Speeding ticket

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
My finace got a speeding ticket in washington state. In the "defendant's signature" aknowledging that she "got the ticket but not admitting guilt" the cop never made her sign it....is this enough to get her off?

Can she just ignore it and then say...hey I never signed getting it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just ignoring it is a bad idea. She will get her license suspended and possibly have a warrant issued for her arrest. If she gets stopped again, she might end up in jail. As for whether the lack of a signature makes the ticket involved, that's going to depend on the laws of your state, city or county and possibly on the judge that hears the case. It's certainly worth a shot to go to court and contest the ticket on this basis, but it may not work.

If you think I'm kidding about going to jail, several years ago I mailed payment for a ticket for an expired emissions a little too late. About a year later, I was stopped for another violation and was actually handcuffed, hauled off to jail and spent a few interesting but not particularly pleasant hours there until I was bailed out. Of course all the other inmates were afraid of me after I told them what I was in jail for. I think a lot of states are moving away from jailing people who ignore traffic violations in favor of suspending licences, given that jails are generally overcrowded with out bringing in traffic violators, but, in most states, driving on a suspended license can get you jail time, too.

[Wongboy]

[ QUOTE ]
LMAO!!! Oh my freaking gosh, here we go, I stand up for obeying the law in general and it's compared to Nazi Germany?! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

This priceless. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

You were not "standing up for obeying the law in general". You were standing up for obeying laws blindly, without any thought to whether the laws make sense. Therefore a comparison to civil disobedience is on point, IMHO. The comparison to Nazi Germany was over the top, however.

Personally, I have a somewhat different view. I think it is fine to violate unjust laws, and I also think that the violator should receive the appropriate consequences for that violation. For example, when someone blocks a freeway to protest, they are not a bad person. However, they should be punised as appropriate for whatever laws they have violated. If they think that they should be allowed to legally block traffic as a protest, then that is something they should take up with their legislators.

[Leader]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All I ask is that if you want me to agree with you or to convince others that I'm wrong, you prove me wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, with many issues "proving" a position wrong is simply impossible.

[/ QUOTE ]

In truth, I'd settle for him just telling me why he thinks I'm wrong. At present he seems to think my argument has no merit at all, but is unwilling to grace the rest of us with the knowledge of where the obvious flaws there in my arguments. It's a typical elitist, extremist position. The fact is he doesn't know why he believes what he does. He just knows he's right and anyone that doesn't agree is obviously irrational.

[Leader]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LMAO!!! Oh my freaking gosh, here we go, I stand up for obeying the law in general and it's compared to Nazi Germany?! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

This priceless. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

You were not "standing up for obeying the law in general". You were standing up for obeying laws blindly, without any thought to whether the laws make sense. Therefore a comparison to civil disobedience is on point, IMHO. The comparison to Nazi Germany was over the top, however.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why shouldn't I choose a nasty example of what his kind of logic leads to? People’s blind obedience to unjust laws <u>has</u> killed people, hundreds of millions of people. I'm not going to make a touchy feely example so he can ignore the consequence of what he's arguing for.

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I have a somewhat different view. I think it is fine to violate unjust laws, and I also think that the violator should receive the appropriate consequences for that violation. For example, when someone blocks a freeway to protest, they are not a bad person. However, they should be punised as appropriate for whatever laws they have violated. If they think that they should be allowed to legally block traffic as a protest, then that is something they should take up with their legislators.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether you see the above as true seems to me to depend on whether you believe in objective morality or not. If you do, then you can't be justly punished for breaking an unjust law.

[Wongboy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You were not "standing up for obeying the law in general". You were standing up for obeying laws blindly, without any thought to whether the laws make sense. Therefore a comparison to civil disobedience is on point, IMHO. The comparison to Nazi Germany was over the top, however.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why shouldn't I choose a nasty example of what his kind of logic leads to? People’s blind obedience to unjust laws <u>has</u> killed people, hundreds of millions of people. I'm not going to make a touchy feely example so he can ignore the consequence of what he's arguing for.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its a very inflammatory argument that tends to distract from an otherwise good point. Internet debates tend to frequently degenerate into a comparison with Nazi Germany and this stirs up emotions making true objective debate difficult.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I have a somewhat different view. I think it is fine to violate unjust laws, and I also think that the violator should receive the appropriate consequences for that violation. For example, when someone blocks a freeway to protest, they are not a bad person. However, they should be punised as appropriate for whatever laws they have violated. If they think that they should be allowed to legally block traffic as a protest, then that is something they should take up with their legislators.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether you see the above as true seems to me to depend on whether you believe in objective morality or not. If you do, then you can't be justly punished for breaking an unjust law.

[/ QUOTE ]

I did not think that you were arguing that speed limit violations should go unpunished. On a broader scale, I think that by choosing to live in a society, we choose to subject ourselves to all of that societies rules and norms. Therefore, we should accept the specified punishment if we intentionally violate a law. That is not to say that violating a law we perceive to be unjust is wrong. However, if you knowingly violate a law (perhaps while protesting that or some other law/issue), then you should be willing to accept the consequences.

[Leader]

[ QUOTE ]
Its a very inflammatory argument that tends to distract from an otherwise good point. Internet debates tend to frequently degenerate into a comparison with Nazi Germany and this stirs up emotions making true objective debate difficult.

[/ QUOTE ]

This argument seems to indicate that I'm responsible for my "opponent's" emotional reaction to what I wrote. I disagree.

[ QUOTE ]
I did not think that you were arguing that speed limit violations should go unpunished.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm arguing that it depends on the circumstances and that arbitrary speed limits are unjust. I'm for the standard that you should be able to drive at any speed you want so long as a reasonable person would not see you as endangering others.

[ QUOTE ]
On a broader scale, I think that by choosing to live in a society, we choose to subject ourselves to all of that societies rules and norms.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can choose not to live in society? How? Why should I have to follow unjust laws or be punished for not following them because I want to interact with others for their own free will? I should be able to do anything that is morally acceptable and be a member of society. I should not have to make a choice.

[ QUOTE ]
Therefore, we should accept the specified punishment if we intentionally violate a law. That is not to say that violating a law we perceive to be unjust is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not talking about laws that I think are unjust. I'm talking about laws that are unjust.

[ QUOTE ]
However, if you knowingly violate a law (perhaps while protesting that or some other law/issue), then you should be willing to accept the consequences.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's common sense not to do something unless you accept what will come of it, but that's not the issue. The issue is whether it should come.

[RikaKazak]

Well, I would like to thank everyone for their input on these "speeding tickets" my fiance has gotten.

I think ignoring the 2nd ticket would be pretty stupid...so going to contest both of them.

Going to just tell the judge, hey, she didn't sign the 2nd..is that enough to get off? And on the first say it was never calibrated so pacing shouldn't be allowed.

Going to subpoena both officers..hopefully they'll just not show up..that'd make everything easy.

But....yes she broke the law...yes I routinely break the law..and if I have to pay the money..I will...not that big of a deal...just rather not get the points on the license.

Also for those that say they NEVER SPEED never break the law...well...in washington state it's a felony to play poker online..if you lived in washington would you of stopped?

[d_assassin]

Spammy spam spam

[Leader]

[ QUOTE ]
The moderator has already been notified about this post.

[/ QUOTE ]

mf'er

[boomshakalaka]

[ QUOTE ]
I speed a lot, but usually because I'm running late to things (terrible I know). I do like going the speed limit though because it saves on gas. If it's like 3 am and I'm in a driving mood I'll go like 60.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, why do people believe that going slower saves on gas, are you really that dense?