Virginia

[Beltway]

99+% of the current violators are not being stopped?

[citation needed]

Alps first -- he said "There will be a small reduction in tickets".

[Alps]

99+% of the current violators are not being stopped?

[citation needed]

Alps first -- he said "There will be a small reduction in tickets".

No, you first. You alleged there would be no reduction. I'm tired of you making baseless arguments but then demanding the gnat's ass of support for anyone's opinion that countermands your own.

[Beltway]

99+% of the current violators are not being stopped?

[citation needed]

Alps first -- he said "There will be a small reduction in tickets".

No, you first. You alleged there would be no reduction. I'm tired of you making baseless arguments but then demanding the gnat's ass of support for anyone's opinion that countermands your own.

That's baloney.  You made the claim that there -would- be a reduction.  Then I responded to that. 

[jakeroot]

You made the claim that there -would- be a reduction.

But by your own admission, an amount [less than 100% of drivers] are being stopped and ticketed for exceeding 80 (ergo, some are). How would raising the threshold to 85 not change that?

The onus is on you to prove that drivers are not being stopped for 80+ right now. Keeping in mind that evidence exists to the contrary.

[Beltway]

You made the claim that there -would- be a reduction.

But by your own admission, an amount [less than 100% of drivers] are being stopped and ticketed for exceeding 80 (ergo, some are). How would raising the threshold to 85 not change that?
The onus is on you to prove that drivers are not being stopped for 80+ right now.

I don't have to prove anything, and I never said that some might not be ticketed in the range 81-85, just that the police won't necessarily issue less tickets; they could legitimately issue 10 times the number of tickets after the limit is raised if they wanted to.

Keeping in mind that evidence exists to the contrary.  "

93 mph in a 55 mph zone.   That is not "evidence," that is a complaint post by someone who was, well, driving recklessly.  US-211, not even a freeway.  These type posts never get into whatever else he might have violated.  "Jalopnik is a news and opinion website about cars..."

[jakeroot]

I never said that some might not be ticketed in the range 81-85

Yes you did:

Why would there be any reduction in tickets, when 99+% of the current violators are not being stopped?

The point is that the 81-85 threshold will no longer be a ticketable offence (assuming less than 20 over). Ergo, fewer ticketable opportunities, ergo less tickets.

[sprjus4]

93 mph in a 55 mph zone.   That is not "evidence," that is a complaint post by someone who was, well, driving recklessly.  US-211, not even a freeway.  These type posts never get into whatever else he might have violated.  "Jalopnik is a news and opinion website about cars..."

Reckless, agreed, but certainly didn't warrant jail time. That's a separate issue aside from the 80 mph threshold being increased though.

[Beltway]

I never said that some might not be ticketed in the range 81-85

Yes you did:

Why would there be any reduction in tickets, when 99+% of the current violators are not being stopped?

No, I didn't make a declaration, I posed a question to anyone reading.

As far as that number goes, for example, a drive from Richmond to Washington, with my cruise control set at 77 mph, probably 1/10 of the vehicles pass me going at least 85 mph.  Most of the time I see no police stop of a vehicle off on the shoulder on that whole trip.  Minimum AADT is over 100,000, so that is lot of vehicles.  Ergo, I could go say 87 mph with impunity, assuming I didn't do something dumb like pass a marked police car at that speed.

The point is that the 81-85 threshold will no longer be a ticketable offence (assuming less than 20 over). Ergo, fewer ticketable opportunities, ergo less tickets.

Ergo, that assumes that the police issue will less tickets.  If they wanted to crack down on what I posted above, they could increase tickets of 86+ a hundred fold.

[Beltway]

93 mph in a 55 mph zone.   That is not "evidence," that is a complaint post by someone who was, well, driving recklessly.  US-211, not even a freeway.  These type posts never get into whatever else he might have violated.  "Jalopnik is a news and opinion website about cars..."

Reckless, agreed, but certainly didn't warrant jail time. That's a separate issue aside from the 80 mph threshold being increased though.

Well, like I intimated, when I see an article like that, I am left wondering what other major infractions were committed that he didn't post, that led to it being not just a whopper of a speeding ticket, but a couple days in jail as well.  Disorderly conduct can lead to getting locked up, for example.

[jakeroot]

I never said that some might not be ticketed in the range 81-85

Yes you did:

Why would there be any reduction in tickets, when 99+% of the current violators are not being stopped?

No, I didn't make a declaration, I posed a question to anyone reading.

I don't care if it was a question, a rhetorical question, or a statement. You implied that ticketing wouldn't go down. I explained to you why that's ridiculous.

The point is that the 81-85 threshold will no longer be a ticketable offence (assuming less than 20 over). Ergo, fewer ticketable opportunities, ergo less tickets.

