Slashdot Mirror
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."
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.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
I bet Waze is relieved that their business model is safe.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
It seems like the police periodically 'forget' or ignore things they have been told are illegal, but which they'd prefer to keep doing.
Because they seem to periodically act as if they're legally allowed to delete the contents of your cell phone when you record them doing something illegal.
And, really, if they can overtly ticket you for warning of their speed trap, they'll just find something else to charge you with.
And people wonder why trust for the police is dwindling.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
This ruling won't stop cops from ticketing you, forcing you to leave work to appear in court, and paying the court costs after the ticket is dismissed. Cops can and do write invalid tickets simply to be dicks, and there's nothing you can do about it.
Our justice system needs to ensure that the victim of a false accusation of a crime is made whole again.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Speedtraps can pose a substantial danger, especially at high speeds (folks slam breaks, cops pull into the left lane from a standstill, or like they like to do it in Mass, back up on the emergency lane to get back into the trap). That's why they are made illegal in some states. And if there's a hazard down the road, you bet I should have a right to warn and be warned about it!
It happened too right here and the judge said something different but it was accepted. The guy receives a ticket for speeding. So he accepts it and goes away. While going away he flashes his headlights to say theres a cop and that same cop see's him flashing his headlights. He receives a ticket. In front of the judge the person tells him that a police officer is there for the security of the people (which is part of their main job by the way )and not give tickets for cash. So for helping a fellow officer, he was helping an officer doing so. The judge accepted in favor of the citizen because of what the person said made a lot of sense. Helping an officer is not illegal and by doing so his ticket was invalid.
PC Gaming enthousiast that gives comments, opinions and reviews on Games. I'm just having fun with games while doing let
dear god what's happening to the slashdot UI???
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
A summer or two ago I saw a kid holding a sign that said "Speed trap ahead!". Over the next hill was a cop, mostly hidden by some bushes. The next stop light had another kid with a sign: "Speed Trap tips" and had a jar full of cash. Good show kids, good show...
if (it != oneThing) it = another;
I don't see how this is different from warning people not to break other laws.
The difference is in this case you are warning people that they will get caught for breaking a law, and they will get caught in about a minute if they don't stop--as opposed to a more general "you shouldn't deal drugs because EVENTUALLY someone will catch you." Philosophically, it's like telling a drug dealer "hide your stash because a cop is coming."
The only difference is that this is a more widespread behavior, so people are generally more okay with it. It's still basically conspiracy (in this case, conspiracy to break the speed limit), and it carries jailtime if they want to pursue it. (The judge here may have bought the free speech argument--more likely, he didn't want to risk getting overturned on appeal. Either way, it doesn't mean every judge will.)
Seems as though the police should actually want people to know about the speed traps. I mean, the ultimate goal for the police is to have everyone follow the law. If people know about an upcoming speed trap, then they'll slow down to the speed limit. If they don't know about the speed trap, then they'll continue to endanger those around them by driving too fast. </delightfully naive>
Of course, we all know that what the police really want is ticket revenue. The more law breakers there are, the more revenue they get, and hence they will try to stop people from warning others to obey the law. This system is rather broken.
You assume that the justice system is calibrated incorrectly. Ideally, the penalty for speeding is designed to disincentivize the behavior and is multiplied to make up for the discount from the low probability of getting caught. A 10% chance of a $200 ticket, for example, or a 5% chance of a $400 ticket. If you warn people where speed traps are, you change the chance of getting caught, which means the fine is no longer as effective a deterrent.
This was actually a big problem with red light cameras--they made more people get caught, which made the expected penalty MUCH higher than it should have been.
So ... if I see someone starting a fight in a bar, and I try and cool it down by shouting to him "Don't be an idiot! There's a cop outside in the street!" .... I should be done for... what, exactly?
... ruining other patrons entertainment value.
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.
Lemme just fix that for you:
I mean, the ultimate goals for the police are enjoy an exercise of arbitrary power, to earn ticket income, and to provide an excuse for illegal search and seizure, which in turn serves as a mechanism to provide yet more income, and property.
There you go. Cheers. :)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
And, IF the point of a speed trap, is to slow down traffic, then flashing my lights does that nicely.
Or, am I maybe wrong here, that the point of a speed trap is nothing more than revenue collection..?
Perhaps we need to change the motto on the police cars to " To Collect and Serve.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Cops in Texas have been spreading the rumor that flashing headlights at another motorist is a gang challenge and could get you shot.
I shit you not.
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.
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.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia