Traffic Ticket Question

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Like I have said before, I am not against going to the procecutor before trial to see what he can do, but even then, you are tieing up the system by doing so.

Well then don't do it, and don't be okay with other people doing it. It ties up resources and wastes taxpayers money, which is what you are so against.

[Antithesis]

Perhaps we've gone over this before, but I am curious about people's specific reasons for fighting traffic tickets.

I suppose it might be far too abstract a concept or might make me a patsy in the eye of some, but I believe when you live in a society, you have a social contract: you take the good with the bad. You might disagree with speeding tickets but you live in our society and take advantage of its benefits that you agree with. I don't feel that you should be able to pick and choose which parts of society you agree with.

I suppose you could argue that your ultimate responsibility is to your family and to have money to provide for them, but my argument against that would be to ensure that you are not speeding so that you won't get a ticket. Obviously people will disagree and I really doubt any good will come of this, but still, I am curious.

[albertGQ]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

Perhaps we've gone over this before, but I am curious about people's specific reasons for fighting traffic tickets.

I suppose it might be far too abstract a concept or might make me a patsy in the eye of some, but I believe when you live in a society, you have a social contract: you take the good with the bad. You might disagree with speeding tickets but you live in our society and take advantage of its benefits that you agree with. I don't feel that you should be able to pick and choose which parts of society you agree with.

I suppose you could argue that your ultimate responsibility is to your family and to have money to provide for them, but my argument against that would be to ensure that you are not speeding so that you won't get a ticket. Obviously people will disagree and I really doubt any good will come of this, but still, I am curious.

I fight traffic tickets because I'd rather pay $0 then $156 and I'd rather have zero demerits added to my driving record then three.

It's as simple as that. You don't have to make it so complicated

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

I fight traffic tickets because I'd rather pay $0 then $156 and I'd rather have zero demerits added to my driving record then three.

It's as simple as that. You don't have to make it so complicated

Pretty much. I've never got a speeding ticket before (knock on wood) but if I did, I'd probably fight it unless it was a major inconvenience just cause I'd rather not pay it.

I think its a stupid idea and wastes a lot of taxpayer time though (the cops, the courts etc)

I still think albert should have paid it, just cause the government needs the money right now for bailouts.

[Antithesis]

nm

[Dion]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

I fight traffic tickets because I'd rather pay $0 then $156 and I'd rather have zero demerits added to my driving record then three.

You'd better hope that Cop doesn't re issue that ticket

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

Perhaps we've gone over this before, but I am curious about people's specific reasons for fighting traffic tickets.

I suppose it might be far too abstract a concept or might make me a patsy in the eye of some, but I believe when you live in a society, you have a social contract: you take the good with the bad. You might disagree with speeding tickets but you live in our society and take advantage of its benefits that you agree with. I don't feel that you should be able to pick and choose which parts of society you agree with.

I suppose you could argue that your ultimate responsibility is to your family and to have money to provide for them, but my argument against that would be to ensure that you are not speeding so that you won't get a ticket. Obviously people will disagree and I really doubt any good will come of this, but still, I am curious.

The social contract is such a far fetched pie in the sky notion that I find it hard to take it the least bit serious. It's interesting on a theoretical level, but in reality it doesn't hold water. People are going to be lead by self interest to at least some degree, the only way that changes is if society is focused exclusively on status relationships and failures to conform to the social contract decrease the status. I just don't see how that's possible.

My whole issue with this is that the process of fighting a ticket is really just a means of requiring the system to perform its function properly. If all of the requisite factors are present the fight is futile, but if there is a deficiency why not exploit it? You can argue morality until you're blue in the face, but it's a rather weak argument considering that the entire concept of morality is self defined. A truly efficient system doesn't have cracks to be exploited, I look at fighting a ticket as a means to either forcing the repair of cracks or the acceptance of them as an unavoidable reality.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by valo403

The social contract is such a far fetched pie in the sky notion that I find it hard to take it the least bit serious. It's interesting on a theoretical level, but in reality it doesn't hold water. People are going to be lead by self interest to at least some degree, the only way that changes is if society is focused exclusively on status relationships and failures to conform to the social contract decrease the status. I just don't see how that's possible.

But now we have a situation that is coming into play where the gov't is going to install a bunch of automated photo radar devices (see the Deerfoot camera and speed on green threads.) Why are they doing this? To catch more speeders. (Let's leave the cash grab part aside for a moment.)

Why are they doing this? Because with a photo radar ticket there is less margin for error, the ticket can be double and triple checked for accuracy before being sent out, and people are more inclined to just pay them because it doesn't have any demerits attached.

So by fighting each and every ticket because it is your right, the system is now changing in a way that me and my fellow speeders don't like. That has always been my point regarding the "social contract" that others have been talking about- now we pay the price for everybody over-using the system.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by ken0042

But now we have a situation that is coming into play where the gov't is going to install a bunch of automated photo radar devices (see the Deerfoot camera and speed on green threads.) Why are they doing this? To catch more speeders. (Let's leave the cash grab part aside for a moment.)

Why are they doing this? Because with a photo radar ticket there is less margin for error, the ticket can be double and triple checked for accuracy before being sent out, and people are more inclined to just pay them because it doesn't have any demerits attached.

So by fighting each and every ticket because it is your right, the system is now changing in a way that me and my fellow speeders don't like. That has always been my point regarding the "social contract" that others have been talking about- now we pay the price for everybody over-using the system.

That's an interesting point, it kind of gets to the argument of social status taking on an elevated role. Obviously it's not the case that you'll be able to put the scarlet letter on those that ruin your ability to speed, but it certainly demonstrates the whole 'some people ruin it for everyone' phenomenon.

