7 ms·

Yeah I agree with this but the problem is that it exists, period. It's extortion. If left unchecked, they'll just raise the price of the fine. That's why a spe

Yeah I agree with this but the problem is that it exists, period. It's extortion. If left unchecked, they'll just raise the price of the fine. That's why a speeding ticket used to be $25 in North Dakota with no court date, compared to $400 in NY with a mandatory court date and points without reaching a plea.

StudentStuff 8y ago
15MPH over in Seattle will run you $159 iirc, with the option of a deferment every 7 years. Or, they'll often bump it down to ~$50 if you go to the pre-trial meeting. No mandatory court though!
- anoncoward111 8y ago
  Dammnnnn Seattle the land of speeding protections!! Doing 72 in a 55 (17mph over limit) came with a sticker price of $400 fine, 6 points on the license, plead guilty by mail or in person pre-trial hearing in the absolute middle of nowhere in NY. Plea bargained to $225 "parking violation" that went straight to the town's budget. Sickening considering most roads in MA have a 70 mph speed limit
  - StudentStuff 8y ago
    I've seen Too Fast For Conditions (a ticket for crashing basically) plea bargained to a parking violation (without much of a discount), but yet to see the same for a speeding ticket. No points or counter for accidents that may affect your license here in WA State tho.
throwawaymath 8y ago
> That's why a speeding ticket used to be $25 in North Dakota with no court date, compared to $400 in NY with a mandatory court date and points without reaching a plea. I’m sorry but for this particular problem I have no sympathy. Don’t speed. It doesn’t matter if most people speed occasionally and it doesn’t matter if there are legitimate obstacles to time management in your life that make not speeding difficult. Speeding is statistically more likely to cause death. It’s one of the leading causes of vehicular manslaughter and the mortality rate increases superlinearly as speed increases. If I could I would make the penalties for speeding, not using a blinker, etc. significantly more onerous than they are now. We live amidst an epidemic hysteria that fosters the belief that a speed limit is a speed minimum. I would happily make someone’s life extremely difficult if they demonstrated a disregard for the dangers of speeding (and unfortunately it seems a majority of drivers do). I would be thrilled if speeding more than 5 mph above the limit incurred mandatory community service for every offense in addition to a fine that scaled aggressively with the offender’s income. But don’t let this screed of mine detract from your broader point. I agree people are taken advantage of for things like parking tickets. I just won’t extend that sympathy for things in the category of, “Most people do this, and it’s frustratingly arbitrarily enforced, but it recklessly endangers the lives of other humans.”
- anoncoward111 8y ago
  Oh god spare me. It's as if you have no grasp of physics. You're going to die whether I hit you at 60mph or 70mph. If 70mph is dangerous, why do many states allow it as a speed limit?
  - justinpombrio 8y ago
    > You're going to die whether I hit you at 60mph or 70mph. If you slam on your brakes first, starting at 60mph instead of 70mph could save a life. EDIT: Oh, it's a troll. Wasn't as clear when I posted this. I need to learn not to feed the trolls... sorry all.
    - anoncoward111 8y ago
      We should all drive 20mph to save all those hypothetical pedestrians. What else can we police to make everything Just That Much Safer (TM)?
  - throwawaymath 8y ago
    So just to be clear, your position is that 60 mph and 70 mph are: 1) equally safe, all else being equal, 2) equally safe, in an where one of those speeds is faster than the legal speed limit, 3) equally safe, when there is a disparity in surrounding traffic speed (possibly due to #2). I want to be extremely clear if that's really your position, because if it is you're hand waving away the danger of a ~16% increase in speed.
    - anoncoward111 8y ago
      Negative. I am in fact saying those two speeds are nearly equally dangerous, such that fining one and not fining another is arbitrary and extortionary. A pedestrian will die or be gravely injured at nearly any speed. A car crashing into another car, especially in opposing directions, is extremely dangerous above say 45mph. You either go on the road and accept this risk, or you don't. Or of course, you end the multi billion dollar car lobbyist industry and I will happily ride a moped to work instead. People who drive 110mph on the highway in traffic are objectively dangerous. Most cars don't brake well from that speed. 70 mph is not fast if I am leaving adequate distance between me and everything else.

