Using Google Maps to Get Out of a Traffic Ticket

Michael Nguyen writes "Edwin uses Google Maps to prove to the judge his traffic ticket was wrongly issued, saving himself some cash and points on his license. During his testimony, Edwin whips out a notebook, loads up Google Maps and upstages the offending officer with some quick Google Map searches." I wonder if anyone's gotten out of a ticket by showing how inaccurate most speed-check methods can be.

Comments

Re:Boing Boing

[Anonymous Coward]

Boing boing pretty much sucks. I don't even want to go to that site as it's filled with annoying ads. Plus their so-called writers scour the net for stories, which most have already appeared on other sites and blogs.

Dangerous

[psyconaut]

A lot of judges don't like "smart-asses"!

-psy

Re:Hopfully the guy was inocent.

[Spleenl3oy]

Notice how he said "citizen" of a free country, not terrorist.

Re:One more thing you can try

[radja]

unnecessary exhaust fumes, damage to the environment.. lots of reasons. basically, if you drive too fast, you're a rude, anti-social bastard and you deserve the small fine.

Re:Hopfully the guy was inocent.

[shiftless]

that still doesn't make it a right. all the necessity in the world and it is still a privilege. what are you going to say to a judge when you've gotten your fourth speedin gticket in 6 months. "your honor, I need a car". he's going to laugh.

I got ~ 10 speeding tickets in 6 months, curiously starting just after I got a new Mustang. I drove around for years in older, less sporty vehicles, and only had a ticket or two. Suddenly the bastards were handing me tickets left and right. Is this because I suddenly became a horrible driver, or some other reason, perhaps something related to "revenue enhancement"?

My license was suspended for months. I was pulled over on several occasions with a suspended license, and let go because having car is a necessity to get back and forth from work, etc.

sorry to be an ass, but you don't have to live in the sticks. it's not a requirement.

I'm tired of seeing this stupid reasoning every time this topic comes up. I'll live where I damn well please, and I'll drive where the hell I please. Period. Try and stop me.

Re:Hopfully the guy was inocent.

[Shaper_pmp]

I know it's bad form to feed the trolls, but nevertheless...

"Since when did we start punishing people for attempted "wrong doing" anyhow? If someone speeds and hurts no one, who exactly is the victim?"

Ummm, forever. Maybe this is a UK/US thing, but over here we've always punished someone for attempting to break the law, regardless of whether they succeed or not. Printed up a bunch of banknotes but haven't distributed them before you get caught? Go to jail. Tried to kill someone but they survivied? Go to jail. Tried to have sex with a minor but they escaped? Go to jail.

I don't think you thought that statement out fully.

"If someone speeds and hurts no one, who exactly is the victim?"

No-one. That time. But by allowing people to drive at whatever speed they like means you'll get a whole lot of victims along the second you relax the restriction.

If one person once shits once behind a tree in the park, nobody cares too much. But if everybody shat in the park all the time, you've got a park full of shit that nobody wants to go to.

Like it or not, some people are stupid, overconfident, thoughtless or just don't give a shit. When one overconfident pillock in a car can plough into a bus stop and kill multiple people, you don't even need the majority to be like this - even a small number of regular incidents means it's not safe to walk anywhere anymore.

"Sure, in theory it may cut down on the wreckless driving. But I seriously doubt it."

Why? You provide no evidence whatsoever to support your position. Proper trolling procedure is to provide at least a confusinglly misleading justification for people to argue about...

"Much more likely is that this prevalent attitude of prevention will stifle individual and society development."

Ok, it was at this point you were clearly trolling. Ability to speed == personal enlightenment?

ROTFL.

And, given you're arguing your right to put other people's lives at risk, with no way for them to object short of throwing themselves in front of your car so you get punished, I'm damn glad we aren't relying on your personal morals.

"Any intelligent person knows when they are driving dangerously."

Parse that carefully. "Intelligent" generally means of above-average intellect. By definition, then, not everyone is "intelligent". Again, by definition "everyone" can't be "above average" - in fact, (allowing for some people who are exactly average) only a minority are then "intelligent".

And some of those are drunk. Or stoned. Or over-tired. Or in a rush. Or unobservant. Etc. Etc. Etc.

"If someone screws up, *that* is when you should punish them. There will no longer be true consequences, but only premonitions (much like Minority Report). And those that do drive wreckless? They will do it *still*."

Yep, as will all those people with any respect for the law, who don't speed now because they're afraid of being caught. What you're doing is basically taking away all the deterrent factor the law has, and turning it into some kind of after-the-fact "eye for an eye" revenge punishment. You hurt someone? You'll get punished. You put several people's lives in terrible jeopardy, but managed to get away with it throught sheer dumb luck? No problem, you'll get off scot-free.

Everyone speeds, but you know what? The level I speed at is related to the official speed limit on that road, because I don't want to hit that magic point where a small fine and 3 points on your license becomes a much more serious punishment. Hence, though I'm not sticking to the limit, it is doing its job - namely, stopping me going as fast as I otherwise might.

As for where you get "there will no longer be true consequences, but only premonitions (much like Minority Report)"... well, I have no idea. How is only punishing people after the fact supposed to usher in a magical fairyland fascist

Interestingly, in North Carolina

[emtboy9]

it is possible to at least get overly aggressive drivers ticketed when there are not cops around. The Highway Patrol here started a program where, if you see someone doing stupid shit (i.e. weaving back and forth in traffic, speeding through a school zone, passing school busses that are stopped, etc)
you can call it in to the HP, and if you agree to testify in court against the driver, they will issue a summons to that person even if no officer is around to witness/pull him/her over.

Obviously, it doenst do a thing for speeders, but the next time that stupid woman on the cell phone slides into my lane on top of me without even noticing that I am there (and I drive an ex-cop car, so its really hard to NOT notice me), I have at least some real recourse that wont land me in jail instead...