Its been a L-O-N-G time since the wife or I got a speeding ticket. Well, she just got one. First in SCarolina.

What do you guys get nabbed for when you get a speeding ticket???

( in $xxx for xx mph over the limit)

$230 for going 50 in a 25.

I haven't had a speeding ticket for about 5 yrs now, so I have no idea.

I did come across this webpage once though, [url]http://www.paynofine.com/[/url], it may help your wife.

I got a $130 fine for doing 55 in a 35.

Kyle

In Texas, you get one freebie per year, providing you are willing to take a defensive driving course (which costs about $60).  No fine, no record.

Well, [b]garandman[/b], if your wife had the right attorney....

Eric The(Nevermind)Hun[>]:)]

I've never gotten one.  I'm proud of living somewhere with such, ahem, overactive traffic cops, and sucessfully not having received one.  I think the last one my wife got here in SC was $5.  Of course, that was a long time ago [:)].  The last few I've heard about around here were $65 for less than 10 over and $130 for more than 10 over.z

Wasn't S.C. the place where a state trooper pulled over a guy for speeding and tried to give him a ticket for about 165 bucks and the guy went beserk all yelling and cursing while the trooper stood there.He even told the guy if he didn't pick up the tickets he'll cite him for litering. Remember that on World's Wildest Police videos? The trooper kept his cool. Damn, they keep showing that.

ETH beat me to it.  [:D]

$0.00  I AM ABOVE THE LAW...DUH dont you people know this already?[:D][:P] [BD]  [;D]  [):)]

No, that was Maine.

In AZ, the fine structure is lef up to the determination of the court which covers the jurisdiction in which the offense was committed.  You could literally pay a difference of hundreds of $$ depending on where you get pulled over, and into which court you are cited.

I have no idea. I've had 2 speeding tickets since I began driving in 1966. The last one, in 1970, cost me $35, IIRC.
Hell, I've been pulled over [u]once[/u] since 1971, and that was on my bike in 1985. The cop told me there'd been a report of motorcycles racing in the area, when I asked why he stopped me.

$300 78 in 55

$120 - 60 in a 55.

Freaking traffic school drove up the cost to keep it off my record.

Av.

Maine State Police.

I like when the guy throws the ticket out of the car....... MSP-T: Sir you need to pick that up, or I will cite you for littering.......

G-Man I got a ticket for 9 over from the SCHP, $47.00. In WI the basic speed citation is $126.20, unless you are on a 65 mph road, then it's $151.00.

In most states it's a modest court cost (usually 20 or 30 dollars) and around 3 to 5 dollars per mile per hour over the limit on the fine.

Then again, if you hire a "POS" attorney to argue the facts and the law, then she might even secure a dismissal.  But that would be "sue-happy" and you would be degrading yourself to the likes of a "POS" lawyer . . .

I haven't had a ticket in 12 years.........

until 6 months ago. I got 2 in 6 months.

72 in 55= $190.00
64 in 45= $100.00

They were in 2 different counties, both got reduced to 9 over the limit when I went to court. They just want the $$$$$$$.

I don't speed anymore(well, not as much[:)]

In PA it varies from $93 to about $165-175 depending on the speed.

Also if you are cool to the cop alot of times you can get the ticket lowered to "failure to obey traffic control devices 3111" this is the $93 fine and it carries no points.

I don't even have to worry about speeding tickets in the city. Philly cops don't have radar. They have to time you to get your speed and I know all the spots they have measured to time people.

Actually, if you watch it closely, you’ll notice that the Trooper seems to be deliberately provoking the driver while playing up to the camera in his cruiser.  

Obviously the motorist has mental problems.  

You’ll notice that the Trooper returns the motorist’s license to him, but is never shown taking the license from the motorist to begin with.  This suggests the Trooper didn’t start his camera at the beginning of the stop.

It appears that the Trooper realized the motorist could be goaded into erratic behavior, returned to his cruiser (possibly to run the license), turned on his camera at that time, then returned to the motorist and said just enough to keep the motorist ranting.

The Trooper is, of course, “Joe Cool” since he knows the camera is on.

(I’m assuming that the camera is not linked to the lights, as is typically the case, or can be overridden.)

My understanding is that this Trooper has since been fired, though I don’t think it was directly related to this stop.

I saw the guy in an interview later and seemed fine.  He said as a liberal democrat sometimes he randomly has delusional fits.

Actually, most officers get overtime for court, especially if it is in fact their day off or not their regular shift.

I knew a CHP officer that worked nights, and they *loved* court- nearly doubled his annual income.

Sigh.

Well I'm sad to say that I've picked up a couple "across the river".

Twenty over still cost you $258 + 6pts?

It did the 3-4 times I got nabbed. [STICK]


I CAN'T DRIVE 55!!!!!  [:D]

$100 for 88 in a 70 in the King Ranch (Kennedy County) Texas. [puke]

it is my understanding that in the State of Texas, if you are caught by the DPS going 100 or more MPH then by law they must take you to jail.  just a friendly reminder to whoever is passing (or should i say flying) through.

