Encounter with Round Rock PD

[gigag04]

...I feel all better now...I was plumb upset thinking that I could be punished for doing right when everyone else was doing wrong...makes no sense at all...

No - but it is possible to get a speeding ticket dismissed under the "reasonable and prudent" element. You just have to convince the judge/jury. Now - if it is snow/sleet/slick and someone is driving the speed limit, but it is not reasonable, I could articulate a speeding ticket (or reckless driving). Just have to prove up that element. It works both ways.

[Oldgringo]

They don't want to issue citations in town because everybody is someone's 2nd or 3rd cousin or something.

Just call up all your cousins and tell them to slow down.

Therein lies the rub, we're still the new people in town. We've only been there 17 years and we don't have any relatives within 600 miles - which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Alas...

[mgood]

The City Manager says,"well, er...uh they don't like to issue tickets". Well, er...uh they don't mind citing an OTR trucker who misses the bypass sign and drives through this hamlet. They don't want to issue citations in town because everybody is someone's 2nd or 3rd cousin or something.

OTR truckers are some of the world's greatest conspiracy theorists. That being said, they may still be right some of the time.
Many of them will tell you that many of these places much prefer to give tickets to someone from out of town (like an OTR trucker as opposed to a local trucker) because that is bringing money into their local economy. If they give a ticket to someone who lives there, that's just moving money around within their local economy.
So, citing the trucker who is obviously unfamiliar with the area since he missed the bypass is worth a lot more than citing some local business owner's kid for driving too fast in a residential neighborhood.

[RottenApple]

OTR truckers are some of the world's greatest conspiracy theorists. That being said, they may still be right some of the time.

ROFL You speaketh the Truth!

Many of them will tell you that many of these places much prefer to give tickets to someone from out of town (like an OTR trucker as opposed to a local trucker) because that is bringing money into their local economy. If they give a ticket to someone who lives there, that's just moving money around within their local economy.
So, citing the trucker who is obviously unfamiliar with the area since he missed the bypass is worth a lot more than citing some local business owner's kid for driving too fast in a residential neighborhood.

When I was driving OTR I typically (<--- Key word) found the exact opposite to be true. I had more trouble from big city LEOs than from the little podunk towns in the middle of nowhere. When doing my 34 hour resets, I like to find hole in the wall towns. One I loved was North Bend, WA. There's a TA truck stop that I'd park at and then go camping and fishing a few miles away.

[Fangs]

I had a buddy who showed me a ticket he got on I-35 for doing 65 in a 65. The reason was the he was impeding traffic. He was just going to pay it, but I convinced him to take it to court and ask to speak to the DA. It was dismissed.

[WildBill]

I had a buddy who showed me a ticket he got on I-35 for doing 65 in a 65. The reason was the he was impeding traffic. He was just going to pay it, but I convinced him to take it to court and ask to speak to the DA. It was dismissed.

[speedsix]

...I feel all better now...I was plumb upset thinking that I could be punished for doing right when everyone else was doing wrong...makes no sense at all...

No - but it is possible to get a speeding ticket dismissed under the "reasonable and prudent" element. You just have to convince the judge/jury. Now - if it is snow/sleet/slick and someone is driving the speed limit, but it is not reasonable, I could articulate a speeding ticket (or reckless driving). Just have to prove up that element. It works both ways.

...both of those possibilities at least make sense...the first 'cause any break we can get is a good one...the second one 'cause 90% of the drivers'll agree that you'd drive slower than posted in bad conditions...even if they really don't and are the ones running us off the road....
...thanks for clarifying...

[tbrown]

I previously forgot to mention, I came in earlier to have the ticket dismissed, and the ticket was not in the system two days later, while my PD usually has all tickets entered into the system by the end of shift. Per my Sergeant's request, I requested the DVR footage from RRPD, but was told it would be a 7-14 day delay for open records request, beyond the point where I could have it dismissed with a small 10-20 dollar fine.

It shouldn't take that long to get the video. It makes me wonder if they're hiding something.

[pnctar]

Or the really cool one, and I've seen this all over the country when I used to drive a truck, is when the LEO is cruising around about 5 mph below the speed limit and everyone is afraid to pass him. I've seen traffic backed up for miles in this parade. I know that guy is up there in his car laughing about it.

I love that one. I was rolling through NM one time and came up on that very same situation. He had his ears on and we started jackjawing about it. He said he loved to do it to mess with people. Even gave me a wave as I passed him.

Loved to do that and see the reaction of folks ... then do 65 in a 60 and see who'd keep up with me . Very rarely someone would pass, 'cept the truckers I was talking to. Sometimes it was fun to clear the way for the guys "earning" a living and the folks just driving to work ...

[C-dub]

I've seen this happen several times, but I do not fear passing an officer if I'm not doing anything wrong.

[srothstein]

...I feel all better now...I was plumb upset thinking that I could be punished for doing right when everyone else was doing wrong...makes no sense at all...

No - but it is possible to get a speeding ticket dismissed under the "reasonable and prudent" element. You just have to convince the judge/jury. Now - if it is snow/sleet/slick and someone is driving the speed limit, but it is not reasonable, I could articulate a speeding ticket (or reckless driving). Just have to prove up that element. It works both ways.

