Ok some of you may have read my speeding ticket thread heres what’s going on. http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=33066

I got a ticket for a 93 in a 65 (28 over) that’s 4points in Jersey.
Cop was very nice said he would knock the ticket down in court he seem genuine.

Ticket was given to me on 7-2-04 it is now 5 days till my court date i have been calling the court house to plead not guilty for the last 4 days. You have 7 days prior to your court date to plead not guilty.

Here is my dilemma, they don't have the ticket in the system..... Is it possible i got a really lucky and the officer lost the ticket?

Last time i called they wanted the badge number of the officer..... I bs'ed said "i was at work i don't have the ticket infront of me." I mean im not trying to get a ticket and if they lost it then well im really thankful to a higher power.

I’m looking to get a lawyer so i can file a letter of "somethingorother" that basically says the ticket was not in you system at the time of the court date please call once the ticket is received. That way i have a way out if they issue a bench warrent for my arrest down the road.

I'm really looking for a favor here i can't afford the $900-$1200 dollar lawyers fees the last 2 guys quoted me, but the again that’s a small chunk of change in comparison to the $5000 i would pay in insurance points over 4years.

My friend got a DUI last summer, the court couldnt find his ticket and his case was dismissed. Sounds like you're going in the same direction.

there's an excellent book on how to get out of paying speeding tickets (has three chapters on methods used to get them thrown out entirely). I can't remember the name, heard about it last decemberr on the radio. Doing a search on amazon http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0965561089/qid=1090438421/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-8811465-6054531?v=glance&s=books pulls up this one and a few others. Might be worth it, I've been thinking about getting one of these books for a while now.

Simple. Give me your car when you lose your license.

My friend got a DUI last summer, the court couldnt find his ticket and his case was dismissed. Sounds like you're going in the same direction.

I'm sorry to hear that!

as for your ticket, I know you said you have learned your lesson, or something to that effect. But, unless the court dismisses it, I dont think you should try to get out of it IMO. You screwed up, be a man and take your punishment.

I get sick of everyone trying to get out of shit like this, I have had 3 speeding tickets and one dangerous driving ticket (all on motorcycles) and have eaten them all. AND my dad is a lawyer, so I could have easily weaseled my way out of it. Yeah, my insurance is high, but it my own fault, and it will come down again.

Theres a point to which punishment is acceptable, being even farther in debt before i got to college is not a good idea.

The punishment should fit the crime, the car got away from me, i was in a rush to get to a friend, whatever the reason, its not worth $6,000.

Theres a point to which punishment is acceptable, being even farther in debt before i got to college is not a good idea.

The punishment should fit the crime, the car got away from me, i was in a rush to get to a friend, whatever the reason, its not worth $6,000.

Not in your opinion, obviously.

What about the people who have lost kids, husbands, wives, because of young people with little driving skill having the car "get away from them". The punishment does fit the crime.

why would you be in a rush to get to your freinds house?? i guarantee it is nothing that would put to rest the minds of people who have lost loved ones because some punk in a fast car lost control.

If you don't want to pay for the crime, don't do it. It's that simple.

Just keep a log of when you called and who you spoke to.
If the ticket does show up, pay it. If you have to go to court and they hit you with extra fines/fees for being late say...your honor I tried to take car of it - show them your log. They should have any late/FTA fines/fees.

....and slow down. Race on the track, not the street. You don't want to scratch your car when (not if) you hit someone/something.

The punishment should fit the crime, the car got away from me, i was in a rush to get to a friend, whatever the reason, its not worth $6,000.

I agree with Shiggins....if you disagree with the punishment, don't break the law. 93 in 65 is major speeding, there's a reason why young people have higher insurance. The only way you will learn is by paying through your nose and not doing it again. Be thankful your license is not suspended.

-arattle

OK everyone start bashing me, but I do not think 93 in a 65 should cost anywhere a near as it does. The 65 is probably too slow for actual conditions. Speed limits are usually set irrationally. And fines are also. The 55 limit was a knee jerk reaction to a man-made oil shortage. When the fed finally let loose of the 55 requirement, states just willy nilly started setting limits. 55 in one population density, 65 another, 70 another, 85 another, or none IIRC about ND or WY, one of the upper west but not west coast states. No study supports current highway limits, and a lot of people speed. Is it really that much more dangerous to drive 93 in a 65 than say 80. Could be depends on congestion and other factors. Rant over.

Look im wrong and I’ll be the first to admit it.... but the thing is i don't have $5000+ to devote to a moment of stupidity, that I’ve learned from.

And your right 93 isn't that much worse the 80 (what i normally drive) and incomparrison everyone was doing 80-87 on the highway that day.

Look im wrong and I’ll be the first to admit it.... but the thing is i don't have $5000+ to devote to a moment of stupidity, that I’ve learned from.

And your right 93 isn't that much worse the 80 (what i normally drive) and incomparrison everyone was doing 80-87 on the highway that day.

Clearly if you 'normally' drive 80 in a 65 its not a moment of stupidity but rather normal stupidity. Thats still speeding,and it is totally irrelevant what everyone else was doing that day or any day, the speed limit is the speed limit.

Im glad tha you say you have learned from this experience, but if and extra $5000+ is going to break the bank, you really shouldn have a $30000 car, becuase stuff like this is part of ownership costs. What if you got into an accident? your insurance would go up similarily, and you wouldnt be able to afford the increase either. From someone that used to live from cheque to cheque, its not healthy kid.

Most people drive 80 all the time in a 65 around here... sometimes it is safer to go with traffic...

Cut the guy a break. Yes he was wrong. He admits he was wrong. But the reality is, speeding tickets are as much about income as it is about safety. The second reality is the road he was caught speeding on, he was probably going with traffic. I drive the GS PKWY & NJTPK regularly, and shit, I regularly get run over doing 80. One last point. The advice he was given (plead not guilty, plea bargin in court) is a regular event in NJ. I mean the line sometimes is so long, it takes hours just to see the prosecutor for 5 minutes. When I had to do that, they gave me the plea without me saying a word.

