AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Virginia  (Read 747122 times)

abc2VE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 33
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Colonial Heights VA & Millersville PA
  • Last Login: August 21, 2019, 08:13:16 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #650 on: January 18, 2013, 11:56:02 AM »

WWBT NBC12: Delegate says I-95 tolls threaten "survival" of Southside Virginia

Quote
Holding a sign reading "no tolls" in bold red letters, Del. Roslyn Tyler (D-Sussex) introduced a bill to the public Thursday that would stop tolls on interstates without General Assembly approval.

Quote
"My bill will allow the General Assembly to vote on tolls, and broaden the conversation," said Tyler at a news conference Thursday. "We need to have a voice for tolls that could be devastating."

I saw that same story last night and thought to myself that it was very misleading. They leave out the fact that toll operations on an Interstate is approved only through the FHWA first and then make it seem like the GA does not already have final say for toll operations putting blame more or less on the governor instead of the state transportation committee. Then the story mentions or implies that toll revenue would go toward nova which isn't true execpt for I-95
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #651 on: January 21, 2013, 11:50:55 PM »

Washington Post op-ed by Gov. Robert F. McDonnell: A long-term answer to Virginia’s transportation funding needs

Quote
Virginia needs a workable, long-term solution to its transportation challenges. That is why this month I announced the “ Virginia’s Road to the Future ” funding and reform package to invest more than $3.1 billion in the state’s transportation network over the next five years. This plan will restructure Virginia’s archaic transportation funding sources and create a system that will grow with economic activity. It will also address the long-term deficiencies of the gas tax by making Virginia the first state in the nation to eliminate it.

Quote
According to the state Department of Transportation, Virginia needs $500 million a year in new revenue by 2019 to eliminate the unsustainable practice of borrowing money meant for new projects to fund the maintenance of existing highways. This plan will provide it. It will also generate $1.8 billion in new funding for road construction needed to help grow Virginia’s economy. It does all of this without raising taxes.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #652 on: January 24, 2013, 09:00:25 PM »

WWBT NBC12: Delegate says I-95 tolls threaten "survival" of Southside Virginia

Quote
Holding a sign reading "no tolls" in bold red letters, Del. Roslyn Tyler (D-Sussex) introduced a bill to the public Thursday that would stop tolls on interstates without General Assembly approval.

Quote
"My bill will allow the General Assembly to vote on tolls, and broaden the conversation," said Tyler at a news conference Thursday. "We need to have a voice for tolls that could be devastating."

I saw that same story last night and thought to myself that it was very misleading. They leave out the fact that toll operations on an Interstate is approved only through the FHWA first and then make it seem like the GA does not already have final say for toll operations putting blame more or less on the governor instead of the state transportation committee. Then the story mentions or implies that toll revenue would go toward nova which isn't true execpt for I-95

NoVa is in a sense getting hit with tolls on the new I-495 HOV/Toll lanes, and on soon-to-be-converted I-95 HOV/Toll lanes in Fairfax, Prince William and Stafford Counties.  And then there are the massive toll increases on Va. 267 (Dulles Toll Road) to fund most of the Dulles Rail project.

Politically, I think it would be difficult to put tolls on the adjacent "free" lanes of I-95 in NoVa, though it was a big mistake not to impose tolls on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge when it was rebuilt.  The governors of both Maryland and Virginia at the  time (Glendening and Gilmore, respectively) get a large dose of the blame for that.

Having said all of the above, I think it is wrong and unfair to people living between Emporia and Petersburg to have to pay a toll, when there are no tolls around Richmond-Petersburg (yes, I imply that the tolls on the old Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike should be revived, in addition to new tolls on I-295) and new tolls on I-95 between Richmond and Fredericksburg (especially between Carmel Church/Ruther Glen and Richmond).
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 09:24:45 PM by cpzilliacus »
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #653 on: January 24, 2013, 09:03:19 PM »

Virginia I-95 deadly bus crash driver sentenced to 6 years

Quote
The driver of a bus that crashed in Virginia, killing four passengers, has been ordered to serve six years in prison
   
Quote
Prosecutor Tony Spencer says Kin Yiu Cheung was sentenced Wednesday in Bowling Green to 40 years with 34 years of his sentence suspended.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #654 on: January 24, 2013, 09:21:55 PM »

You just passed Emporia on a good day.  Was on that stretch at least once a month in 2012 and I'd say at least 75% of the time there were at least three patrol cars counted from Emporia to Petersburg.

