Quoted: Quoted: stickin' it to the man EXACTLY!! That's the bottom-line. My fine would have been about $30 more,  but that's not the issue for me. I am not going to put up with the traffic ticket revenue scam that local govt perpetrates onto it's citizens. Fook em!! I'll fight every single ticket I get. BTW, a drivers training class would have cost me about $130 total and taken 6 hours of my time. This deal costs $150 total and 30 minutes of my time. I have another ticket that is outstanding and my attorney told me he worked a deal on that one also (that took two years before the trial came up). It was for 28MPH over the limit and the fine would have been $350+ and thousands more $$$ in insurance premiums. On that ticket he worked out deferred adjudication with a $150 fine and 30 days probation. The ticket will not be on my record. The lawyer fee for that was $150. So $150 lawyer fee plus $150 actual fine is still less that the original fine for the ticket, and I have no ticket on my record....so no increased insurance premium. This ticket is in a different district and they don't even require I show up for court. It took ZERO investment of my time.

You make a solid case for the fight... what part of TX are you in?

Quoted: All you self-righteous types: Each one of you is an unconvicted criminal, just like everyone else. I'd borrow money from the mob to bet that every driver here has rolled through a stop sign, for example. And we all break laws on a daily basis that we're not even aware of. So take a break with the sanctimonious hypocrisy.

the differnce is that some believe that breaking the law is ok, while some understand what they might have did is wrong, and will try to learn from there mistakes. i have rolled through stop signs without even thinking about it. but i did not believe what i did was right. i understand what i did was wrong and will try harder next time to not make the same mistake. accepting that it is ok to  make these mistakes and break the law is WRONG. we are human, and mistakes WILL be made, but accepting these mistakes as ok makes you A BAD PERSON.

it is a fundemental thought process that is being argued here. the belief (and self delusion for justification) that breaking traffic laws is "ok" becasue its "just for revenue" or its "not gonna hurt anyone" IS WRONG. the roads we drive on are not built for any one person to do as they want. we set forth traffic laws so that we might get from point a to point b in the safest manner possible. those who do not follow those rules, no matter how simple they might be, put the entire system at risk. every time a traffic law is broken, you put not only yourself, but the others who use this public system at risk.

there is no way in hell anyone here can tell me they have the right to do this. it is not acceptable. quite thinking your above the law, and slow the fuck down.

Quoted: ... some believe that breaking the law is ok, while some understand what they might have did is wrong, and will try to learn from there mistakes. i have rolled through stop signs without even thinking about it. but i did not believe what i did was right. i understand what i did was wrong and will try harder next time to not make the same mistake. accepting that it is ok to  make these mistakes and break the law is WRONG. we are human, and mistakes WILL be made, but accepting these mistakes as ok makes you A BAD PERSON. it is a fundemental thought process that is being argued here. the belief (and self delusion for justification) that breaking traffic laws is "ok" becasue its "just for revenue" or its "not gonna hurt anyone" IS WRONG. the roads we drive on are not built for any one person to do as they want. we set forth traffic laws so that we might get from point a to point b in the safest manner possible. those who do not follow those rules, no matter how simple they might be, put the entire system at risk. every time a traffic law is broken, you put not only yourself, but the others who use this public system at risk. there is no way in hell anyone here can tell me they have the right to do this. it is not acceptable. quite thinking your above the law, and slow the fuck down.

Hypothetical situation: Tomorrow "assault rifles" and high-cap mags become illegal. You are required to turn them in for destruction, and to report those who do not. Would you comply? Would someone who did not be a "BAD PERSON"?

(BTW, you'd better hope grammar and spelling never become regulated by laws  )

Quoted: Quoted: All you self-righteous types: Each one of you is an unconvicted criminal, just like everyone else. I'd borrow money from the mob to bet that every driver here has rolled through a stop sign, for example. And we all break laws on a daily basis that we're not even aware of. So take a break with the sanctimonious hypocrisy. the differnce is that some believe that breaking the law is ok, while some understand what they might have did is wrong, and will try to learn from there mistakes. i have rolled through stop signs without even thinking about it. but i did not believe what i did was right. i understand what i did was wrong and will try harder next time to not make the same mistake. accepting that it is ok to  make these mistakes and break the law is WRONG. we are human, and mistakes WILL be made, but accepting these mistakes as ok makes you A BAD PERSON. it is a fundemental thought process that is being argued here. the belief (and self delusion for justification) that breaking traffic laws is "ok" becasue its "just for revenue" or its "not gonna hurt anyone" IS WRONG. the roads we drive on are not built for any one person to do as they want. we set forth traffic laws so that we might get from point a to point b in the safest manner possible. those who do not follow those rules, no matter how simple they might be, put the entire system at risk. every time a traffic law is broken, you put not only yourself, but the others who use this public system at risk. there is no way in hell anyone here can tell me they have the right to do this. it is not acceptable. quite thinking your above the law, and slow the fuck down.

No.  I will drive at a speed I think i reasonable.  There is nothing magic about the law.  It's often made by idiots for idiotic reasons.  

