Cop didn't care about CHL - still wrote me two tickets.

[The Annoyed Man]

In this particular case on a Texas state highway, the speed limit was 60 mph - not 260 mph - and the drivers who are obeying the speed limit have a reasonable expectation that the drivers around them will also obey the speed limit, or at least stay close to it, which the law requires of all drivers, whether or not they have secret fantasies of being the next Wayne Gardner or Mario Andretti.

That is a dangerous assumption, one that is just as foolish as assuming that all the drivers around them are sober and fully insured.

Other than that, this is probably not the place to debate Autobahn versus Interstate, but I do appreciate your comments.

I'll grant you the dangerousness of the assumption, and I'll drop the Autobahn versus Interstate comparison... ...BUT, whether or not that assumption by most drivers is foolish, it is still the reality of the situation. So in any system that is running, however mistakenly, on the principle that one can reasonably expect all other drivers to be obeying the law (which describes the majority of drivers), it is the driver who upsets the apple cart - either by driving impaired, recklessly, or at excessive speed (which may or may not overlap with recklessness) - who causes the unsafe condition. The unsafe condition is not caused by the complacent driver. Where the complacent driver is wrong is in not being adequately prepared (either in mindset or in driving skills) for the possibility of an impaired/reckless/speeding driver in their vicinity. However, since the complacent driver is acting within the law, and the impaired/reckless/speeding driver is acting outside the law, it is then incumbent upon the impaired/reckless/speeding violator to change their ways to bring them into compliance with the rest of the drivers, who constitute the vast majority on the road, so that all may use the roads safely.

Can we at least agree on that?

[bci21984]

§ 545.351. MAXIMUM SPEED REQUIREMENT. (a) An operator
may not drive at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent
under the circumstances then existing.
(b) An operator:
(1) may not drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is
reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard for
actual and potential hazards then existing; and
(2) shall control the speed of the vehicle as
necessary to avoid colliding with another person or vehicle that is
on or entering the highway in compliance with law and the duty of
each person to use due care.
(c) An operator shall, consistent with Subsections (a) and
(b), drive at an appropriate reduced speed if:
(1) the operator is approaching and crossing an
intersection or railroad grade crossing;
(2) the operator is approaching and going around a
curve;
(3) the operator is approaching a hill crest;
(4) the operator is traveling on a narrow or winding
roadway; and
(5) a special hazard exists with regard to traffic,
including pedestrians, or weather or highway conditions.


being able to articulate his disregarding subsection 5 would be very easy, "i witnessed the motorcycle passing and distancing himself from other vehicles that were traveling at a constant pace."

[Originalist]

Just wanted to point out that the police don't need to use radar to write speeding tickets.

The radar gun was invented in 1954.
The speeding ticket was invented long before 1954.

This comment is based on......

Maybe in 1954 you didn't need a RADAR Gun to write speeding tickets but in 2008 with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (the standards they have established) and case law from around the country (including federal courts (other than the SCOTUS) you most certainly do. Not only do you have to have the RADAR Gun but you must be trained in how to use it, that is right...any cop who hops in a cruiser and turns on the RADAR Gun without any training is wrong.

Bryan

Don't need a radar to write a ticket using TC 545.351. In court the officer will simply say "based on my training and experience, and considering the road and traffic conditions, I believed the violator's speed to be unsafe".

Even if a vehicle is travelling under the posted speed limit an officer can write a ticket for speeding if the conditions make it unsafe to travel at the posted speed limit. Speed limits are just that - the maximum speed limit.

Don't need a radar to pace a vehicle using the patrol car's speedometer.

Don't need a radar to clock a vehicle using a stopwatch and 2 known, fixed points of reference.

While radar and lidar are the most commonsly used methods for determining speed, there are other methods that police can, and do, use to ticket violators.

Of course everyone is entitled to contest any speeding ticket, radar or not. And many times (not most times, but it isn't rare either) a judge will dismiss a ticket, even if radar was used. That's up to the judge. There are no guaranteed tickets nor are there any guaranteed ways out of a ticket (unless you're a judge).