I think the biggest change with a 70-mph speed limit is that it most likely makes the cops more likely to focus on the people exceeding 80 mph, given that many out-of-staters don't realize that 81 mph in a 70-mph zone is grounds for a reckless driving ticket in Virginia. That is, it's that much easier to tag someone with the more serious ticket, so in many cases it may be easier to get away with speeds between 70 and 80 mph. No guarantee of that, of course.

I think your reasoning is sound.  The daughter of a colleague of mine got banged with a reckless driving ticket on I-85 between South Hill and Petersburg (where I believe the posted limit has been 70 for a while now). She was driving between 80 and 90 MPH.

The "81 in a 70 equals reckless" is one reason I objected to those so-called "abusive driver fees" that were briefly in place a few years ago. Some people argue, "Well, don't speed and you won't have any problem. If you speed, you can't complain." But does any reasonable person REALLY believe that a lousy 11 mph over the speed limit should be grounds for a $3,000 fine??? I sure don't, absent extenuating circumstances like weather or driving at night without headlights or some such. (The 70-mph speed limit applied only on I-85 during the time when the "abusive driver fees" were in effect.)

Is 81 MPH "reckless driving" on a relatively lightly-driven freeway like most of I-85 in Virginia?  I don't think so, at least not if the pavement is dry and visibility is good.  If I recall correctly, there is language in  the Code of Virginia that says that doing above 80 is prima facie evidence of reckless driving.  On many roads that is probably correct.  On a modern Interstate highway? Not always!

On the flipside, I do believe that the reckless driving  provisions in Virginia's laws keep many so-called "crotch rocket" motorcycle riders doing their insane riding (and sometimes dying) on the Maryland side of the river (Maryland has reckless driving provisions in its Transportation Article, but the burden of proof on the State is higher). Note that there is no mention of speed (I believe there was formerly a provision defining exceeding the posted limit by 30 MPH or more as reckless driving).

Quote
TRANSPORTATION 
TITLE 21.  VEHICLE LAWS -- RULES OF THE ROAD 
SUBTITLE 9.  RECKLESS, NEGLIGENT, OR IMPAIRED DRIVING; FLEEING OR ELUDING POLICE

Md. TRANSPORTATION Code Ann. § 21-901.1  (2012)

§ 21-901.1. Reckless and negligent driving


   (a) Reckless driving. -- A person is guilty of reckless driving if he drives a motor vehicle:

   (1) In wanton or willful disregard for the safety of persons or property; or

   (2) In a manner that indicates a wanton or willful disregard for the safety of persons or property.

(b) Negligent driving. -- A person is guilty of negligent driving if he drives a motor vehicle in a careless or imprudent manner that endangers any property or the life or person of any individual.

HISTORY: An. Code 1957, art. 66 1/2, § 11-901; 1977, ch. 14, § 2; 2000, ch. 315.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

1995hoo

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 10306
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 06:19:53 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #655 on: January 24, 2013, 10:52:01 PM »

Va. Code 46.2-862 defines reckless driving based on speed as follows:

Quote
A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who drives a motor vehicle on the highways in the Commonwealth (i) at a speed of twenty miles per hour or more in excess of the applicable maximum speed limit or (ii) in excess of eighty miles per hour regardless of the applicable maximum speed limit.

So it's more than merely prima facie. I have seen people who weren't charged with reckless at speeds in excess of 90 mph in Virginia, but that's the exception and not the norm.
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Virginia
« Reply #656 on: January 25, 2013, 09:42:56 AM »

Va. Code 46.2-862 defines reckless driving based on speed as follows:

Quote
A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who drives a motor vehicle on the highways in the Commonwealth (i) at a speed of twenty miles per hour or more in excess of the applicable maximum speed limit or (ii) in excess of eighty miles per hour regardless of the applicable maximum speed limit.

So it's more than merely prima facie. I have seen people who weren't charged with reckless at speeds in excess of 90 mph in Virginia, but that's the exception and not the norm.