Quoted: Quoted: ... some believe that breaking the law is ok, while some understand what they might have did is wrong, and will try to learn from there mistakes. i have rolled through stop signs without even thinking about it. but i did not believe what i did was right. i understand what i did was wrong and will try harder next time to not make the same mistake. accepting that it is ok to  make these mistakes and break the law is WRONG. we are human, and mistakes WILL be made, but accepting these mistakes as ok makes you A BAD PERSON. it is a fundemental thought process that is being argued here. the belief (and self delusion for justification) that breaking traffic laws is "ok" becasue its "just for revenue" or its "not gonna hurt anyone" IS WRONG. the roads we drive on are not built for any one person to do as they want. we set forth traffic laws so that we might get from point a to point b in the safest manner possible. those who do not follow those rules, no matter how simple they might be, put the entire system at risk. every time a traffic law is broken, you put not only yourself, but the others who use this public system at risk. there is no way in hell anyone here can tell me they have the right to do this. it is not acceptable. quite thinking your above the law, and slow the fuck down. Hypothetical situation: Tomorrow "assault rifles" and high-cap mags become illegal. You are required to turn them in for destruction, and to report those who do not. Would you comply? Would someone who did not be a "BAD PERSON"? (BTW, you'd better hope grammar and spelling never become regulated by laws  )

even before i typed this i knew this question was going to be asked. i was waiting for it before i decided to post this.

i was gonna write a whole thing up, but if you dont understand the differnce between traffic laws on public roads (driving is a privlage, not a right) and the rights granted to us by the second amendment, ive already lost the argument.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... some believe that breaking the law is ok, while some understand what they might have did is wrong, and will try to learn from there mistakes. i have rolled through stop signs without even thinking about it. but i did not believe what i did was right. i understand what i did was wrong and will try harder next time to not make the same mistake. accepting that it is ok to  make these mistakes and break the law is WRONG. we are human, and mistakes WILL be made, but accepting these mistakes as ok makes you A BAD PERSON. it is a fundemental thought process that is being argued here. the belief (and self delusion for justification) that breaking traffic laws is "ok" becasue its "just for revenue" or its "not gonna hurt anyone" IS WRONG. the roads we drive on are not built for any one person to do as they want. we set forth traffic laws so that we might get from point a to point b in the safest manner possible. those who do not follow those rules, no matter how simple they might be, put the entire system at risk. every time a traffic law is broken, you put not only yourself, but the others who use this public system at risk. there is no way in hell anyone here can tell me they have the right to do this. it is not acceptable. quite thinking your above the law, and slow the fuck down. Hypothetical situation: Tomorrow "assault rifles" and high-cap mags become illegal. You are required to turn them in for destruction, and to report those who do not. Would you comply? Would someone who did not be a "BAD PERSON"? (BTW, you'd better hope grammar and spelling never become regulated by laws  ) even before i typed this i knew this question was going to be asked. i was waiting for it before i decided to post this. i was gonna write a whole thing up, but if you dont understand the differnce between traffic laws on public roads (driving is a privlage, not a right) and the rights granted to us by the second amendment, ive already lost the argument.

Ha.  Kinda like you not understanding the difference between malum in se and malum prohibitum.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... some believe that breaking the law is ok, while some understand what they might have did is wrong, and will try to learn from there mistakes. i have rolled through stop signs without even thinking about it. but i did not believe what i did was right. i understand what i did was wrong and will try harder next time to not make the same mistake. accepting that it is ok to  make these mistakes and break the law is WRONG. we are human, and mistakes WILL be made, but accepting these mistakes as ok makes you A BAD PERSON. it is a fundemental thought process that is being argued here. the belief (and self delusion for justification) that breaking traffic laws is "ok" becasue its "just for revenue" or its "not gonna hurt anyone" IS WRONG. the roads we drive on are not built for any one person to do as they want. we set forth traffic laws so that we might get from point a to point b in the safest manner possible. those who do not follow those rules, no matter how simple they might be, put the entire system at risk. every time a traffic law is broken, you put not only yourself, but the others who use this public system at risk. there is no way in hell anyone here can tell me they have the right to do this. it is not acceptable. quite thinking your above the law, and slow the fuck down. Hypothetical situation: Tomorrow "assault rifles" and high-cap mags become illegal. You are required to turn them in for destruction, and to report those who do not. Would you comply? Would someone who did not be a "BAD PERSON"? (BTW, you'd better hope grammar and spelling never become regulated by laws  ) even before i typed this i knew this question was going to be asked. i was waiting for it before i decided to post this. i was gonna write a whole thing up, but if you dont understand the differnce between traffic laws on public roads (driving is a privlage, not a right) and the rights granted to us by the second amendment, ive already lost the argument. Ha.  Kinda like you not understanding the difference between malum in se and malum prohibitum.