Polak - I am sorry I can't help you. I think the advise above on keeping a log is the best bet. Keep checking in, especially on the day you have to plea. Are you checking with the state police, or the municipality you got the ticket in? If I remember right, state police tickets are handled by the local municipallity. Maybe check with the state police.

dag

Clearly if you 'normally' drive 80 in a 65 its not a moment of stupidity but rather normal stupidity.

pfffft - cruising speed. Police won't even bat an eye at you if you pass them at that speed.

Most people drive 80 all the time in a 65 around here... sometimes it is safer to go with traffic...

I can understand that, and i agree that it sometimes is safer to go with the flow. But I can safely say, if you told a judge what you have said in this thread he would say T.S and slap you with more fines for wasting time.

OK, I'm not going to beat you up about this because clearly that's been taken care of. Others please do not think that I condone his actions, because I definitely do not, however he asked for assistance and he's getting quite a black eye here already. He has parents let them handle the lectures.

Polak, call the BAR association in your area and ask them for a list of lawyers that specialize in vehicular law, and ask for pro bono attorneys. There are a lot of lawyers that do pro bono, or free, legal work.

Good luck to you in life, and please slow down and be careful!

I dont mean to beat on the kid. But, I have lost 3 freinds/relatives in my life 1 because of DUI, 2 because of speeders.

So you can understand why it pisses me off so much, especially the guy who got off his DUI above.

In one case some punk kid was doing 20Km/hr (about half of what he was doing) over the posted limit in his daddies firebird, lost control and killed my girlfreind of the time. His punishment was BS, he lost his license for 1 year and did some volunteer work. So, you will excuse me when I get angry about people trying to weasel out of stuff like this, but people really need to learn to take responsibility for their actions. Its very easy to say you have learned your lesson. In fact, in all three of the above cases, they said just that in the trials.

Sorry for the tradegy in your life. It is terrible, and quite frankly, I do agree that DUI is an offense no one should get away with. I even side with the idea that if there is a death, the person should be charged with manslaughter. I have know many people that should never be allowed behind the wheel, but continue to do so around the law. I also feel that what Polak did isn't at the level of what you just brought up. I have met Polak and he seems to be a headsy guy. Even the best of drivers get into accidents and make mistakes. This doesn't mean that you should have to take everything that is given to you due to that mistake.

dag

Sorry for the tradegy in your life. It is terrible, and quite frankly, I do agree that DUI is an offense no one should get away with. I even side with the idea that if there is a death, the person should be charged with manslaughter. I have know many people that should never be allowed behind the wheel, but continue to do so around the law. I also feel that what Polak did isn't at the level of what you just brought up. I have met Polak and he seems to be a headsy guy. Even the best of drivers get into accidents and make mistakes. This doesn't mean that you should have to take everything that is given to you due to that mistake.

dag

I certainly dont think what he has done is anywhere near what I have seen. And he does seem like he has a good head on his shoulders, he certainly doesnt write like other people his age, I dont even understand them.

It just annoys me at how many people dont take speeding seriously, they have the laws for a reason, and people die when you dont obey them. A lot of people feel that when they get a speeding ticket, they will just find away out of it, and then continue to speed. I know of so many people that get out of speeding tickets, especially with X-Coppers, that it has almost become redundant.

I would just like people to take more care when driving, and see those who dont actually take responsibility for what they do.

Sign up for prepaid legal services, its no contract, like 30 a month, and they cover pre existing conditions. After you get your letter, cancel it.

http://www.prepaidlegal.com/

On a more serious note, I don't think you need a lawyer just yet....since they don't have your ticket in the system, it is not your responsibility. I would still go to court just in case it gets called up, and be prepared to plead guilty with explanation (or whatever it is called in NJ). This is pretty bad speeding, but it's not the end of the world, the judge will probably take off half the points if you have a half-decent explanation. The only reason you'd need to consider a lawyer is if you miss the court date and your ticket *does* get called up. Then you'd need to show your effort to call in and enter a plea, and their negligence and the fact that you were unable to do so. But if I were you, I wouldn't worry about it too much, just try to show up for the court date "just in case." Good luck, we all speed, just try to be smarter about it next time -- 93 in 65 is pretty damn fast.

-arattle

...as for your ticket, I know you said you have learned your lesson, or something to that effect. But, unless the court dismisses it, I dont think you should try to get out of it IMO. You screwed up, be a man and take your punishment.

I get sick of everyone trying to get out of shit like this, I have had 3 speeding tickets and one dangerous driving ticket (all on motorcycles) and have eaten them all. AND my dad is a lawyer, so I could have easily weaseled my way out of it. Yeah, my insurance is high, but it my own fault, and it will come down again.

Am I the only one who thinks this is funny? Speeding is not a MORAL issue. It is a legal issue, and the law is set up for people to have a defense. You even said you wanted to be an attorney, now that is the funniest part! What are you going to say to your client, "suck it up buddy, pay the fine! And that'll be $200 for the advice!"

Most laws find their beginnings in ethics and morals, including speeding. The law is in place becuase speeding is dangerous, and when this danger is present, the driver and innocent people are exposed to the effects of it.

I said I wanted to be an attorney, yes, but an intellectual property lawyer, not a traffic lawyer. Although if I dealt with taffic law, I would say suck it up buddy, pay the fine and take the points and dont be so stupid next time. I probably wouldnt make too much $$.

Most laws find their beginnings in ethics and morals, including speeding. The law is in place becuase speeding is dangerous, and when this danger is present, the driver and innocent people are exposed to the effects of it.
Sorry, but incorrect. Speeding laws are a taxation issue and speed limits are intentionally set below the 70th percentile for purposes of entrapment. States loose their federal highway money if they don't comply and would otherwise be unable to balance their budgets if they didn't have a traffic enforcement based income stream.
Standing still is dangerous and traveling at a speed that is 20% below the average speed is even more so. However, there are no fines for that or driving record points.
A $5000 premium increase on the part of the insurance industry is collusion at best.
There is no morality in law. Morality in law would be, logically, illegal by definition.
Despite your plea to humanity about your relatives, killing someone while incidentally speeding is not immoral, just illegal. Intending to kill someone is immoral.

