Got pulled over for going 7 MPH over.

Started by texaskdog, December 13, 2024, 08:01:30 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Rothman

Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.


wxfree

Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 03:28:36 PM
Quote from: wxfree on December 14, 2024, 03:10:54 PMAmericans 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.

My point is that the obligation of the law, to limit personal freedom only as actually necessary for safety and justice, is binding on legislators and administrators, and that laws should not be unjust, so that strict enforcement is not unreasonable or burdensome on those not engaged in harmful activity.  If speed limits are too low, they should be raised, not ignored.  They should be at a level at which enforcement promotes safety.  If laws against jaywalking don't promote safety, they should be repealed.  A personal complaint of mine is laws about sidewalks.  I'm required to walk on the left side of the street unless there's a sidewalk.  In places, there's a sidewalk on one side, and then it ends, and then there's a sidewalk on the other side.  The laws says that I should cross the street repeatedly to stay on the sidewalk when it's safer to walk on the left side, and use the sidewalk on that side when there is one.  This should be fixed.

I was speaking of ideals.  I'm not saying "don't speed."  I was writing about something I've been thinking about for years.  My point about patriotism is that the laws should be written in such a way that following them is patriotic, not in a way that penalizes reasonable and prudent conduct.  The "law," the Constitution and our principles of government, imposes an obligation on the legislators to write the statutes, which are directives for how the principles of law are to be carried out, in the most freedom-promoting way that brings about safety and justice, and imposes an obligation on the people to follow those laws with a mind toward those same goals of safety and justice.

The American spirit is rebellious.  That isn't wrong.  It can be a virtue as much as it can as much be a vice.  The intent influences the direction in which the outcome will tend, by which I mean that even in a rebellious spirit, an intent toward justice tends toward an outcome being just in the same way that an intent toward selfishness and disregard for the public good tends toward outcomes in favor of those things.  What's patriotic is an intent toward our national values of equality and justice, and writing and following laws with those values in mind.
I'd like to buy a vowel, Alex.  What is E?

Rothman

Someone doesn't seem to understand that those high-falutin' values have little to do with our actual country values, which are much better reflected in who our current political and economic system protects, specifically in whose rights and whose wealth are protected.

Considering how the system is resistant to change to change those parameters, any broad appeal to equality and justice is pretty silly.

All of this contributes to actually tying patriotism to rebellion, not conformity.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

wxfree

I'm a philosophical thinker.  To me, there's value in understanding principles and motivations, because they help us understand behaviors and outcomes even when they seem unrelated to those behaviors and outcomes.  My rant wasn't motivated by this discussion, but is something I've been thinking about for a long time.  I know this isn't a philosophy forum, but often writing something out helps me to understand my own thoughts better.  I agree with what's being said, and my high-falutin' (a description I don't disagree with) words are meant to inspire thought, not to comment on behavior.

My own choice is to follow the laws.  That's my choice, and in a way it's an act of rebellion because society doesn't like it.  I do it for the reason I described, personal discipline and a recognition of the equal right to the use of the road held by everyone else.  More broadly, it's about the right of the people to live in a free and just society.  It isn't even really about following the law as much as deciding to do what I believe is right, which is to abstain from impairing anyone else's rights.
I'd like to buy a vowel, Alex.  What is E?

vdeane

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 13, 2024, 11:37:12 PM"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.
True, but I would not want to be going (according to my car) the exact speed limit and then get a ticket because of my car's speedometer and/or the camera being a mph or two off.  Not to mention that most people have analog speedometers, and cruise control will often have the car vary by +/- 1 mph from what it's set for.  So having some buffer is reasonable.  Then again, I'm defining "some" as something like 3 mph, not the typical 10 mph.  But I'd also like to see our speed limits raised to reasonable levels before enforcing so strictly.

I'm not sure how to test my car's speedometer scientifically, though I expect that it's accurate because it usually isn't right on or within 1 mph of the "your speed" signs and based on the distance I go in an hour on the Thruway.  I've found most cars are off by more, though always on the side of being slower than what the speedometer says (so my Civic's 70 is probably closer to 72 on most cars).

Quote from: wxfree on December 14, 2024, 03:10:54 PMAmericans 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.
I feel like there's another reason why we have overly strict laws combined with lax enforcement: it basically allows the police to go after anyone if they want to, since if everyone is a lawbreaker, anyone can be stopped at any time.

Honestly, as someone with Asperger's, I wish we had a system where the law was both reasonable and enforced.  Having unreasonable laws with lax/no enforcement is just a minefield.  Figuring out what the "real law" is instead of the stated law is hard for me and not a game I want to have to play, nor do I want to have to vary how I treat certain laws by where I am.  Bringing it to speed limits specifically, if the sign says X, I don't want what the "real" speed limit is to vary by jurisdiction, nor do I want to have to figure it out.  I want it to just be X, everywhere.  I'd love to give up my usual "5 over on surface roads, 7 over on freeways", but to do that without it feeling like I'm crawling and having roadtrips take a lot longer, the speed limits (especially on the interstate system) would need to be raised to reasonable levels.  My trigger for that would probably be NY raising most of the 65 zones to 70 (especially on the Thruway), especially as speed cameras are on the rise, and every jurisdiction has their own (often not published) tolerance on those.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Max Rockatansky

If anything this thread proves there is probably too much analysis of speed limits in general.  If you don't drive like a dickhead then you probably aren't getting pulled over often.

texaskdog

I didn't think 7 over was "driving like a dickhead".  After that I went 4 over and had people riding my bumper for an hour.

wxfree

Besides the funny language, that's what the speed limits should be.  The nearest number divisible by 5 below the "minimum dickhead speed" in good conditions.