Right, I agree with you for the most part, 545.351 implements the basic speed law, reasonable and prudent. I was talking specifically about the offense of speeding (or determining your speed) and in order to be charged with Speeding (which is different that unsafe speed) you must meet the elements of the offense. Of which (in a nut shell) you must identify the vehicle, estimate the speed of the vehicle, verify the speed and make sure it is relevant to your estimate and identify the operator. (This is not the exact language (I don't have my books w/me). Yes there are other methods out there for speed measurements (I stick to RADAR/LIDAR because in TX it is the most commonly used. In PA only State Police are permitted to use RADAR guns (at least it was when I lived there) and municipalities had to use VASCAR (Time and distance) to measure speed.) I frankly forgot about it when I replied to Odin's post because, like I said, RADAR/LIDAR is predominate in Texas and all I use. If you want to break it down, as long as the Officer can prove the calibration of the speedometer was correct, he could pace you as well. Again, you have to apply case law to all of these things. Case law for RADAR enforcement alone took up a whole chapter in my NHTSA Police Doppler RADAR Operator course.

I think you guys are talking green apples and red apples here.

IANLALEO (I am no longer a Law Enforcement Officer), but IIRC to write a ticket for excessive speed, you must have proof of the speed from radar, lidar, clocking (Vascar) or other measurement source. Unsafe spied (higher or lower) is a different ticket, similar to careless and imprudent or reckless driving and can be written under the discretion of a visual reference. All are moving violations, but written for a different reason.

with Keith B but would like to add..... or Speeding

[srothstein]

AFCop,

I just wanted to correct one very common misconception about Texas speed laws. The law is the section quoted earlier (TC 545.351). The correct charge is speeding. There is no other law such as unsafe speed in Texas, at least as a state law.

What confuses many people is the title to section 545.352, Prima Facie Speed Limits. This section establishes that the posted speed limit is considered to be prima facie evidence of the maximum speed that is reasonable and prudent for that section of road. In other words, it is not truly illegal to go faster than the posted speed limit, you just need to be able to prove that what you did was both reasonable and prudent.

As a side note, I wrote a lot of speeding tickets in San Antonio before we were issued radar guns. When I first started there, only the traffic section had radar in the cars. The rest of us on patrol were still expected to enforce traffic laws, including speeding. I always thought it was only reasonable to write a ticket to someone if I could follow them for more than 1/10th of a mile and them not see me behind them as they sped. They were clearly not paying enough attention to surrounding traffic for the speed they were going then.

Currently, Texas has no legal requirements for an officer to be able to run radar or lidar. It is generally better, and most departments write it in policy, for the officer to have been trained in the proper use. Other wise, they make very poor witnesses. There is a section of law that requires training as specified in the occupations code. But, since the code does not require any specific training in the area, TCLEOSE has no training requirement either. There is an AG opinion that says this section of the law is basically null since all officers have met the training requirement if there is no requirement.

[Originalist]

Currently, Texas has no legal requirements for an officer to be able to run radar or lidar. It is generally better, and most departments write it in policy, for the officer to have been trained in the proper use. Other wise, they make very poor witnesses. There is a section of law that requires training as specified in the occupations code. But, since the code does not require any specific training in the area, TCLEOSE has no training requirement either. There is an AG opinion that says this section of the law is basically null since all officers have met the training requirement if there is no requirement.

Right, but with the amount of case law out there, granite I know it would be a long shot to introduce even Federal Case Law if it wasn't in Texas, and the lack of Training someone could pull off the "Florida 25 MPH Tree" I honestly can't cite offense after offense, that is why I cheat and have the books w/me and cheat sheets (I just didnt need them where I am at right now, so I am shooting from memory that is 3 months old now). I personnally have never attempted to cite for "Unsafe Speed" so the particulars I no nothing about. Like most cops, I have adopted a philosophy that somethings erk me and I cite them all the time and others, not so much and get treated accordingly. As I mentioned earlier, Pacing is a viable option, you just have to be certain your speedometer is calibrated and if you have a 2 year old sedan with 70,000+ miles, it might be time to have it checked. That is my opinion.