In any event, in MD the state being unprepared to support their case (in this instance - missing a formal record of the offense) is grounds for dismissal. I would imagine there is some parallel in NJ.

I disagree on the moral aspect of speeding, but whatever your position on that or your potential subspecialty of law, an attorney saying "I don't think you should try to get out of that" strikes me as funny. Maybe you should be a judge, it seems more natural.

Klegg?

we all speed, even shiggins says he speeds, the key is whether the speed is dangerous at a certain point, this is where the morality and ethics issue play in. 80 in a 65 is ok on a bright sunny day, but in a thunderstorm? Speed limits are just a means of income so that we wont have to pay more taxes.

Above all else.. how would getting an attorney be helpful in this matter? I don't understand how you're going to defend yourself and say you're "not guilty" when it was 93 on a 65. I'm lost there. What would your defense be?

In California, if you just go to court, see the judge, say you're guilty, judge will ask you if you want traffic school.. say yes... bamn, reduced fines of 70% or more. I had a ticket 98 on a 65. Reduced it from a $490 to 201 with traffic school. My insurance wont be affected.

i believe polak doesnt mind paying the fine, he wants to avoid the points. The lawyer will be key in getting the charge of speeding changed to a charge like failure to obey postings, or excessive speed for the situation or something like that ( i dunno the laws, the only 'speeding' ticket never actually was a speeding ticket, it was a failure to obey posted speed limit, and didnt come with points or a mentioning of how fast i was going...honesty works with police officers although i would have preferred a warning).

I would still go to court on the appointed date. If they don't have record then they should dismiss. However, if this is your second ticket in the year and because your under 18 then I would look into getting a lawyer for protection. If I'm not mistaken NJ law states that if you have more than 12 points on your record then you will get a notice of suspension. If you take the traffic school and have 2 points deducted, but that is the max in a 5 yr period. My advice....go to your court date...if they don't have record it will be dropped. If they don't have record but, try something stupid then ask for a continuance to seek counsel. Worst case senario is you go to traffic school get the 2 points deducted....still have the remaining 2 points on your license and you try harder not to hot foot it.

Sorry, but incorrect. Speeding laws are a taxation issue and speed limits are intentionally set below the 70th percentile for purposes of entrapment. States loose their federal highway money if they don't comply and would otherwise be unable to balance their budgets if they didn't have a traffic enforcement based income stream.
Standing still is dangerous and traveling at a speed that is 20% below the average speed is even more so. However, there are no fines for that or driving record points.
A $5000 premium increase on the part of the insurance industry is collusion at best.
There is no morality in law. Morality in law would be, logically, illegal by definition.
Despite your plea to humanity about your relatives, killing someone while incidentally speeding is not immoral, just illegal. Intending to kill someone is immoral.

In any event, in MD the state being unprepared to support their case (in this instance - missing a formal record of the offense) is grounds for dismissal. I would imagine there is some parallel in NJ.

I understand the current state of the laws. I know that taffic violations provide sizable incomes to their respective governements.

You can be fined for driving to slow, my father has been, its dangerous driving. I guess they dont have a title for that particular offence, but it is none the less against the law, so is being stopped in a lane.

As for morality in law, i didnt say there was, I said many laws arise from ethics and morality, which is most definitely true.

killing someone while incidentally speeding is not immoral, just illegal.....true. But the act of speeding is immoral. Any reasonable person realizes the greater risk associated with higher speeds. Knowing of the greater risk to yourself and innocent people and ignoring it, is immoral.

I personally dont speed in cars, unless travelling with the flow of traffic, which is safer. The only time I ever speed is on my motorcycle and certainly only in places where absolutly nobody else will get hurt if I lose it.

Sorry, but incorrect. Speeding laws are a taxation issue and speed limits are intentionally set below the 70th percentile for purposes of entrapment. States loose their federal highway money if they don't comply and would otherwise be unable to balance their budgets if they didn't have a traffic enforcement based income stream.
Standing still is dangerous and traveling at a speed that is 20% below the average speed is even more so. However, there are no fines for that or driving record points.
A $5000 premium increase on the part of the insurance industry is collusion at best.
There is no morality in law. Morality in law would be, logically, illegal by definition.
Despite your plea to humanity about your relatives, killing someone while incidentally speeding is not immoral, just illegal. Intending to kill someone is immoral.

In any event, in MD the state being unprepared to support their case (in this instance - missing a formal record of the offense) is grounds for dismissal. I would imagine there is some parallel in NJ.

Additionally, the police do not monitor and regularly pull people over for failing to keep to the right. Just last night during evening rush hour traffic, there were trucks going about the same speed in the left and center lanes. Traffic was backed up for miles and people were constantly jostleing from center to left lane and back trying to go in which ever lane was quickest. From miles back all one knew is something is slowing things done. As is finally approached the local truck in the left lane and semi in the center lane taking turns as who was ahead of who, my first thought was the smaller truck (local) was in the left hand lane because there was a left exit coming up and he didn't want to worry about merging when it was time. Wrong! The left exit came and he didn't take it. About 100 yards after the exit it makes a new lane on the left. I was able to move over and pass.

Also, police rarely give out tickets for following too closely, but what do yoiu think causes those 120 car pileups? Also, and again referring to my commute last night. Following too closely causes the accordian effect. Car 1 brakes 5 mph, car 2 seeing car 1 and wanting to increase the following distance (because he's too close) brakes 10 mph. Car 3 is also too close and brakes more than car 2 in front to increase distance. This continues until cars are stopping on the highway. But if all the cars were following at the proper distance, when car 1 broke, car 2 would have just eased off the gas a little and kept the same distance, and so forth. A slight general slowdown with no one stopping. The above type of accordian style stopping happening in the different lanes at different times contributes to people switching lanes as described in the first paragraph.