That's basically what I recommend to others who don't have my views on driving, which is everyone.  Keep up with traffic, don't try to leave everyone behind, and you probably won't be bothered.  It really has nothing to do with numbers.  You can go below the limit and still be driving aggressively and dangerously.
I'd like to buy a vowel, Alex.  What is E?

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: texaskdog on December 14, 2024, 05:04:41 PMI didn't think 7 over was "driving like a dickhead".  After that I went 4 over and had people riding my bumper for an hour.

Hence why emphasized it wasn't likely to happen often.  If you drive enough you're probably getting pulled over at least a couple times in a lifetime.

vdeane

Quote from: wxfree on December 14, 2024, 05:11:07 PMThat's basically what I recommend to others who don't have my views on driving, which is everyone.
I honestly don't understand it.  Who would prefer our current system of having an "official limit" and a separate "real" limit that isn't publicized and which is inconsistent between jurisdictions over having the number on the sign being reasonable with that being the "real" limit?
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 03:28:36 PMHow 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.

Why not skimp out on the bill at the restaurant? 


SEWIGuy

I think the reason is the opposite. We make a lot of laws because we like legislating to tell people what to do (and not to do.) Law enforcement is left with a bunch of stuff that is hard to enforce and inconsistent, and ye some agencies use those inconsistencies to do what they want and strictly enforce. But many, if not most, just pick and choose what they emphasize enforcing given limited resources.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2024, 05:34:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 03:28:36 PMHow 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.

Why not skimp out on the bill at the restaurant? 

Because someone else is harmed through my theft. Way different than a victimless crime like jaywalking.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: vdeane on December 14, 2024, 04:50:57 PMI'm not sure how to test my car's speedometer scientifically, though I expect that it's accurate because it usually isn't right on or within 1 mph of the "your speed" signs and based on the distance I go in an hour on the Thruway.  I've found most cars are off by more, though always on the side of being slower than what the speedometer says (so my Civic's 70 is probably closer to 72 on most cars).

In the older days:

When I've tested my speedometer, the best way I found is to use the milemarker signage, driving at 60 mph.  If I'm  doing it in 60 seconds, I'm good. And I'll do it a few times at different markers, in case a few of the signs are slightly off.

In the present day:

Use a phone app that shows the speed you're going, and compare it to the speedometer.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 05:41:31 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2024, 05:34:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 03:28:36 PMHow 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.

Why not skimp out on the bill at the restaurant? 

Because someone else is harmed through my theft. Way different than a victimless crime like jaywalking.

Well, until someone is hit.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2024, 05:47:05 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 05:41:31 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2024, 05:34:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 03:28:36 PMHow 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.

Why not skimp out on the bill at the restaurant? 

Because someone else is harmed through my theft. Way different than a victimless crime like jaywalking.

Well, until someone is hit.


That's a risk I am willing to take.

texaskdog

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 14, 2024, 05:15:16 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on December 14, 2024, 05:04:41 PMI didn't think 7 over was "driving like a dickhead".  After that I went 4 over and had people riding my bumper for an hour.

Hence why emphasized it wasn't likely to happen often.  If you drive enough you're probably getting pulled over at least a couple times in a lifetime.

I drove Lyft 5 years and got pulled over 4 times, plus 2 more times, 6 warnings in 12 years so not doing too bad.  Helps being old and white though.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 05:48:54 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2024, 05:47:05 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 05:41:31 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2024, 05:34:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 03:28:36 PMHow 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.

Why not skimp out on the bill at the restaurant? 

Because someone else is harmed through my theft. Way different than a victimless crime like jaywalking.

Well, until someone is hit.


That's a risk I am willing to take.

A 2nd victim is the innocent person that was obeying the traffic laws, along with passengers, extending to family and friends. Then they're possibly out of work if injured physically or mentally.  And they may need to pay a deductible for the repairs on the vehicle, along with other costs related to auto accidents.

I'm not saying I'm perfect, just for an FYI. I'm just saying that people pick and choose what 'crimes' they want to commit to rebell against unjust laws, and often they're picking crimes that won't give them police records. 

Scott5114

Quote from: wxfree on December 14, 2024, 03:10:54 PMWe ban drugs and gambling because having a good time is a sin...

Maybe your state does. ;)

Really, though, the point your post makes is a part of the culture that varies from region to region. Nevada's philosophy tends to be to get by with as few laws as possible. Even those seem to be borderline optional, because if you break the law, how would anyone know? Most of the state is empty, so who's going to complain? And if they do, are the police going to bother to show up?

