by admin — published on May 28th, 2008
A new Texas House Bill (soon to become law, I’m sure), will remove the option of taking a driver safety course for those ticketed for a speed of 95 mph or more.
House Bill 586 amends the Code of Criminal Procedure to add the spouse or dependent child of a member of the U.S. military forces to the list of defendants eligible, at the discretion of the judge, to complete a driving safety course or motorcycle operator training and safety program in lieu of certain other court action on a traffic violation. This bill also makes a defendant charged with driving at a speed of 95 miles per hour or more ineligible to take a driving safety course in lieu of certain other court actioon.
It’s pretty stupid and irresponsible to be driving that fast in the first place; but, now, those that do will suffer stiffer penalties all around.
EDIT: Additional information added to post 9/16/2008
In response to Chuy’s comment below, I have researched and found additional information regarding the eligibility to take a driver safety course in the state of Texas.
Article 45.0511 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedures (section p) lays down what traffic offenses deem one IN-eligible to take a driver safety course. Specifically, they are:
- Passing a school bus while stopped, with signals flashing (Tx Trans. Code 545.066)
- Leaving the scene of an accident (Tx Trans. Code 550.022)
- Failure to give proper information at an accident scene (Tx Trans. Code 550.023)
- A serious traffic violation, relating to commercial operation (Tx Trans. Code 522.003)
- Any traffic offense committed in a construction zone when workers are present. (Tx Trans. Code 542.404, 729.004(b))
You see, in that section of the law, there is NO mention of speeding of 25 mph or more. You have to dig a little deeper. Near the beginning of the same code, 45.0511(b)(5) states you are eligible to take the course if:
[you are] charged with an offense to which this article applies, other than speeding at a speed of:
(a) 95 miles per hour or more; or
(b) 25 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit
So, basically, the 25 mph thing might as well be considered part of the IN-eligibility list.
If you found this website/post informative or interesting,
won't you consider making a small donation or other contribution?
by admin — published on May 26th, 2008
Finally, someone’s fighting back against the fleecing of the general populace
Famous for liking things big, Texas lawmakers have laid the smackdown on red light and speed cameras in a big way!
HB.922 addresses this issue:
House Bill 922 amends the Transportation Code to prohibit a municipality from implementing an automated traffic control system to enforce compliance with speed limits and requires the attorney general to enforce the prohibition.
This means that cameras, automated radar or laser, or anything else designed to snag an image of a car, driver, or license plate and record its speed is now forbidden.
The even larger racket of red-light cameras have had the brakes applied by HB.1052, which requires warning signs, at least 100 feet out, before intersections at which a municipality uses a photographic traffic monitoring system to enforce compliance with a traffic-control signal.
Read the rest of this entry »
by admin — published on May 24th, 2008
If you have ever thought of holding a SpeedTrapAhead sign, or are considering doing so yourself, there are a couple of points of law with which you should be familiar.
I have heard stories, and read some articles, of other people holding signs of this sort in other countries. Some of them made their point. Some of them attracted lots of attention, not all of it good (like Fred Zahn in the picture to the left). Some have been ticketed. And, some have gone to jail. Is that what you pictured when you were dreaming of having the fortitude to hold a SpeedTrapAhead sign yourself? The first two reactions, ‘making your point’ and ‘attracting lots of attention’, are the good parts. The rest are definitely NOT good!
I have read only about Texas law; so, I don’t know much about the laws in any other state or country. One of the things I learned while perusing through the Texas legal statutes, was that holding a sign is NOT “Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution”. Here is the part of Texas law that affirms that statement:
Texas Penal Code – Sec. 38.05. HINDERING APPREHENSION OR PROSECUTION.
(a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to hinder the arrest, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of another for an offense [...] he:
(1) harbors or conceals the other;
(2) provides or aids in providing the other with any means of avoiding arrest or effecting escape; or
(3) warns the other of impending discovery or apprehension.
(b) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(3) that the warning was given in connection with an effort to bring another into compliance with the law.
(c) [...]
I’ve omitted parts of the passage that don’t apply; but, you can clearly see from the highlighted portions, that it’s perfectly legal to hold a sign like this. You are trying ” to bring another into compliance with the law”. So, you can’t get arrested for “Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution”.
