They need to drop the or slow down part. I reciever a ticket for not moving over. I slowed from 70 to under 50. I was in a box van. The cop told I should move over period. The clerk said pay the fine or lose the DL. Cheaper to pay fine than fight. The locality was 3.5 hrs from home.
SVreX wrote: If "safety" were the concern, it would be far better to step up the safety training for drivers, or help officers understand better techniques for pulling people over.
How do you propose implementing life-long driver-reeducation for adult motorists? There is no infrastructure in place to handle this, and no money available to put one in place...And it would be immediately shot down as unconstitutional government interference in our already busy lives. Unfortunately, after high school is over this ultimately can only be realistically accomplished almost exclusively through issuing 'revenue generating' traffic citations.
Exactly what new techniques do you propose for the all-too-common scenario of officers responding to other roadside incidents like disabled vehicles and collision on traffic congested highways around major cities?
SVreX wrote: In reply to N Sperlo: They absolutely care abou revenue. So much so that laws have been passed in my stat to try to combat it. Try getting a move over ticket in Poulan, GA. They have a half mile of state highway, 1 cop, and 1 source of revenue. To ahead and Google it- the place is legendary. I know. I've been there (and won, after 3 court appearances) Speed trap towns exist all over this country, and cops care a great deal a out generating revenue.
it really depends. Sure, some local-yokel sheriffs are filling their own coffers with ticket cash. But most state police ticket revenue goes into the general fund, not back to the police force. While I'm sure there are cops out there who just like to write tickets and bust people, I think it's pretty ignorant to think that police officers care more about raising money for the state than they do about the welfare of the driving public (and public in general).
Now, as to whether legislatures create certain LAWS as revenue-producers (speed cameras, anyone?), that's a different story. But a police officer's job is to enforce the law, even if it's not a law they necessarily like. They don't get to make that choice.
Yeah, I get the need to remind people to be basic decent human beings. That said, I was given a ticket for not moving over, even though the leo was parked right in front of the exit I needed to use. I guess those exits are "closed".
I had a former client die because FL cops/emergency vehicles thought laws and flashing lights meant parking a police car and an ambulance in the fast lane over the crest of a hill made sense.
unk577 wrote: I believe the law in Florida is move over or slow to half the posted speed limit. I wish the law was not needed but the majority of society could care less about anyone but themselves. They don't have a second thought about endangering someone else's life so they can make it to their destination 3 seconds sooner.
Money talks and bullE36 M3 walks.
If you make people think "is getting there 1 minute sooner worth a $200 ticket?" then you get a change in behavior, even subconsciously.
I drive a certain speed not because my car can't go, say, 85mph, safely on a highway. I do it because I sure as hell don't want a suspended license or a big ticket.
I'll note that Virginia implemented this law last year. And we have plenty of police and emergency vehicles on the side of the beltway on a daily basis (mostly because people are going 100mph in heavy traffic and/or getting in dumb accidents). I probably don't have a single commuting day in which there isn't a police car with lights on or a roadside assistance vehicle with flashing lights on the shoulder of the DC beltway.
I've had no problem being able to slow to a reasonable speed or change lanes, nor have I seen any people doing crazy things around emergency vehicles on the shoulders. Seems to me that most people are doing it exactly how the law intended them to....slow down, be aware, change lanes if possible. YMMV. I've always thought DC area drivers suck, but maybe drivers in [insert place where people are apparently doing crazy lane changes and slamming on the brakes] are simply dreadful drivers.
I've always moved over, even before the law... Partly out of courtesy and partly because I don't trust the dumbasses of the world not to walk out into the lane...
I'm also that dick who only partly moves over so Mr Impatient doesn't try screaming up the now clear right lane.
accordionfolder wrote: In reply to SVreX: 80 WHOLE PEOPLE. That's like, most of GA, eh?We done proved it guys, all cops are crooked and all laws are broken. /thread I do so love sweeping generalizations made from minute sample sizes. We'll have to agree to disagree, I hate useless rules as much as anyone, but I can't be persuaded on this is one. Too many of my Dad's friends are dead from people failing to move over for me to think that money is the root of this law.