StudentStuff 8y ago

15MPH over in Seattle will run you $159 iirc, with the option of a deferment every 7 years. Or, they'll often bump it down to ~$50 if you go to the pre-trial meeting. No mandatory court though!

anoncoward111 8y ago
Dammnnnn Seattle the land of speeding protections!! Doing 72 in a 55 (17mph over limit) came with a sticker price of $400 fine, 6 points on the license, plead guilty by mail or in person pre-trial hearing in the absolute middle of nowhere in NY. Plea bargained to $225 "parking violation" that went straight to the town's budget. Sickening considering most roads in MA have a 70 mph speed limit
- StudentStuff 8y ago
  I've seen Too Fast For Conditions (a ticket for crashing basically) plea bargained to a parking violation (without much of a discount), but yet to see the same for a speeding ticket. No points or counter for accidents that may affect your license here in WA State tho.

throwawaymath 8y ago

> That's why a speeding ticket used to be $25 in North Dakota with no court date, compared to $400 in NY with a mandatory court date and points without reaching a plea. I’m sorry but for this particular problem I have no sympathy. Don’t speed. It doesn’t matter if most people speed occasionally and it doesn’t matter if there are legitimate obstacles to time management in your life that make not speeding difficult. Speeding is statistically more likely to cause death. It’s one of the leading causes of vehicular manslaughter and the mortality rate increases superlinearly as speed increases. If I could I would make the penalties for speeding, not using a blinker, etc. significantly more onerous than they are now. We live amidst an epidemic hysteria that fosters the belief that a speed limit is a speed minimum. I would happily make someone’s life extremely difficult if they demonstrated a disregard for the dangers of speeding (and unfortunately it seems a majority of drivers do). I would be thrilled if speeding more than 5 mph above the limit incurred mandatory community service for every offense in addition to a fine that scaled aggressively with the offender’s income. But don’t let this screed of mine detract from your broader point. I agree people are taken advantage of for things like parking tickets. I just won’t extend that sympathy for things in the category of, “Most people do this, and it’s frustratingly arbitrarily enforced, but it recklessly endangers the lives of other humans.”

anoncoward111 8y ago
Oh god spare me. It's as if you have no grasp of physics. You're going to die whether I hit you at 60mph or 70mph. If 70mph is dangerous, why do many states allow it as a speed limit?
- justinpombrio 8y ago
  > You're going to die whether I hit you at 60mph or 70mph. If you slam on your brakes first, starting at 60mph instead of 70mph could save a life. EDIT: Oh, it's a troll. Wasn't as clear when I posted this. I need to learn not to feed the trolls... sorry all.
  - anoncoward111 8y ago
    We should all drive 20mph to save all those hypothetical pedestrians. What else can we police to make everything Just That Much Safer (TM)?
- throwawaymath 8y ago
  So just to be clear, your position is that 60 mph and 70 mph are: 1) equally safe, all else being equal, 2) equally safe, in an where one of those speeds is faster than the legal speed limit, 3) equally safe, when there is a disparity in surrounding traffic speed (possibly due to #2). I want to be extremely clear if that's really your position, because if it is you're hand waving away the danger of a ~16% increase in speed.
  - anoncoward111 8y ago
    Negative. I am in fact saying those two speeds are nearly equally dangerous, such that fining one and not fining another is arbitrary and extortionary. A pedestrian will die or be gravely injured at nearly any speed. A car crashing into another car, especially in opposing directions, is extremely dangerous above say 45mph. You either go on the road and accept this risk, or you don't. Or of course, you end the multi billion dollar car lobbyist industry and I will happily ride a moped to work instead. People who drive 110mph on the highway in traffic are objectively dangerous. Most cars don't brake well from that speed. 70 mph is not fast if I am leaving adequate distance between me and everything else.