I’ve read many, many comments from readers of the Statesman, and various online blogs. Some comments were very supportive of my “Crusade” against “Speed Traps.” Others were quite critical in their tone. ( I really HATE the moniker “crusade”, BTW.)

Questions! There were myriads of questions to be answered. Who would answer them? Well, there were lots of opinions … and, you know, we ALL have one, if you know what I mean. People on the net were voicing their opinions, basically answering questions, perhaps, on MY behalf.

These were  their opinions — most often NOT mine. I rarely post responses to forum comments, so I felt I needed to input MY two-cents-worth in my own forum, so  — Here goes…

How did this all come about?

A  friend and I were simply trying to learn how to create websites and determine what kind of site would produce the most traffic. I had recently moved to Lakeway, TX, and soon heard about the hard-handed enforcement of speed laws. Also on my mind was an “urban legend” story of a boy who held a “Speed Trap ahead” sign to warn drivers. Down the block, there was another boy holding a big jar labeled “Tips.”

The story about the boys led me to wonder whether such an act was even legal. Soon, I was on the net, researching applicable laws regarding “obstruction of justice” and other similar subjects. Come to find out, it was not only legal, but there were sections of Texas law (Sec. 38.05 (b) and 38.15 (c)) that actually decriminalized warning drivers of speed enforcement zones.

I decided to try the ” ‘Speed Trap Ahead’ warning thing.” So it began. This was how I could generate better web traffic — all just a friendly competition with my friend, blogging about issues that were on my mind while learning the basics of website generation. Phew!

Why keep at it?

I quickly learned that “speed traps” was a very popular subject. And I got lots of trafic! That was the point in the beginning, after all. Very soon, it became apparent that I had opened a BIG can of worms. My website quickly became a public information and discussion forum about all sorts of issues. I began including posts about Texas traffic laws, thus hopefully educating drivers and influencing their driving habits. I posted videos, blogged, answered emails, and read up on various subjects related to driving in general. Eventually, it became a convoluted creation of (1) a contest with my friend, and (2) a mission of learning and relaying to others the intricacies of Texas driving laws.

I’d really like to continue, but…

It’s getting late, and I have a phone interview with Houston news radio station KTRH tomorrow morning. Stay tuned for answers to more questions posed by supporters and antagonists alike. Cheers! Happy New Year!

Drive safely!

Check out the article yourself; but, I just have to elaborate on a portion the reporter mentioned.

Yes, I AM un-employed. However, I have worked continuously for the past 30+ years without EVER being without a job or EVER accepting one cent from ANY government agency. I have only been out of work since early fall, when the company I worked for cut near half of its employee base, and sent our jobs to India, Malaysia, and Ukraine. (Thanks! LibreDigital, Inc.)

It’s been nearly two years since I’ve even been out on the roads wearing my shirt. And, I haven’t even been updating my website or writing blog entries during that time due to the civil lawsuit. I DON’T just sit around doing this instead of looking for a job. In fact, the whole sign holding/t-shirt wearing thing I did in the past, was WHILE I was working nights, often 50-60 hours a week!!

Anyway… I just had to add that little bit of clarification. Everything else is, of course, open to your interpretation as you see fit. Be sure to check out the numerous and varied comments at the end of the article. 

VS.

If you recall, I was detained, arrested and issued six tickets for various city code ordinances in April of 2009. Eight months later, I went to court in defense of the tickets I received. At the conclusion of four and a half hours of testimony, I was adjudged NOT-guilty on all charges — Duh! In email exchanges between city officials (which were acquired through public information requests), even the city manager intimated that he didn’t really think the charges that were levied against me were appropriate for the circumstances. However, prosecutor Scott Taliaferro was unwavering in his resolve to take my case to the full extent possible. Who knows why these frivolous charges weren’t dropped at my first appearance. Scratch that! — I know WHY, I just wonder WHO was the main influence to push the issue.

Regardless of the whos and whys, all the criminal charges were essentially dismissed (NOT guilty). But, not before a few interesting details came out in testimony. Shortly before trial, the prosecutor spoke with my attorney, discussing with him details about what Code Enforcement officer Jeff Brown had told him. Seems as though James Debrow had told Brown to find anything he could to write me tickets for — that “This was getting personal”!! Debrow wanted to slap me with ANYthing he could, just to flex his muscle and cost me time/money — all because his little feelings were hurt?

