If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#141
|
|||
|
|||
"Brent P" > wrote in message news > In article >, Jim Yanik wrote: > >> I would consider it unusual for someone to be driving 35 in a 45 zone >> late >> at night/early AM. Most people drive at or over the limit,especially when >> the roads are empty. Unusual behavior late at night/early AM would be >> sufficient grounds for a traffic stop,IMO. > > The only reason it is unusual behavior is because the roads are so > underposted. The other problem is that late at night is also prime > speeding ticket issuing time. So you're damned if you do, damned if you > don't. This is exactly what happened--it was a 4 lane street, 2 lanes in each direction, and I saw no speed sign so I decided to err on the side of safety. |
Ads |
#142
|
|||
|
|||
|
#143
|
|||
|
|||
|
#144
|
|||
|
|||
In article >, Jim Yanik wrote:
>>> I would consider it unusual for someone to be driving 35 in a 45 zone >>> late at night/early AM. Most people drive at or over the >>> limit,especially when the roads are empty. Unusual behavior late at >>> night/early AM would be sufficient grounds for a traffic stop,IMO. >> The only reason it is unusual behavior is because the roads are so >> underposted. > This does not compute;one drives 10 MPH -under- the underposted limit,as > ordinary behavior?(with no or minimal impairment) > > It makes more sense to drive OVER the UNDERposted limit. The only reason it is unusual to driver UNDER the limit is because the speed limit is so LOW to begin with. >> The other problem is that late at night is also prime >> speeding ticket issuing time. So you're damned if you do, damned if >> you don't. > Then why not drive AT or close to the posted limit?(as reasonable behavior > for those times of the dark.) > IMO,10 or more MPH under at night with little traffic IS suspicious > behavior justifying a traffic stop. Because we all know radar guns are perfectly accurate...... I've driven 5-8mph under in heavily patrolled speed limit zones. I've often been in unfamiliar areas where I had to guess at the limit because it looked like a revenue zone and I thought I may have missed a sign. So if it looked like a 45mph traffic speed road, I would drive 30mph. Figuring that the real speed limit couldn't be higher than 40 and could be as low as 25mph. |
#145
|
|||
|
|||
In article >, Jim Yanik wrote:
>>> I would consider it unusual for someone to be driving 35 in a 45 zone >>> late at night/early AM. Most people drive at or over the >>> limit,especially when the roads are empty. Unusual behavior late at >>> night/early AM would be sufficient grounds for a traffic stop,IMO. >> The only reason it is unusual behavior is because the roads are so >> underposted. > This does not compute;one drives 10 MPH -under- the underposted limit,as > ordinary behavior?(with no or minimal impairment) > > It makes more sense to drive OVER the UNDERposted limit. The only reason it is unusual to driver UNDER the limit is because the speed limit is so LOW to begin with. >> The other problem is that late at night is also prime >> speeding ticket issuing time. So you're damned if you do, damned if >> you don't. > Then why not drive AT or close to the posted limit?(as reasonable behavior > for those times of the dark.) > IMO,10 or more MPH under at night with little traffic IS suspicious > behavior justifying a traffic stop. Because we all know radar guns are perfectly accurate...... I've driven 5-8mph under in heavily patrolled speed limit zones. I've often been in unfamiliar areas where I had to guess at the limit because it looked like a revenue zone and I thought I may have missed a sign. So if it looked like a 45mph traffic speed road, I would drive 30mph. Figuring that the real speed limit couldn't be higher than 40 and could be as low as 25mph. |
#146
|
|||
|
|||
In article >,
Arif Khokar > wrote: >Brent P wrote: > >> In article >, Jim Yanik wrote: > >>>>In the first case they stop and check anyone they want. > >>>But they have SOME amount of probable cause.Do they really stop people just >>>for driving the speed limit? I'm doubtful about that. > >> Driving that slow _IS_ the probable cause, or at least part of it. > >Actually, it's one of several factors (at least that's what claimed) >forming "reasonable suspicion." A drug dog "alerting" then changes it >to "probable cause." Yep. The Fourth Amendment has meaning only if cops can't get a dog to bark on surreptitious command. |
#147
|
|||
|
|||
In article >,
Arif Khokar > wrote: >Brent P wrote: > >> In article >, Jim Yanik wrote: > >>>>In the first case they stop and check anyone they want. > >>>But they have SOME amount of probable cause.Do they really stop people just >>>for driving the speed limit? I'm doubtful about that. > >> Driving that slow _IS_ the probable cause, or at least part of it. > >Actually, it's one of several factors (at least that's what claimed) >forming "reasonable suspicion." A drug dog "alerting" then changes it >to "probable cause." Yep. The Fourth Amendment has meaning only if cops can't get a dog to bark on surreptitious command. |
#148
|
|||
|
|||
|
#149
|
|||
|
|||
|
#150
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|