Ergo, that assumes that the police issue will less tickets.  If they wanted to crack down on what I posted above, the could increase tickets of 86+ a hundred fold.

They will issue zero tickets for reckless driving under 85 (assuming less than 20 over), not "less". Whether they do or don't right now is irrelevant. It's a matter of law.

[sprjus4]

^

Not to mention places such a Hopewell and Emporia who patiently wait along I-295 and I-95 respectively for those going 81 mph or higher then hit the blue lights. Driving through Hopewell weekly in the past few years, almost always saw them camping out in the median where the interstate briefly enters city limits.

Emporia has gotten better over the past few years, though in the past they had patrols frequently watching the highway. Same applies to US-58.

[sprjus4]

Update on the 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan planning process for the Hampton Roads region.

Comments were received on the candidate projects, notably from the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC).

They have and will continue to oppose the following projects -
1) New Route 460 (Suffolk to Zuni) - New location freeway paralleling the existing US-460. Expensive, little benefits, severe wetland impact, score poor on SmartScale, VDOT scrapped.

2) Route 460/58/13 Connector - Upgrade to interstate standards & potential 8-lane widening of US-58 between I-664 and Suffolk. Existing capacity adequate through 2040, enormous impacts on wetlands, VDOT scrapped study.

3) Southeastern Pkwy & Greenbelt - New location freeway through Chesapeake and Virginia Beach paralleling Clearfield Ave, Elbow Rd, Dam Neck Rd, and Oceana Blvd. High wetland impact. "Climate change" makes impact worse today more than 2010.

4) Nimmo Pkwy Phase VII-B - New location roadway parallel to narrow and windy Sandbridge Rd. Serious wildlife, habitat, and wetland impact.

They also recommend "close scrutiny" for the any Bowers Hill Interchange proposals, which in their terms means they will oppose any proposal once its officially put out there. Concepts were revealed earlier this year, however they are now re-evaluating it to include a continuous HO/T lane network through the interchange tying in with a potential I-664 HO/T system.

Throughout March, cost estimates and prioritization scores will be developed for all of the candidate projects.

Finally, an interactive map displaying all of the candidate projects has been created - http://hrpdc-gis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=b8852614e73a42bfa3730963d216f2ab

https://www.hrtpo.org/uploads/docs/030420%2000A%20Full%20Agenda%28new%29.pdf

[NJRoadfan]

The problem that people have with Virginia's reckless driving stature is that the bar is set particularly low and its classed as a class 1 criminal misdemeanor (the highest level and equivalent to a DUI, simple assault, or petit larceny). Driving 10mph over the speed limit in a 70mph zone is considered reckless driving and gives one a criminal record... which is ridiculous. The flow of traffic on the Richmond to Washington stretch of I-95 tends to be around 75-80mph outside of rush hours, which makes just about everyone on the road a "reckless" driving criminal depending on the current speed limit.

My home state of NJ has a reckless driving stature (NJSA 39:4-96) that is written similar to Virginia's. the biggest difference is that there are no speed limit thresholds in the law and its not a criminal misdemeanor. In practice people are rarely charged with it because you have to actually be driving recklessly to be charged with it. People usually get a ticket for it in conjunction with a DUI, a serious accident, or speeding really really above the speed limit (usually 100+mph and/or street racing which is also another chargeable offense). Basically you really have to screw up to be charged with it. Even then its not a criminal charge (that I can find, DUI isn't a criminal charge in NJ either), although it has possible jail time associated with it.

[Beltway]

Not to mention places such a Hopewell and Emporia who patiently wait along I-295 and I-95 respectively for those going 81 mph or higher then hit the blue lights. Driving

How do you know they "hit the lights" at 81 mph?

Do you do ride-alongs with the police?

[Beltway]

I never said that some might not be ticketed in the range 81-85

Yes you did:

Why would there be any reduction in tickets, when 99+% of the current violators are not being stopped?

No, I didn't make a declaration, I posed a question to anyone reading.

I don't care if it was a question, a rhetorical question, or a statement. You implied that ticketing wouldn't go down. I explained to you why that's ridiculous.

It could stay the same or go up, as I explained, whether or not the 81 to 85 range was being targeted.  Besides, that range is still well over a limit of 70 mph and still can be ticketed for speeding.

I entered the subthread when the claim was made (in so many words) that total ticketing revenues would drop.  That is not provable either way.

[Alps]

Not to mention places such a Hopewell and Emporia who patiently wait along I-295 and I-95 respectively for those going 81 mph or higher then hit the blue lights. Driving

How do you know they "hit the lights" at 81 mph?

Do you do ride-alongs with the police?

