Kind of curious about which state has the harshest penalties overall.
Couple IL nominations (http://www.cyberdriveillinois.com/publications/rules_of_the_road/rr_chap04.html (http://www.cyberdriveillinois.com/publications/rules_of_the_road/rr_chap04.html))
* Illegal passing a school bus: 3 month license or vehicle registration suspension on the first offense
* Railroad crossing violation: 1 month license suspension on the first offense
IMHO a license suspension on either of the above seems like overkill for a first offense.
I dunno- I think either of those are a pretty blatant offense. It's easy to accidentally go a few miles an hour over the speed limit, but you have to consciously act to pass a school bus. I can foresee a situation where one inadvertently gets stuck in the middle of a railroad crossing, but even that requires a bit of inattentiveness on the driver's part.
Both of those activities are actually dangerous unlike a lot of things we ticket for, and things that are actually dangerous should come with harsh punishments. Speeding a little bit is not an indication of somebody who shouldn't be on the road. Especially if you pass a school bus, it either means you have no idea what the hell you're doing in a car and shouldn't be on the road, or you blatantly disregard the safety of others and shouldn't be on the road.
children need to learn how to cross the street by themselves without artificial aids.
Wait until the school bus is gone, and you can see and be seen without a giant yellow obstacle in the way. that is, after all, how it works in every other aspect of real life.
yes, one should exercise caution when driving near a school or whatnot, but to make one aspect of transportation (children crossing the street after getting off the bus) extra puffy and fluffy and guaranteed harmless, while every other aspect of life remains equally dangerous, means that no one learns that common sense needs to be exercised, both if you are a driver, and if you are a pedestrian.
Post Merge: October 20, 2010, 12:23:06 PM
as for the railroad crossing violation - going around a lowered gate, where the lights are flashing and the train is blaring ... getting flattened into assorted human parts seems like an appropriate punishment. If, somehow, you manage to get away with it, have fun trying it again next time.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 19, 2010, 07:24:44 PM
as for the railroad crossing violation - going around a lowered gate, where the lights are flashing and the train is blaring ... getting flattened into assorted human parts seems like an appropriate punishment. If, somehow, you manage to get away with it, have fun trying it again next time.
The way it's written, though, means one could also get their licensed revoked for proceeding past a flashing lights only railroad signal when the train is stopped just short of the crossing and is still sitting there or has reversed directions ( such as switching operations near the crossing - those can really play havoc with the crossing signals)
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 19, 2010, 07:42:04 PM
The way it's written, though, means one could also get their licensed revoked for proceeding past a flashing lights only railroad signal when the train is stopped just short of the crossing and is still sitting there or has reversed directions ( such as switching operations near the crossing - those can really play havoc with the crossing signals)
that is pretty silly. I've run into switching before - usually there is a flagman directing the switch engine who also manually waves cars through the crossing when it is safe. Never mind that the lights are going full-tilt.
Quoteyes, one should exercise caution when driving near a school or whatnot, but to make one aspect of transportation (children crossing the street after getting off the bus) extra puffy and fluffy and guaranteed harmless, while every other aspect of life remains equally dangerous, means that no one learns that common sense needs to be exercised, both if you are a driver, and if you are a pedestrian.
I'm all for natural selection when it comes to children de-boarding buses- we need the population control and it would raise the average level of common sense. That said, society strongly frowns on that idea and the general notion when it comes to raising children is "don't let them cross busy streets without aid" - whether society places too much value on the lives of idiots or not (and I would argue that they do), society does deem that all life is sacred and that children just aren't as smart as adults. I don't know how to argue that passing a school bus isn't really dangerous and stupid as long as we're operating on the notion that all life is sacred.
Quote from: corco on October 19, 2010, 08:14:03 PMthe general notion when it comes to raising children is "don't let them cross busy streets without aid"
I don't know when it became such a social bugaboo - crossing the street is
just not that difficult.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 19, 2010, 09:10:29 PM
Quote from: corco on October 19, 2010, 08:14:03 PMthe general notion when it comes to raising children is "don't let them cross busy streets without aid"
I don't know when it became such a social bugaboo
When drivers like you came into being.
Quote from: Adam Smith on October 20, 2010, 12:30:37 AM
When drivers like you came into being.
542000 miles without an at fault accident. The world, frankly, needs more drivers like me.
