sounds like you got away easy with the girl.. lol

looool beta phaggot. You've never gone 10 km over the speed limit? Go back to your mommas tit m8

last time i checked going 10 over the limit didn't constitute losing your car for 7 days, "m8"

I drive over the limit, and I'm sure Soundy does too, but the difference is I've got the balls to admit I'm at fault when I get a legitimate speeding ticket.

I never said I had my car impounded you cheeky cunt. I said I was given a suspension a few weeks later in the mail.

M8

"Excessive speeding is defined in the Motor Vehicle Act as driving at a speed greater than 40 km/h over the speed limit."

Excessive Speeding and Careless Driving - Road Safety Rules and Consequences of Unsafe Driving - RoadSafetyBC

I don't get how going 10 over the limit is excessive speeding.

This is from 2008, but might be relevant. Gist is that probation starts at 4-6 points, then you gotta be careful for a year. Suspension means you can't drive. Probation means you're on thin ice. Thought I'd clearify that, at 3 am, I thought prohibition meant suspension... derp.

edit:forgot the link
http://drivesmartbc.ca/young-drivers...y-licence-away
http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/osmv/share...guidelines.pdf

strong BB.com language. Wrong site. I am also sure people get their licence's suspended for going 60 in a 50 zone all day errday!

Then again everyone always THINKS they are going 60.... even when hardly anyone does... it's interesting how that works. "I wouldn't be stopping you for going 80+, if you were going 60".

LOLWUT?

Oh yeah, all the time... I've had a few tickets in my day, although it's been many many years since I got a speeding ticket. Only other ones I can think of are a red light ticket downtown once, and the most recent which was a seatbelt ticket. And yeah, I paid them all.

I wish that was so. The bs ticket that I got was precisely because I was going literally 61 down Knight. When the officer came back to me, he told me he was only booking me for doing 51 in 50 zone because "I had a good record".

Yes, I am still fxxking pissed. It was a blatant ripoff, plain and simple. Even the officer knew it was utter bs.

So you admit to breaking the "limit"..ie...the maximum speed you are permitted to go by law...was a blatant ropoff, plain & simple? By you, who chose to break the law...or by the Cop who caught you and gave you a VT? You got the minimun fine permitted for speeding so why are you upset at the Cop?

Interesting question... If he wrote you for 51 in a 50, don't radar units have an allowed margin of 2km/h?

I am not upset at the officer. Yes, I think it was pointless for him to nap me. But he was a nice guy, and did what he can to give me a break. Rather, I'm upset at the system because it is dysfunctional and against common sense. 50 kph southbound at the approach of Knight Bridge simply makes no sense. You're at the bottom of the hill, you're about to enter a freeway, but there is still a big long stretch of 50kph between 63rd and the Marine on-ramp?

Officer Zulutango, I know you are trained to follow orders from your superiors and the law. But just because they are orders and the law doesn't necessarily make them sensible. That's why you are also asked to use your discretion when you are enforcing the law.

Agreed. Off topic, but losing my car (and subsequently her) was the key to me getting my entire life together....

Just because you may disagree with a law doesn't mean you don't have to follow it. Not all speed limits make sense but most people also aren't qualified to analyze a roadway and determine a speed limit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Traum (Post 8575765) I am not upset at the officer. Yes, I think it was pointless for him to nap me. But he was a nice guy, and did what he can to give me a break. Rather, I'm upset at the system because it is dysfunctional and against common sense. 50 kph southbound at the approach of Knight Bridge simply makes no sense. You're at the bottom of the hill, you're about to enter a freeway, but there is still a big long stretch of 50kph between 63rd and the Marine on-ramp? Officer Zulutango, I know you are trained to follow orders from your superiors and the law. But just because they are orders and the law doesn't necessarily make them sensible. That's why you are also asked to use your discretion when you are enforcing the law.

Although, under "normal" circumstances, personally I would not issue a VT for 11k over the limit, but photo radar used to issue them at that level. The limit is just that...the idea that you could break the limit by 10kmh started when the Govt said photo radar tickets would be issued for 11kmh and more over the limit. Drivers took this to mean that they were permitted to speed as long as it was not above 10kmh over the limit and that 1-10k was not speeding. The law says 1k or more over the limit is speeding.

You might be interested to know that in New Zealand limits are enforced with tickets being issued at 4k over the limit and impaired driving charges starting at .05 mg%. Lots of whining from drivers but big drops in crashes and fatals there. I don't know what actual speed you were caught doing but often a higher speed is actually recorded before the driver sees the Cop, brakes and then looks at the speedo showing a lower speed. We were trained that traffic law enforcement is to be used to change driving behaviour and reduce the risk and crashes. The discretion is to be used to achieve this goal and sometimes it means enforcing the laws as they are written. The statement concerning "1 kmh over the limit" may be what you took from the conversation about the fact that you only have to be proved to be doing 1k over to be convicted, not that you actually were only doing 1k over.

