Virginia Traffic Tickets (1 Viewer)

[VVextreme]

Everyone, please sign this petition and help us out in VA. If you need a zip code, you can use mine. 23113 Thanks!

http://www.petitiononline.com/va3202/petition.html

 

[Waymer]

speeding doesn't kill people, collisions kill people.

That's a bad argument if you want to prove your point. Reckless driving does kill people, and some speeding is reckless in certain cases.

 

[FWtex]

speeding doesn't kill people, collisions kill people. (guns don't kill people, people kill people.)

Why in the world should you pay huge fines just because you are going faster than what someone else thinks I should. I guarranttee that 99% of the speed limits had no real thought put into it as to why it should be that speed. Also, many speed traps are designed to trick you into speeding.

I going out on a limb and guess that you may have a problem following authority? Using this logic, why can't I kill someone if I feel I am right. Only reason its illegal is because someone wrote it in the book.

LOL

 

[VVextreme]

That's a bad argument if you want to prove your point. Reckless driving does kill people, and some speeding is reckless in certain cases.

"legal" driving kills people too... Driving is dangerous, and we all take that risk everytime we are out on the road. but to say every single traffic law is reasonable or even fair, is absurd.

How about when you are at a traffic light at 4 am, and no one is around for miles? You still have to wait for that light to turn green, but does that make sense when you can easily tell no one is coming? Heck no.

And are all speeding limits fair and reasonable? Not even close. Furthermore, what's reasonable for one driver is not reasonable for another driver. I know plenty of driver's who shouldn't be driving period. What about the elderly who can't see anything? I know they have to drive to take care of themselves and might not have any other choice, but they are also endangering the lives of everyone.

The capabilities of a driver is relative to the individual driver. Therefore I believe the penalties should be for accidents, not trivial traffic laws that have little to no relevance to driver safety. Sure there are some good traffic laws out there as well, but just as many crazy ones. If you can handle driving 80 miles an hour safely, then you shouldn't be penalized thousands of dollars because of it.

Now if you drink and drive? Or if you kill someone, then go nuts. But driving 10 to 20 miles an hour over a speed limit on an empty highway should not merit such a steep penalty. This is ridiculous.

 

[VVextreme]

I going out on a limb and guess that you may have a problem following authority? Using this logic, why can't I kill someone if I feel I am right. Only reason its illegal is because someone wrote it in the book.

LOL

Well if you want to be technical, you can kill legally kill someone if it's right. AKA Self defense... but nice try. Thanks for playing.

I have no problem following authority, just as long as it makes sense. However anyone who thinks the government ALWAYS does the right thing, is extremely naive. And if a law doesn't make sense, I have the right to question it and protest it. I still follow all the laws for the most part (ok, who doesn't speed at some point in their life.) And believe we need to follow the law. But we must remain active in the political process and make our opinions known.

Here are some quotes from one of the guys who helped shape the foundation of this country. I'm just trying to follow his advise...

“If once the people become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions.”
Thomas Jefferson

“Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms (of government) those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny”
Thomas Jefferson

“A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither”
Thomas Jefferson

“The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive.”
Thomas Jefferson

“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
Thomas Jefferson

 

[St. Greatness]

Well, if you don't get caught, you have nothing to worry about. I'd sign the petition, but like I said in my earlier post, the government is not going to change or get rid of this law......for now.

 

[MLU]

speeding doesn't kill people, collisions kill people. (guns don't kill people, people kill people.)

So if I collide with someone at 2 mph will I kill them?

 

[VVextreme]

So if I collide with someone at 2 mph will I kill them?

well if it's a pedestrian, and you run them over and don't apply the brakes, maybe?

or if they have a super weak heart, and have a heart attack cause they are so ****** you hit them, maybe? anything is possible.

However 70 mph on the interstate is legal, depending on the state. And it's very possible to be driving 65-70, and kill someone. So should we require everyone to drive light-weight mopeds and go only 1 mph so no one ever dies in a car wreck again?

just curious, but how often do you drive 2 mph? if that's as fast as you are gonna go, you might as well walk.

 

[Waymer]

"legal" driving kills people too... Driving is dangerous, and we all take that risk everytime we are out on the road. but to say every single traffic law is reasonable or even fair, is absurd.

How about when you are at a traffic light at 4 am, and no one is around for miles? You still have to wait for that light to turn green, but does that make sense when you can easily tell no one is coming? Heck no.

And are all speeding limits fair and reasonable? Not even close. Furthermore, what's reasonable for one driver is not reasonable for another driver. I know plenty of driver's who shouldn't be driving period. What about the elderly who can't see anything? I know they have to drive to take care of themselves and might not have any other choice, but they are also endangering the lives of everyone.

The capabilities of a driver is relative to the individual driver. Therefore I believe the penalties should be for accidents, not trivial traffic laws that have little to no relevance to driver safety. Sure there are some good traffic laws out there as well, but just as many crazy ones. If you can handle driving 80 miles an hour safely, then you shouldn't be penalized thousands of dollars because of it.