I think all this criticism of the requirement to stop for school buses is misguided. That provision in the law operates to the benefit of adult drivers, not just the children. It adds a redundant layer of safety and thus cuts the risk that an adult driver will have to explain why it was his or her car that hit a child. Even if he or she is not at fault, the cloud of suspicion and social opprobrium--"Does he or she think life is cheap?"--is hard to dispel. Moreover, in most parts of the country it is relatively easy to avoid school bus routes during the times when school buses circulate on them, so the inconvenience to motorists is not great compared to, say, 20 MPH school zones.
The key issue in crossing the street is cognitive development, not natural selection. In order to do it successfully, without the aid of external devices like signalized pedestrian crossings and school bus stop flags, children need to be able to estimate the speed of traffic approaching them and also the ability to appreciate that other objects in their visual field might be blocking their view of traffic that could conflict with them if they attempt to cross. Even teenagers have difficulty estimating speed and adults often have trouble visualizing the possibility of hidden traffic that will conflict.
The Playstation generation might have more difficulty progressing through this cognitive development than was the case 20 years ago when I was growing up, but even then young children were expected to pay careful attention to traffic, adhere to prescribed routes, follow the lead of older children, and avoid surface arterials.
NH - reckless driving, $500 AND mandatory 60-day suspension on the first offense.
Yeah, it's reckless, so that's reasonable right? Not so fast. I don't remember the reckless statute word-for-word, but it is incredibly vague and gives the police the power to hit you with it for virtually anything. It's not nearly as vague in the punishment portion of the statute. How convenient.
Quote from: US-43|72 on October 20, 2010, 10:50:47 AM
I don't remember the reckless statute word-for-word, but it is incredibly vague and gives the police the power to hit you with it for virtually anything.
so much for "live free or die".
I don't feel that those panalties are in appropriate at all.
As for railroad crossings, in addition to the harsh penalties, I would include penalty escalators for each passenger in the vehicle. One of the big reasons why many railroaders end up taking early retirement (at a MAJOR cost to their employers, BTW) is that they have problems after hitting cars, as well as all of the close calls - it gets to people after a while.
:verymad:
Mike
The whole school bus thing is an interesting situation. To an extent, I agree with J N Winkler about the benefit to adult drivers . . . it also minimizes the risk that all the reductionistas come out of the woodwork.
But some school districts abuse this right to a completely absurd extent. Near my folks' house, the bus that carries 5th and 6th graders stops twice within about 50 feet. And this isn't an on an arterial--it's a low-volume residential roadway for crying out loud. Talk about lunacy.
-Alex (Tarkus)
If one kid is saved from being killed or seriously hurt by a car while getting off the bus, the law is appropriate, and justified. I say make the law more stringent. You pass a school bus with lights flashing, kill a kid, the cops shoot you on site. it has absolutely nothing to do with "common sense." There are grown adults that have none, how do you expect a five year old to understand.
Quote from: Tarkus on October 20, 2010, 04:02:23 PM
The whole school bus thing is an interesting situation. To an extent, I agree with J N Winkler about the benefit to adult drivers . . . it also minimizes the risk that all the reductionistas come out of the woodwork.
But some school districts abuse this right to a completely absurd extent. Near my folks' house, the bus that carries 5th and 6th graders stops twice within about 50 feet. And this isn't an on an arterial--it's a low-volume residential roadway for crying out loud. Talk about lunacy.
-Alex (Tarkus)
It could be worse, in my neighborhood, one of the many school buses through here comes by at 6:15 A.M.
Quote from: rarnold on October 20, 2010, 09:18:12 PM
If one kid is saved from being killed or seriously hurt by a car while getting off the bus, the law is appropriate, and justified. I say make the law more stringent. You pass a school bus with lights flashing, kill a kid, the cops shoot you on site. it has absolutely nothing to do with "common sense." There are grown adults that have none, how do you expect a five year old to understand.
you imply that kids' lives are worth more than adults'.
Quote from: mgk920 on October 20, 2010, 12:07:58 PM
I don't feel that those panalties are in appropriate at all.
Panalties? :pan:
Quote from: rarnold on October 20, 2010, 09:18:12 PM
You pass a school bus with lights flashing, kill a kid, the cops shoot you on site.
So one manslaughter justifies abandoning the right to due process? :hmmm: Yeah, I'm not voting for you...
You're right, shooting people might be a bit extreme. Maybe permanent license revocation would work? I like that idea better, plus no one gets shot, and due process is not violated.