Speed is just one factor that effects highway safety. Going 93 is a 65 is no more dangerous that going 65 in the left lane, when people are going 70 plus in the middle lane. Also, someone above posted that many people fly at 80-85 on teh particular highway where the ticket was given. If so, going 93 is safer for all concerned than going 65, 93 is closer to the average than is 65.

that is a rediculous price to pay for a simple speeding ticket. Here in Missouri it is either 50 dollar lawyer fees for up to about 15 over and then they charge like 100 bucks till like 30 over. Most speeding tickets only take a phone call to resolve. I had a 65 in a 25 when I was 18 and my attorney charged 75 and fine court fees were 325. My DWI I got a few months ago is also not to bad in missouri. 750 for attorney, 150 for dwi class and probably 1000 dollars in fines since my attorney is taking it down so I dont get points on my license at all.

killing someone while incidentally speeding is not immoral, just illegal.....true. But the act of speeding is immoral. Any reasonable person realizes the greater risk associated with higher speeds. Knowing of the greater risk to yourself and innocent people and ignoring it, is immoral.
Irresponsible, probably. Illegal, definitely. Immoral, however, is illogical. If the speeder himself decides speeding is immoral and does it anyway, he alone can judge it to be immoral. You cannot.

I disagree. I believe society judges it immoral to wantonly disregard the well being of others. speeding is a blatant disregard for the well being of those around you, and thus immoral.

By your arguement, if someone murders another, but doesnt feel it to be wrong in their eyes; they are acting morally. This isnt the case, morals are defined by society, not individuals.

I live in Canada so his offence of 28 mph over the posted limit is a hair off of 45 km/hr. 45 km/hr over is grounds for suspension in Ontario. This speed goes beyond making money, its is dangerous, plain and simple.

by the way, this is good conversation :)

So what you are saying is you are better than Polak because you have "eaten all" of your tickets, yet in a later post you say "killing someone while incidentally speeding is not immoral, just illegal.....true. But the act of speeding is immoral. Any reasonable person realizes the greater risk associated with higher speeds. Knowing of the greater risk to yourself and innocent people and ignoring it, is immoral" and "I personally dont speed in cars, unless travelling with the flow of traffic, which is safer. The only time I ever speed is on my motorcycle and certainly only in places where absolutly nobody else will get hurt if I lose it." :mad:

You also say that "I have had 3 speeding tickets and one dangerous driving ticket (all on motorcycles) and have eaten them all :rolleyes: . AND my dad is a lawyer, so I could have easily weaseled my way out of it. Yeah, my insurance is high, but it my own fault, and it will come down again." :confused:

I say, get off your Moral high horse and quit preaching because you by your own standards are immoral! Let me repeat the quote..."But the act of speeding is immoral. Any reasonable person realizes the greater risk associated with higher speeds. Knowing of the greater risk to yourself and innocent people and ignoring it, is immoral." Yet you say you only speed on your motorcycle and in areas where noone else is at risk? I am raising the BS flag on this one because if that were true how do you have 4 tickets????

Polak shows more maturity than most kids his age I know, and I say kids because I am 33 and feel that he is still a kid even though he acts much more mature than others his age. He is not trying to get out of the ticket all together in my opinion only trying to mitigate the financial burden on his future. You may have more money than he and his parents do, and even if you do not who are you to judge him when you are equally as stupid, but only on your motorcycle?

You have lost my respect and probably that of others as well by your good for the goose but not the gander position you have displayed here. And if you think speeding on your motorcycle only endangers you then think again. What about the family that may come upon your bike and body laying in the road dead and the effect it will have on them even if they don't wreck trying to avoid you?

In RX-8 club survivor I have just cast my vote to throw you off this thread! Mods a little help here please!

relax dude. I dont think I am better than anyone, and I have said that I think polak is mature too.

So what you are saying is you are better than Polak because you have "eaten all" of your tickets, yet in a later post you say "killing someone while incidentally speeding is not immoral, just illegal.....true. But the act of speeding is immoral. Any reasonable person realizes the greater risk associated with higher speeds. Knowing of the greater risk to yourself and innocent people and ignoring it, is immoral" and "I personally dont speed in cars, unless travelling with the flow of traffic, which is safer. The only time I ever speed is on my motorcycle and certainly only in places where absolutly nobody else will get hurt if I lose it." :mad:

There is nothing wrong with going with the flow of traffic, i said that in a previous post. It is safer as polak said. Going excessivly fast compared to others is dangerous, and knowing of those dangers makes it immoral.

I will get to the motorcycle thing in a minute.

You also say that "I have had 3 speeding tickets and one dangerous driving ticket (all on motorcycles) and have eaten them all :rolleyes: . AND my dad is a lawyer, so I could have easily weaseled my way out of it. Yeah, my insurance is high, but it my own fault, and it will come down again." :confused:

I say, get off your Moral high horse and quit preaching because you by your own standards are immoral! Let me repeat the quote..."But the act of speeding is immoral. Any reasonable person realizes the greater risk associated with higher speeds. Knowing of the greater risk to yourself and innocent people and ignoring it, is immoral." Yet you say you only speed on your motorcycle and in areas where noone else is at risk? I am raising the BS flag on this one because if that were true how do you have 4 tickets????

I really feel the immorality of speeding really comes in when you endager other peoples lives by your action. I threw the self danger in there because I was thinking of seatbelt laws, but it certainly fits.

As for my 4 tickets, I ride with my good freind every sunday night starting at 3:00 a.m, so i guess its mondays really. We live in the middle of farm country, and we go to a twisty road by my house which is surrounded by farm land. I have never seen another car on this road other than 1 of the 2 local police officers at this time of night. He takes this road home becuase there is one corner which has had a large number of accidents, and unless another car passes by, nobody would know. I have ridden this road every sunday during the m/c season aggresively since I was 16 years old, and in the last 11 years have gotten 4 tickets on the same stretch of road. The only reason is because the police officer was checking on the road. He never had a radar on us..ever. I have never fought the charges. Two of the speeding tickets are for 15 km/h over (the minumum) and 1 (the first) for 30 over. The dangerous driving was because we stopped the bikes on the road to film some dear that were fighting on the side of the road.

