I just went to court June 12th to fight my careless driving ticket. In short I passed three state troopers, slowed to half the speed limit. Once clear I accelerated without shifting, and my exhaust was a combination of Pypes O/R H-pipe and SLP loudmouths, so it got their attention and gave them the impression I was going faster then I was. Needless to say they gave me the careless driving ticket.

Now, I'm not sure how different the courts can be... but I had to wait in court from 6:30 to almost 1AM. I was just about the last to be seen, and I had talked to the prosecutor and he said they would drop the careless to noise, or improper equipment, whatever the case. There were no officer's present either, so I didn't have to bother with that. Like I said, i'm not sure how every place is, but in this instance this is how it was and it was my first time so I have nothing to compare it with.

My suggestion would be to plead not guilty, talk to the prosecutor and explain to him you'd like to have it reduced because you want no points. If you have a clean record I don't think the judge will have any problems reducing it. Although, don't go in there telling them the light was about to turn green, you had the engine revved to 2500 RPMs, once the light turned green you slammed the gas and shot off like a rocket, but only to the speed limit. Take the bullet, if it's a manual transmission be like. "Well, this is my first manual car, and I let out the clutch quickly and the car spun wheels which got the officer's attention." this is if the officer isn't there, i'm not sure what you would have to say or do if he was there, and had proof of you doing what you did. Anyway, good luck.

 

i cant read this anymore, its getting too dramatic. lol

 

This is getting quite heated...

It doesn't matter what it costs to run the public safety department. That is null.

The whole point of our(?) argument is that increasing ticketing allows the city to better balance it's budget. It doesn't matter if it's profit or revenue. They are still making the money.



That's why our city recently went on a "Red light camera" buzz. That's why the same cameras were -banned- in California because the courts said the companies/cities involved had too much money making interest in the project!





I'm not saying all cops are bad. To the contrary, I'm good friends with many, many of them. They've watched my back and helped me out of tickets I was too stupid to get into. There are many, many genuinely wonderful people on the force. Unfortunately, to some, the badge gives a God complex... Those are the cops that, IMO, are fueling this particular argument.

 

The bottom line is that the country needs speeders, or else we would go bankrupt. I pay a ot of attention to this, and read all I can find on the subject. In Car & Driver current July issue, on page 31 is an article talking about cities that set up 'scameras' to catch speeders. The bottom line was that it increased fatality rates in those areas using them, not lowering it. The real bottom line is that ITS ALL ABOUT REVENUE ENHANCMENT. When revenue enhancment is put before safety, you have a problem. So the entire country has a problem.
There was a story this week of a scam officers used to bust speeders and red light runners, by having a male officer dress up like a female on a bust intersection. In his interview, he said that he believe that it would help drivers keep their focus on traffic more. How so? Sounds like an accident waiting to happen to me. My point here is the police will go to very extreme lengths, IMO sometimes creating a dangerous situation, putting 'revenue enhancment' over safety. No doubt that counties need their $; understood. But when revenue enhancment is put before safety, there is a problem. And this happens too often in today's world. And I am waiting to meet a cop that never speeds offduty.

 

Technically those red light cameras are illegal because you just get the pic and the bill in the mail, which violates our right to confront our accuser. Some politicians with their heads on straight are trying to get them taken out, but its never works because we already bought them and they're raking in so much money that they dont want to take them down.

 

u have no chance at getting the judge to let u off dont even try, i have seen people with far better cases then you did have the judge laugh at them

 

No, I don't feel bad at all. Quite the contrary. I giggle at every post you make. I just like how when I bring up a point and black and white numbers, you can't say anything about them, but instead, you bring three more, completely different, arguments to the table.

Public SAFETY Budgets are the ones I was quoting. NOT Public SERVICE. Public SAFETY does not include garbage men, street cleaners, and public works. And I asked you if you'd had a ticket from a fireman lately, so don't think I am lumping them into writing tickets. BLACKGT, I spelled out my agrugment pretty plainly, if you read my posts, you'd see my argument and would stop twisting my words.