I tend to look at it like steroid testing, there's always something ahead of the current system. The more that one form of enforcement is used the more people will develop means to combat it. Heck, people got so fed up with all the speed cameras in Australia that it became a political issue and there are now giant signs telling you that one is ahead.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

P You might disagree with speeding tickets but you live in our society and take advantage of its benefits that you agree with.

What is the name of Our Society?

[Berger_4_]

Bumpity bump bump...so I got a ticket on Friday for doing 67 through a 50 (the speed limit on highway 13 slows down to 50 going through Killam, I thought I was through the slow zone and was getting back up to 100 when I got pulled over).

Now my first question is this---who are the COFL? Would that be county mounties or sheriffs? I can't remember which one pulled me over haha.

Secondly, has anyone heard about the sheriffs not being able to use radar guns after a certain amount of time because while they're licensed to use them, they aren't certified to recalibrate them after so many hours are up? My cousin is really good friends with an R.C. in Grande Prairie and he swore up and down this was true...so is it?

[ken0042]

If you fight a ticket; one of the pieces of evidence the Crown will introduce is when/where/how the radar gun was last calibrated. If they don't bring that up, you can ask.

[albertGQ]

So I also got a speeding ticket yesterday. Got busted going 110 in a 70 (Country Hills Blvd). No excuses on my part. Just needed to be somewhere at 8am and I was running a bit late. The thing that pisses me off is that the cop also gave me a ticket for failing to pull over for a police officer. That was another $284. I am going to fight this one, and since I am, I might as well fight my speeding ticket. They both total $551 so they are definately worth fighting.

What I want to do is plead not guilty and set a court date. I've only done this process once and the cop did not show up (he told me he wasn't going to when he issued me the ticket). This cop was pretty mean, he even called back up when I supposedly did not pull over for 400 meters. Do I have a leg to stand on for these tickets? Anyone ever got this type of ticket? I never even saw his lights and am pretty sure his siren was not on. I would've definately heard them if they were

On the back of the ticket, it says I can just mail it in to pleae not guilty and set a trial date. Can I mail both tickets at the same time or would I have to individually? I would like to mail both simutaneously that way hopefully only one trial date is set. If I have to mail them seperately, I'm afraid they might view them as two seperate incidences and set two trial dates

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Berger_4_

Bumpity bump bump...so I got a ticket on Friday for doing 67 through a 50 (the speed limit on highway 13 slows down to 50 going through Killam, I thought I was through the slow zone and was getting back up to 100 when I got pulled over).

Now my first question is this---who are the COFL? Would that be county mounties or sheriffs? I can't remember which one pulled me over haha.

Secondly, has anyone heard about the sheriffs not being able to use radar guns after a certain amount of time because while they're licensed to use them, they aren't certified to recalibrate them after so many hours are up? My cousin is really good friends with an R.C. in Grande Prairie and he swore up and down this was true...so is it?

Well seeing as how the Sheriffs are pretty much a strictly traffic enforcement body, I highly doubt that there would be such a glaring deficiency with their ability to do their job.

Hell even if it is true, I'm guessing the frequency of calibration is long enough (I'm thinking in the year long range) that it probalby doesn't matter.

[burn_this_city]

Too bad it got quashed.. From what I've heard you could have bought groceries with the ticket.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Berger_4_

Bumpity bump bump...so I got a ticket on Friday for doing 67 through a 50 (the speed limit on highway 13 slows down to 50 going through Killam, I thought I was through the slow zone and was getting back up to 100 when I got pulled over).

Now my first question is this---who are the COFL? Would that be county mounties or sheriffs? I can't remember which one pulled me over haha.

Secondly, has anyone heard about the sheriffs not being able to use radar guns after a certain amount of time because while they're licensed to use them, they aren't certified to recalibrate them after so many hours are up? My cousin is really good friends with an R.C. in Grande Prairie and he swore up and down this was true...so is it?

Is it county of flag staff? Was it a pick up truck? I probably know the guy that gave you the ticket.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

This cop was pretty mean, he even called back up when I supposedly did not pull over for 400 meters. Do I have a leg to stand on for these tickets?

I would make sure you note the 400 metres thing. By my math 110 km/h is 30.5 metres per second, so you pulled over within 13 seconds.

[REDVAN]

When are you going in? We should have a CP meet while there, haha.

[Berger_4_]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Is it county of flag staff? Was it a pick up truck? I probably know the guy that gave you the ticket.

Nope it was an SUV. And a woman. Who meant business. There was no "Hey how you doing today, you know you were speeding right? Well I will drop the ticket a little since you weren't going that fast" stuff. It was "I caught you doing 67 in a 50 (which at that point should no longer be a 50, but I suppose that's irrelevant license and registration." Comes back with the ticket and "blah blah blah pay here blah blah blah".

Come to think of it, the whole way she dealt with me is a good reason why I want to fight the ticket...the few times I've been pulled over, the police have always been really good about stuff. She was having no part of that though. I don't expect you to axe a ticket, but at least be personable or something. I dunno maybe that's just me being ridiculous.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

On the back of the ticket, it says I can just mail it in to pleae not guilty and set a trial date. Can I mail both tickets at the same time or would I have to individually? I would like to mail both simutaneously that way hopefully only one trial date is set. If I have to mail them seperately, I'm afraid they might view them as two seperate incidences and set two trial dates

Was there not a court date already on the tickets? There should be one...and than you can either pay the voluntary payment or goto the court house on the date given on the ticket and that will start the process....