who is deciding what is immoral and what isnt?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... some believe that breaking the law is ok, while some understand what they might have did is wrong, and will try to learn from there mistakes. i have rolled through stop signs without even thinking about it. but i did not believe what i did was right. i understand what i did was wrong and will try harder next time to not make the same mistake. accepting that it is ok to  make these mistakes and break the law is WRONG. we are human, and mistakes WILL be made, but accepting these mistakes as ok makes you A BAD PERSON. it is a fundemental thought process that is being argued here. the belief (and self delusion for justification) that breaking traffic laws is "ok" becasue its "just for revenue" or its "not gonna hurt anyone" IS WRONG. the roads we drive on are not built for any one person to do as they want. we set forth traffic laws so that we might get from point a to point b in the safest manner possible. those who do not follow those rules, no matter how simple they might be, put the entire system at risk. every time a traffic law is broken, you put not only yourself, but the others who use this public system at risk. there is no way in hell anyone here can tell me they have the right to do this. it is not acceptable. quite thinking your above the law, and slow the fuck down. Hypothetical situation: Tomorrow "assault rifles" and high-cap mags become illegal. You are required to turn them in for destruction, and to report those who do not. Would you comply? Would someone who did not be a "BAD PERSON"? (BTW, you'd better hope grammar and spelling never become regulated by laws  ) even before i typed this i knew this question was going to be asked. i was waiting for it before i decided to post this. i was gonna write a whole thing up, but if you dont understand the differnce between traffic laws on public roads (driving is a privlage, not a right) and the rights granted to us by the second amendment, ive already lost the argument. Ha.  Kinda like you not understanding the difference between malum in se and malum prohibitum. who is deciding what is immoral and what isnt?

Is this a trick question? You are. Read your above post.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... some believe that breaking the law is ok, while some understand what they might have did is wrong, and will try to learn from there mistakes. i have rolled through stop signs without even thinking about it. but i did not believe what i did was right. i understand what i did was wrong and will try harder next time to not make the same mistake. accepting that it is ok to  make these mistakes and break the law is WRONG. we are human, and mistakes WILL be made, but accepting these mistakes as ok makes you A BAD PERSON. it is a fundemental thought process that is being argued here. the belief (and self delusion for justification) that breaking traffic laws is "ok" becasue its "just for revenue" or its "not gonna hurt anyone" IS WRONG. the roads we drive on are not built for any one person to do as they want. we set forth traffic laws so that we might get from point a to point b in the safest manner possible. those who do not follow those rules, no matter how simple they might be, put the entire system at risk. every time a traffic law is broken, you put not only yourself, but the others who use this public system at risk. there is no way in hell anyone here can tell me they have the right to do this. it is not acceptable. quite thinking your above the law, and slow the fuck down. Hypothetical situation: Tomorrow "assault rifles" and high-cap mags become illegal. You are required to turn them in for destruction, and to report those who do not. Would you comply? Would someone who did not be a "BAD PERSON"? (BTW, you'd better hope grammar and spelling never become regulated by laws  ) even before i typed this i knew this question was going to be asked. i was waiting for it before i decided to post this. i was gonna write a whole thing up, but if you dont understand the differnce between traffic laws on public roads (driving is a privlage, not a right) and the rights granted to us by the second amendment, ive already lost the argument. Ha.  Kinda like you not understanding the difference between malum in se and malum prohibitum. who is deciding what is immoral and what isnt? Is this a trick question? You are. Read your above post.

i never said that breaking a traffic law is "malum in se". i understand quite well the differnce. i said that accepting that it is ok to break laws makes you immoral. i am not defining laws, but human character. i quite clearly defined traffic laws as malum prohibitum in the last to sentences in the second paragraph. putting someting 'possibly' at risk is sorta what malum prohibitum is about, isnt it?

Now why would someone want to muddy up the water with such "high speed" legal BS teminology like maulm prohibitum and malum in se??  What, you think such neat sounding words make the situation complex??  Good god....

Who gives a rats ass whether or not a law is based on morality or not?  The fact is our laws are designed to regulate behavior that has been shown to be harmful to a thriving society... period.  So what?  If a person has slightly looser standards of personal conduct and beliefs it gives them the right to violate all laws based on morality??  Give me a fucking break.

Geeezzz... I have NEVER been so pissed off about an issue than I have been over this one.  So for those who have "muddied the water" with such neat sounding words... let me again voice my stand...

IT'S NOT ABOUT THE VIOLATION IN AND OF IT'S SELF... IT' S ABOUT KNOWINGLY BREAKING A LAW AND WHEN COUGHT, REFUSING TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS... AND THEN...,

COMING HERE AND CALLIN IT SWEET

This kind of thinking... "screw speeding laws, I'll drive like I want to" and "I'm not paying my speeding tickets because the police are just trying to make money" as well as "malum in se VS malum prohibitum is EXACTLY the root of the problem as to why our country is the way it is...

NO INDIVIDUAL SENSE TO DO THE RIGHT THING AT THE RIGHT TIME NO MATTER HOW DISTASTEFUL

Quoted: Quoted: who is deciding what is immoral and what isnt? Is this a trick question? You are. Read your above post.

The thought police will be here for you soon.  

btw, that was my first "hourglass".

i feel special now.

Quoted: Geeezzz... I have NEVER been so pissed off about an issue than I have been over this one.

You need to step away from the keyboard and have a beer or something.  Maybe get yourself a blowjob from the wife/girlfriend/boyfriend/goat.  

It's just the internet, dude.  Relax.

Quoted: i said that accepting that it is ok to break laws makes you immoral.

Yes, and you're wrong.

Quoted: Geeezzz... I have NEVER been so pissed off about an issue than I have been over this one.

