Judge Says You Can Warn Others About Speed Traps

cartechboy writes "Speeding is against the law, and yes, even going 5 mph over the speed limit is breaking the law. But everyone does it, right? What about when you see a cop? Some cops are ticketing people for notifying fellow motorists about speed traps. In Florida, Ryan Kintner simply flashed his high-beams to warning oncoming cars that there was a cop ahead. He was given a ticket for doing so. He went to court to fight the ticket, and a judge ruled that flashing lights are the equivalent of free speech, thus he had every right to flash his lights to warn oncoming cars."

Comments

Common sense? In MY judiciary?

[sandytaru]

I bet some police officers are mighty pissed off about this ruling, but as someone who frequently drives with the lights on to warn fellow motorists of speed traps, I am pleased.

Re:Common sense? In MY judiciary?

[lgftsa]

The Australian road rules sidesteps the "warning" issue:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/l...

  AUSTRALIAN ROAD RULES - REG 218
Using headlights on high-beam
218 Using headlights on high-beam

        (1) The driver of a vehicle must not use the vehicleâ(TM)s headlights on high-beam, or allow the vehicleâ(TM)s headlights to be used on high-beam, if the driver is driving:

                (a) less than 200 metres behind a vehicle travelling in the same direction as the driver, or

                (b) less than 200 metres from an oncoming vehicle.

                Penalty: Offence provision.

                Note: "High-beam" and "oncoming vehicle" are defined in the dictionary.

        (2) However, if the driver is overtaking a vehicle, the driver may briefly switch the headlights from low-beam to high-beam immediately before the driver begins to overtake the vehicle.

                Note: "Low-beam" and "overtake" are defined in the dictionary.

Re:Common sense? In MY judiciary?

[gbjbaanb]

Way back in the day, The RAC (breakdown rescue club) used to have uniformed drivers who were famous for saluting motorists - the reason they did so was not to be polite, but to warn them of upcoming speed traps - if they didn't salute, you slowed down. Of course, this didn't count as warning the motorist as the RAC man hadn't done anything... literally.

I guess the point about trying to catch speeding drivers is that these are the ones who will speed up after they've gone past the trap and continue to be dangerous - best to catch them and take note of who they are so they can be banned after they've been caught enough times.

Re:Common sense? In MY judiciary?

[cayenne8]

I use this app Trapster .

It also helps you to know where those nasty breathalizer traps are too....so you can take a 'safer' back route home.

;)

Catching up to Australia

[Platinumrat]

About 10 years ago, or it could have been longer, we had a similar case in Australia. The driver in question argued that he was just informing other drivers to drive safely. The magistrate agreed with the argument and the charges were dropped. Suffice it to say, the police were mightily annoyed, but there is nothing they can do about it now.

Re:Vive la difference!

[Whumpsnatz]

Wrong. Police seize property not just on drug raids, but in all kinds of situations, and the money from selling that property goes to - the police department.

Re:Vive la difference!

[Curunir_wolf]

At this point, yes you are wrong. The whole point of the Police for is not to protect and serve but to take in enough money to stay alive. If you look at a police department and look at the "crimes" people are arrested and fined for you will see that the vast majority are revenue collection under the guise of breaking a law and nothing more.

You sir, are an idiot.

Police do not get to keep the money they collect. None of that money is allowed to go back to the police department.

Sorry, but you are wrong, especially to assert that "none" of that money goes back to the police department. It's different state-by-state and by jurisdiction, of course, but you'll find that most fines from local tickets go directly to that jurisdiction. For a small town, it could be a significant amount of the municipality's revenue, and of course, the more revenue they have the more they can budget for the police department.

There actually are some jurisdictions where the police department gets a percentage of each fine, and even more have something like a "public safety fund" (controlled by the police department) that gets some amount from each fine. Direct revenue from fines is probably rare, but there are jurisdictions that do that.

And, of course, the worst abuse happens with "asset forfeiture", which allows the police to retain a significant portion of all the assets (including cash) that they confiscate, regardless of whether any charges are even filed against the original property owner. This policy was actually put in place to encourage police, who were becoming skeptical of the US "drug war", to continue to participate.