I believe police officers have discretion in enforcing the law.  sometimes they issue the ticket up to the severity of the infraction, other times they let you go with a lesser ticket, a written warning, or a verbal warning.
Logged

1995hoo

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 10306
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 06:19:53 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #657 on: January 25, 2013, 10:27:34 AM »

Va. Code 46.2-862 defines reckless driving based on speed as follows:

Quote
A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who drives a motor vehicle on the highways in the Commonwealth (i) at a speed of twenty miles per hour or more in excess of the applicable maximum speed limit or (ii) in excess of eighty miles per hour regardless of the applicable maximum speed limit.

So it's more than merely prima facie. I have seen people who weren't charged with reckless at speeds in excess of 90 mph in Virginia, but that's the exception and not the norm.

I believe police officers have discretion in enforcing the law.  sometimes they issue the ticket up to the severity of the infraction, other times they let you go with a lesser ticket, a written warning, or a verbal warning.

Correct, they do. The instance I observed was one where I was in court for another matter and they called a case involving a guy who got a simple speeding ticket for going 98 in a 55 zone (I-66 west of Fair Oaks Mall....may not mean much to you since you're not from around here....it's a road that was upgraded in the 1990s and is now four lanes per side, wide, smooth, good shoulders, you could land a smaller airplane on it). The judge asked the cop why he didn't write a reckless ticket and the cop replied that it was night, the moon was full and bright, the weather was dry, there was almost nobody on the road, and the defendant was driving a brand-new Corvette with temporary plates, so the cop felt that he was not posing an unreasonable danger to himself or to anyone else and that he gave in to the temptation to see what the new car could do. The judge accepted it, didn't rag on the cop for not writing the "bigger" ticket. I kind of respected that cop for showing some reasonable thought.

But anyway, my point in my reply to cpzilliacus was more that if the statute said speeding over 80 mph were prima facie reckless driving, it would be a situation of what we call a "rebuttable presumption"—the conduct is presumed to be reckless driving and the motorist would have the burden of proving that even if he were exceeding 80 mph, it did not rise to the level of reckless driving because he was not endangering himself or anyone else or anyone's property (the so-called "general rule" for reckless driving under another Virginia statute—it's not quite worded the way I just put it, but that's the general principle). The statute doesn't allow that kind of defense—it says that speed in excess of 80 mph is reckless driving, assuming of course that the officer charges you with a violation of that particular statute. That means that you can't argue that even though your speed was over 80 you shouldn't be convicted of reckless based on not endangering anyone.

As I said before, I think it's a bit of a "gotcha" law now that we have more widespread 70-mph speed limits, simply because most people would not view 11 mph over the limit as inherently reckless. It was more of an issue a few years ago when there was a short-lived law tagging Virginia residents (NOT out-of-staters) with so-called "abusive driver fees" for certain tickets. I know there are people who say "the law is the law" and "if you don't want to pay the penalty, don't speed." Fair enough. But does any rational person (meaning you set aside the most hyper anti-car types) really believe that going 81 mph in a 70-mph zone should be grounds for a $3000 penalty on top of the ticket, again assuming there are no aggravating circumstances like heavy traffic or bad weather?
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Virginia
« Reply #658 on: January 25, 2013, 10:33:41 AM »


Correct, they do. The instance I observed was one where I was in court for another matter and they called a case involving a guy who got a simple speeding ticket for going 98 in a 55 zone (I-66 west of Fair Oaks Mall....may not mean much to you since you're not from around here....it's a road that was upgraded in the 1990s and is now four lanes per side, wide, smooth, good shoulders, you could land a smaller airplane on it). The judge asked the cop why he didn't write a reckless ticket and the cop replied that it was night, the moon was full and bright, the weather was dry, there was almost nobody on the road, and the defendant was driving a brand-new Corvette with temporary plates, so the cop felt that he was not posing an unreasonable danger to himself or to anyone else and that he gave in to the temptation to see what the new car could do. The judge accepted it, didn't rag on the cop for not writing the "bigger" ticket. I kind of respected that cop for showing some reasonable thought.

now I'm wondering why the case ended up in court.  if I got busted for a 98 in a 55 and the cop gave me me a lenient ticket when he could've given me a reckless driving instead... I'd happily mail in the fine and take the insurance hit!!
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #659 on: January 25, 2013, 11:05:25 AM »

Va. Code 46.2-862 defines reckless driving based on speed as follows:

Quote
A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who drives a motor vehicle on the highways in the Commonwealth (i) at a speed of twenty miles per hour or more in excess of the applicable maximum speed limit or (ii) in excess of eighty miles per hour regardless of the applicable maximum speed limit.