Then your priorities are pretty fucked up.

Quoted: Quoted: Geeezzz... I have NEVER been so pissed off about an issue than I have been over this one.   You need to step away from the keyboard and have a beer or something.  Maybe get yourself a blowjob from the wife/girlfriend/boyfriend/goat.   It's just the internet, dude.  Relax.

Yea I know... I guess I am just getting worn down with the way folks keep avoiding taking responsibility for their actions and then bragging about it.  I'm LEO and see it every damn day.

I have no problem with WHAT was done, just the fact he came in here and called it "sweet" all the while recommending it to others.

Sorry to all offended................  BTW... beer is in hand .

Quoted: Yea I know... I guess I am just getting worn down with the way folks keep avoiding taking responsibility for their actions and then bragging about it. .

That's your interpretation of events.  Going to court IS taking responsibility for his actions.

Quoted: That's your interpretation of events.  Going to court IS taking responsibility for his actions.

Yep, and it was sweet that the case was dismissed.  

Quoted: Quoted: Geeezzz... I have NEVER been so pissed off about an issue than I have been over this one. Then your priorities are pretty fucked up.

Remember... I'm not pissed about the "speeding ticket" or the fact he "got out of it"... it's his posted response about the situation...

Bowhunter,

Save the electrons, man.  It is pointless to discuss morality with these amoral boobs.  God help them if they or a loved one is ever in a car wreck.  God help them if they ever have a daughter who is assaulted.  God help them if they ever have to face any difficult burden in their lives.  They will cry for justice when they kicked justice in the balls and laughed about it for so long.

They are lost souls and want to stay that way.

Quoted: Bowhunter, Save the electrons, man.  It is pointless to discuss morality with these amoral boobs.  God help them if they or a loved one is ever in a car wreck.  God help them if they ever have a daughter who is assaulted.  God help them if they ever have to face any difficult burden in their lives.  They will cry for justice when they kicked justice in the balls and laughed about it for so long. They are lost souls and want to stay that way.

What's pointless is even TRYING to discuss something with someone like you.  I've run into types like you before.  They are mostly on the usenet, but you can sometimes find them on message forums.  They have a neatly packaged little philosophy with no shades of grey, and they run people through it like a filter.  The only problem is, it's never come into contact with reality.

Quoted: Now why would someone want to muddy up the water with such "high speed" legal BS teminology like maulm prohibitum and malum in se??  What, you think such neat sounding words make the situation complex??  Good god.... Who gives a rats ass whether or not a law is based on morality or not?  The fact is our laws are designed to regulate behavior that has been shown to be harmful to a thriving society... period.  So what?  If a person has slightly looser standards of personal conduct and beliefs it gives them the right to violate all laws based on morality??  Give me a fucking break. Geeezzz... I have NEVER been so pissed off about an issue than I have been over this one.  So for those who have "muddied the water" with such neat sounding words... let me again voice my stand... IT'S NOT ABOUT THE VIOLATION IN AND OF IT'S SELF... IT' S ABOUT KNOWINGLY BREAKING A LAW AND WHEN COUGHT, REFUSING TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS... AND THEN..., COMING HERE AND CALLIN IT SWEET This kind of thinking... "screw speeding laws, I'll drive like I want to" and "I'm not paying my speeding tickets because the police are just trying to make money" as well as "malum in se VS malum prohibitum is EXACTLY the root of the problem as to why our country is the way it is... NO INDIVIDUAL SENSE TO DO THE RIGHT THING AT THE RIGHT TIME NO MATTER HOW DISTASTEFUL

I'm just going to go ahead and ask how exactly do you type the sound a sheep makes.


Do you really believe this thing that you just wrote,  I'll copy the important part again,  

"The fact is our laws are designed to regulate behavior that has been shown to be harmful to a thriving society... period. "

Hell man I'm from California and I don't buy that shit.

Are you entitled to a jury trial for a traffic citation in Texas?
I am suprised.

Congrats!

I'm 9-0 on beating or having speeding tickets thrown out. If you do you're homework, it's surprisingly easy to beat a traffic ticket. They are betting on you to plead and pay your fine like a good little lemming. As soon as your start making them work for the fine and court costs, it throws the whole equation out of balance. When they realize that you're not going to be easy money, they will likely move on to an easier target.

Quoted: Yeap its an option here in CA.  Seen it and have been present to it.

You do NOT have a right to a jury trial for traffic infractions in California.
If you say you do, you are wrong.

Quoted: Congrats! I'm 9-0 on beating or having speeding tickets thrown out. If you do you're homework, it's surprisingly easy to beat a traffic ticket. They are betting on you to plead and pay your fine like a good little lemming. As soon as your start making them work for the fine and court costs, it throws the whole equation out of balance. When they realize that you're not going to be easy money, they will likely move on to an easier target.

Just more overtime money for me.  I do not care if you are convicted or not.  I get paid either way.

Quoted: Quoted: Congrats! I'm 9-0 on beating or having speeding tickets thrown out. If you do you're homework, it's surprisingly easy to beat a traffic ticket. They are betting on you to plead and pay your fine like a good little lemming. As soon as your start making them work for the fine and court costs, it throws the whole equation out of balance. When they realize that you're not going to be easy money, they will likely move on to an easier target. Just more overtime money for me.  I do not care if you are convicted or not.  I get paid either way.