I am not trying to say I am perfect, and have not said that I am. I am merely discussing the moral issues associated with speeding on public roads. and this is in no way directed at polak!!


Polak shows more maturity than most kids his age I know and I say kids because I am 33 and feel that he is still a kid even though he acts much more mature than others his age. He is not trying to get out of the ticket all together in my opinion anly trying to mitigate the financial burden on his future. You may have more money than he and his parents do, and even if you do not who are you to judge him when you are equally as stupid, but only on your motorcycle?

I ahve already said i respect polaks maturity.

I am a 27 year old student, I dont have more money than anyone for things of this nature.

You have lost my respect and probably that of others as well by your good for the goose but not the gander position you have displayed here. And if you think speeding on your motorcycle only endangers you then think again. What about the family that may come upon your bike and body laying in the road dead and the effect it will have on them if they don't wreck trying to avoid you?

In RX-8 club survivor I have just cast my vote to throw you off this thread! Mods a little help here please!

I may have lost some peoples respect, its unfortunate. None of this was directed towards polak specifically after my first comment. You raise a good point about the family, or for that matter, my family when they find out. It raises new issues which i didnt really take into account and certainly is something to think about. isnt that the point of discussion.

I appreciate you comments, and certainly didnt want to come off as high and mighty. I am hardly perfect. The discussion of this thread left form polaks original questions to a morality debate, which I found interesting.

I apologize if I have offended you or anyone. I certainly hope that you dont hold it against me in all future discussions.

It doesnt change my opinion that speeding is an immoral act.

Im really not satisfied with the above post I made, and I dont know why. Im struggling to find away to say what I thinking.

Basically, I do not think I am perfect. I do speed, knowingly on my m/c, although I do my very best to minimize the risk to innocent people. I make a concious effort not to speed in a car, simply because of the increased danger to others. I dont think what I do/done is right, nor moral. I havent said otherwise in this thread.

The thing that sparks my anger is the non chalant attitude that accompanies speeders. And the general attitude of many people in todays society that other poeple arent their responsibility.

There are almost two different discussions in this thread.

The first involving my opinion about tryin to get out of tickets. Which bothers me because people dont seem to believe that they should be held responible for infractions of this nature. Many have a very lax attitude towards speeding.

Then a discussion began about the morality of speeding. Which really is a totally different topic all together. I can still believe that speeding is immoral while having sped myslef. Just the same as one can beleive theft is immoral, but download music and videos from the internet.

I dont know if this makes any sense to those reading, Im having trouble getting across my point.

Just a thought, but does a local law school have a student clinic? Fees are free or very low, and it would be a case all of the students would be interested in. You could learn what you need without spending a lot, and the students would benefit.

Heh i not only want a lawyer i want a GOOD lawyer.

What should I expect to pay a decent guy? $600 is my lowest quote
Still looking into the pro bono thing, left a message.

I'm still lost on what your defense is going to be? Only have a lawyer if you have something to defend yourself with. IF you are going to say you're guilty, then you wont need one, and they'll simply reduce the fine, and the charges.

If you are going to fight it... the results CAN get bad. Lost hours, lost money, and possibly NO CHANCE of traffic school... thus getting even more crap from your insurance company.

Well the cop had told me to plead not guilty and that we would work on a reducing the charge, in court.

Don’t know about CA but here in NJ the only way you can hope to get a 4 point ticket down to no points (especially at my age) is be serious show up with a lawyer.

Now this is assuming that ticket is ever turned in *fingers crossed*. If it isn't then i just want a formal letter written by an attorney that says if the ticket is ever turned in and issued this is what happened etc... Which covers my ass if i have a bench warrant issued for my arrest a couple months down the road.

I disagree. I believe society judges it immoral to wantonly disregard the well being of others. speeding is a blatant disregard for the well being of those around you, and thus immoral.

By your arguement, if someone murders another, but doesnt feel it to be wrong in their eyes; they are acting morally. This isnt the case, morals are defined by society, not individuals.

I live in Canada so his offence of 28 mph over the posted limit is a hair off of 45 km/hr. 45 km/hr over is grounds for suspension in Ontario. This speed goes beyond making money, its is dangerous, plain and simple.

by the way, this is good conversation :)

I'm sorry you're wrong. Do you know the difference between your post and Jeff 's(MazdaManiac)? He is using philosophy... logic only.

Society can believe whatever it wants. It all amounts to two things... jack and sh*&t. Society regularly deems something to be moral today and immoral tomorrow. That doesn't actually change the intrinsic morality of said act, only society's view of it. Utilitarianism does not describe the intrinsic morality of a situation or act, only a relativistic view based on the "greater good" not an "ultimate good."

Someone who commits a homocide and doesn't believe it to be wrong is usually deemed insane. If this was not true, then children (even 3 yr olds) can and should be held accountable for acts such as murder... this is obviously incorrect.

And yes I enjoy philosophical arguments as well. :)

I'm sorry you're wrong. Do you know the difference between your post and Jeff 's(MazdaManiac)? He is using philosophy... logic only.

Society can believe whatever it wants. It all amounts to two things... jack and sh*&t. Society regularly deems something to be moral today and immoral tomorrow. That doesn't actually change the intrinsic morality of said act, only society's view of it. Utilitarianism does not describe the intrinsic morality of a situation or act, only a relativistic view based on the "greater good" not an "ultimate good."

Someone who commits a homocide and doesn't believe it to be wrong is usually deemed insane. If this was not true, then children (even 3 yr olds) can and should be held accountable for acts such as murder... this is obviously incorrect.

And yes I enjoy philosophical arguments as well. :)
Ding ding ding!

Arguing anything from the point of its moral value is going to get you nowhere, especially as soon as you are forced to use reason to support it.