Then, there’s the issue of “instanter”ing me before the Judge. Generally, this involves holding a detainee at the local “jail” for the municipal Judge to personally review the facts before any further disposition. There was much confusion and disagreement between testimonies of officers Debrow, Almaguer (pictured left), and Stone. Stone said that he first was just going to detain me locally at Lakeway police department, but then received information instructing him to go ahead and take me downtown to be booked, etc. Almaguer, I believe, was simply a pawn during this whole encounter, blindly doing only what he was told to do. Poor guy. He was quite frazzled as he tried to answer the attorney’s questions, most of the time stating that he was just “following orders”, and several times removing his glasses to wipe his eyes. During testimony, he stated that he understood there were “standing orders” for my arrest, and he was just doing what he was told.

At one point during testimony, Judge Kevin Madison paused to query the witness himself. [paraphrasing the following] “So you were told that the Judge was called, and that there were ‘standing orders’ to arrest the defendant? ["Yes."] Well, I am the Judge (for this jurisdiction), and I received NO such call(s) regarding this matter! Hmmmm… (shaking his head)”. So, all the talk and testimony about contacting the Judge was probably hogwash. Debrow just wanted me to go to jail!

While I was being detained at the Lakeway Police Department, Lt. Todd Radford (now Police Chief) and officer Debrow were discussing the “identification” I provided, scurrying back and forth between offices to consult law books. (See Sec. 38.02 of the Texas Penal Code). Even after they determined that I had violated no laws other than (potentially) local ordinances, they STILL went forward with the full arrest and booking, etc. Chief Radford lives a street over from me, and I occasionally see him walking his dog. A few months ago, he extended an invitation to a cup of coffee at his office. He seems to be a nice person and was, I believe, genuinely extending a hand, but… perhaps another time, under different circumstances. I WOULD, though, like to know why they proceeded with the full monty.

Mysteriously, less than two weeks after the trial, Sgt. James Debrow was gone! “Honorably Retired” is what I was told. He had only been there about two years!! Retired? Is that what they call it nowadays? And now, almost a year after the criminal trial, my civil case against the City, et. al. has come to an end. We settled out of court. But, before I say more, I feel compelled to say something:

“The parties have agreed to resolve this litigation by settlement. I believe that my case was meritorious and that at trial I would prevail. The City believes that its officers are without fault, that it has meritorious defenses, and that it would prevail at trial. The settlement has been made by the City of Lakeway and me to avoid additional legal expense and further inconvenience, and so we may buy our peace”

Actually, I didn’t have to say that. I’m only “required” to say that “When asked…”, and I haven’t been asked. I’m just blurting out stuff without being asked!!     Obviously, the intent of all this mumbo jumbo is to keep under wraps what the actual AMOUNT of the settlement is. Let’s just say that I’m having a nice Christmas!

This is just a quick update of what has transpired over the past couple of years. I’ll be updating/editing it more over the next few days. I just wanted to get the word out to those of you that have been following  this whole debacle. The website has been at a standstill since April, 2009. But, I’m now at liberty to resume my SpeedTrapAhead activities/videos/posts. All posts related to Lakeway are now back up on the site (search “Lakeway” to find all of them), and all videos are now back up on STA’s YouTube page.

Stay tuned for more!

Sebastopol, which glories in its well-deserved reputation for strict traffic enforcement, is launching a public relations program asking drivers to slow down when going through town.

Police issue more speeding tickets in Sebastopol than any other city of its size in Sonoma County. But that hasn’t stopped residents from complaining about traffic scofflaws.

“The No. 1 complaint is regarding traffic, mostly speeding cars, usually on neighborhood streets,” said police Chief Jeff Weaver. “If I was to add up all the complaints I get about thefts, drug use, gangs or violent crime, it would not equal traffic complaints.”

Since the department doesn’t have the staff to station police officers in the neighborhoods, the next best thing is to post signs asking people to drive slowly, Weaver said.

“The staffing is the same as in 1986. I still have 14 police officers. We don’t have the time to devote to traffic as we once did,” Weaver said. “If this helps fill the gap, great.”

As part of the program, expected to cost $640, signs and banners proclaiming “Slow Down Sebastopol,” with the city seal and police department shield, will be posted at the entrances to the city, on some civic buildings and in some neighborhoods.

In addition, Weaver said the city will install permanent electronic signs that read a vehicle’s speed in the eastbound lanes of Bodega Avenue in west Sebastopol, and a third portable reader will be available to put at areas where speed or collisions are a problem.

There will not be an increase in enforcement, but Sebastopol already writes more tickets than other small departments.

In 2009, the department made 7,144 traffic stops, many related to the burgeoning downtown tavern scene, compared to 6,004 in 2008, Weaver said.

Officers issued 334 speeding tickets, compared to 641 in 2008.