Calmmmmmmmmmmmm your questions. Calmmmmmmmmm.

[Verlanka]

93 mph in a 55 mph zone.   That is not "evidence," that is a complaint post by someone who was, well, driving recklessly.  US-211, not even a freeway.  These type posts never get into whatever else he might have violated.  "Jalopnik is a news and opinion website about cars..."

Reckless, agreed, but certainly didn't warrant jail time.

Especially since he was isolated from the world during the time in jail, according to what he wrote.

[Beltway]

Not to mention places such a Hopewell and Emporia who patiently wait along I-295 and I-95 respectively for those going 81 mph or higher then hit the blue lights. Driving

How do you know they "hit the lights" at 81 mph?
Do you do ride-alongs with the police?

Calmmmmmmmmmmmm your questions. Calmmmmmmmmm.

Ummmmmmmmm  the comment provoked an inquiry  Hmmmmmmmm.

[Beltway]

93 mph in a 55 mph zone.   That is not "evidence," that is a complaint post by someone who was, well, driving recklessly.  US-211, not even a freeway.  These type posts never get into whatever else he might have violated.  "Jalopnik is a news and opinion website about cars..."

Reckless, agreed, but certainly didn't warrant jail time.

Especially since he was isolated from the world during the time in jail, according to what he wrote.

Jail does that to a degree, but they didn't put him in solitary per what he wrote.

[cpzilliacus]

Update on the 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan planning process for the Hampton Roads region.

Comments were received on the candidate projects, notably from the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC).

Has the SELC ever expressed any favorable comments about any proposed highway project?

[cpzilliacus]

Not to mention places such a Hopewell and Emporia who patiently wait along I-295 and I-95 respectively for those going 81 mph or higher then hit the blue lights. Driving

How do you know they "hit the lights" at 81 mph?

Because at least one (and maybe more) City of Hopewell sheriffs have said so to the news media.

I am not going to post a link since you can look it up yourself - so do not ask.

[sprjus4]

Not to mention places such a Hopewell and Emporia who patiently wait along I-295 and I-95 respectively for those going 81 mph or higher then hit the blue lights. Driving

How do you know they "hit the lights" at 81 mph?

Because at least one (and maybe more) City of Hopewell sheriffs have said so to the news media.

I am not going to post a link since you can look it up yourself - so do not ask.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpt8-HcEYy8

3:09

The assistant city manager of Hopewell said, "We don't ticket until over 10 miles over the speed limit", which is 81 mph, conveniently where the reckless driving threshold begins. I would be willing to bet when the speed limit was 65 mph, they still didn't start ticketing until 81 mph.

Why ticket at 80 mph or below when it would just be a regular speeding ticket?

$1.8 million collected in speeding tickets in one year. That's a speed trap, and one that's taking advantage of that reckless driving threshold.

[LM117]

Not to mention places such a Hopewell and Emporia who patiently wait along I-295 and I-95 respectively for those going 81 mph or higher then hit the blue lights. Driving

How do you know they "hit the lights" at 81 mph?

Because at least one (and maybe more) City of Hopewell sheriffs have said so to the news media.

I am not going to post a link since you can look it up yourself - so do not ask.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpt8-HcEYy8

3:09

The assistant city manager of Hopewell said, "We don't ticket until over 10 miles over the speed limit", which is 81 mph, conveniently where the reckless driving threshold begins. I would be willing to bet when the speed limit was 65 mph, they still didn't start ticketing until 81 mph.

Why ticket at 80 mph or below when it would just be a regular speeding ticket?

$1.8 million collected in speeding tickets in one year. That's a speed trap, and one that's taking advantage of that reckless driving threshold.

Hopewell's delegate at the time was also responsible for getting rid of a budget amendment that was passed in 2012 that reduced the amount of ticket revenue local governments could keep.

https://www.progress-index.com/news/20161001/another-chance-for-hopewells-million-dollar-mile

[Beltway]

Not to mention places such a Hopewell and Emporia who patiently wait along I-295 and I-95 respectively for those going 81 mph or higher then hit the blue lights. Driving

How do you know they "hit the lights" at 81 mph?

Because at least one (and maybe more) City of Hopewell sheriffs have said so to the news media.
I am not going to post a link since you can look it up yourself - so do not ask.

There was a newspaper article posted a year or so ago in one of these threads that quoted them as saying that they don't ticket stop someone until beyond 85 mph.

"CBS This Morning" is a tabloid show.

[jakeroot]

"CBS This Morning" is a tabloid show.

shit man, all news media is. But we don't all have access to scholarly articles. Even those of us who do (hi!) don't care enough to scour around for hours to prove a point that you'll just refute anyways. Arguing with you really is pointless.