I'll tell you this from first hand experience.. If you plead NOT guilty for a speeding ticket.. you will lose. It's your job to deny that you speed, need to get a witness at least, or say that the cop is a liar. Judges will always favor the cops simply because they've heard all the excuses in the world... I'm still not sure what it is you are trying to defend yourself with.

Are you going to say you didn't speed? That the cop is a liar? I guess you can hire a lawyer, appear in court and say you're guilty.. but what's the point of that? Just to spend more money? Maybe it's time to ask your parents to bail you out on this one... in the end, your insurance is going to go up. Btw, if you fight this, and lose, the Judge can revoke your chance for traffic school.. keeping those points permanently on your record for at least 10+ years. That's far worse than getting 4 points for 3 years and having it erased.

The fact is that you were speeding, and you deserve a ticket. Yeah, this country is so messed up you can actually get out things you were guilty of sometimes. In this case, you are gonna need more then a lawyer. You are gonna have to lie to your lawyer and the judge, and make up a story if you wanna get out of the ticket fully. You best take this advice. Don't get a lawyer, go in there with your parents, explain to judge you made a mistake, and you likely will get ticket reduced to 2 points. You are still a minor, so your parents can have an influence on getting ticket reduced. Your parents should be more upset about this then you, because they are the ones paying for your insurance. Are you listed under your own insurance policy, or is the car in their ownership, and they are driving it. For someone your age, it would be $5k+ per year to insure a car like that. I am gonna assume your parents own the car , and you are under their policy driving it. I hope even though you have a very high lifestyle for someone so young, you can be a man, and take the hand you are dealt. You are guilty, and you need to swallow it, and take the ticket. If you don't get what you deserve now, and you get away with this, it's never gonna teach you anything, so you best just take the ticket and learn. They let you plead not guilty for oppurtunity to reduce ticket. If you think you have a chance of getting off, I hope your dad or the laywer you hire is best friends with the judge.

I'll tell you this from first hand experience.. If you plead NOT guilty for a speeding ticket.. you will lose. It's your job to deny that you speed, need to get a witness at least, or say that the cop is a liar.
Though I generally agree with this sentiment, it isn't always the case. It just depends on what is at stake and what it is worth to you.

My last ticket was for 52 in a 35. I, basically, called the cop a liar.
She said she had me on RADAR and I said that wasn't possible because she didn't have a line of sight that didn't include a dozen other vehicles. I also mentioned it was stop and go traffic.
I brought pictures, including a photo looking from her vantage point on that street for every day at the exact time of the citation for two weeks.
There wasnt a single photo in which traffic wasn't standing completely still. It was rush hour.
For the coup de gras, I asked her what part of the car at which she aimed her RADAR.
She said the front plate.
I don't have a front plate.
Dismissed. That makes something like 10 for 10 over the last half a decade or longer.

The thing is.. this is 93 on a 65... no speed gun would be needed. Otherwise I would have told him to use that as a defense.

Speeding that fast is REALLY hard to beat... I just got a ticket of 98 in a 65 so I know. Luckily I went to court, sucked it up, and took traffic school online. Cost me $201, and my insurance wont know a thing. No points, etc.

I'm wondering why NJ would just stick it to him for 4 points, with no chance of Traffic school reducing those points or just taking them off completely. Is that a NJ law? For a minor?

Here in Cali, you get to serve traffic school and it's clean.

Besides, Polak I'm sure can just tell his parents and they'll cover whatever expenses it'll be... afterall they co-signed the car. Whether it be hiring a GREAT lawyer or just paying the higher premium on that car. 5k per year for insurance would be SICK. Hell, if it was that high, and I couldn't pay it, I would have to suck it up, sell the RX-8, and get a Civic or Hyandai or something. If you can pay it, just accept this as a lesson learned.

I'm sorry you're wrong. Do you know the difference between your post and Jeff 's(MazdaManiac)? He is using philosophy... logic only.

Society can believe whatever it wants. It all amounts to two things... jack and sh*&t. Society regularly deems something to be moral today and immoral tomorrow. That doesn't actually change the intrinsic morality of said act, only society's view of it. Utilitarianism does not describe the intrinsic morality of a situation or act, only a relativistic view based on the "greater good" not an "ultimate good."

Someone who commits a homocide and doesn't believe it to be wrong is usually deemed insane. If this was not true, then children (even 3 yr olds) can and should be held accountable for acts such as murder... this is obviously incorrect.

And yes I enjoy philosophical arguments as well. :)

Interesting. I see your point. To be honest, I have never taking a philosphy class in my life, its always been history or sciece, and I dont know why. I can see there are going to be a few more books in my futre :mad: like there isnt already enough!! and most of them came from this board!! haha, anyways, if you have any sugestions i would apprciate it, interesting stuff.

Well... I didn't enjoy my philosophy class so much, but I think that was due to the teacher. My political philosophy, Political science methods and ethics classes were extremely enlightening. My professors for those classes should never be allowed to leave my univ.

Books.... hmm....

Isaiah Berlin
- Four Essays on Liberty

Charles Taylor
- The Idea of freedom: Essays in honour of Isaiah Berlin

John Stuart Mill
- Utilitarianism
- On Liberty

Immanuel Kant
- Groundwork (or Foundations) of the Metaphysics of Morals

Michael Walzer
- Just and Unjust Wars

St. Thomas Aquinas
- St. Thomas Aquinas on Politics and Ethics
- Selected Writings (PENGUIN CLASSICS)

William Ockham
- Summa Logicae

... this should be more than enough to get you started. Enjoy!

I personally dont speed in cars, unless travelling with the flow of traffic, which is safer. The only time I ever speed is on my motorcycle and certainly only in places where absolutly nobody else will get hurt if I lose it.

I swore to myself I wasn't going to get involved in this, but...

Don't you think this is a rather selfish view of the world?

Unless you are an orphan (I am), without a spouse/significant other/piece on the side, pet, neighbor, or coworker who cares about you, someone will get hurt if you lose it. I imagine most of the people on this board would get hurt, due to the strong camradarie we all share.