Of Course tickets generate revenue for a city, for a county, and eventully the feds. I never argued they didn't. I simply argued that the revenue generated from tickets comes nowhere close to 70 or even 50% of it's income. That's just silly. And according to Chicago's budget proposal, they don't even come close to 13% of its income. I think we are just spelling it out over and over again, and are actually on the same side, here. Do you agree on these simple facts stated above?

As far as you "independant" budget office. I think we all know I could find an "independant" budget office to make the opposite claim and have it published in the paper. Do you believe everything you read in the paper and on the internet? Scary if you do!

 

I was telling my husband when we first got the stang that I was accidently spinning the tires when getting onto the main highway and at this one odd road that gets you on in the middle of a curve and your sitting on a hill upwards so have to tromp the gas a bit to get on it before a car comes around the curve either direction as they don't slow down there. He tells me to be careful because a cop can give you a ticket for spinning the tires and I didn't know that! I've gotten much better at not doing that. I had a bit of a heavy foot because my truck the older it gets the more you have to push on the gas pedel to get it to up to the speed limit. Its very slow to accelerate on freeway ramps, so I'm not trying to get up to speed fast its just that it takes the truck a bit to get to get there.

 

Good. I'm glad you are amused. How are the arguments completely different when they all pertain to the revenue generated by tickets?

Ok, so exclude public works, street cleaners and garbage men. Which still leaves firemen, ambulance drivers/EMTs, safety inspectors, policemen, and all other persons on the public safety payroll.

Once again, my point being that none of these personnel spend 100% of their time issuing tickets, and therefore your argument of the cost to employ these people is greater than the revenue generated from tickets is a completely invalid excuse and has no bearing on the "$1 spent = $5 revenue" issue.

I agree that ticket revenues are not that high of a percentage. But they are an important part of city budgets, which was my original point. Even 10% of the budget of a city like Chicago is A LOT of money. Do you agree on that?

Plus they are important in helping to balance the budget because they can more easily increase fines, delevop new citations, or install red light cameras. Increasing taxes would be more difficult because of the greater opposition it would bring.

Um, no I don't believe everything, but I do believe USA Today is a trusted news source. At least by most people. Please do post some valid data that tickets cost more than they bring in.

 

It's getting closer now, I can feel it. It will end soon.

The fact that none of these personnel issue tickets 100% of the time COMPLETELY validates my argument. If they were writing tickets 100% of the time, well, then public safety would be a profitable wing of governement by the 1:5 quote, wouldn't they. And the USAToday figure may just be correct but a 1:5 ratio is nowhere near enough to keep a city afloat because of the fact that firemen and paramedics, etc. do not write these 1:5 tickets and police are only writing them a generous 15% of their time on average. Even the cost to employ and outfit just the police outweighs the fines they bring in. It's fact. It's spelled out in the budget sited. But you are right. That doesn't mean the 1:5 isnt valid.

Is 10% of a city like Chicago's budget alot? You bet it is. Never argued otherwise. Though, like I said before, it is probably not even 10% due to that figure including sooo many other types of fines and fees.

Your last point. Again, I never said that tickets cost more than they bring in. Only that they are not the largest lump of income a city receives as others seem to think. In fact, you are correct. If I wrote tickets 100% of my time (I'd have carpal-tunnel by 30) I am sure I'd be my Chief's hero. But there is so much more to do.

I have enjoyed the argument. I think we have come to an agreement of sorts and when all is said and done, we actually have been arguing the same side, though going at it differently and extensively. And hi-jacking a post to boot! LOL. I didn't even really mean to get into an argument over the money, but when people posted such wild statistics that were unbased and un-backed, it got out of hand. And the bottom line is that as GettingMyMustang stated, gathering statistics is a very subjective science/art however you perceive it. There will always be statistics to prove either side of an argument (is an egg healthy for you), that's why I urged you to delve deeper into the research. But it doesn't matter. I think we both get eachother's points.

Cheers