So it's more than merely prima facie. I have seen people who weren't charged with reckless at speeds in excess of 90 mph in Virginia, but that's the exception and not the norm.

You  are correct, but I disagree with the law as passed by the Virginia General Assembly.  There are plenty of  times  when 80 MPH is reckless driving, but not always.

I have to wonder how many people that get charged with reckless driving were doing nothing more than driving driving 80 MPH.  I get the impression that some cops know the difference, but that others automatically write the reckless driving charge if the clock a vehicle at or above 80.

Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #660 on: January 25, 2013, 11:21:38 AM »

Va. Code 46.2-862 defines reckless driving based on speed as follows:

Quote
A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who drives a motor vehicle on the highways in the Commonwealth (i) at a speed of twenty miles per hour or more in excess of the applicable maximum speed limit or (ii) in excess of eighty miles per hour regardless of the applicable maximum speed limit.

So it's more than merely prima facie. I have seen people who weren't charged with reckless at speeds in excess of 90 mph in Virginia, but that's the exception and not the norm.

I believe police officers have discretion in enforcing the law.  sometimes they issue the ticket up to the severity of the infraction, other times they let you go with a lesser ticket, a written warning, or a verbal warning.

Correct, they do. The instance I observed was one where I was in court for another matter and they called a case involving a guy who got a simple speeding ticket for going 98 in a 55 zone (I-66 west of Fair Oaks Mall....may not mean much to you since you're not from around here....it's a road that was upgraded in the 1990s and is now four lanes per side, wide, smooth, good shoulders, you could land a smaller airplane on it). The judge asked the cop why he didn't write a reckless ticket and the cop replied that it was night, the moon was full and bright, the weather was dry, there was almost nobody on the road, and the defendant was driving a brand-new Corvette with temporary plates, so the cop felt that he was not posing an unreasonable danger to himself or to anyone else and that he gave in to the temptation to see what the new car could do. The judge accepted it, didn't rag on the cop for not writing the "bigger" ticket. I kind of respected that cop for showing some reasonable thought.

That part of I-66 (now from U.S. 29 at Gainesville to U.S. 50 at Fair Oaks) is quite safe at 100 MPH  when traffic is light (as long as they don't try to exit at some of the sharp ramps at the interchanges, which were not especially upgraded when I-66 was reconstructed).  I don't think people should drive that fast, but doing so in the middle of the night when the pavement is dry is not especially dangerous.

The cop (and the judge) showed professionalism and integrity in that case.

But anyway, my point in my reply to cpzilliacus was more that if the statute said speeding over 80 mph were prima facie reckless driving, it would be a situation of what we call a "rebuttable presumption"—the conduct is presumed to be reckless driving and the motorist would have the burden of proving that even if he were exceeding 80 mph, it did not rise to the level of reckless driving because he was not endangering himself or anyone else or anyone's property (the so-called "general rule" for reckless driving under another Virginia statute—it's not quite worded the way I just put it, but that's the general principle). The statute doesn't allow that kind of defense—it says that speed in excess of 80 mph is reckless driving, assuming of course that the officer charges you with a violation of that particular statute. That means that you can't argue that even though your speed was over 80 you shouldn't be convicted of reckless based on not endangering anyone.

As I said before, I think it's a bit of a "gotcha" law now that we have more widespread 70-mph speed limits, simply because most people would not view 11 mph over the limit as inherently reckless. It was more of an issue a few years ago when there was a short-lived law tagging Virginia residents (NOT out-of-staters) with so-called "abusive driver fees" for certain tickets. I know there are people who say "the law is the law" and "if you don't want to pay the penalty, don't speed." Fair enough. But does any rational person (meaning you set aside the most hyper anti-car types) really believe that going 81 mph in a 70-mph zone should be grounds for a $3000 penalty on top of the ticket, again assuming there are no aggravating circumstances like heavy traffic or bad weather?

