and CHP enforcement practices have made at 7 MPH over the limit acceptable.

[SEWIGuy]

Americans have an interesting relationship with the law.  We love ideals, but we hate rules.  I believe that we have a societal obligation to obey the laws.  To me, it's a matter of personal discipline.  Traffic laws not only limit speeds, but also remind us that everyone else has an equal right to the use of the roads, that impeding or endangering someone else in order to get ahead, or for personal enjoyment, is not an entitlement.  Obeying the law is also an act of patriotism.  Complying with speed limits and even paying your taxes are recognitions of the importance of doing what's necessary to make your country better.  Trying to get away with misconduct is unpatriotic.  This obligation to obey the law also applies to legislators and administrators.  In our system of law, limits on personal conduct must be the least restrictive necessary in order to bring about the objective, such as public safety or the administration of justice.

Americans, not unreasonably, are described as ungovernable.  Even when they want to perform their patriotic duty and contribute to a just and secure society, they don't like being told that they have to.  We like laws that we can ignore because they don't work.  We often set speed limits that are too low, and then don't take them seriously because they're not reasonable.  We set limits on immigration that are too low, and then when that brings about illegal immigration we don't take it seriously because our laws don't work.  We ban drugs and gambling because having a good time is a sin, and then don't take those laws seriously because the harm in enforcing the law is greater than the harm the law was meant to prevent.  I've been to a festival in Austin that was heavily patrolled by local law enforcement, and people were openly and obviously smoking illegal stuff.  As long as they behaved themselves, nobody cared.  It was like a sample of what living in a place with reasonable laws would be like.  Of course, there are drugs that are much worse, just like there are places where it's truly necessary to go slow, but the disrespect we have for the law, and the disrespect that the law teaches us by being too strict, makes getting away with crime into a game, makes law enforcement and their protectees see each other as enemies, and takes away from the idea that you should make good decisions because it's good for you and for your country rather than because someone is forcing you to.

I'm legalistic.  I believe that laws should be enforced strictly.  Enforcement is strict, but the same strictness applies to those who write the statutes, the written will of the legislature, which determines how the principles of law are to be carried out in the area subject to that legislature's jurisdiction.  They're required to write them in the least restrictive way necessary to accomplish the objective, such that strict enforcement is not unreasonable or unworkable.  Our duty is not to ignore badly written laws, but to replace the legislators who write them and to demand better.

How can following the laws be considered patriotic, when the entire beginning of the country was about rebelling against "unjust" laws?

Anyway, we don't have time for strictly enforcing every law on the books. I have a life to lead. So I will continue going 5-10 over. I will jaywalk when I go to the restaurant across the street. I guess that makes me unpatriotic and ungovernable in your eyes. So be it.