Quote from: rarnold on October 21, 2010, 11:27:04 AM
You're right, shooting people might be a bit extreme. Maybe permanent license revocation would work? I like that idea better, plus no one gets shot, and due process is not violated.
without consideration of the facts, there is no due process. If you hit someone because they're either a moron or actively suicidal, and they take off full speed into your grille faster than any human reflex can avert the collision, then you need to have every opportunity to prove in court that you are not responsible.
Quotewithout consideration of the facts, there is no due process. If you hit someone because they're either a moron or actively suicidal, and they take off full speed into your grille faster than any human reflex can avert the collision, then you need to have every opportunity to prove in court that you are not responsible.
If you drive through giant red flashing lights on a very visible yellow bus and a big red octagon that says STOP and in some jurisdictions even a big barrier or sorts, that's a good indication that you're not responsible. Like with any other traffic violation, I'm sure you'd have the opportunity to prove in court that you are not responsible.
I think we've completely overloaded the word "responsible". I meant responsibility as in liability, not responsibility as a vague synonym for common sense!
I once drove through a set of giant flashing lights with an extended octagonal sign yade yada. I was proceeding through an intersection with a six or eight lane arterial, with a school bus coming the opposite way. It turned on its lights as I was entering the intersection on green, and stopped on the other side of the intersection, right on the corner. I was forced to go just past its implied barrier in order to get out of the intersection.
Colossal irresponsibility on the part of the bus driver, or even those who planned the bus route. If you want people to stop, you have to give them the time and space to be able to do so safely. I wasn't about to come to a halt in the middle of a large arterial street and get creamed when the light changed.
QuoteI once drove through a set of giant flashing lights with an extended octagonal sign yade yada. I was proceeding through an intersection with a six or eight lane arterial, with a school bus coming the opposite way. It turned on its lights as I was entering the intersection on green, and stopped on the other side of the intersection, right on the corner. I was forced to go just past its implied barrier in order to get out of the intersection.
Colossal irresponsibility on the part of the bus driver, or even those who planned the bus route. If you want people to stop, you have to give them the time and space to be able to do so safely. I wasn't about to come to a halt in the middle of a large arterial street and get creamed when the light changed.
If you never heard about it again though, I'd bet the bus driver didn't think you committed a crime. I'm pretty sure they are actually required to report people who pass them illegally so the police can pay them a nice visit.
Quote from: corco on October 21, 2010, 12:50:58 PMLike with any other traffic violation, I'm sure you'd have the opportunity to prove in court that you are not responsible.
Being summarily executed by the roadside kinda puts a damper on my ability to appear in court. Well, I suppose my lawyer might survive to represent my estate. Hey Rarnold, maybe the punishment you devised should include executing my lawyer, all my heirs, and even my friend Mike, my former college roommate Bryan, and that one guy who took my order at the fast food place the other day ... lest one of them come to avenge me.
Quote from: corco on October 21, 2010, 01:11:00 PM
If you never heard about it again though, I'd bet the bus driver didn't think you committed a crime. I'm pretty sure they are actually required to report people who pass them illegally so the police can pay them a nice visit.
I did my absolute best to proceed safely through an absurd situation, so hopefully the driver gave me leeway with regard to the poor planning of his school district.
well, that and I had plates from eight states away, at a time that I was living about eleven states away.
At least here, school buses flash yellow lights to warn drivers that they're stopping and going to hold up traffic.
Quote from: Bickendan on October 22, 2010, 12:51:07 AM
At least here, school buses flash yellow lights to warn drivers that they're stopping and going to hold up traffic.
Those are prohibited in a few states - they flash the red ones well in advance.
Quote from: corco on October 21, 2010, 12:50:58 PM
Quotewithout consideration of the facts, there is no due process. If you hit someone because they're either a moron or actively suicidal, and they take off full speed into your grille faster than any human reflex can avert the collision, then you need to have every opportunity to prove in court that you are not responsible.
If you drive through giant red flashing lights on a very visible yellow bus and a big red octagon that says STOP and in some jurisdictions even a big barrier or sorts, that's a good indication that you're not responsible. Like with any other traffic violation, I'm sure you'd have the opportunity to prove in court that you are not responsible.
Don't forget the freaking strobe light on top of the bus.