In comparison, in the city of Healdsburg, which has a similarly-sized department, officers made 2,982 traffic stops and wrote 45 speeding tickets in 2009.

In Cloverdale, officers made 1,933 traffic stops and wrote 67 speeding tickets in 2009.

Sebastopol has a reputation for aggressively enforcing speed limits, dating back to 1974, when the department hired an officer with traffic safety funds, Weaver said.

“For a long time, the Sebastopol police had a ruthless reputation for speed enforcement,” Weaver said. “I grew up in Santa Rosa and I knew that when you got to the Sebastopol city limits, you slowed down.”

That officer gave Weaver’s sister a speeding ticket when she was hurrying to church to play the piano, and he also gave the department’s current dispatcher a ticket, Weaver said.

“I love it,” Weaver said. “I am comfortable with the strict enforcement of the traffic laws because it saves lives.”

There will be a one-month grace period, during which offenders will get off with a warning. After that, violations are Class C misdemeanors that could result in a $500 fine. Here are some answers to questions about the law.

How will the ban be enforced?

With difficulty. Officers will make stops based primarily on erratic driving, said Austin Assistant Police Chief Al Eells. Beyond that, police will have to catch a driver in the act to make a traffic stop. Because dialing a cell phone can look like texting, an officer will need to watch a driver for a “prolonged” period of time to make sure he’s actually texting, said Cmdr. Stephen Baker, who heads up Austin Police Department’s highway enforcement command.

Moreover, since the violation must also occur while the vehicle is moving, the observing officer essentially will have to be driving alongside a potential offender. Thus, for safety reasons, the opportunity to view driving-and-texting scofflaws will occur mainly in slower, city driving. “It’s going to be a lot of officer discretion,” Baker said.

What about the surfing/scrolling/e-mailing part of the ban: How will that be enforced?

Lightly. It will be difficult to distinguish whether a driver is, say, looking up a contact to dial (legal) or reading e-mail (illegal). “If a person is just holding a cell phone up in front of his face and reading it, we don’t make that stop,” Baker said. “There’s no way we’re going to be taking those to court.”

Will police take my cell phone and read my texts?

While prosecutors say such searches would be legal, Baker said Austin police won’t search anyone’s phone.

What if I’m from out of town and haven’t heard about the law?

Driver beware. Eells said the city will place informational brochures at places such as the airport and convention center. “Will that capture the guy traveling through Austin on I-35? Probably not,” he said.

Will anyone be arrested?

Not unless the driver refuses to sign a citation. A texting violation won’t go on the driver’s record, either.

How big is the problem locally?

Austin police report that since the beginning of the year, there have been 129 serious collisions in which cell phones have been implicated and 12 involving texting while driving.

Why is texting banned and not cell phones?

We’re not ready to give up driving and dialing. This year the Texas Legislature considered more than a dozen bills to restrict driving while chatting, but settled on only one: no cell phone usage in school zones.
“Our cars are different in Texas,” Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso, told The Dallas Morning News in April. “We want to be able to carry guns, spit, chew, call on our cell phones or sharpen our knives while driving.”

Why have any bans?

Driving distractions have always been a problem, said John Lee, who literally helped write the book on the subject: “Driver Distraction: Theory, Effects and Mitigation.” He recently attended a conference where a presenter showed a video of a trucker talking on two cell phones and smoking while steering through a work zone with his knees. The current problem, said Lee, a University of Wisconsin professor, began when cell phones turned into computers. Unlike time-honored distractions such as adjusting the radio or screaming at the kids, texting and surfing mix cognitive, visual and physical demands that make it difficult to drive responsibly at the same time. “On the face of it, I can’t imagine why anyone would try to drive while doing it,” he said. Plenty of people do, though. On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Transportation unveiled a Web site on to the issue: www.distraction.gov. Starting Wednesday, federal employees will be prohibited from texting while driving government vehicles. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have banned texting and driving. Four of those bans also include prohibitions on Internet browsing and GPS navigation.

Is texting really dangerous?

Most likely. Stories abound of drivers jabbing at cell phones while drifting in and out of their lane – what police call “pinballing.” Some of the most avid texters – teenagers – are statistically horrible drivers anyway.
That’s why, in addition to the 18 states with outright bans, eight others – including Texas – prohibit young drivers from texting while behind the wheel. In July, a Virginia Tech Transportation Institute study that placed cameras in long-haul truckers’ cabs pegged the risk of texting while driving at 23 times greater than when not texting. A couple of weeks ago, a University of Utah study found that teenagers driving a laboratory simulator had a six-fold risk of crashing when they texted.

