Thanks for posting that.

So now we arrive at the paradox, what are speed traps designed to do?

Two common answers:

1) Make people slow down.
2) Generate revenue.

If the goal was #1, then by flashing the person, you are causing them to slow down, so the goal is solved. Unless of course the goal is #2.

I often ask people why speed traps exist. The answer often goes like this:

A: "To stop people from speeding."
Q: "Why then, do the police hide, out of site, and not out in plain view?"
A: "So people won't see them."
Q: "Why don't they want people to see them?"
A: "Because if they do they'll slow down."

Most people will say that getting a ticket makes you slow down. If that were true, then there would be no repeat offenders, so obviously the ticket system is not very effective.

So you are not allowed to flash people because it will cause them to slow down. What if there were no speed trap? What if you were just flashing speeders for the sole reason of slowing them down? That would have to be illegal too. So to me it seems like the goal is to NOT get people to slow down.

The more info we have, the more it looks like #2 above is the correct answer.

 

Game set match...

I think i may have to memorize that post and ask the cop next time he pulls me over...

 

So we established its illegal, it will get you stopped its ok and if you don't like it write your local law maker? (I can pull quotes for each of these from this thread) Is this going anywhere?

I4BTL

 

We all recognize it is illegal. We have established you will get a ticket (assuming you get pulled over). And we have established (somewhat) that some feel it is courtesy. Not all have felt it is O.K. at all. And many feel they are brought about for the wrong reasons (money, not slowing people down).

Progress? Not too sure, just a fun thread to read through...

 

I never heard of a Summary Offence until just now.

You learn something new everyday.

 

Nope, never was never will.

 

This is the least I could do since I started it.

I do not want to spark the arguments in this thread again all I am doing is passing along this web site. If you flash or not......this is my courtesy to every Mini driver out there. Consider it my flash to you.

Look and see if your traps are listed....if not list them....it is free.

http://www.speedtrap.org/index.html

 

Been using that a long time, confirmed many; even linked it a few times here as it has info on fighting a "trap" ticket.

 

In response to the original question: YES. Unless the oncoming vehicle is an H2 or something obnoxious like that.
What about if I pet the sweaty things?

 

motor on, it seems like we are on the same page.

 

I think your answer is too simplistic.

I grant you that I am sure there are some small towns, in some states more than others, that do depend upon ticket revenues. I don't think most people would deny that. Its usually where a highway goes from 55 to 45 to 35 rapidly and the vacationer keeps on at 65 ignoring the signs. Real bad idea. On the other hand.

"Hiding in the bushes" is also illegal in some states. I just read that yesterday about Florida (not in the mood for looking it up right now) but the article said the cops were hiding in the bushes and the ticket not allowed (or something like that).

The argument about repeat offendors doesn't wash because:

• The more tickets you get, if you continue, sooner or later your license WILL get suspended then revoked.
• Your insurance will get so expensive that you can no longer driver and/or your insurance company will drop you

Both of these things are negatives that hurt. Do people still speed? Of course some do, they take their chances and pay their money. But, will others slow down? Yes ... its ALL about the $$$. When you KNOW that the next speeding ticket means your insurance is going to double, only a fool (IMHO) will take that chance (or the rich )

Second, sometimes cops set up traps around residential areas, places near kids playing, schools, etc., usually after too many complaints from parents. They exist for ONE purpose only, to make you SLOW down and not hurt someone.

Have you ever been on an Interstate and seen the huge sign showing your speed? Its there for one reason, to make you aware. I've seen people ignore them and continue on. In other cases, I've seen the cop car sitting a mile down the road and those that CHOSE to ignore get nailed .... duh.

I can tell you about my local "main" street. Speed limit 25, highly residential. Way too many people speeding on it. First, the cops waited around a corner, no way you could see him. Nailed many people. Did that stop the speeders? Nope. So they moved on to the large radar signs for awhile. Did that stop the speeders? Nope. Finally they went to "traffic calming" measures. Huge island with rotaries. Did that stop the speeders? Not at first, many decided to just keep on speeding EXCEPT, you can see all the skid marks as they smacked the walls. Now nobody speeds on that road. Traffic calming works.