I agree with all of the above.  And the other thing that annoys me about Virginia reckless driving charges is this - I  know several people who have gotten charged with violating one of those reckless driving provisions in the Code of Virginia (I recall seeing that there are a few more hits beyond 46.2-862), including the mother of a team-mate of my stepson who was (very properly) cited for reckless driving for doing 70+ on an arterial highway in  Fairfax County (might have been 7 or 123), yet every one of them got the reckless driving charged reduced to something much less serious by retaining an attorney to represent them and then doing a plea agreement with the Commonwealth's Attorney.  I am not knocking members of the Virginia Bar for representing their clients well (that's what they are supposed to do), but in the case of the team-mate's mother, she deserved that charge, and deserved to be convicted (she has had several reasonably serious traffic charges in Maryland, so her speeding in Fairfax County was not an isolated event).
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

1995hoo

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 10306
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 06:19:53 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #661 on: January 25, 2013, 11:37:24 AM »

Va. Code 46.2-862 defines reckless driving based on speed as follows:

Quote
A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who drives a motor vehicle on the highways in the Commonwealth (i) at a speed of twenty miles per hour or more in excess of the applicable maximum speed limit or (ii) in excess of eighty miles per hour regardless of the applicable maximum speed limit.

So it's more than merely prima facie. I have seen people who weren't charged with reckless at speeds in excess of 90 mph in Virginia, but that's the exception and not the norm.

You  are correct, but I disagree with the law as passed by the Virginia General Assembly.  There are plenty of  times  when 80 MPH is reckless driving, but not always.

I have to wonder how many people that get charged with reckless driving were doing nothing more than driving driving 80 MPH.  I get the impression that some cops know the difference, but that others automatically write the reckless driving charge if the clock a vehicle at or above 80.

Sure, I don't dispute anything you say here. I had just been responding to your earlier query about whether the statute made speeds greater than 80 mph prima facie reckless. I noted that it does not do that. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the existing law is a separate question from what the law is.




Correct, they do. The instance I observed was one where I was in court for another matter and they called a case involving a guy who got a simple speeding ticket for going 98 in a 55 zone (I-66 west of Fair Oaks Mall....may not mean much to you since you're not from around here....it's a road that was upgraded in the 1990s and is now four lanes per side, wide, smooth, good shoulders, you could land a smaller airplane on it). The judge asked the cop why he didn't write a reckless ticket and the cop replied that it was night, the moon was full and bright, the weather was dry, there was almost nobody on the road, and the defendant was driving a brand-new Corvette with temporary plates, so the cop felt that he was not posing an unreasonable danger to himself or to anyone else and that he gave in to the temptation to see what the new car could do. The judge accepted it, didn't rag on the cop for not writing the "bigger" ticket. I kind of respected that cop for showing some reasonable thought.

now I'm wondering why the case ended up in court.  if I got busted for a 98 in a 55 and the cop gave me me a lenient ticket when he could've given me a reckless driving instead... I'd happily mail in the fine and take the insurance hit!!

I don't know, but the defendant didn't appear, so I'm guessing he was just a dumbass.



.... I am not knocking members of the Virginia Bar for representing their clients well (that's what they are supposed to do) ....

We appreciate the kind thought!  :-D
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

NJRoadfan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1355
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 08:17:00 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #662 on: January 25, 2013, 04:09:11 PM »

Fair enough. But does any rational person (meaning you set aside the most hyper anti-car types) really believe that going 81 mph in a 70-mph zone should be grounds for a $3000 penalty on top of the ticket, again assuming there are no aggravating circumstances like heavy traffic or bad weather?

The bigger problem in my eyes are the criminal misdemeanor charges. Putting driving 11mph over the limit in the same league as drunk driving (a much more serious offense) and giving people a criminal history for something viewed as minor and routine in other states is flat out ridiculous. In NJ, 11mph over the limit is a 2 point offense and a $95 fine ($160 in 65mph zones or designated safe corridors). Doing 80mph with a max limit of 65mph in NJ is 4 points and a $180 fine. Most states are like this, but not silly Virginia.
Logged

oscar

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 6723
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:15:22 PM
    • my Hot Springs and Highways pages
Re: Virginia
« Reply #663 on: January 25, 2013, 05:01:03 PM »

And the other thing that annoys me about Virginia reckless driving charges is this - I  know several people who have gotten charged with violating one of those reckless driving provisions in the Code of Virginia (I recall seeing that there are a few more hits beyond 46.2-862), including the mother of a team-mate of my stepson who was (very properly) cited for reckless driving for doing 70+ on an arterial highway in  Fairfax County (might have been 7 or 123), yet every one of them got the reckless driving charged reduced to something much less serious by retaining an attorney to represent them and then doing a plea agreement with the Commonwealth's Attorney.  I am not knocking members of the Virginia Bar for representing their clients well (that's what they are supposed to do), but in the case of the team-mate's mother, she deserved that charge, and deserved to be convicted (she has had several reasonably serious traffic charges in Maryland, so her speeding in Fairfax County was not an isolated event).