Still, “there’s a whole lot we still don’t know yet,” said Anne Fleming, a spokeswoman for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a nonprofit research organization funded by insurance companies. For example, she said, though studies show that texting while driving increases risky behavior, that doesn’t necessarily mean more crashes.

She points out similar gaps in cell phone research. Federal statistics show that at any given time, 11 percent of drivers are using phones. The Insurance Institute studied crash records and found a four-fold risk of serious crashes among drivers using phones. Taken together, those findings would suggest a big rise in overall accidents. But, said Fleming, such stats haven’t shown up yet.

Am I part of the problem?

Not according to you. A 2008 American Automobile Association report revealed that 82 percent of motorists rated distracted driving as a serious problem. But more than half also admitted to talking on a cell phone while driving; 14 percent said they texted behind the wheel. Translation: “I’m a perfectly fine driver. The problem is with all the other nuts out there,” said Bernie Fette, public affairs officer for Texas A&M University’s Texas Transportation Institute.

Are other types of drivers prohibited from texting?

Under an emergency order issued in 2008 by the Federal Railroad Administration following several high-profile rail crashes, locomotive engineers cannot text while on duty. “We don’t have a steering wheel in locomotives,” said Connie English, state legislative director of the United Transportation Union of Texas. “But you still have to be observant.”

Don’t other activities distract drivers, too?

Sure. A Virginia Tech Transportation Institute study found 80 percent of all crashes could be linked to driver inattention, which includes distraction and fatigue. The institute has produced a continuum of distractions, from less risky to more, such as: checking your speedometer, talking on your CB radio, reading a book, personal grooming, looking at a paper map and using a calculator.

What about eating?

Potentially hazardous, depending on the comestible. In 2002, Hagerty Classic Insurance, which insures owners of classic and collectible automobiles, analyzed the issue after it kept hearing that “police reported seeing pizza or hamburger splattered all over the cars and accident scenes,” said McKeel Hagerty, the Michigan company’s CEO and founder. Its findings, based on statistics and interviews with law enforcement officials: Foods that spilled easily were more perilous because drivers reflexively try to clean up – particularly owners of collectible cars. No. 1 on the list was coffee. But the top 10 also included barbecue, chili and cream-filled doughnuts. No. 2? Hot soup. “Go figure,” said Hagerty.

How about talking with other passengers?

Distracting, at least for the young and chatty. Virginia Tech’s continuum showed talking to be low-risk. But when Texas A&M’s Texas Transportation Institute used a driving simulator to measure how teenagers drove while using cell phones or chatting with passengers, it found the latter to be more distracting. Why? “The driver was physically turning to talk to the other guys,” Fette said.

Dogs?

Possibly distracting, politically untouchable. In 2008 the California Legislature passed a bill prohibiting drivers from keeping pets on their laps, however, the so-called Paris Hilton bill was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Do laws restricting the use of distractible devices work?

Possibly. An October 2009 study by the Insurance Institute concluded that states with cell phone bans showed marked and sustained declines in the rate of use among drivers. That said, many drivers continued to use their phones illegally and others simply might have switched to hands-free devices – which research shows are nearly as dangerous.

Are there better solutions?

Rather than targeting a handful of the endless focus-diverting activities, Lee and others are working to develop in-vehicle sensors which, by tracking head or eye movements, activate an alarm whenever a driver is distracted.

Under Austin’s new law, can I use my fabulous new iPhone app to read the Statesman while driving to work?

Not legally.

Can I continue to read the indispensable print version while commuting?

Yes.

Source: Austin American Statesman

.

.

.

Per my lawyer’s suggestion, any posts that pertain to my encounters/dealings with Lakeway or the Lakeway Police, have been temporarily suspended until further notice.

Please feel free to email me directly if you have any comments or questions.

In the meantime, read on for other informative, funny, and otherwise interesting stuff.

.

.

.

.

.

I work in Austin, TX near Metric and Braker. During one of my breaks from work, I made a quick trip to purchase an air compressor from a Craigslist seller. He lived near Lamar and North Loop. On my way back, I was going north on N. Lamar approaching Hwy 183. At the stop light at Morrow street, I was in the left lane. Intending to turn north on 183, I realized that I needed to be in the right lane (the green arrow on the map). So, when the light turned green, I pulled through the intersection, used my turn signal, and smoothly moved over two lanes. There was only one vehicle, several car lengths to the right-rear of me; and, I was never close enough to him to be in any way reckless.

Anyway, in my move to get to the right lane, I drove over the solid white line that delineates the regular lanes from the “exit” lane (where the little red arrow points). I continued on, through the next couple of lights, turning onto the northbound access road. Then, flashing red & blue lights caught my attention. I was being pulled over by an Austin cop. But, for what?! I thought maybe I had clipped through a yellow light at one of the signals or something.