...both of those possibilities at least make sense...the first 'cause any break we can get is a good one...the second one 'cause 90% of the drivers'll agree that you'd drive slower than posted in bad conditions...even if they really don't and are the ones running us off the road....
...thanks for clarifying...

So, if you accept that this term, which is not defined in the Transportation Code, can work for either side of the limit, perhaps you could explain why the second term could not work the exact same way? I do agree with what GigAg said, and the same works for the impeding law. If it is normal for people to do ten over and they would beat a speeding ticket for it, then it would be impeding to go only five over and have a stack of cars behind you.

[mgood]

I've seen this happen several times, but I do not fear passing an officer if I'm not doing anything wrong.

I'm with you there. I'll pass if I can. But frequently I'm a dozen cars back behind people who are afraid to pass and I can't get around them because they take up every lane.

[speedsix]

...I feel all better now...I was plumb upset thinking that I could be punished for doing right when everyone else was doing wrong...makes no sense at all...

No - but it is possible to get a speeding ticket dismissed under the "reasonable and prudent" element. You just have to convince the judge/jury. Now - if it is snow/sleet/slick and someone is driving the speed limit, but it is not reasonable, I could articulate a speeding ticket (or reckless driving). Just have to prove up that element. It works both ways.

...both of those possibilities at least make sense...the first 'cause any break we can get is a good one...the second one 'cause 90% of the drivers'll agree that you'd drive slower than posted in bad conditions...even if they really don't and are the ones running us off the road....
...thanks for clarifying...

So, if you accept that this term, which is not defined in the Transportation Code, can work for either side of the limit, perhaps you could explain why the second term could not work the exact same way? I do agree with what GigAg said, and the same works for the impeding law. If it is normal for people to do ten over and they would beat a speeding ticket for it, then it would be impeding to go only five over and have a stack of cars behind you.

...ain't no "perhaps" about it...you might wiggle out of a ticket where you were speeding because everyone else was, too, and the flow kinda carried you along: "Judge, there were 15 cars and I was in the middle of them...didn't realize I was doing 15 over..."...that makes some sense...
... but to be written a ticket when you weren't violating the posted speed limit makes no sense at all...you can't be guilty of breaking the law when you're keeping it...it's not illegal to stop at a stop sign...(the only way it would be is if an officer was directing traffic and trying to pull you through it...he supercedes the posted signs)...you can't be arrested for not stealing a car...it's simple to me...if five guys are speeding, that doesn't make them right and the guy doing the posted speed wrong...it's not an opinion poll...it's law...which a lot of folks seem to say doesn't mean what it clearly says...spank any child for not misbehaving like the others around him and see what happens...that way of thinking's like the guys sloughing off at work coming to the guy giving it 100% and telling him "Slow down, Joe, you're making us all look bad"....if you're going to tell drivers to get out there and do like the other guys are doing, you'll have chaos...so we have a law that sets limits...and following them, you know you're safe from punishment...impeding is a bad thing...driving the posted speed limit is a good thing...and if it impedes anyone it has to be the bad guys who are breaking the law...how simple does it get?!!!!!

"Sec. 545.352. PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS. (a) A speed in excess of the limits established by Subsection (b) or under another provision of this subchapter is prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable and prudent and that the speed is unlawful."
...this means that if you're above the posted speed limit the speed you're doing is NOT REASONABLE AND PRUDENT and it IS UNLAWFUL...unless you can show special circumstances why this doesn't apply to you...and troopers routinely tell folks on the way to the hospital to deliver a baby to go on...but DON'T SPEED...it's not reasonable to endanger lives in this case...so if you're going the posted speed, you're reasonable and prudent, you're driving lawfully with regard to speed, and you're NOT impeding anyone...it's THEIR problem, not yours...

gigag04 said: "No - but it is possible to get a speeding ticket dismissed under the "reasonable and prudent" element."
...one possible example would be if there was a government-ordered evacuation going on...another is if a tornado was chasing you down the road...the danger of letting it catch you was greater than the danger of speeding...kind of like the "law of greater good" where, in some dire circumstances, the value of breaking the law is greater than the value of keeping it...but this sure isn't one of those circumstances...
...you either accept it or you don't...I gotta go bury a horse, now, y'all have a good day...

[gigag04]

Yeah I generally disagree with that. It seems like you are ignoring the reasonable and prudent part.

[speedsix]

...give me examples of court-contested tickets where the judge agreed that it was reasonable and prudent for the person who was written up for 78 in a 65 and argued that he was just doing what everyone else was doing so that he wouldn't "impede" them...it isn't going to fly with the officer..."I'm dealing with YOU right now, not them"...and it isn't going to fly with the judge "You were doing 13 over the posted limit...you're wrong...pay the man"...reasonable and prudent deals with speeds LOWER than the posted speed...not higher...so, yes I AM ignoring the reasonable and prudent part...it wouldn't fly as an excuse for going over the posted speed...which is what "Sec. 545.352. PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS. (a) A speed in excess of the limits established by Subsection (b) or under another provision of this subchapter is prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable and prudent and that the speed is unlawful." CLEARLY says...