---Andrew

I swore to myself I wasn't going to get involved in this, but...

Don't you think this is a rather selfish view of the world?

Unless you are an orphan (I am), without a spouse/significant other/piece on the side, pet, neighbor, or coworker who cares about you, someone will get hurt if you lose it. I imagine most of the people on this board would get hurt, due to the strong camradarie we all share.

---Andrew

you should always get involved, any criticism is constructive to me.

anyways, i already conceded that point to someone else who raised it. 'Tis a little selfish, I just wasnt thinking about it in the I die because of it way.

Cheers

Well... I didn't enjoy my philosophy class so much, but I think that was due to the teacher. My political philosophy, Political science methods and ethics classes were extremely enlightening. My professors for those classes should never be allowed to leave my univ.

Books.... hmm....

Isaiah Berlin
- Four Essays on Liberty

Charles Taylor
- The Idea of freedom: Essays in honour of Isaiah Berlin

John Stuart Mill
- Utilitarianism
- On Liberty

Immanuel Kant
- Groundwork (or Foundations) of the Metaphysics of Morals

Michael Walzer
- Just and Unjust Wars

St. Thomas Aquinas
- St. Thomas Aquinas on Politics and Ethics
- Selected Writings (PENGUIN CLASSICS)

William Ockham
- Summa Logicae

... this should be more than enough to get you started. Enjoy!

Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

The the interstates by me have a 65 limit with a 45 minimum. traffic usually moves 75-80. I would feel a whole lot safer at 93 than the 45 minimum, if I had to choose.

The speed really isnt the dangerous part, its the control. Driving 65, not paying attention or being in control is much more dangerous than traveling 193.

PS, I dont speed all that much, i have been F'ed in the A too many times

Here's my suggestion if no one has made it yet. NJ MVS website has the capability for you to check your ticket online and pay it there as well.

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/atswep/njmcdirectmain

So if it shows up there, you know they have it in the system.

Today Is The 26th. Court Was Today Right? How Did It Go?

PS, I dont speed all that much, i have been F'ed in the A too many timesDoes that make it harder to push the right foot down?

Oh, wait, I get it. Never mind. :p

Did anyone find out what Polak's defense is? Or is the law in NJ that if you bring a lawyer in, you automatically get a lesser charge or something?

Here's my suggestion if no one has made it yet. NJ MVS website has the capability for you to check your ticket online and pay it there as well.

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/atswep/njmcdirectmain

So if it shows up there, you know they have it in the system.
Been there done it everyday 10times over since i found out orally from the court house. Its still not showing up.

Courts the 29th I wasn't including weekends when i said 5 days (wishful thinking)

Did anyone find out what Polak's defense is? Or is the law in NJ that if you bring a lawyer in, you automatically get a lesser charge or something?Looks like his defense is, they lost the citation! You can't get a better defense than that. Congratulations, PoLak.

Don't jinx it damnit!

So he's going to go into court, with a lawyer, and tell the judge that since there is no record of the ticket, then he's innocent of the speeding charges? Uhhh :rolleyes:

Just stepping into court with a lawyer is saying.. 'hey I have a ticket somewhere, I'm here to do something about it.' And when it's all said and done, trying to beat a cop over a speeding ticket charge at 93 mph, is very tough.

Looks like his defense is, they lost the citation! You can't get a better defense than that. Congratulations, PoLak.

holy shit people...calm down...

I love all the Law abiding fools on this thread...like you have never gone over the speed limit...you guys need some therapy because if you believe in the law that much you aren''t TRULY FREE (I studied Legal Theory for years)

Funny thing is I got virtually the same ticket as polak...but mine was a 96 in a 65...I fought and fought for my life...eventually proving that the trooper had no clue how to use his new Lazer Gun and so we settled for having nothing on my record, and a minor fine...

Instead of: $280 for ticket... $65 for court costs... Loss of License for 30 days.... License Reinstatement Fee $140...Plus insurance Rate increase...I don't even want to think about it

I researched EVERYTHING about these devices and speeding, overall I learned that:

speeding does not cause more accidents...but will make accidents more severe...but most of the time alcohol is involved...alcohol is like a multiplier that is never removed from highway speeding studies

FINALLY AND MOST IMPORTANTLY...the insurance companies have kept the speed limits in this country low for years...this forces us to speed (yes forces us...since our body and minds lock in to driving to fast at 85-95 NOT 55 to 65). Plus cars today are MUCH safer and more stable to drive at high speeds then cars of just 10 years ago let alone 20 or more years. Insurance companies lobby to keep lower speeding limits...upping the amount of speeders, upping tickets and upping insurance premiums...

TO TOP IT OFF...
Laser Gun technology was never supposed be completed due to the inherent physical limitations of the technology...the company, who designed it to guide slow moving space vehicles to dock with the international space station was going bankrupt trying to develop the technolgy to work with speed acquisition...GUESS WHO BAILED THEM OUT...GEICO FUCKING INSURANCE DID! Those bastards...they annoy us with those shitty comercials and then help unleash an error ridden technology to control our speed on the road when it shouldn't be controlled anyway...

the answer to speeding...NOTHING...the answer is make it very difficult to get a drivers license...serious training needed....NO CELL PHONES...NO EATING...JUST DRIVE FUCKER and intense training to handle any situation in a car....

To give you an idea how much this is a MONEY MAKING CORRUPT MACHINE...you just have to look at small towns all over the country that reside on a major highway...their budgets for consist of 40-65% for speed violations!!! Holy shit...if you look at the numbers... there are 144million speeding tickets given each year in the US that is a lot of tickets considering there are only 280 million people and over a third of them cant drive anyway! (too young, too old, or others)

So he's going to go into court, with a lawyer, and tell the judge that since there is no record of the ticket, then he's innocent of the speeding charges? Uhhh :rolleyes:

Just stepping into court with a lawyer is saying.. 'hey I have a ticket somewhere, I'm here to do something about it.' And when it's all said and done, trying to beat a cop over a speeding ticket charge at 93 mph, is very tough.
It would sure be tougher without a lawyer. If you want to play the shiggins game of "Here, take my money and mess with my insurance for years," then more power to you. As the above poster wrote, lawyers have more tricks they can use to get you off. You keep the "moral high ground." I'll keep my payments down.