I love the imput and the amount of knowledge that is on the Forum, I just wish I would have been more active when I first signed up. I love this Forum and I love all you guys/gals knowledge and point of views. I really like that people can have different opinions and stil get together at the range and throw lead through paper. My rant is over

Bryan

[texasmr2]

Gotta love being 22.

Yah that is a great age but a more mature riding attitude will let ya see next year thru a helmet and not from a hospital bed or worse!
I guess you can realize how many driver's I irritated on Monday coming back from the deer lease because I was DOING the speed limit but I was in the lefthand lane so that was there problem. Anyway on 59 North there is alot of construction and speeding in a 'construction zone' doubles the fine.

Future LEO,
texasmr2

[dtalley]

Breaking the law is breaking the law..... the old saying if you can't do the time don't do the crime..... Good law abiding citizens (90+MPH) giving CHL holders a good name..

[airbornerangerboogie]

My first encounter turned out to be a good one. I was returning home from a dinner and was driving my daughters car. I look in my rear view mirror and saw those dreaded flashing lights and pulled over. I turned on my over head lights and put both hands on the wheel awaiting the troopers approach. He ask for my license and insurance and I handed him my DL and CCL along with my daughters insurace form. He told me that I had been doing 55 in a 45 and as an added bonus, the insurance was out of date. I was sweating bullits, when he asked me if I was carrying and I told him yes, that it was a 1911 commander in a IWB on my right hip. He handed me my DL and CCL back and said he was going to let me off with just a warning, tipped his hat and said have a nice day.....

[dac1842]

I have been reviewing the traffic code under speed law exceptions, I dont see CHL holders listed. So I really dont understand why a few folks here seem to think they are exempt.

[DONT TREAD ON ME]

[Originalist]

I dont think people expect to be given a pass on tickets, most people post here to share experience with the LOE and the CHL. i.e. disarmed, rude about having weapon, etc. What I have noticed, as many have, is some..... NOT ALL LEOs have a tendency to look at a CHL as a "Good Guy" and extend them some form of courtesy. Same for me and being in the Military. If I am pulled over, I certainly dont expect to be "let go" but am much appreciative if they do. Which has happened more frequently than before I had either.

On the flip, if they expect it, well I hope they do not portray that to the LEO. When I am at work on base and people throw out things like they expect something, the only thing they get is a hard time.

[Captain Matt]

I guess you can realize how many driver's I irritated on Monday coming back from the deer lease because I was DOING the speed limit but I was in the lefthand lane so that was there problem. Anyway on 59 North there is alot of construction and speeding in a 'construction zone' doubles the fine.

Future LEO,
texasmr2

545.051. DRIVING ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY.
(b) An operator of a vehicle on a roadway moving more slowly
than the normal speed of other vehicles at the time and place under
the existing conditions shall drive in the right-hand lane
available for vehicles, or as close as practicable to the
right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, unless the operator is:
(1) passing another vehicle; or
(2) preparing for a left turn at an intersection or
into a private road or driveway.

[Captain Matt]

I have been reviewing the traffic code under speed law exceptions, I dont see CHL holders listed. So I really dont understand why a few folks here seem to think they are exempt.

Same as off duty cops.

[FIFTY]

I guess you can realize how many driver's I irritated on Monday coming back from the deer lease because I was DOING the speed limit but I was in the lefthand lane so that was there problem. Anyway on 59 North there is alot of construction and speeding in a 'construction zone' doubles the fine.

Future LEO,
texasmr2

545.051. DRIVING ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY.
(b) An operator of a vehicle on a roadway moving more slowly
than the normal speed of other vehicles at the time and place under
the existing conditions shall drive in the right-hand lane
available for vehicles, or as close as practicable to the
right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, unless the operator is:
(1) passing another vehicle; or
(2) preparing for a left turn at an intersection or
into a private road or driveway.

I agree, and I would have been irritated with you as well. You aren't a cop and shouldn't be smugly blocking traffic...

[MBGuy]

In some states, I know Colorado and Oklahoma for sure, they are stopping and ticketing left lane hogs even if they're not speeding.

I wish they'd start doing that here.