The lawyers ge paid to.  So does the judge.  Everybody wins!  Therefore, we should let all speeders get off.  Its win-win all the way around.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Congrats! I'm 9-0 on beating or having speeding tickets thrown out. If you do you're homework, it's surprisingly easy to beat a traffic ticket. They are betting on you to plead and pay your fine like a good little lemming. As soon as your start making them work for the fine and court costs, it throws the whole equation out of balance. When they realize that you're not going to be easy money, they will likely move on to an easier target. Just more overtime money for me.  I do not care if you are convicted or not.  I get paid either way. The lawyers ge paid to.  So does the judge.  Everybody wins!  Therefore, we should let all speeders get off.  Its win-win all the way around.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Congrats! I'm 9-0 on beating or having speeding tickets thrown out. If you do you're homework, it's surprisingly easy to beat a traffic ticket. They are betting on you to plead and pay your fine like a good little lemming. As soon as your start making them work for the fine and court costs, it throws the whole equation out of balance. When they realize that you're not going to be easy money, they will likely move on to an easier target. Just more overtime money for me.  I do not care if you are convicted or not.  I get paid either way. The lawyers ge paid to.  So does the judge.  Everybody wins!  Therefore, we should let all speeders get off.  Its win-win all the way around.

The Judges, Lawyers, Clerks, Court Reporters and Deputies all get paid if the Defendant is convicted also.  So why let them go again?

Quoted: But Tact, you said you were going 28 mph over the limit.  How is that not reckless?

I dont know what his situation was, but I was perfectly safe driving 100 mph on a long stretch of road out in West Texas on the way to Big Bend National Park, as I was the only vehicle on the road that I could see.

Being aware of road conditions and driving appropriately are far more important to driving safely than watching your speedometer.

Quoted: The Judges, Lawyers, Clerks, Court Reporters and Deputies all get paid if the Defendant is convicted also.  So why let them go again?

Then the defenant doesn't win, so not everybody wins.  Duh.  

Quoted: Being aware of road conditions and driving appropriately are far more important to driving safely than watching your speedometer.

+1

Arbitrary posted speed limits have little to do with safe driving. Near where I live, there are wide four lane divided highways with no major intersections and very little traffic, but the posted speed limit is 55MPH because it's state law.

Quoted: It is pointless to discuss morality with these amoral boobs.

So according to you any violation of law is immoral?

I disagree with that though, most laws in this day and age have little to do with morality and alot more to do with control.

If you violate someones rights I believe that is what makes something immoral. If someone is speeding, who's rights are they violating? If no ones rights are being violated then no immoral action has occured.

God help them if they or a loved one is ever in a car wreck.  God help them if they ever have a daughter who is assaulted.  God help them if they ever have to face any difficult burden in their lives.  They will cry for justice when they kicked justice in the balls and laughed about it for so long.

Freedom is not free. Freedom has its costs, and I would rather live in a free society with all its risks than to live in a "safe" society with no liberty.

Quoted: Quoted: Now why would someone want to muddy up the water with such "high speed" legal BS teminology like maulm prohibitum and malum in se??  What, you think such neat sounding words make the situation complex??  Good god.... Who gives a rats ass whether or not a law is based on morality or not?  The fact is our laws are designed to regulate behavior that has been shown to be harmful to a thriving society... period.  So what?  If a person has slightly looser standards of personal conduct and beliefs it gives them the right to violate all laws based on morality??  Give me a fucking break. Geeezzz... I have NEVER been so pissed off about an issue than I have been over this one.  So for those who have "muddied the water" with such neat sounding words... let me again voice my stand... IT'S NOT ABOUT THE VIOLATION IN AND OF IT'S SELF... IT' S ABOUT KNOWINGLY BREAKING A LAW AND WHEN COUGHT, REFUSING TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS... AND THEN..., COMING HERE AND CALLIN IT SWEET This kind of thinking... "screw speeding laws, I'll drive like I want to" and "I'm not paying my speeding tickets because the police are just trying to make money" as well as "malum in se VS malum prohibitum is EXACTLY the root of the problem as to why our country is the way it is... NO INDIVIDUAL SENSE TO DO THE RIGHT THING AT THE RIGHT TIME NO MATTER HOW DISTASTEFUL I'm just going to go ahead and ask how exactly do you type the sound a sheep makes. Do you really believe this thing that you just wrote,  I'll copy the important part again,   "The fact is our laws are designed to regulate behavior that has been shown to be harmful to a thriving society... period. " Hell man I'm from California and I don't buy that shit.

OK, OK I worded it wrong and that is not what I meant, what I mean is laws like speeding laws are aimed at specific behaviors that are harmful... come on we all can certainly agree speed does contribute to problems.  NOT EVERY SPEEDER CAUSES PROBLEMS... speeding in general causes problems.  Hell, I speed sometimes.

That's not my beef here...  as I have stated above in my other responses... speeding, so what. There are plenty of screwed up laws and if I break one and get caught, I'll pony up the price and accept responsibility... that's my point.