Now if you drink and drive? Or if you kill someone, then go nuts. But driving 10 to 20 miles an hour over a speed limit on an empty highway should not merit such a steep penalty. This is ridiculous.

Nowhere in my post did I ever disagree with anything you said other than that you chose a poor statement to make your argument. Quit twisting statements and meanings as if everyone is against you and is an ally of the government and focus on the point I made, because you didn't even address that...you focused on "legal" driving.

You should know if you are even a remotely decent driver (debatable thus far based on your posts) that speed, as you said, isn't the greatest culprit in causing accidents. But the differences in speed are on the main reasons. If the speed limit is 70 and you are going 80-90, or even 50-60, then that's where the biggest risk comes into play.

But, you say that if you can handle driving 80, then you should be able to do it. Well, I hate to inform you of this, but there aren't individual laws in this country. Not every John Doe gets to pick which ones should apply to him. Reasons like those listed below are the purposes in the law.

Studies of individual drivers have examined how drivers' speed choice affects their likelihood of accident involvement. Accident records of more than 10,000 drivers were related statistically to their observed speeding behaviour. These showed clearly that accident risk rises the faster a driver travels: at 25% above the average speed, a driver is about 6 times as likely to have an accident than a driver travelling at the average speed. (see graph)

http://www.cyclenetwork.org.uk/info/trlspeed.html

There's plenty more out there to bring up...but I'm bored of this discussion and would rather watch the British Open today than debate you.

But to end this discussion I would like to go back to my original post. You said speeding doesn't kill people. I said that in some cases speeding is reckless driving, can you deny this? You haven't yet, in fact you ignored that question completely.

 

[VVextreme]

Nowhere in my post did I ever disagree with anything you said other than that you chose a poor statement to make your argument. Quit twisting statements and meanings as if everyone is against you and is an ally of the government and focus on the point I made, because you didn't even address that...you focused on "legal" driving.

You should know if you are even a remotely decent driver (debatable thus far based on your posts) that speed, as you said, isn't the greatest culprit in causing accidents. But the differences in speed are on the main reasons. If the speed limit is 70 and you are going 80-90, or even 50-60, then that's where the biggest risk comes into play.

But, you say that if you can handle driving 80, then you should be able to do it. Well, I hate to inform you of this, but there aren't individual laws in this country. Not every John Doe gets to pick which ones should apply to him. Reasons like those listed below are the purposes in the law.



http://www.cyclenetwork.org.uk/info/trlspeed.html

There's plenty more out there to bring up...but I'm bored of this discussion and would rather watch the British Open today than debate you.

But to end this discussion I would like to go back to my original post. You said speeding doesn't kill people. I said that in some cases speeding is reckless driving, can you deny this? You haven't yet, in fact you ignored that question completely.

Ok to answer your original question, it's the same thing as in any other aspect of life. If it pays off, you're good. If it doesn't, then you were reckless.

Rationale: A coach who gambles and goes for it on fourth and goal. If he makes it to win the game, he's a genius. If not? He gets ripped apart the next day by the fan base. Happens every year. In our culture, the results of our actions define that action.

Therefore, if you drive 80 MPH and nothing happens, then you weren't reckless. However there's also the scenario that if you are an elderly person with a legal license and are obeying all speed limits perfectly, but you could be considered a reckless driver IMO if they are accident prone because clearly they should no longer be driving under their current state.

Over in Germany, they have streets that have no speed limits. Just because this is how we do things here, doesn't mean it's the right way and only way to do it. I also believe that some interstates over in Montana used to not have speedlimits, but I think that has changed recently.

______________________________________________________________________

But also, I'd like to point out that your post is talking about safety. However, these Virginia laws that I speak of have nothing to do with safety for the public.

"The language of the bill states that the purpose is to "generate revenue" and hence the fines have nothing to do with traffic safety."

http://www.petitiononline.com/va3202/petition.html

Therefore your traffic safety points are mute in this discussion. I do agree with you that citizens do not have the right to pick and choose which ones they follow without expecting to endure the consequences of those actions. However, I do have the right to sign petitions and voice my opinion and remain active in the political process to have the laws changed. (Which is what I'm doing here, and elsewhere.)

And honestly, other states might want to be proactive in their disaproval of these types of laws. Rationale: It's only a matter of time before some greedy politician will want to do this for you if they see that VA was able to get away with this.

 

[Waymer]

It's only a matter of time before some greedy politician will want to do this for you if they see that VA was able to get away with this.

I would welcome it...it's just another source of revenue that can help lead to lower costs elsewhere, including costs that may come out of my pocket.

 

[MLU]

well if it's a pedestrian, and you run them over and don't apply the brakes, maybe?

or if they have a super weak heart, and have a heart attack cause they are so ****** you hit them, maybe? anything is possible.

However 70 mph on the interstate is legal, depending on the state. And it's very possible to be driving 65-70, and kill someone. So should we require everyone to drive light-weight mopeds and go only 1 mph so no one ever dies in a car wreck again?

just curious, but how often do you drive 2 mph? if that's as fast as you are gonna go, you might as well walk.

