Fighting speeding tickets - yay or nay?

[the Interceptor]

Since every thread about legal counsel for fighting a speeding ticket is bound to become an arena for fighting about the pros and cons, I thought we probably need a thread to have the debate independently of actual cases.


Question being: where do you stand on fighting a ticket you got for speeding?


Would you always try to escape it, no matter whether it was justified or not? Do you meet a decision depending on each case? Or do you see a ticket as something you deserve, because you broke the law? Vote in the poll, and leave your opinion here.

It might also be important to note that those who accept speeding tickets are not necessarily drivers who stick to the limit down to the last digit, while those who fight every ticket are not brainless speeders by default. We all stray over the limits. So please, don't smash each others heads!

[Ford Prefect]

If you stand to become a pedestrian for any amount of time, yes. Otherwise, it´s really not worth the hassle. Speeding is relatively cheap in Germany.

I just received one of those annoying photos. I haven´t had points on my license for god knows how long, now I´ll be getting one of them. No point fighting it though, since I am so clearly visible in the picture that it wouldn´t get me anywhere.

[sonza68]

I generally hire a lawyer to get it lowered to a no points offense. They get their money, I get fewer points on my license, everybody wins...well, sort of.

[BlaRo]

I fight all my tickets. The option's written into the legal system; you'd have to be stupid not to take it.

Usually I show up at a municipal court and the fine automatically gets reduced with a zero-point violation. No lawyer needed. I have yet to show up to a county court to square off against an issuing officer, however.

Also, the option's there to fight parking tickets as well: I usually just pay those, or toss them in the bin and hope they don't find me.

[Elvis313]

I'm pretty much speeding all of the time but yet I only got 3 tickets, the last one yesterday including a point.
However, It's just fair.
I know the consequences and because of that I'll never do anything they'd take my licence away for.

[LeVeL]

Whenever I break the speed limit, I do so at the appropriate time and place. I would NEVER speed in a school zone, for example. On the other hand, driving home from college in the western part of the state through the middle of nowhere, with long straights, and virtually no traffic, I do 90mph the whole way. It is perfectly safe. I have great long-range visibility, there is no traffic, and no side streets or buildings or anything of that sort. So yes, I will fight every single ticket I get in such a situation.

I got one a couple of years ago that is somewhat questionable. 54 in a 30. I was coasting down a hill with my foot right over the brake pedal. Visibility was good. Fought it mostly because I was 19 and the insurance premium would murder me. Won very easily and haven't gone over 40 there since.

Reckless driving, DUI, or street racing should automatically mean severe consequences. Speeding is often a lot safer than people make it out to be. A lot of it is also down to the driver. I trust my autocross-ace friend at 100mph on an empty highway 100% - I can fall asleep in the pass seat. Another friend, drives the limit but Im scared for my life.

[Blind_Io]

I'd rather pay the fine up front and do traffic school to keep it off my record.

The way I see it is this: fighting a ticket is a gamble, you might loose and have to pay the fine and take the points, or worse, the officer testifies that he actually clocked you going 7 mph faster than what he wrote on the ticket and you end up with a bigger fine for your trouble (this has happened).

If I can do traffic school, I take that option. It's a guaranteed win since I don't get any points and my insurance stays the same. In the long run it's cheaper; I do have to pay the fine, but it removes any doubt about winning the trial.

When I was in California I would always do a Trial By Written Declaration. With this option, if you don't like the outcome you can still show up in court and fight it again or ask for traffic school. It's a free swing.

Most recently a cop in Salt Lake pulled me over for "almost running a red light." It took all my will to not say, "Then why don't you almost write me a ticket?" The cop was dead wrong and he knew it. He said that my back tires were leaving the intersection when the light turned red; in this state the law says you can't enter the intersection on a red. If my rear tires were leaving the intersection as the light turned red then it's impossible for me to be entering the same intersection at the same time. I challenged the cop on the spot to tell me where in the traffic code it said my actions were illegal and he couldn't do it. I then told him what the law really said the last time I looked and asked if it had been changed since then. He mumbled something about "the tie going to the runner" whatever the hell that means and then he let me go.

[Jakain]

Nay. Waste of time.

Unless of course you are potentially going to lose your license or get jailtime in which case I'd imagine the police officer would show up if you're one of those unfortunate idiots who get caught driving as if they're trying to get back to the future.

[jebjeb]

Depends, No point system here so no worries about that. But if its in a city I got a connection in I fight it but arange for the cop not to show(automatic dismissal).

My brother is a local cop so normally a mention of that gets me a warning but no ticket

[ja404]

I fight them. It affects your insurance for like 5-6 years here. That adds up. Especially in a state where you're required to have insurance (meaning they can rape you and there's nothing you can do about it).

[LeVeL]

Originally Posted by Blind_Io

I'd rather pay the fine up front and do traffic school to keep it off my record.

The way I see it is this: fighting a ticket is a gamble, you might loose and have to pay the fine and take the points, or worse, the officer testifies that he actually clocked you going 7 mph faster than what he wrote on the ticket and you end up with a bigger fine for your trouble (this has happened).