Yea, California, I hear ya loud and clear.  

You see, this tactic of "going to court" knowing that the chance of a "full docket" will most likely force the prosecution to decline to take your case to a judge or jury spills over to a hole host of crimes much more serious.  

It's tax dollars that pay my over time each and every hour I have to go to court because someone I issued a ticket to tries to "get out of it", your tax dollars pay your local officers OT as well.  So when you look at it that way, do you still support the original poster??   Do you still think that it's "SWEET"?  Do you think that it's fair that you pay the bill every time someone puts the system to the test just to "get out of a ticket"... even if they have their own atty the "system" still spends $$ to resolve the issue.  

I'm luckey, we have a no-nonsense Judge in our county, you ask for a "hearing" (we have Infraction Hearings), you'll get one.  No "dismissed" tickets here just because you want to fight it.  Our Judge will warn defendants beforehand that if he feels that you have wasted the courts time with a BS defense, you will pay accordingly.  I respect that.  Most defendants elect to forego the hearing and pay their original fine after hearing the judges opening remarks.      

If you get charged and feel that the charge is wrong, by all means fight it... but when you get caught doing something and you were doing it knowing full well... just pay the price and move on.  In the long run, we all benefit.  THATS MY POINT... nothing else.

I guess some of us are just simply not gonna agree on this issue.  Maybe because I'm a Deputy I see things differently...

Quoted: The officer was curt, and I admitted that I was speeding, but what pissed me off about him was how he tapped the hood scoop on my car and asked "oh what's this?" I said the scoop for the intercooler, and he said "so this is a suped up car huh?" I said no, I just bought it 3 weeks ago, I haven't modified it, and he said "ah but it's high performance." Going on a fishing expedition or just being a prick thinking he's gonna stick it to someone with a fast car? Probably a little of both.

Illegal moded car is a $1000+  plus you pay to un mod it PLUS you pay for reinspection.  He was fishing allright.   Looking for you to admit something that would give him the right to search it.

Just thought I'd add this little gem to the thread.

A human law has the character of law to the extent that it accords with right reason, and thus derives from the eternal law. Insofar as it falls short of right reason it is said to be an unjust law, and thus has not so much the nature of law as of a kind of violence.

St. Thomas Aquinas

Even in the Middle Ages they understood the difference between law and morality.

Quoted: But, obeying the laws of society is not only the "lawful" thing to do, it is also the "moral" thing to do. Romans 13:1  Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2  Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3  For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4  For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Obey the laws that do not obviously conflict with God's moral laws.

Who cares. I'm not christian.

Quoted: The LEGAL SYSTEM was designed with the intent to protect the innocent from false charges NOT to be taken advantage of by "get the guilty off".  Now the OVER BURDENED LEGAL SYSTEM is being used to "get folks off of charges" and therein lies the problem.

You couldn't be more wrong.  The legal system was designed with the intent to punish murderers, robbers, rapists, arsonists, thieves, and the like.  Our system is overburdened NOT because a man exercises his right to trial, but because foolish politicians have imposed a Nanny State upon us that seeks to tell ever man when he may or may not take a piss.  I could fix the legal system tomorrow by throwing out 9/10 of the laws on the books, which are nothing more than a politician's attempt to control the citizenry.  The law should focus on those few criminals who are truly a threat, rather than attempting to protect everyone from everything.  

I'm luckey, we have a no-nonsense Judge in our county, you ask for a "hearing" (we have Infraction Hearings), you'll get one.  No "dismissed" tickets here just because you want to fight it.  Our Judge will warn defendants beforehand that if he feels that you have wasted the courts time with a BS defense, you will pay accordingly.  I respect that.  Most defendants elect to forego the hearing and pay their original fine after hearing the judges opening remarks.

Frankly, this disturbs me.  Is you judge punishing everyone who seeks a trial, or just those with bullshit defenses.  Every judge certainly has a right, and justice is served by throwing out stupid defenses like "my dog made me do it."  But every man has a right in a criminal setting to put the prosecution to its burden of proof.  If this judge is punishing all who simply ask for their right to trial, then he dishonors his office in the most profound way possible, and does far more harm to this country than every speeder put together.  

Good grief,  my bullshit limit was exceeded by page 3, so I'm skipping ahead.

Go ahead and speed, run lights, drive drunk, ride a bicycle on the interstate, whatever,  I or someone like me will pick up the pieces eventually. Just quit the moral relativity bullshit okay?  It really sucks up bandwidth better spent on discussing "Badger, Badger, Badger".

BTW:  Some of you guys should thank GOD there are lawyers to cover your asses, because you couldn't legally fight your way out of a wet paper bag.  Of course, it's only $$$.

There are a lot of cops posting on here about obeying the speed limit because it's "the right thing to do." Funny thing is, I can't remember the last time I saw a police officer driving the posted speed limit.

I love it when people go to trial.  I'm 42 wins, 2 losses, 1 dismissed.  Not bad in 10 years.  Plus the judges gives the max on trials.

Quoted: You couldn't be more wrong.  The legal system was designed with the intent to punish murderers, robbers, rapists, arsonists, thieves, and the like.   Frankly, this disturbs me.