That actually makes my whole point about lawyers, and the damage they have done to our society.

My wife broke the speed limit. It was CLEARLY posted, and she made a choice to exceed it.

BOTH she and I acknowledge that, and accept it. The PROPER response is to either pay the fine, or throw ourselves on the mercy of the court, which has the right to demand justice (such as is defined by existing statute, which if we don't like we can go to Columbia and try to change thru legislative channels) but ***MAY**** opt to show lenieency.

The WRONG response is "Let's find me a lawyer that can weasel my way out, and cheat justice (as defined above)."

[rolleyes]

Personal responsibility - remember when "conservatives" USED to beleive in that?????

[rolleyes]

Ahhh, the good old days.....

I commend your wife's acceptance of responsibility.  She's guilty, she'll plead, good for her.  Guess what?  That's what happens to over 95% of criminal cases in America today.  You don't know any better, I guess, but the "cheating justice" thing does not occur as often as you proffer.  Yes, most people who are charged with a crime are guilty of a crime (not always the one charged for a variety of reasons); however, that does not mean ALL are guilty.  For example, your wife's speedometer may have been defective giving her a false reading.  Is she guilty of speeding in that case?  Maybe not, but she would be guilty of possessing defective equipment in her vehicle (a lesser offense- usually zero points on her DMV abstact and insurance ).  Life is not as simple as you would like it to be.

Ignorance is still bliss- enjoy the hate.

Post from garandman -

Nonsense, [b]garandman[/b], as usual, you read way too much into a humorous reply![:D]

Then let her plead 'straight up' and take her medicine like a big girl!

'Leniency' in a speeding case? Well, OK, I suppose, you can always ask.

So, in the event that you are ever charged with a serious crime, let me direct you to the very best lawyer for someone with your attitude: he or she will be called 'District Attorney', 'States Attorney', 'Prosecutor', or some such title.

He or she will be the lawyer bringing the serious charges against you.

Simply make an appointment to meet with him or her and spill your guts.

Do not mind if the prosecutor insists on having a court reporter present to take down all of your statements.

When you are finished spilling your guts, this prosecutor may have you sign some sort of statement that he has prepared based upon what you have revealed.

Go ahead and sign it without delay. You may not even read it since the prosecutor is your attorney and he/she wouldn't be adding anything to your story! Right?

Now [u]that's[/u] the kind of legal representation that you wish for and deserve!

Sure it is. Heh-heh-heh.[:D]

Refresh my memory, when were the days when a man's word was his bond? When was a handshake every as good as a written agreement?

Surely [u]not[/u] during Biblical Days.

Surely [u]not[/u] during the Middle Ages.

Surely [u]not[/u] during the beginning of the Modern Era. 'First, let's kill all the lawyers' W. Shakespeare.

Surely [u]not[/u] during the early days of this Nation. Abraham Lincoln made a nice living representing farmers suing other farmers! So much for a man's word being his bond!

So when [u]was[/u] this Golden Age of Personal Responsibility?

Eric The(OrIsThatJustAnother'Garandmanism'?)Hun[>]:)]

To my lawyer friends -

Don't you realize how revealing (whether accurate or not) it is to watch ya'll get your shorts all in a wad over a few generalized comments about SOME lawyers, and certain ugly aspects of the profession??

Lemme illustrate -

When teh Enron / Andersen mess broke, and it was vogue to bash those "evil, manipulative" accoutants, I made nary a peep. In fact, I joined in  slightly, condemning the Andersen guys pretty severely or the rotten dirtbags they were. I ****DID NOT**** yell bloody murder for anti-accountant bigotry, or some such like you guys are.

You know why??? Do you understand WHY I have little problem with accountant bashing, as popularized by the Enron mess???

(pay close attention here)

CUZ I KNOW THAT'S NOT ME. I'M NOTHING LIKE THOSE ANDERSEN GUYS.

In screaming bloody murder like you are, yer (unintendedly and MOST likely incorrectly) revealing yourselves.

Ever heard the phrase -

"Methinks thou doest protest too loudly"

I'm QUITE sure you guys are the BETTER / BEST subset of lawyers. At least yer not working to take my guns from me.

So if what I've said about lawyers doesn't apply to you, just say "Cool, g-man ain't talking about me, and leave it at that."

Otherwise, you run the risk of "protesting too loudly."

Like they say bout OJ , "innocent men have no need to run."

Fair enough, however, you painted that original post with an all-inclusive brush (I saw "POS lawyers", not "POSWTEOSIVACASEA* lawyers").  That is why you got responses like mine.




I did not see the vehement protests your refer to.  Don't confuse a challenge to a silly notion with "protesting too much".  I was trying to respond reasonably to what I saw as MAJOR protest (sort of like Jerry's anti-dentite rampage on dentists that time on Seinfeld).

At any rate, thanx for clarifying.



* "Piece of Shit with the exception of Steve in VA and Circuits and Shaggy et als"