One of the quirks of Virginia law is that you can be convicted of the lesser charge of "improper driving" only if you're charged initially with reckless driving.  Some of the "reckless" tickets may've been issued in anticipation of the charge being later reduced to "improper", which is what would've been charged at the outset had that been an option. 
Logged
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #664 on: January 25, 2013, 05:26:16 PM »

And the other thing that annoys me about Virginia reckless driving charges is this - I  know several people who have gotten charged with violating one of those reckless driving provisions in the Code of Virginia (I recall seeing that there are a few more hits beyond 46.2-862), including the mother of a team-mate of my stepson who was (very properly) cited for reckless driving for doing 70+ on an arterial highway in  Fairfax County (might have been 7 or 123), yet every one of them got the reckless driving charged reduced to something much less serious by retaining an attorney to represent them and then doing a plea agreement with the Commonwealth's Attorney.  I am not knocking members of the Virginia Bar for representing their clients well (that's what they are supposed to do), but in the case of the team-mate's mother, she deserved that charge, and deserved to be convicted (she has had several reasonably serious traffic charges in Maryland, so her speeding in Fairfax County was not an isolated event).

One of the quirks of Virginia law is that you can be convicted of the lesser charge of "improper driving" only if you're charged initially with reckless driving.  Some of the "reckless" tickets may've been issued in anticipation of the charge being later reduced to "improper", which is what would've been charged at the outset had that been an option.

Apparently members of the Virginia Bar that defend clients charged with reckless driving also sometimes have gotten the charge reduced to "improper equipment" (I am not sure what that that is - defective speedometer maybe?).
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

NJRoadfan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1355
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 08:17:00 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #665 on: January 25, 2013, 06:17:04 PM »

Apparently members of the Virginia Bar that defend clients charged with reckless driving also sometimes have gotten the charge reduced to "improper equipment" (I am not sure what that that is - defective speedometer maybe?).

Equipment violations are a common plea down charge, and don't have any points associated with them since they are non-moving violations. They usually do that in exchange for a big fat fine, because after all, its about making money and not roadway safety.
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #666 on: January 28, 2013, 10:10:19 AM »

The Virginian-Pilot followed a VDOT Safety Service Patrol guy on his rounds on the (snow-covered) Hampton Roads freeway network and put the resulting video (just over 2 minutes long) on YouTube. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8VR2sEHqb0&sns=em

I have to wonder if some of the drivers featured in the video know that they have 4-wheel drive and how to engage same.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 10:16:24 AM by cpzilliacus »
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #667 on: January 28, 2013, 10:12:45 AM »

Equipment violations are a common plea down charge, and don't have any points associated with them since they are non-moving violations. They usually do that in exchange for a big fat fine, because after all, its about making money and not roadway safety.

In Maryland, an equipment violation results in a so-called Safety Equipment Repair Order (SERO), which does not carry any fine.  The owner of the vehicle is required to get the defective equipment repaired and then take the vehicle to a certified Maryland vehicle inspector (or a state police barrack) and get a sign-off that the repairs have been completed.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

bsmart

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 71
  • Last Login: December 06, 2018, 10:00:52 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #668 on: January 31, 2013, 08:21:21 PM »

Equipment violations are a common plea down charge, and don't have any points associated with them since they are non-moving violations. They usually do that in exchange for a big fat fine, because after all, its about making money and not roadway safety.

In Maryland, an equipment violation results in a so-called Safety Equipment Repair Order (SERO), which does not carry any fine.  The owner of the vehicle is required to get the defective equipment repaired and then take the vehicle to a certified Maryland vehicle inspector (or a state police barrack) and get a sign-off that the repairs have been completed.

