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."
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!
I don't see how this is different from warning people not to break other laws.
If I say to someone who is under investigation by law enforcement for trafficking narcotics "Hey, you shouldn't do that, you might get in trouble", am I committing a crime?
If my wife is driving and we are, unbeknownst to me, approaching a speed trap and I warn her to slow down, am I committing a crime?
If they pull me over for this, what do they charge me with?
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.
SIGSEGV caught, terminating
wait... not that kind of sig.
OT, but worth it. Slashdot has announced that it will roll out beta this month and that the classic interface will only be available for "a number of months."
Please, Please, Please don't do this!
the reason the cops will not be pleased, is because of the "totally not really a thing(tm)" ticket quotas they get slapped with when the local municipal govt overspends on its budget, like it always does.
the city of course asserts that no such ticket quotas happen, and that they are an urban legend, however, my dad was of the police bacon variety for 25 years, and speaks with authority that yes, ticket quotas are real, and that there are punishments for not meeting them.
if the goal of the policeman is to basically do a shakedown on people in the name of public safety, (when in reality, the posted speed limits have shit little to do with modern highway safety, and have even been shown to be a safety HAZARD when followed in many areas-- making the "safe" speed the same as that of the rest of the flow of traffic, not what is posted), then of course they will be upset when motorists are allowed to warn of said shakedowns.
it's simple.
city says "write this many tickets, or suffer consequences" (then lies about it to the public)
cop has strong incentive to write as many tickets as possible.
city has highway speed limits posted dating from the 1950s and 1960s, intended for 2 lane highways being enforced on multi-lane metro traffic arteries, and does not want to update them because they are lucrative.
cops now have motorists warning each other about the shakedowns going on, and will be more likely to fail at meeting the "mythical" ticket quotas.
of course, the cops have the "my word against yours" thing going on with city officials, and cant prove that they get defacto enforced penalties for not meeting the "supposed" quotas, and besides, even if treated seriously, who is going to investigate and rule on the matter? both parties that would normally perform that service have outstanding interest in the matter.
so, caught in that nasty legal limbo, with a "so totally not really a requirement, honest!" requirement that now may not be met, you can bet that local city cops with traffic radar guns are going to be be snitty about this.
from the sounds of it, this was not a municipal judge that decided this case.
that's the difference here.
No, it is not "Free Speech". It is criminal informant behavior.
Apparently, you're incorrect. I just read somewhere that a Judge ruled it Free Speech. :-)
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I've been told by a police officer who I know personally that much of the value behind speeding stops isn't speed enforcement or even impacting speeding generally, it's the chance to "interview" the motorist, look around at what's visible in their car, run their ID through the computer. Basically look to see if there's anything they can possibly use against you for an arrest of any kind.
It's kind of like running a roadblock.
If speed traps were about safety, the locations of speed traps would be places statistically correlated with high levels of accidents, especially those related to speeding. Instead, speed traps end up in places where it's easy to speed, such as at the end of long downhill sections or wide-open areas with good road conditions.
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.
Flashing your lights at someone is more like telling someone: "the cops are outside, flush the drugs down the toilet now!"
No.
It's directly analogous to saying, "Up ahead, there is a reason you should slow down."
Speed traps aren't the only reason people flash lights, you know. Accidents around blind corners, for example.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
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.
Think of it not as "enabling drunk driving" but more as helping enable people's right to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures". Many tools can be misused (hammer, car, chef's knife) and I think your takeaway regarding that particular tool is telling. As a non-drinker I am disgusted by the idea I can be stopped for no reason so some cop can stick his head in my car and ask me questions while looking for anything "suspicious".