If the Legal System was designed to "punish" .... then why is there a mechanism for a defense?  Our leagl system is more involved than either you or I have noted...

If your disturbed by a Judge that refuses to cave in to the pity BS defenses that many folks try to throw the courts way, good, don't do a crime in our jurisdiction.  And yes, his goal is to weed out the "I thought I was going 55 and not 85... I guess my speedometer is off" type defenses.  IMO we sure as hell could use more no-nonsense Judges in our courts today.

I can see you are an educated man as am I.... we simply don't see eye to eye on these issues.  

ETA:  I went back and omitted some from my post before I realized your response...

Quoted: There are a lot of cops posting on here about obeying the speed limit because it's "the right thing to do." Funny thing is, I can't remember the last time I saw a police officer driving the posted speed limit.

I'm a cop, I admitted above to speeding.  That's not the issue.  Asking for a trial as a means to "get out of a ticket" knowing the case load will offer a chance of a dismissed case to me is not the issue....

Doing so and then posting here that it's "SWEET" and then to "highly recommend" the same tactic on this site is what I have issue with.

Just keep it to yourself........ that's all

Quoted: Bowhunter, Save the electrons, man.  It is pointless to discuss morality with these amoral boobs.  God help them if they or a loved one is ever in a car wreck.  God help them if they ever have a daughter who is assaulted.  God help them if they ever have to face any difficult burden in their lives.  They will cry for justice when they kicked justice in the balls and laughed about it for so long. They are lost souls and want to stay that way.

Bwhahahahahahaha, now that is funny.

See the way I see it is that we are talking about liberty, plan and simple.  Speeds being set at
55 or 60, what is the difference?  It was not some higher law that was used to set the speed
limit.  

As for being lost, I don't think so, in fact totally the opposite in my case.  I wish people understood
more this concept of liberty.  Ever read the passage in the bible that says  "wheresoever
goes the spirit of the lord there is liberty."  See, having liberty is very important, you
can't find Christ in an enviroment which has no or limited liberty.  

This thread was started by someone exercising his free will and PAYING for it by
abiding by our RULES.  What the heck is wrong with that?  You realize of
course your are SLAMMING someone that is man enough to PAY for his deeds
by FOLLOWING our laws.  In my opinion I feel less for the person, who out
of convenience, just pays the fine and goes about his way.


Also,
Those latin words are not supposed to make the issue
seem grander, they are meant to reduce to the essence of what is talked about.  There is
nothing profound about them, they are very small simple words.  Sure their not English,
they are in Latin and form the very foundation on which ALL our laws are divided into.
You guys that are having a hard time understanding the classification of laws into two
types are missing the point of laws altogether in my opinion.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Now why would someone want to muddy up the water with such "high speed" legal BS teminology like maulm prohibitum and malum in se??  What, you think such neat sounding words make the situation complex??  Good god.... Who gives a rats ass whether or not a law is based on morality or not?  The fact is our laws are designed to regulate behavior that has been shown to be harmful to a thriving society... period.  So what?  If a person has slightly looser standards of personal conduct and beliefs it gives them the right to violate all laws based on morality??  Give me a fucking break. Geeezzz... I have NEVER been so pissed off about an issue than I have been over this one.  So for those who have "muddied the water" with such neat sounding words... let me again voice my stand... IT'S NOT ABOUT THE VIOLATION IN AND OF IT'S SELF... IT' S ABOUT KNOWINGLY BREAKING A LAW AND WHEN COUGHT, REFUSING TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS... AND THEN..., COMING HERE AND CALLIN IT SWEET This kind of thinking... "screw speeding laws, I'll drive like I want to" and "I'm not paying my speeding tickets because the police are just trying to make money" as well as "malum in se VS malum prohibitum is EXACTLY the root of the problem as to why our country is the way it is... NO INDIVIDUAL SENSE TO DO THE RIGHT THING AT THE RIGHT TIME NO MATTER HOW DISTASTEFUL I'm just going to go ahead and ask how exactly do you type the sound a sheep makes. Do you really believe this thing that you just wrote,  I'll copy the important part again,   "The fact is our laws are designed to regulate behavior that has been shown to be harmful to a thriving society... period. " Hell man I'm from California and I don't buy that shit. OK, OK I worded it wrong and that is not what I meant, what I mean is laws like speeding laws are aimed at specific behaviors that are harmful... come on we all can certainly agree speed does contribute to problems.  NOT EVERY SPEEDER CAUSES PROBLEMS... speeding in general causes problems.  Hell, I speed sometimes. That's not my beef here...  as I have stated above in my other responses... speeding, so what. There are plenty of screwed up laws and if I break one and get caught, I'll pony up the price and accept responsibility... that's my point. Yea, California, I hear ya loud and clear.   You see, this tactic of "going to court" knowing that the chance of a "full docket" will most likely force the prosecution to decline to take your case to a judge or jury spills over to a hole host of crimes much more serious.   It's tax dollars that pay my over time each and every hour I have to go to court because someone I issued a ticket to tries to "get out of it", your tax dollars pay your local officers OT as well.  So when you look at it that way, do you still support the original poster??   Do you still think that it's "SWEET"?  Do you think that it's fair that you pay the bill every time someone puts the system to the test just to "get out of a ticket"... even if they have their own atty the "system" still spends $$ to resolve the issue.   I'm luckey, we have a no-nonsense Judge in our county, you ask for a "hearing" (we have Infraction Hearings), you'll get one.  No "dismissed" tickets here just because you want to fight it.  Our Judge will warn defendants beforehand that if he feels that you have wasted the courts time with a BS defense, you will pay accordingly.  I respect that.  Most defendants elect to forego the hearing and pay their original fine after hearing the judges opening remarks.       If you get charged and feel that the charge is wrong, by all means fight it... but when you get caught doing something and you were doing it knowing full well... just pay the price and move on.  In the long run, we all benefit.  THATS MY POINT... nothing else. I guess some of us are just simply not gonna agree on this issue.  Maybe because I'm a Deputy I see things differently...

10 years Park Ranger and I think you should fight EVERY DAMN ONE. When you show up to court do they say "would the CONVICTED please rise" or defandant. I must admit that I am no longer a Park Ranger and part of it was because I worked with folks who could not see the spirit of the law vs the letter of the law.

My motto was always education before retaliation ( and you know damn well you take the job personally ).

They dismissed my sons case last Thursday and he didn't even have to get a lawyer.

The LEO never showed up.

Quoted: Quoted: Funny, isn't it, that law breakers always blame the system?  Peole who speed claim to be the safe drivers.  Naturally, it is all pure bull shit. Sadly, these asshats are the ones who have most of the accidents and hurt most of the innocent people.  They think they should be able to speed, drink and drive, not wear seat belts, etc.  But when the shit happens, they never step up and pay for the costs of their selfish, immature, and deadly behavior. Someday, should they be the recipient of someone else's stupid behavior, they will complain to the world how they were done wrong. The good news is that these people are very consistent and in fact pay a price for their moronic ways.  They don't get the promotions, they don't get offered the plum jobs, they typically end up marrying people who are just as narcisistic as they are.  It is appropriate, but it isn't justice. So if I speed, then I'll get passed over for my next promotion and my wife will turn into a Jerry Springer candidate?   Will my penis shrink too?  Cause if that happens, then I'm slowing down, man.   LOL, Only on Arfcom could there be enough sanctimonious bullshit to get a speeding ticket thread to 7 pages of heated debate.  Some people here are just looking to be offended at the slightest "provocation".   Even class warfare and the Ten Commandments have been brought into it.  Ridiculous. "Those damned rich people in their flashy BMW's, hiring them hi-fallutin' lawyers to beat tickets.  You're all going to hell!!!!"

+1

Quoted: I've got an even better idea for you. Slow down. That's what I do and I haven't had a ticket in over 40 years.

Well......I've had about 30 tickets in 30 years.....and I still have a safe drivers discount on my car insurance.

Well, TacticalStrat, my friend, please take this little bit of advice from a friend.

If you have had 30 tickets, you are a lousey driver.  Sorry, but those are the facts.

Lousey drivers are a major source of death and injury on public roads.  My daughters and grandkids are on those roads and I don't want them hurt or killed by lousey drivers.

I'm glad that police officers write tickets to lousey drivers.  That's what I want them to do.  Before those lousey drivers kill someone I love.

Posters that harp about "revenue generation" are clueless.  The vast majority of society fully supports police officers upholding traffic laws.  They are doing exactly what we want them to do, i.e., making the roads safe for the average citizen.

Please SLOW DOWN, before you hurt or kill someone or yourself.

(And I don't mean to hurt your feelings and hope you aren't offended by some friendly advice.)




it's possible you are right OP but sometimes it's not just a repeat offender.  I got nailed in a "revenue trap" last weekend coming home from a work conference in Nevada.  Cop pulls me over (one of about 7 or 8 cops working that trap) and says they got me going 90.

problem is, my truck is governed at 85mph. No possible way to hit 90 unless I was going down a hill. I was on a dead flat road.

Anyway, it's about two hours drive south of my home.  It will take way more than the 120 bucks it will cost to pay the traffic school fee and the ticket fee (75 bucks) for a plea in abeyance, keeping it off my record.

It's bogus and was a shitty way to pick up some revenue for whatever they think they need to buy. I'm pissed cause there are lots of "Real" speeders flying around on the roads and you rarely if ever see any of them get pulled over.

It further confirms my opinion that Highway cops are totally useless.  They work to justify their own existance.  

Stick it to the man Tacitical Strat.  I may go fight mine just for the principle of it.  Should be pretty easy to do. I can get a video of me trying to go over 85 but then I'd have video proof of me doing ten over the local limit to get out of a ticket where I'm pegged at ten over

all I know is highway cops suck. we don't need them.

EDITED TO ADD: I am limiting my disgruntlement to Highway patrol cops since about all they do is traffic tickets and accident reports.  Normal city and county cops serve other vital functions and not just sit around trying to boost rev.

It might be that in my state (utah) the highway patrol is paid about 25 percent less than other cops and there is this lingering sense of resentment.  Most of the UHP are PITA except a few.

They are also the only other LEO that I have met that won't sign off on Class III stuff. Everyone else is easy to deal with.

Hope they get a paycut this year......