Right, the chances are slimm. However, if I hit someone doing 80, even in a car the chances are great that someone will die. I guess you could say that it would depend on the speed of my car to determine whether or not I would kill them with my car then, right?

You can argue, whine, etc. all you like, but only people who speed are going to complain about this law. (ie. people who are breaking the law) I think that a similar law needs to be instituted in Baton Rouge ASAP. I bet people would get one speeding ticket in their life. After that, they'll start leaving home or work earlier. A $3,000 fine is a fantastic deterrent if you ask me. It won't stop everyone, but it will stop a lot and as a result, the roads should be safer.

 

[VVextreme]

MLU, by your logic... why don't we execute litter bugs? We'd never have litter anywhere again.

Or why don't we give life sentences to those who don't pay their taxes?

Why don't we confiscate everything a person owns, if they steal a piece of gum from a store?

Or how about charge $1050 bucks and making it a felony for failure to give proper signal?

Or how about "Driving as little as 15 MPH over the limit on an interstate highway now brings six license demerit points, a fine of up to $2500, up to one year in jail, and a new mandatory $1050 tax."

Oh wait, I forgot, they are already doing the last two. And that doesn't even include how it affects your insurance rates for the next 11 years.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1818.asp

Not everyone is rich, and not everyone is "perfect" like you, MLU. Excuse me if I don't believe you should have your hands cut off for making a small mistake (accidental or on purpose.)

 

[Waymer]

However 70 mph on the interstate is legal, depending on the state. And it's very possible to be driving 65-70, and kill someone. So should we require everyone to drive light-weight mopeds and go only 1 mph so no one ever dies in a car wreck again?

First of all, as I stated before it is the deviation of speed above and below the speed limit that leads to accidents, not the speed itself. What you are failing to realize (or admit, one or the other) is that going 10-15 mph over the speed limit does increase the risk of accident, and at those speeds it significantly increases the risk of serious injury or fatality.

http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/speed/speed.htm

Secondly in regards to your reply to MLU you are just being obnoxious and overly dramatic (a pattern I've noticed in this thread). We don't execute litter bugs because they have posed no immediate threat to you or I in most cases, whereas driving 15 mph faster does pose an immediate threat in a lot of cases. I would also like to point out that we don't execute speeders...so your references are really over-the-top and without merit. To make a more realistic point why don't you just say that we should enforce and increase litter bug fines more than we currently do (fines for littering typically range from 100 to 500 dollars based on personal experience).

Let me ask you a serious question. Do you believe exceeding the speed limit by 15 mph over is dangerous (I'm not talking specifically about you and how good of a driver you may be...I'm talking about the general population of the U.S.)? I'll assume you will say that it depends on the driver and that elderly, slow drivers are just as much of a risk (which, I agree and statistics support if you read my link). But, based on the studies exceeding the speed limit by that type of speed is in fact dangerous and is in fact deadly in a lot of cases. Does that mean it will happen to you? No, not at all. It may not even happen to anyone you ever know. But it certainly could based on the odds.

So, I guess what I am getting at is are you just upset because this could potentially affect you as a "fast" driver? And this is another serious question...why don't you just observe the speed limit if you are worried about being fined?

Also, please don't lecture me that this has nothing to do with safety. You're right, the direct cause for this is to raise funds, I realize that. But that doesn't mean the two are mutually exclusive.

 

[MLU]

First of all, why would you ever need to go over 80 mph? You're not a physician, paramedic, firefighter or police officer, so whatever reason you have to shave seconds off of your arrival time (and yes, you will only arrive a few seconds earlier than observing the speed limit) is probably not good enough for you to be driving that fast. Those laws are there for a reason and it's in your best interests to observe them.

MLU, by your logic... why don't we execute litter bugs? We'd never have litter anywhere again.

Or why don't we give life sentences to those who don't pay their taxes?

Why don't we confiscate everything a person owns, if they steal a piece of gum from a store?

You hear that? It was your credibility going out the window.

Not everyone is rich, and not everyone is "perfect" like you, MLU. Excuse me if I don't believe you should have your hands cut off for making a small mistake (accidental or on purpose.)

I can't really believe that I am going to dignify your lunacy with a response, but here goes:

If I were rich, I wouldn't take such care to avoid getting traffic tickets. I'm not perfect, but I do have a perfect driving record. Perhaps that's why such laws do not concern me?

Let me leave you with this: It has been my observation that Arkansas is one of the cleanest states that you will ever drive through. The entire state is practically a Nat'l Park and while I do not wish to ever live there, I have spent many a wonderful day camping or canoing there.

A first offense misdemeanor littering conviction in Arkansas is subject to "one thousand dollars ($1,000) and sentenced to one hundred (100) hours of community service"

I feel one reason Arkansas is such a clean state can be directly attributed to this law. Unless the Virgina law is about to get overturned, it appears that the Judicial System there feels it's quite rational. Perhaps the drivers in Virginia are just that bad?

Also, I am curious as to why you are championing this cause by yourself? Does no one else feel the way that you do? Are you the only person on the entire forum of over 15,000 members with this opinion?