That makes no sense because the fine for going 51 or 61 in a 50 zone is the same. "Booking" you for 51 in a 50 rather than 61 changes nothing.:suspicious:

Side note (not directly pointing at you Traum) :

The argument that going with the flow with traffic to defend yourself is very flawed. Heck, there really is not excuse in my opinion, except if you are rushing someone to the hospital. There are reasons, but very rarely an "Excuse". Going with the flow of traffic is like saying you are breaking the law because everyone else is doing it. If everyone looted a store, does that make it okay? aka rioting..... I guess in the minds of all those people in 2011... it is okay.. So I guess the reality is, there are a lot of people who were never taught about being accountable, while growing up.

Damn... are you telling me I got jipped there too?

:facepalm:

I am assuming you either were clocked going 71. or you heard wrong. Because going 71 in a 50 would constitute being charged the second tier which is 196 for speeding.

Nope, I was nowhere near 70. I was cruising down Knight while holding gear -- no gas, no brakes, just a straight cruise at 60 and the engine revs kept me from going fast. I very lightly got back on gas around where southbound Knight exits out to Marine westbound only to keep pace because that's roughly where the downward slope ends and a slight incline begins before the bridge comes. I know the 60 zone doesn't start until the on-ramp from Marine merges with the bridge, but I didn't see the speed trap, and I thought just being 10 over would not be a problem because generally it isn't. When the officer jump out to pull me over, I cursed myself and look at the speedometer right away -- low and behold, my speedometer needle was on the faster side of 60, but still touching that 60kph line. I was doing 60 the whole damn time. That's why I am pissed.

I am not disputing that I was faster than 50. I am not making that claim now; I did not make that claim then, and I did not dispute anything with the cop at the time. Plain and simple, I got ripped off. I 100% think it is a dick move to nab someone doing 60 or 61 in a 50 zone, and judging by Spidey and Zulutango comments, I am now thinking that the cop wasn't actually being nice at all -- the entire scenario could easily be interpreted as the cop pulling a dick move to nab me, and then he did what he could to make sure that the charge (of being 1kph over) would stick. To top it off, he even acted like he was doing me a favour by "only" charging me for being 1kph over. If that were the case, this officer totally excels in his job -- I gotta commend him for that. It would also make him a dick in my eyes though.

Still, I am going to thank Spidey and Zulu for pointing things out because I can now view the entire incident under a new light.

When the officer jump out to pull me over, I cursed myself and look at the speedometer right away --

As Spidey said, the readings were taken before he "jumped out" and they may have been different from when you looked at your speedo after seeing him.

I'd be really interested in something here. The officer may have snookered himself by charging you at 51 km/h.
1. Dispute the ticket
2. Request disclosure including a photocopy of the charging officer's notebook, a transcription of the notes, and definitions of any abbreviations used.
3. Make and model of the speed measurement instrument.

For example, the accuracy of an UltraLyte LR B (pp 51) is ±2 km/h.

The procedure generally is for police to make a visual estimate on speed, then use the instrument to corroborate their estimate. Depending on what kind of notes were kept, it can be inferred that driving at an alleged 51 km/h may actually only have been 49 km/h based on the accuracy of the instrument.

If he kept full notes on how he lowered your speed as a courtesy, pay the fine and move along.

There is no provision on a VT to record the actual speed the target was doing, in fact you might not want it shown, because it will become part of the official court record if it is. If you were doing 23k over the limit and that was written on the face of the VT, but you were issued a VT for $138 instead of $196, then you would likely have to pay the higher fine if convicted. I don't believe that 51 in a 50 zone was written on the face of your VT. A fine of $138 would be the appropriate fine for evey speed between 51 and 70k in a 50 k zone.

As Zulu said, Traum, you don't know which point you were actually clocked at. Regardless of what really happened and how fast he got you at, at the end of the day it does suck to be dinged for going 61 in a 50. I see how you can feel being ripped off as others around you every day travel at that speed without any repercussion, but drivers don't dictate the speed limit, the signs do.

Also, the fact he said he was going to charge you for 51 (which I strongly believe he meant or said 1+over 50) as he did clock you at 71+. Did he actually tell you how fast he clocked you at, or did you say 61 as that's what you believed you were going at.

The incident actually happened quite a few months ago, and at the time, I just sucked it up and paid off the fine since I think the fine goes up after a certain period.

I don't remember the exact words the officer used, nor the charge that was written on the ticket, but I do remember understanding / interpreting it to be 51 in 50 zone. I was too upset at the time to remember the details of the dialog we had, but the part that I clearly remembered is something along the lines of "I could have charged you for something faster, but because you had a good driving record, I am only going to charge you for..."

Nowadays, when I need to cross the Knight Bridge, I either take a detour and use the on-ramp from Marine, or I will make it a point to coast down the entire hill on Knight in 2nd gear at 50kph to piss every other driver off. When I am not in a rush, it is actually quite amusing to go dead slow (aka 50) this way and watch what the other drivers do. :concentrate:

Everytime I see a cop in my rear-view I purposely drive 5 under the speed limit. they get the maddest I cant count how many times I've had the cops light me up just to pass me.