I got my 2nd speeding ticket. What should I do?

"truckinsp" <truckinsp@ nowhere.com> wrote in message k.net>...

Why do you hate America?

> >It looks like I will have to fight dirty.
>
> Go ahead.....look like a fool.....I particularly love those who come in
> thinking the judge was born yesterday.....
>
> >I have a few things working for me:
>
> Nah, you don't
>
> >1) Where he was, and what he drove: He was parked right around a
> >corner, after I passed under an overpass. He drove a Cruiser marked
> >"Highway Patrol." I barely had time to react, and I even hit the
> >brakes the moment I saw him.
>
> So how does THAT work in your favor??????

The cop was dirty. Don't you get it?

>
> >2) The traffic was quite heavy at the time. If I had to hazard a
> >guess, I'd say that the rate of cars going by was about 100 per
> >minute. Most were traveling between 65-80mph.
>
> And you were traveling 94 mph.....and in that kind of traffic....if I were
> the judge, I'd up the charges to reckless endangerment....

Not everyone is like you grandpa. Some of use have places to go to
and we needed to be there like 5 minutes ago.

>
> >3) When I asked him how he knew that I was speeding, he said "I
> >watched your vehicle, to see if it looked like you were going above
> >90. Then I flipped on the radar and got your speed."
>
> Standard procedure....we're trained to estimate speeds.....

You mean revenue generation.

>
> >4) I then asked for permission to see the radar readout. He informed
> >me that it would not be safe to do so (too many cars going by) and
> >that the readout was erased after a few seconds.
>
> Are you kidding????? Do you think that we have time to "lock" the radar
> just so the perp can get a view??????

Why should we take your word. What if you made up a reading?

>
> >5) He also admitted that he writes many speeding tickets along that
> >same road every day.
>
> He more than likely does......looks like a good hunting ground.....
>
> >6) When the cop acted surprised at the speed of my Sentra, I simply
> >said, "Well yeah, it's a pretty good car. She gets me where I need to
> >go."
>
> Remember to repeat that to the judge in court......
>
> >7) The cop pulled me over as the sun was going down. I don't think he
> >got a good look at my face. I was just part of a string of tickets
> >he'd written that day. He wrote down my car color as "Gray," but it
> >is really a bluish-purple. I have a goatee, though it could very
> >easily become a full beard.
>
> So what???? You could easily shave too.....Do you honestly think the judge
> is going to care that he doesn't remember that you had a goatee at the
> time?????
>
> >Questions:
>
> >- Is it possible for me to find out if he's been using a POP radar? I
> >hear those can be wildly inaccurate.
> HUH??????
>
> >- Where can I find the traffic study for the toll road?
>
> Try the state DOT
> >- Will a judge grant continuance for just about anything?
>
> Maybe until you **** him off...... but probably not for a traffic ticket
> case......
>
> >- Could I convince the judge to reduce the ticket and dismiss the
> >points based on any of the above items?
>
> ROTFLMAO....go ahead and ask....wish I could be there to
> watch.....especially when you tell him the cop can't recognize you because
> you grew a beard.....
>
> Why don't you just grow up and take responsibility for your actions? THAT
> will impress the judge because he doesn't see THAT very often....

Around 12/5/2004 8:34 PM, truckinsp wrote:

> Arif wrote:
>
>> truck: "We can't have higher speed limits because they result in more
>> crashes and less deaths."
>>
>> me: "If people were driving faster, then why were there less deaths?"
>>
>> truck: "People weren't driving faster."
>>
>> me: "If people weren't driving faster, then why were there more crashes?"
>>
>>
>>truck: <changes subject>
>
>
>>See what I mean? He doesn't want to admit that he effectively shot his
>>own argument in the foot by saying that average American drivers are
>>able to choose safe speeds independent of whether a posted limit exists
>>or not.
>
> My story has always been the same....speed kills.....

Which is fundamentally incorrect. As Bill said, it's not speed that
kills you, but a sudden stop.

> the lack of a speed limit in MT is proof of NOTHING

Wrong. It proved unequivocally that no matter how high you set the speed
limit, people will choose their own safe speed for themselves.



--
~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

Around 12/5/2004 8:34 PM, truckinsp wrote:

> Arif wrote:
>
>> truck: "We can't have higher speed limits because they result in more
>> crashes and less deaths."
>>
>> me: "If people were driving faster, then why were there less deaths?"
>>
>> truck: "People weren't driving faster."
>>
>> me: "If people weren't driving faster, then why were there more crashes?"
>>
>>
>>truck: <changes subject>
>
>
>>See what I mean? He doesn't want to admit that he effectively shot his
>>own argument in the foot by saying that average American drivers are
>>able to choose safe speeds independent of whether a posted limit exists
>>or not.
>
> My story has always been the same....speed kills.....

Which is fundamentally incorrect. As Bill said, it's not speed that
kills you, but a sudden stop.

> the lack of a speed limit in MT is proof of NOTHING

Wrong. It proved unequivocally that no matter how high you set the speed
limit, people will choose their own safe speed for themselves.



--
~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

>To me it sounds as if that's Judy Diarrhea's new nick and (s)he is trying
>it with a slightly less obvious approach.

>Chris

Well, when you can't debate the questions and you can't add anything new,
best thing to do is namecall or compare me to a troll.....

>To me it sounds as if that's Judy Diarrhea's new nick and (s)he is trying
>it with a slightly less obvious approach.