Truemagellan ... No mention of any speed gun was used. So he wouldn't be able to use that as a defense. Read through the entire thread.

Speed-ER... I mention the lawyer thing is because he may be spending more money than he should. Like I said before, I'm not sure how NJ laws are... but here in Cali, you can just go see judge, say you're guilty, he'll ask if you want to serve traffic school... do it, and no harm on your record, and your insurance wont know the difference. I just did this with a ticket of 98 in the 65. Paid 201 dollars instead of the 400+ I was suppose to pay. Took traffic school online, finished in 5 minutes. No lawyers, no excuses, nothing to worry about.

Maybe it's because of his age that he's getting 4 marks on his license?

age must be the factor you are right outlawsextreme...sorry about my rant...just got pissed at some of the posts that said speeding is criminal...I'm cool now : )

in Texas, if your ticket is over 25 MPH over the limit, you cannot take traffic school.

holy shit people...calm down...

I love all the Law abiding fools on this thread...like you have never gone over the speed limit...you guys need some therapy because if you believe in the law that much you aren''t TRULY FREE (I studied Legal Theory for years)

Funny thing is I got virtually the same ticket as polak...but mine was a 96 in a 65...I fought and fought for my life...eventually proving that the trooper had no clue how to use his new Lazer Gun and so we settled for having nothing on my record, and a minor fine...

Instead of: $280 for ticket... $65 for court costs... Loss of License for 30 days.... License Reinstatement Fee $140...Plus insurance Rate increase...I don't even want to think about it

I researched EVERYTHING about these devices and speeding, overall I learned that:

speeding does not cause more accidents...but will make accidents more severe...but most of the time alcohol is involved...alcohol is like a multiplier that is never removed from highway speeding studies

FINALLY AND MOST IMPORTANTLY...the insurance companies have kept the speed limits in this country low for years...this forces us to speed (yes forces us...since our body and minds lock in to driving to fast at 85-95 NOT 55 to 65). Plus cars today are MUCH safer and more stable to drive at high speeds then cars of just 10 years ago let alone 20 or more years. Insurance companies lobby to keep lower speeding limits...upping the amount of speeders, upping tickets and upping insurance premiums...

TO TOP IT OFF...
Laser Gun technology was never supposed be completed due to the inherent physical limitations of the technology...the company, who designed it to guide slow moving space vehicles to dock with the international space station was going bankrupt trying to develop the technolgy to work with speed acquisition...GUESS WHO BAILED THEM OUT...GEICO FUCKING INSURANCE DID! Those bastards...they annoy us with those shitty comercials and then help unleash an error ridden technology to control our speed on the road when it shouldn't be controlled anyway...

the answer to speeding...NOTHING...the answer is make it very difficult to get a drivers license...serious training needed....NO CELL PHONES...NO EATING...JUST DRIVE FUCKER and intense training to handle any situation in a car....

To give you an idea how much this is a MONEY MAKING CORRUPT MACHINE...you just have to look at small towns all over the country that reside on a major highway...their budgets for consist of 40-65% for speed violations!!! Holy shit...if you look at the numbers... there are 144million speeding tickets given each year in the US that is a lot of tickets considering there are only 280 million people and over a third of them cant drive anyway! (too young, too old, or others)

Amen! :D

my court date is the 28th. 79 in a 65, i hope they lose mine!

Ok I know you've all been dying to know what happened but my internet has been down for 48hours blah! You don't know how much that ticks me. Apologizes to people who ordered anything from me in the last couple of days i haven't been able to view/ship anything.

So i went to court dressed nice etc checked the list outside the court room, saw that i wasn't on it. Went to the cashier and asked if she could find the ticket via my name, DL#, registration etc..... Nada.

Then she asked for the ticket and i said well flat out "No" and she said "well that’s the only way we can help you", does anyone else find that to be a bit of an oxymoron i mean how is that going to "help" me.

So basically i live in fear until that ticket resurfaces assuming its not lost.

I have a question for shiggans, i am aware of my right to a fair a speedy trial, therefore i have 45days to be arraigned correct?
Does that apply even though i can't plead "not guilty"?... since the ticket doesn't “exist.”

I would just ignore it for now and blame them for losing it if they ever bring you up for charges.

Hehe i could picture a "welcome to dealing with the government kid" response if i told that to the prosecutor.

Get the clerk of court to give you a certified statement that no such ticket exists in the system. That is the only way your butt will be covered in the event this does resurface magically.

I have a sort-of similar experience going on.

I received a speeding ticket in 1989 out near Annapolis.
I never received a court notice and I never paid it. It just "went away".
I have had many tickets since and I regularly check my driving record and that citation has yet to ever appear.
However, one day recently when I was arranging a continuance for another ticket (another win for me), the clerk mentioned that I have an outstanding ticket in Anne Arundel county.
I asked the date and disposition she said 1989 and outstanding.
When I asked how it is possible to have an outstanding ticket for 15 years without a conviction, suspension or anything similar shae replied that she simply had no idea.
So, I asked how I should make it go away. She said "pay it". I nearly laughed her out of the courthouse.
She said that if I didn't pay it, they could convict me of the violation and then suspend my license.
Well, I'll wait for that court notice. I can imagine the officer's notes that day in court:

Judge: "Mr Abrams, how do you plead?"
Me: "Innocent, your honor."
Judge: "Deputy Fife, please present your case."

a clerk wheels in an elderly man in a police uniform, an oxygen canard under his nose

Officer: "Howzat?"
Judge: "Your case. Please present the state's case."
Officer: "Case of what? Where am I?"
Judge: "Do you have you notes?"

I think that one might get dismissed...