Unfortunately, this also seems to apply to things where compliance and enforcement are really in everyone's best interest, like stopping for red lights and having license plates...
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

wxfree

Quote from: vdeane on December 14, 2024, 04:50:57 PMI feel like there's another reason why we have overly strict laws combined with lax enforcement: it basically allows the police to go after anyone if they want to, since if everyone is a lawbreaker, anyone can be stopped at any time.

Honestly, as someone with Asperger's, I wish we had a system where the law was both reasonable and enforced.  Having unreasonable laws with lax/no enforcement is just a minefield.  Figuring out what the "real law" is instead of the stated law is hard for me and not a game I want to have to play, nor do I want to have to vary how I treat certain laws by where I am.  Bringing it to speed limits specifically, if the sign says X, I don't want what the "real" speed limit is to vary by jurisdiction, nor do I want to have to figure it out.  I want it to just be X, everywhere.  I'd love to give up my usual "5 over on surface roads, 7 over on freeways", but to do that without it feeling like I'm crawling and having roadtrips take a lot longer, the speed limits (especially on the interstate system) would need to be raised to reasonable levels.  My trigger for that would probably be NY raising most of the 65 zones to 70 (especially on the Thruway), especially as speed cameras are on the rise, and every jurisdiction has their own (often not published) tolerance on those.

There's a legal precedent that the people have a right to be informed as to what conduct is prohibited by law and what isn't.  Laws can be declared unconstitutional for vagueness.  I think that's why the famous Montana speed limit was struck down, that it was found to inadequately inform drivers of what speeds are subject to legal consequences.

It could be argued that speed limits that are subject to variable or secret enforcement standards are vague.  When the law is written with clarity, it could be argued that enforcement guidelines should also be clearly defined.  I don't think that's a winning argument, but I think it's a reasonable one.  Courts would probably find (and may have in the past) that since not going over the speed on the sign is not subject to legal action, then that's adequate warning, and that any intentional lack of enforcement only acts in the favor of drivers, not as a violation of their rights.  I would argue back that this is stupid, and then go to jail for contempt.  I think I would be right, but I'd still be in jail and the laws would still be the same.
I'd like to buy a vowel, Alex.  What is E?

SEWIGuy

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2024, 06:34:36 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 05:48:54 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2024, 05:47:05 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 05:41:31 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 14, 2024, 05:34:33 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 03:28:36 PMHow 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.

Why not skimp out on the bill at the restaurant? 

Because someone else is harmed through my theft. Way different than a victimless crime like jaywalking.

Well, until someone is hit.


That's a risk I am willing to take.

A 2nd victim is the innocent person that was obeying the traffic laws, along with passengers, extending to family and friends. Then they're possibly out of work if injured physically or mentally.  And they may need to pay a deductible for the repairs on the vehicle, along with other costs related to auto accidents.

I'm not saying I'm perfect, just for an FYI. I'm just saying that people pick and choose what 'crimes' they want to commit to rebell against unjust laws, and often they're picking crimes that won't give them police records. 

🙄🙄🙄

It's fine. I jaywalk without remorse.

Max Rockatansky

#46
In all these years of distance running I've never been once accosted for jaywalking.  That includes places like Clark County where it was once a thing Las Vegas Metro supposedly used to heavily enforce.

I've been hit by cars twice while running.  In both cases I was a legal pedestrian.  I would argue that well timed jaywalking has kept me safer over the years than unquestioningly following pedestrian laws. 

vdeane

Quote from: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2024, 05:39:59 PMI think the reason is the opposite. We make a lot of laws because we like legislating to tell people what to do (and not to do.) Law enforcement is left with a bunch of stuff that is hard to enforce and inconsistent, and ye some agencies use those inconsistencies to do what they want and strictly enforce. But many, if not most, just pick and choose what they emphasize enforcing given limited resources.
They're not contradictory.  Someone can hate being told what to do and love telling other people what to do.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

freebrickproductions

I mean, I tend to drive with a heavy foot on the gas as well, but there's absolutely a good few towns (like Town Creek, AL) where I set my cruise control right at the speed limit on my speedometer until I see the speed limit go back up.
It's all fun & games until someone summons Cthulhu and brings about the end of the world.

I also collect traffic lights, road signs, fans, and railroad crossing equipment.

(They/Them)

Scott5114

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 14, 2024, 06:57:11 PMThat includes places like Clark County where it was once a thing Las Vegas Metro supposedly used to heavily enforce.

What Metro does really depends where in town you are and what you look like. If you're in the Strip area, maybe jaywalking is enforced. But a lot of those nitpicky laws are how Clark County hassles the "bad element" into staying away from the tourists. You probably looked like you were going to spend money.

If you were jaywalking across Rainbow or Boulder Highway or something? Metro couldn't give less of a shit. I've almost hit several people who were running around in the traffic lanes of Rainbow in the dark for who knows what reason.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.