>Chris

Well, when you can't debate the questions and you can't add anything new,
best thing to do is namecall or compare me to a troll.....

>If speed killed, we'd have no space program, NASCAR would be gone, and
>all cars would be governed to 5 mph.
>Speed does not kill.
>As trite as it may sound, it's the sudden stop that kills. The job of
>the drivers is to apply a lot of thought to avoid that sudden stop.
>It's not really hard, most people manage it every day.

ROTFL......you sound like the guy who says sticking a gun barrel in your
mouth doesn't kill you....it's pulling the trigger that does......

Sorry Bill, but speeding is what leads to the sudden stops.......

>If speed killed, we'd have no space program, NASCAR would be gone, and
>all cars would be governed to 5 mph.
>Speed does not kill.
>As trite as it may sound, it's the sudden stop that kills. The job of
>the drivers is to apply a lot of thought to avoid that sudden stop.
>It's not really hard, most people manage it every day.

ROTFL......you sound like the guy who says sticking a gun barrel in your
mouth doesn't kill you....it's pulling the trigger that does......

Sorry Bill, but speeding is what leads to the sudden stops.......

truckinsp wrote:
> >Somehow I doubt your knowledge of MT and its "experiment". AFAIK
> >there was no "experiment". They had 'resonable and..." long before
> >the 55 limit was institued. My first pass through MT was 1956 and
it
> >was that way then, remained so until the 55. During the 55 until
they
> >were forced to change it was still basically 'r&p' except you could
> >for speeding under the 55. A for 'no long wide open roads..."
What,
> >never been in the eastern half??
>
> >Harry K
>
> Yea, I have....have you ever gone from Billings to Hardin in a snow
storm???
> or better yet, come back the other way??? I have... tell me about
Pryor
> hill....
>
> You ever go from Billings to Miles City when the snow is coming at
you
> sideways? I have.
>
> You ever driven from Poplar to Livingston? I have....
>
> You ever driven from Bozeman to Big Timber in 70 mph winds?? I
have....
>
> You ever driven from Great Falls to Wolf Point? I have....
>
> Don't try to tell me about MT....I grew up there......
>
> Just because you may have crossed MT on a few nice hot summer days
doesn't
> tell you a THING about that state.....
>
> And YES, it WAS an experiment.....the "reasonable and prudent" of the
50's
> had NOTHING to do with the road conditions that exist in MT today or
the
> amount of people crossing the state today.....

truckinsp wrote:
> >Somehow I doubt your knowledge of MT and its "experiment". AFAIK
> >there was no "experiment". They had 'resonable and..." long before
> >the 55 limit was institued. My first pass through MT was 1956 and
it
> >was that way then, remained so until the 55. During the 55 until
they
> >were forced to change it was still basically 'r&p' except you could
> >for speeding under the 55. A for 'no long wide open roads..."
What,
> >never been in the eastern half??
>
> >Harry K
>
> Yea, I have....have you ever gone from Billings to Hardin in a snow
storm???
> or better yet, come back the other way??? I have... tell me about
Pryor
> hill....
>
> You ever go from Billings to Miles City when the snow is coming at
you
> sideways? I have.
>
> You ever driven from Poplar to Livingston? I have....
>
> You ever driven from Bozeman to Big Timber in 70 mph winds?? I
have....
>
> You ever driven from Great Falls to Wolf Point? I have....
>
> Don't try to tell me about MT....I grew up there......
>
> Just because you may have crossed MT on a few nice hot summer days
doesn't
> tell you a THING about that state.....
>
> And YES, it WAS an experiment.....the "reasonable and prudent" of the
50's
> had NOTHING to do with the road conditions that exist in MT today or
the
> amount of people crossing the state today.....

truckinsp wrote:
> >Somehow I doubt your knowledge of MT and its "experiment". AFAIK
> >there was no "experiment". They had 'resonable and..." long before
> >the 55 limit was institued. My first pass through MT was 1956 and
it
> >was that way then, remained so until the 55. During the 55 until
they
> >were forced to change it was still basically 'r&p' except you could
> >for speeding under the 55. A for 'no long wide open roads..."
What,
> >never been in the eastern half??
>
> >Harry K
>
> Yea, I have....have you ever gone from Billings to Hardin in a snow
storm???
> or better yet, come back the other way??? I have... tell me about
Pryor
> hill....
>
> You ever go from Billings to Miles City when the snow is coming at
you
> sideways? I have.
>
> You ever driven from Poplar to Livingston? I have....
>
> You ever driven from Bozeman to Big Timber in 70 mph winds?? I
have....
>
> You ever driven from Great Falls to Wolf Point? I have....
>
> Don't try to tell me about MT....I grew up there......
>
> Just because you may have crossed MT on a few nice hot summer days
doesn't
> tell you a THING about that state.....
>
> And YES, it WAS an experiment.....the "reasonable and prudent" of the
50's
> had NOTHING to do with the road conditions that exist in MT today or
the
> amount of people crossing the state today.....

I was addressing your very incorrect statement that there are no long
open roads in MT. What, do they disappear in winter? Or are yhou
trying to weasel that roads are not 'open' in bad weather? I have made
more than a 'few' trips through there and may (probably do) have more
miles driving the northern tier in all seasons than you do. Any one
who claims that there are no long open stretches in MT looses a lot of
credibility.

Harry K

Harry K