In a future post, I’ll talk about how holding a sign is not “interfering with public duties”. In the mean time, think about all the things you COULD get in trouble for (while not doing something stupid, of course); and, I’ll tell you why you’ll probably be just fine.
Keep the speed down. Pay attention to your surroundings. And, keep your hard earned money in your pocket — not in the magistrate’s!
by admin — published on May 23rd, 2008
In 2007, officers issued almost 58 thousand speeding tickets around the city.
APD is able to devote thousands of hours to traffic enforcement thanks to a federal grant. A half a million dollar grant pays officers overtime to look for speeders and red light runners.
And, it seems, officers have their favorite areas for catching speeders. It’s pretty apparent that the 7300 block of Hwy 290 E is a favorite hot spot. Better watch out, too, if you’re traveling in the 1700 block of Riverside. Do you drive in the 5200 block of E. Ben White, or the 1500 block of W. Anderson Lane? Well, you’re likely to get a ticket in all of those areas if you’re a little heavy footed, or just not paying attention.
Below is a list of the top 20 speeding ticket hot spots in Austin. This list, provided by the Austin Police Department, shows the number of tickets issued in 2007 for the areas listed. As you can see, the first three on the list are really high-profile areas, and are quite likely to be enforced more so than other areas of town.
Be careful out there!
Tickets Block & Street Name
4856 7000-7600 HIGHWAY 290 EAST
2001 1500-2000 RIVERSIDE EAST
1949 5100-5400 BEN WHITE EAST
866 1200-1900 WEST ANDERSON LANE
745 1000-2200 CONGRESS AVE SOUTH
729 8200-8500 MANCHACA ROAD
677 3000 WINDSOR ROAD
674 4000-4900 FM 2222
539 10800-10900 RESEARCH BLVD
511 1400-1800 ENFIELD
477 4300-4500 SLAUGHTER LANE
459 100-400 BRAKER LANE
372 7200-7400 BEN WHITE EAST
350 100 SOUTH 1ST STREET
297 3900-4100 AIRPORT BLVD
290 3700-3900 SPICEWOOD SRPINGS ROAD
270 5300 WESTGATE
254 13000-13800 RESEARCH 183 NORTH
217 2200-2600 BARTON SPRINGS ROAD
205 3700-4000 MANCHACA ROAD
View Larger Map with MORE Austin Speed Traps!
by admin — published on May 15th, 2008
The most profitable UK speed camera issued $26 million in tickets at night when a speed limit change warning sign was completely unlit.
M11 cameraThe UK’s most profitable speed camera that has been sending £60 (US $120) tickets to vehicle owners at the rate of 2000 per day may now be forced to issue refunds. The device, located on the southbound M11 at Woodford, Essex is situated at the point where the speed limit suddenly drops from 70 MPH to 50 MPH. Last month motorist Simon Grills forced the Crown Prosecution Service to drop his speed camera ticket after he proved the signs warning of the speed change were effectively invisible at night. Grills produced evidence showing the lights meant to illuminate the signs had been burned out since November 18, 2005. Grills had spent months fighting the ticket he received in September 2006.
“When I got flashed I couldn’t work out how I’d missed the sign,” Grills told the Sunday Mirror newspaper. “Then it clicked — it’s simply not visible at night.”
It is estimated that since the bulbs burned out, at least 214,000 drivers had been trapped by the camera at night, generating £13 million (US $26 million) in revenue.
The speed camera in question has been the center of controversy since it was first installed, inspiring one group to take its disagreement outside the courtroom. Captain Gatso, the leader of the anti-photo enforcement vigilante organization known as Motorists Against Detection (MAD), cited the M11 camera as evidence that officials were engaging in “fleecing, not policing” and proceeded to use a heavy truck to yank the device off of its mounting in late 2002.
“We have spoken to numerous police officers and emergency service personnel countrywide and they agree that the majority of speed cameras are sited for revenue, not safety, and in a lot of cases they just impede general progress,” Captain Gatso said in a statement at the time.
Source: (Sunday Mirror (UK), 3/30/2008)
Loading ...