I pulled into the Capital Metro Park-n-Ride, turned off the ignition, turned ON the interior light, rolled my window down, put my keys on top of the cab, and my hands on the steering wheel. When the officer approached, he asked if I knew why I had been pulled over. I said that I did not. “You crossed over the white line back there,” he said. I said, “Huh? Where?” I thought he was talking about a stop limit line at a stop light; but, I never go past those thick white bars. He explained what he was referring to, then told me to sit tight until he came back. While he was gone, I was thinking, “there weren’t any prohibitive white markings back there!” The satellite picture above is a little outdated. Below is a more current view, showing only a single white line, and no chevrons in the wider part where it splits.

So, the cop came back with a citation for “crossed solid white line”. He said he could give me a ticket for “unsafe lane change”, but he was giving me this one because it’d “be a little cheaper”. I thought, “That’s good, because ‘unsafe lane change’ is a legitimate charge. ‘Crossed solid white line’ is NOT!” So, I accepted my ticket for something that isn’t even illegal and went on back to work.

Now here’s a little explanation of what all the different lane markings mean:

The official meaning of lane markings in Texas is not detailed in the Transportation Code. Instead, section 544.001 of the Transportation Code requires that the state adopt a manual that details all the specifics of signs, signals, and markings. The manual that has been adopted is the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Texas MUTCD); and, this manual is the “law” when it comes to all traffic control devices, including lane markings. The meaning of the various devices described in the MUTCD is enforceable.

Many people aren’t sure exactly what particular lane markings mean. Heck, some people don’t even know why some lines are white and some yellow! So, here’s a little guide, showing what the lines/markings mean.

So, I’ve plead “not guilty” on my ticket, and am waiting to hear from the court regarding an arraignment date. We’ll see how it goes; and, I’ll keep you updated.

Comments? Post away!

Join the forum discussion on this post - (5) Posts

In a typical year, the state of Texas has more than 1,000 highway projects under contract. As a result, drivers are likely to encounter a variety of work zone conditions, including uneven pavement, narrow lanes, concrete barriers, slow moving equipment, and loose gravel.

About 100 people, most of them motorists, are killed in work zones across Texas each year.

If you’re traveling in Texas, here’s the law regarding driving in work zones:

Texas law requires you to obey all signs in work zones. Fines for moving violations can be as much as $400 in construction or maintenance work zones marked with signs indicating that fines double when workers are present. You should always see a “Begin . . .” sign at the start of such zones. Enforcement of rules while in the ‘zone’ ends when you see the “End . . .” sign. (Note: I have noticed that the wording on ‘zone’ signs sometimes varies. For instance, the ‘end’ sign may say, “End Road Work”, or “End Work Zone”. Regardless, you should look for and pay particular attention to where a construction or work zone begins and ends.)

TRAVEL TIPS:

• Plan ahead by checking the web at www.dot.state.tx.us for state construction sites where travel may be delayed.
• Allow extra travel time, and be patient. Reducing your speed from 60 miles per hour to 45 miles per hour in a two-mile work zone delays your journey by only ONE minute!
• Observe all work zone warning signs; and, pay attention to flaggers in orange vests directing traffic.
• Merge at the first notice of a lane closure or change.
• Keep a safe distance between your vehicle, other vehicles, traffic barriers, construction workers, and equipment. Extra caution is required when driving in an active work zone at night!
• Avoid distractions! Don’t use your cell phone or send text messages. Don’t fiddle with the radio controls or your MP3 player.

The mayor of Warren, Michigan says a warning wasn’t enough after he was stopped for speeding. So he asked for a ticket instead — and got it. Warren Mayor Jim Fouts was pulled over Monday on the way to City Hall for going 45 mph in a 40 mph zone. The officer told him to watch it next time.

Fouts says he was uncomfortable the entire day with just a warning, thinking it might be construed as favoritism. So he called the deputy police commissioner and demanded the ticket.

Police delivered it to Fouts’ office and Fouts paid the $100 fine.

Fouts told The Detroit News that he “had to set an example.”

He had to “set an example”?! An example of what? How to be a numb nut? He was doing 5 mph over the limit. A warning is what was appropriate; and, he demanded a ticket. The cop probably didn’t even know he was the mayor.

Pew! Pew! Pew!

Pretty soon, these cameras will be turning and twisting around, tracking our movements. These traffic cameras, and security cameras and the like, are everywhere! Seems that there’s no place where you aren’t visible by one somewhere.