And finally you got what Greatbear refers to as the large speed trap with three or more cars on a highway. The cop will literally stand in the high speed lane and pull you over. I just saw one YESTERDAY on they way home .... warm weather brings out the cops. Did they have cars pulled over? Of course. Were they out to make money? Doubtful, it was state police on a State Highway.

 

I've heard that stimulates and thus excercises the heart....much better for your health

 

I giggled after reading how to avoid a trap ticket.

To sum it up it went like this:

Don't drive like an idiot...
Stay with the flow of traffic...
Be a responsible driver...
... and you'll avoid a ticket.


...

 

Yes but there is a good bit of info on trap laws and precedents set where towns overly pursued speeding tickets as primary enforcement. And knowing where they sit doesn't hurt ethier

 

So much stress ... so little time ... so much to worry about ... life is too short

 

Hence the reasin for a radar detector, then I'm not paraniod about the speed limit while I drive. (ohh and mine worked great at laser detection, and was quite accurate about picking it up too)

 

That's why I have to speed on my way to my massage appointments -- so I appreciate a little curtosey flash here and there

 

ROFL ... OK

 

 

OMG!! That pesky First Amendment! That thing just has to be repealed IMMEDIATELY. We simply CANNOT allow a law to remain on the books that even has the potential to interfere with the issuing of speeding tickets.

Hopefully one day soon, the military spy satellites can be programmed to detect any and all cars that violate the speed limit by more than 0.0000001 mph, then vaporize them and their scofflaw occupants with a high intensity laser beam.

Yes boys and girls, that was sarcasm. The truth of the matter is that I'd happily appeal any violation for flashing my lights all the way to Federal Court based on my First Amendment rights. I also flash for children in or near the road, accidents, road debris, or any other hazard to oncoming traffic.

Rawhyde

 

Almost every argument for or against is too simplistic. I'm not trying to start a peeing contest, but this is an area that, due to my profession, I have a lot of experience in. I also don't want to threadjack too much, because the topic of speed enforcement and how speed limits are set is beyond the scope of this thread.

But the basic jist is:

a) There is a method used by traffic engineers to set speed limits on roads.
b) Said method above is not always utilized.
c) When said method above is not utilized, it always results in a speed limit that is set lower than what an engineer would have set it at.
d) Lowering the speed limit below what would have been set in 'a' above does not usually make the road safer.
e) A lower limit is a very easy thing to "sell" because people incorrectly assume that lower speeds always = safer.
f) Once a speed limit is set to low, it's difficult to raise because of 'e' above.
g) The police are not to blame for any of this.

It's a complex subject for sure, and I'm not arguing this because I'm some lead-foot who wants to fly everywhere. I'm just concerned when I see one of those signs you mentioned, and 99% of everyone that passes it is "speeding" according to the sign on the road. Especially when I know that had that limit been set properly, only 5-10% of drivers would be over, and only a few of those would be over enough to be a problem (and those are the ones who deserve to be ticketed).

Maybe I'm old fashioined, but I'm one of those "the government is answerable to the people" types rather than the other way around. It's not enough to draw a line in the sand and say, "You can't cross this because I said so". There has to be a reason. In some areas there is a reason, like the ones you mentioned. No one is trying to defend speeding in a school zone or a neighborhood, but a 55 limit on a road that should be marked at 65 or 70 is just a load of rubbish.

 

Fantastic post, cydewaze... represents my position 100%.

For you and anyone else reading this that isn't aware, there is a non-profit organization who dedicates their mission to EXACTLY the sensible logic regarding driving laws that cydewaze describe above. I believe strongly in their mission so much that I became a life member many years ago.

I'm talking about the National Motorists Association - check them out, they're worth looking at. If you become a member, you get a bimonthly newsletter that details what is going on around the country regarding traffic laws and other vehicle-related legislation.

 

There is a club with the word "Motorists" in it, and I am not a member???

 

I was a member back when they were called Citizens for Rational Traffic Laws. Think it sounded too radical so they changed it.

 

On the way to work this morning I came upon a nice unmarked cop sitting there waiting for speeding dummies. Being that I was doing 40 in a 35 and could have been stopped I felt good not getting stopped. Also i found this nice article on a sped trap up in McBee SC.

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/14865185.htm

Art