Actually you don't have to go to a Barracks. I recently got one for a burnt out headlight and after fixing it just caught up with one of our town deputies when he was at a local gas station . He looked at the light, had me flash the high beam and signed it off.  Then I just had to mail it in.
Logged

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #669 on: January 31, 2013, 08:50:52 PM »

Equipment violations are a common plea down charge, and don't have any points associated with them since they are non-moving violations. They usually do that in exchange for a big fat fine, because after all, its about making money and not roadway safety.

In Maryland, an equipment violation results in a so-called Safety Equipment Repair Order (SERO), which does not carry any fine.  The owner of the vehicle is required to get the defective equipment repaired and then take the vehicle to a certified Maryland vehicle inspector (or a state police barrack) and get a sign-off that the repairs have been completed.

Actually you don't have to go to a Barracks. I recently got one for a burnt out headlight and after fixing it just caught up with one of our town deputies when he was at a local gas station . He looked at the light, had me flash the high beam and signed it off.  Then I just had to mail it in.

Not all county/municipal cops will sign-off on those SEROs. 

Another good alternative (if there's one in your county) is a truck weigh/inspection station. 

If you ask someone there nicely, they will usually check things out and give you a sign-off.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #670 on: February 04, 2013, 02:38:39 PM »

Anyone else noticed the annoying inability of certain online mapping programs (in particular, Mapquest) to distinguish between Virginia's primary  system of highways and the secondary system?  Mapquest labels them all as primary system, as does the Verizon Wireless GPS software.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

NJRoadfan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1355
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 08:17:00 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #671 on: February 04, 2013, 04:11:55 PM »

Anyone else noticed the annoying inability of certain online mapping programs (in particular, Mapquest) to distinguish between Virginia's primary  system of highways and the secondary system?  Mapquest labels them all as primary system, as does the Verizon Wireless GPS software.

Google has been struggling with it for awhile. They were labeling NC's SSRs as county routes for a period of time. I have also noticed that they have been labeling some county routes in NJ as state routes as well.
Logged

1995hoo

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 10306
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Fairfax County, Virginia
  • Last Login: Today at 06:19:53 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #672 on: February 05, 2013, 12:36:15 PM »

The Washington Post reports the House of Delegates PASSED the Governor's transportation funding plan with a modification—they eliminated the $100 "alternative-fuel vehicle" fee.

It still has to pass the Senate. Today is the "crossover" deadline by which each chamber had to finish work on its own bills before sending them to the other chamber or dropping them.
Logged
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #673 on: February 06, 2013, 06:42:02 PM »

Channel 12 (WWBT, NBC): VDOT steps up highway sign safety inspections

Quote
RICHMOND, VA (WWBT) -Last year, two of the giant, green overhead signs you see up and down the interstate collapsed into oncoming traffic - leading NBC12 to ask VDOT: are Virginia's highways safe?

Quote
A 2,000 pound sign and pole crashed down onto I-95 in Prince George on January 17, 2012. Less than a month later, it happens again - this time on I-66 in northern Virginia. A 30-foot high sign topples onto the road, striking a pick-up truck.

Quote
In both cases, VDOT was lucky no one was hurt. On both days, there was high wind.

Quote
In both signs, the anchor bolts failed.

Quote
The base is probably the most critical part of the sign, and the anchor bolts that go deep into the ground hold the sign in place.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

cpzilliacus

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10295
  • Age: 60
  • Location: Maryland
  • Last Login: September 19, 2019, 11:28:32 PM
Re: Virginia
« Reply #674 on: February 09, 2013, 09:33:00 PM »

PilotOnline.COM (Virginian-Pilot): Quality of pothole-repair work questioned

Quote
NORFOLK

In 2008, the state agreed to pay $32 million to a private company over five years to maintain the interstates in South Hampton Roads, a job that included routine pothole repair.

Quote
The contract said those fixes should work like this: Damage equal to or bigger than a certain size - 6 inches by 6 inches by 1 1/2 inches deep - must be patched immediately upon notice. Everything else must be fixed within two days. A report detailing how everything is done on time is due monthly to the Virginia Department of Transportation.

Quote
But something isn't working, say local representatives on the Commonwealth Transportation Board, a body appointed by the governor that allocates highway funding and establishes policy.

Quote
Their evidence: Just look at the roads.

Quote
"It's unacceptable and it's dangerous," board member Shep Miller said. He said he has blown three tires on local interstates since October, including two in January before a stretch of freezing weather made the situation even worse.
Logged
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

 


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.