If I can do traffic school, I take that option. It's a guaranteed win since I don't get any points and my insurance stays the same. In the long run it's cheaper; I do have to pay the fine, but it removes any doubt about winning the trial.

When I was in California I would always do a Trial By Written Declaration. With this option, if you don't like the outcome you can still show up in court and fight it again or ask for traffic school. It's a free swing.

Massachusetts doesn't do traffic school. Nor does it have Trial By Written Declaration. You challenge the ticket, go see the magistrate. If he/she doesn't let you off the hook, then you can appeal their decision and request to see a judge. If you lose the hearing, you pay the ticket. And you cant possibly get into any more trouble, unless you take a swing at the judge and badmouth his mother. Oh, and even if you pay your ticket right away, it still goes on your record and your insurance goes up.

[jebjeb]

Originally Posted by Blind_Io

I'd rather pay the fine up front and do traffic school to keep it off my record.

The way I see it is this: fighting a ticket is a gamble, you might loose and have to pay the fine and take the points, or worse, the officer testifies that he actually clocked you going 7 mph faster than what he wrote on the ticket and you end up with a bigger fine for your trouble (this has happened).

Then immediately have that cop arrested for falsifying legal documents and false police report

[hajj]

Given that many speeding tickets in Germany are actually wrong I would fight them. Laser guns seem to be very prone to error. Also there is a new fixed speedcamera which has always be thrown out in court as the manufacturer doesn't want to give details over the exact measurement technique used.
In the Netherlands however I wouldn't bother, the room for error is much bigger, so almost nothing will be thrown out.

[Adunaphel]

Not worth the hassle for me to fight it. Fines are relatively cheap in The Netherlands, and I'm old enough not to have a points license (I count myself very lucky over this), so no real risk of losing my license if I keep my speeds slightly in check (repeat offences of 40 kph or more over or one offence of 50 kph over is about the only way I can lose my license through speeding). Saying that, I've been very lucky over the past few years with the fines I receive. The biggest one was a few months ago for 11 kph over on a 70 kph road. Most fines I get are the 6 kph over kind. I understand that when you stand to lose a lot more over a single speeding offence, there's a point in fighting it though.

[katwalk]

I would fight if they were lying, but if I deserve it I'll pay

[Blind_Io]

Originally Posted by jebjeb

Then immediately have that cop arrested for falsifying legal documents and false police report

If you read the tickets it says how much he clocked you for and there is a separate section for the citation. It allows the cop to say that he clocked you doing 85 in a 65 but only wrote you up for 5 over. It's not falsified, it gives the cops the discretion to cut you a break.

I've been over this debate with cops and they all say the same thing: if you want to take discretion out of the encounter that is fine with them. It means no warnings and no breaks. And that missing front plate or burned out signal lamp gets put on there too instead of a kind, "Oh by the way, please fix your brake light"

[Sik02Stang]

Ill say, if its something that you just feel you deserve and that the Police were out to get you for some reason and that you want the judge to know that they have been watching you for days and that you deserve to watch the branded and then fed to the lions, well, then fight it.

otherwise, i kinda see it as a badge of honor. im not afraid to brag that i was busted doing 90 in a 50 and i had to spend the night in jail. yes, i may have gone to jail and yes i now have $700 in fine, but damn i had alot of fun getting to that point!

(no, i really didnt, it was just an example)

[Red_Bull]

Originally Posted by LeVeL

On the other hand, driving home from college in the western part of the state through the middle of nowhere, with long straights, and virtually no traffic, I do 90mph the whole way. It is perfectly safe. I have great long-range visibility, there is no traffic, and no side streets or buildings or anything of that sort. So yes, I will fight every single ticket I get in such a situation.

For sure it may be safe, but surely it's still going to come down to the fact that yes, you were indeed over the posted legal speed limit. Can you honestly, and successfully make a subjective argument about whether it was safe or not?

[LeVeL]

Originally Posted by Red_Bull

For sure it may be safe, but surely it's still going to come down to the fact that yes, you were indeed over the posted legal speed limit. Can you honestly, and successfully make a subjective argument about whether it was safe or not?

I can go to court and fight it and I have a good chance of winning. Even though I broke the limit, my driving was safe. That's all I care about. Of course, I wouldn't base my defense on speeding being safe

[BlaRo]

Originally Posted by Red_Bull

For sure it may be safe, but surely it's still going to come down to the fact that yes, you were indeed over the posted legal speed limit. Can you honestly, and successfully make a subjective argument about whether it was safe or not?

It might be news to you, but cops are more interested in how safe you're actually driving rather than assigning revenue generation based on an numerical limit that may or may not fit the actual conditions. If you get caught by a cop, you can argue that you were maintaining an appropriate speed for the weather and visibility conditions present at the time of the ticket, and the cop and judge determine (using a combination of experience and common sense) whether you're right.

And it is almost always revenue generation*: town needs a new school? Promotion time for cops? Not enough state/federal funding for road construction? Setting up speed traps generates massive profits for local police departments, the state, and especially for insurance companies: $3-7 billion dollars for them. And seeing as speeding only accounts for 5% of all car accidents, unlike, say, driver inattentiveness or substance use, why contribute more to the machine on top of all those numerous taxes we all pay?

(*Or you could always just get greedy, like New Rome.)