The very first time I rented a car in the US I committed two violations in the first hour of driving. I passed a school bus with its lights flashing. At the time I didn't realise you had to stop. I'm used to the rules over here where you treat school buses as parked vehicles. The other offence was passing a red traffic light. That was because the signal wasn't next to the stop line. When I eventually stopped I was in the middle of the road blocking cross traffic so I had to continue.
I came rather close to passing a school bus on my way to, erm, school a few days ago. Was driving on a 2-lane road with an SL of 40 mph, when a bus came along the other way. Perfectly normal, I see a bus through here almost every morning, so I proceed at speed. The bus slams on its brakes and the red lights come on maybe 30 feet before passing me. I'm not going to pass it because I'm not willingly going to break a law as severe as that, so I slam on my brakes too, much to the dismay of everything in the backseat of my car. I think cases like that are proof that sometimes passing a school bus should be forgiven.
^ Are there no regulations relating to the time the bus stops and the red lights coming on? Maybe a few seconds of amber should flash first?
I'm pretty sure there are, I just guessed that the driver forgot to hit them in time, because at least here in Hampton, the driver has to press a button for each set of lights.
On the Carpenter buses I used to ride at school the driver only had to press a switch to turn the yellow lights on. Opening the door automatically activated the sign, red lights, and turned the yellow lights off.
On a subject of penalties, NJ has a law on 65mph roads. All Fines Doubled. I do not know what the law is exactly, but it may apply to any violation, or it may refer just to speeding. PA does not do this, neither does any state where the speed limits are 65+.
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 19, 2010, 06:51:52 PM
Kind of curious about which state has the harshest penalties overall.
Hands-down winner has to be Massachusetts, but not because of any statutory penalty on the books.
If you decide to contest a traffic citation, you must pay an administrative fee of $275, which the Commonwealth keeps even if you are found not responsible. Yes, that's right...you pay for exercising your right to force the Commonwealth to prove the charge against you.
And yes, the state appeals court is considering the constitutionality of this even as I write it.
In Nova Scotia we have "Stunting"........driving 50km/h over the limit. It's an automatic seven-day licence suspension with the vehicle impounded on the spot for seven days. Then there's two fines — one for the Stunting with a fine of $2,410.21 and a loss of six points and then one for speeding with a fine of $282.71, three points and a further seven-day licence suspension.
Quote from: ghYHZ on December 21, 2011, 05:06:19 PM
In Nova Scotia we have "Stunting"........driving 50km/h over the limit. It's an automatic seven-day licence suspension with the vehicle impounded on the spot for seven days. Then there's two fines — one for the Stunting with a fine of $2,410.21 and a loss of six points and then one for speeding with a fine of $282.71, three points and a further seven-day licence suspension.
that's 30mph over the limit. which is usually approaching reckless, but not so consistently that it needs to have its own special word: "stunting".
I've done 98 in a 65 in rural Utah for about 80 miles straight and "stunting" would be the last word I'd use to describe that behavior. I was not reckless in the slightest, and - given that I had absolutely no audience - I certainly wasn't going for the show.
I would imagine Nova Scotia has some similarly rural roads with low traffic counts.
New York similarly has a law where if they catch you doing 30 over they can hit you with a reckless driving charge. Which is a misdemeanor and thus gives you a criminal record if convicted.
New York is also known for being a relatively tough state on points and license suspension. Three speeding tickets in 18 months alone gets you a 90-day suspension.
Compare that to Connecticut, where speeding only gets you one point and you need 12 points in 24 months to get suspended.
Quote from: Duke87 on December 21, 2011, 09:04:17 PM
New York similarly has a law where if they catch you doing 30 over they can hit you with a reckless driving charge. Which is a misdemeanor and thus gives you a criminal record if convicted.
that definitely needs to be made a judgment call. I could do the Northway at 100mph because the traffic counts are so low.
^^^
Definitely. Going 100 on the Northway, which I presume is 65mph is much less dangerous than going 60 on a 25mph residential street even though both are 35mph over the limit!
It really should be a percentage, but how many cops or judges will get that right?
Quote from: mightyace on December 21, 2011, 09:45:56 PM
^^^
Definitely. Going 100 on the Northway, which I presume is 65mph is much less dangerous than going 60 on a 25mph residential street even though both are 35mph over the limit!
It really should be a percentage, but how many cops or judges will get that right?
except it should not quite be a percentage either. 90 in a 50 has a good possibility of being unsafe. 9 in a 5, quite likely very safe.
(I don't know if 5mph is ever an enforceable speed limit on a public road. 27 in a 15 is a less good example, but still has a good probability of being safe - imagine finding yourself on a low-quality dirt road that you've driven many times, and you're in a 4x4 vehicle.)
there is indeed a set of calculations that could balance "absolute amount" vs. "percentage" but indeed, how many cops or judges could be bothered to deal with that - or, even, look at the chart they are conveniently issued?
this is why a hard speed limit is just a stupid idea. there should definitely be a recommended speed, but sometimes exceeding it by 30 is not a problem, and sometimes going 30 under it is still too fast. Imagine that same Northway (whose speed limit is indeed 65) at night, in freezing fog, covered in ice - with 15-20 being the safe operating speed.
of course, what cop or judge wants to think when they could be collecting revenue instead?
Quote from: SidS1045 on December 21, 2011, 04:47:34 PM
Hands-down winner has to be Massachusetts, but not because of any statutory penalty on the books.
If you decide to contest a traffic citation, you must pay an administrative fee of $275, which the Commonwealth keeps even if you are found not responsible. Yes, that's right...you pay for exercising your right to force the Commonwealth to prove the charge against you.
And yes, the state appeals court is considering the constitutionality of this even as I write it.
Yeah, read about that in the January 2012 issue of Car & Driver, and there's nothing more to say than it's a complete bullshit fine.
Makes the $4 paperwork fee I once paid for proof of a ticket dismissal seem a lot less "sting-y".
30 over is also reckless driving in VA, but I believe 81+ MPH, no matter what the posted speed limit is, is as well.
why do the good citizens of Virginia tolerate this sort of horse-shittery?
I don't really see it enforced much, especially on rural interstates.
Quote from: Takumi on December 22, 2011, 11:20:27 AM
I don't really see it enforced much, especially on rural interstates.
I've gotten pulled over for 73 in a 65, 200 feet past the WV state line on I-81 (where I had happily been doing 73 in a 70). In my opinion, VA is plenty harsh.
I haven't been on that part of 81 in awhile, but that does sound like something a state trooper would do. On the rural parts of I-95, I-85 and I-64, particularly the 70 MPH sections on the first two, I see police going 80+ all the time.
I was stopped last month for doing 83 in a 70 on I-77 in VA. The sheriff said that speed is classed as dangerous driving by his department but after he looked at my licence he did me just for the speed which was $6 for every 1mph over the limit. He said I saved $150 by removing the dangerous driving charge. He also mentioned 81 is the speed at which they start pulling people over for on that road.
being pulled over for 83 in a 70 doesn't seem unreasonable. but to add a "dangerous driving" charge to it certainly is. I've driven I-77 and while there are some mountainous sections, 83 in a 70 in good weather is not dangerous at all.
Quote from: rarnold on October 20, 2010, 09:18:12 PM
If one kid is saved from being killed or seriously hurt by a car while getting off the bus, the law is appropriate, and justified.
Not this argument again. Saving a single life isn't necessarily good justification for ANY law. I guarantee that banning cars completely would save a large number of lives, even those of children. Would it be worth it? Absolutely not. I also guarantee that banning swimming pools would save the lives of children. Worth it? Nope.
Nothing in life is without risk. You can't legislate it away.
And FWIW, I have no problems with school buses. I just hate the "if it saves even one life then it's worth it" crap. I have similar arguments with people regarding stupid post-9/11 security theater (primarily, the TSA).
Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 21, 2011, 09:16:54 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 21, 2011, 09:04:17 PM
New York similarly has a law where if they catch you doing 30 over they can hit you with a reckless driving charge. Which is a misdemeanor and thus gives you a criminal record if convicted.
that definitely needs to be made a judgment call. I could do the Northway at 100mph because the traffic counts are so low.
Well, as with anything else a cop can pull you over for, it is a judgment call.
But it's not unique. Reckless driving being a misdemeanor rather than just a moving violation is, in my understanding, pretty universal. As is the standard of 30 mph or 50 km/h over being the cutoff. Unless you're Virginia, in which case it's only 20 over, or anything over 80 (which in some cases can be as little as 10 over).
NJ has a double speeding fine in all 65 mph posted zones and on US 40 Hamilton Township just west of US 322 (50 MPH).
New Jersey has multiple double fine "traffic safety corridors". There's one on US 1 north of Trenton as well.
Pennsylvania also does this.