Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I won't comment on any of the advice except the last little bit of legal advice that recommends:

"Answer the question "Do you know how fast you were going ?" with "Truly, I don't - my mind must've been wandering". "But I must have been going over the speed limit, or you wouldn't have stopped me." Note that you were not speeding deliberately - no "late for work" excuses !

I do not think the above is very good advice. I don't believe either making a false statement or a confession is ever a good idea when confronted with law enforcement. Saying your mind was wandering or that you must have been speeding means you cannot defend yourself against the officer's statements in court. Cops are taught to recognize that and to know that, as a result, he or she has free reign to write the ticket.

Although law enforcement is not required to read your constitutional rights on a traffic citation stop, you still have them. You have a right to remain silent and a right to an attorney. One of the main reasons a police officer asks "Do you know how fast you were going?" is to get a confession. If you answer as suggested by the autopedia link, he's got the confession. Even if he did not have a positive id or radar lock, the confession may be good enough for a conviction.

The approach I use is only to answer questions relating to my identity, "what is your name? etc." I do not answer any other questions, including "where are you going?" I merely remain silent and do not respond. If the police officer keeps repeating the question, as some will, after about 3 or 4 times, I say: "I am not answering that question." If he or she persists, I say, "I want to talk with my attorney before I answer any of your questions." ("I think I want to talk to my attorney" won't work; it has to be "I want to . . ." Cops are acutely aware of the difference.)

There is a lot of psychological pressure to answer the police officer's questions; however, answering questions can never help and can only hurt. If the officer has a good enough case to write the ticket before he talks to you, he or she is going to write the ticket anyway. If they don't, then any talking you do may make their ticket for them. (In very remote cases, pretty women showing their tits may actually get them out of a ticket, but that approach does not work for me.)

If you refuse to answer questions or ask for an attorney, the cop will probably figure that you are an attorney. Even if you have out of state tags, he or she might figure that even if he writes a ticket, you will just call up the prosecutor and work something out. Of course, some times you get the ticket anyway, in which case, you might try calling up the prosecutor and getting the ticket amended to a non-moving violation. (That tends not to work well for 130 in a 70, or 90 in a construction zone, though.)
This might be against popular thinking but...I view speeding as a game...the speeder is breaking a law and the police officer is trying to catch people breaking the law. Usually the speeder does not get caught but when they do, they should be prepared to face the consequences. When I lived in Canada I worked for the RCMP for a couple of years. It was insane the lengths people would go through to try and get their ticket thrown out. A common approach was to fight the ticket and go to court. If the officer didn't show up, the ticket was thrown out. What it meant was that instead of investigating more serious crimes, the officer had to go to court to deal with someone who was upset that they had been caught breaking a law.

Everyone here is an adult, if you break the law, you pay the consequences.
Sept. heading to Ely I got stopped west of Austin. My car was in Ely just about to go through tech. and I wasn"t there! I didn"t dare tell him were I was going though. He got me at 94mph (sweating). But because i was honest with him, and he was a old farmer like me we bs't, and he wrote me for 10mph over speed ($90) cool.. could of been worse
I suggest Fight Your Ticket by Attorney David W. Brown. For anyone in the Sacramento area, see Attorney Peter Madsen at the Sacramento Traffic Clinic - he is good. I have an open account there.

I think the only reason for speeding tickets is to keep the legislators in drugs, whores and alchohol - not that I have an opinion about it. It surely isnt for safety.

I think there are only three things that will get you in trouble on the road; inattention, intoxication, and incompetence.

But that is just my opinion, and what do I know.
I would suggest you buy the best "remote" detector that your money can come up with. It's far easier to not get into a ticket, than it is to get out of one.

BTW, if you get pulled over, and you have a detector hanging from your front windshield. You won't be getting any breaks .... you're getting the ticket for sure. Get a remote and hide the sensors and head unit.

The Passport SR1 works very well
I think you may be able find research that says a person is 6 times more likely to be in an accident if they drive below the speed limit than if they drive above it. Of course, the faster you are going when you wreck, the more severe your injuries tend to be.

I do not consider speeding a game. I participate in open road racing to legally satisfy my urge to speed. I think it has helped my daughter as well. Having my 17 yo daughter navigate with me at Nebraska let her observe the remnants of Sam Bryant's car. She also had met Bud Ridenour in May. My somewhat biased perspective is that her exposure to open road racing has tempered her desire to illegally speed and made her question her judgment regarding her own driving skill. I think she now has a better understanding of the seriousness of driving.

Speed limits are necessary because there are too many fools. However, I suspect the major reason behind writing speeding tickets is to check wants and warrants, and to search the car for drugs and contraband.

Add Reply

Link copied to your clipboard.