Apparently you prefer sweeping generalizations based on ZERO sample size since you have offered nothing but your opinions.
How about a study showing reduced deaths? Any statistical anything?
I am perfectly willing to be convinced, but I don't think you can. There are studies in virtually every state showing the reality of these laws being used for revenue generation all over the country. I'd love to see the opposite, but no one in this thread has offered anything other than their own anecdotal input.
I am really sorry to hear about your Dads friends, but can you show that hear saved any?
Driven5 wrote:SVreX wrote: If "safety" were the concern, it would be far better to step up the safety training for drivers, or help officers understand better techniques for pulling people over.How do you propose implementing life-long driver-reeducation for adult motorists? There is no infrastructure in place to handle this, and no money available to put one in place...And it would be immediately shot down as unconstitutional government interference in our already busy lives. Unfortunately, after high school is over this ultimately can only be realistically accomplished almost exclusively through issuing 'revenue generating' traffic citations. Exactly what new techniques do you propose for the all-too-common scenario of officers responding to other roadside incidents like disabled vehicles and collision on traffic congested highways around major cities?
That is incorrect.
The system already exists for retraining older drivers, drivers with too many points, etc.
irish44j wrote:SVreX wrote: In reply to N Sperlo: They absolutely care abou revenue. So much so that laws have been passed in my stat to try to combat it. Try getting a move over ticket in Poulan, GA. They have a half mile of state highway, 1 cop, and 1 source of revenue. To ahead and Google it- the place is legendary. I know. I've been there (and won, after 3 court appearances) Speed trap towns exist all over this country, and cops care a great deal a out generating revenue.it really depends. Sure, some local-yokel sheriffs are filling their own coffers with ticket cash. But most state police ticket revenue goes into the general fund, not back to the police force. While I'm sure there are cops out there who just like to write tickets and bust people, I think it's pretty ignorant to think that police officers care more about raising money for the state than they do about the welfare of the driving public (and public in general). Now, as to whether legislatures create certain LAWS as revenue-producers (speed cameras, anyone?), that's a different story. But a police officer's job is to enforce the law, even if it's not a law they necessarily like. They don't get to make that choice.
First off. You understand that state police are not the same thing as local police, right? And there are much more local police and Sheriffs.
Secondly, I never said police OFFICERS were concerned about revenue generation. I said POLICE, which I intended to be an all-encompassing reference to the system of law enforcement as it is implemented in conjunction with judicial and legislative efforts.
OFFICERS generally do their jobs well. This law is used by POLICE routinely for revenue generation inappropriately.
SVreX wrote: There are studies in virtually every state showing the reality of these laws being used for revenue generation all over the country. I'd love to see the opposite, but no one in this thread has offered anything other than their own anecdotal input.
So just because it also generates revenue, means that it is unjustified, ineffective, or being abused? So do speeding tickets, but I have absolutely no problem with them being issued in a responsible manner to people flagrantly disregarding the unfortunately necessary laws...I too am waiting (but not holding my breath) to see studies, not just the opposing anecdotal evidence, that these laws are specifically a widespread safety hazard everywhere they are implemented, causing more severe injuries and deaths than they prevent. But no one in this thread has offered anything of the sort.
SVreX wrote: That is incorrect. The system already exists for retraining older drivers, drivers with too many points, etc.
That is incorrect.
The current system can only advise a limited number of people on driving within the letter of the laws they have to obey and is entirely incapable of providing for a complete reeducation on the proper driving procedures and guidelines beyond the written letter of the law for every licensed motorist in the country on a regular repeating basis.
In reply to Driven5:
"Responsible manner"... Good, we agree.
"...every licensed motorist in the country "... We both know I didn't say that.
Have you looked for the studies? Type "move over law revenue". You will find page after page. Google is your friend.
You'll need to log in to post.
