SovCit records his own defeat on camera

[Unidyne]

While not a "scam", it is entertaining none the less.

Scott Richardson was caught driving 50 in a 40 zone in Addison TX, pulled over by a uniform cop, and records his own encounter with said officer using "sovereign citizen" tactics. That is, opening the window only a crack, asking "As a man, what right do you have to stop another man?", and insisting that speed limits are suggestions and not laws. Quoting Mr. Richardson directly (starting at around 1:10 of the video):

Speeding in and of itself is not a crime. According to the State of Texas, the actual ... um .. it is the ... um ... oh, you know, the Attorney General. Not the Attorney General but the Prosecutor. Yes, the D.A.! The D.A. is the one who stated on page nineteen that speeding in and of itself is not a crime. It is not illegal.

The officer, finally having enough of Mr. Richardson's legal tactics, smashes his window (after warning that he would do so) and drags him out of the car. Later on you can hear the arresting officer telling another officer, "He's giving me the Republic of Texas crap!"

Richardson says he will defend himself in court. Permit me to say that he will have a fool for a lawyer.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/1 ... 58198.html

[webhick]

"He's giving me the Republic of Texas crap!"

That needs to be on a coffee mug.

[Judge Roy Bean]

"He's giving me the Republic of Texas crap!"

That needs to be on a coffee mug.

I think it already is.

If you don't already know, the town of Addison is one of the most thoroughly-traffic-patrolled enclaves in all of Texas. Rightfully so. In addition to a very convenient and busy airport, it harbors a vast number of restaurants and bars - including, arguably, the state's best sushi bar. Word has it that if you can make a restaurant work in Addison, it will work anywhere in Texas and at least 50% of the rest of the country so the fun never quits.

Some of that success comes from extremely diligent law enforcement (the former mayor owns a highly-regarded restaurant there).

Not the place to experiment with sov cit nonsense.

[Gregg]

I believe that, while a little more nuanced than our sovereign 'tard makes it, in some states their is at least a bit of validity to the "a speed limit is just a suggestion" claim.

In Ohio, a posted speed limit is prima fascia the legal limit, but I think and have heard that, it can be disputed if you can establish that going 50 in a posted 40 zone was reasonable, safe etc.. under the circumstances at the time. Say, taking a bleeding patient to a hospital on a clear day with no other traffic, perhaps?

Maybe one of the attorneys can confirm, deny or clarify that.

[Dr. Caligari]

Maybe one of the attorneys can confirm, deny or clarify that.

I am a lawyer, but I have never fought a traffic ticket, so I am no expert on this. But my understanding is that the rule is exactly the opposite-- going over the posted speed limit is always a violation, but going under the posted limit can also be a violation if the prosecution can prove you were going faster than conditions warrant (e.g., going 65 mph in a blinding snowstorm).

[JamesVincent]

Maybe one of the attorneys can confirm, deny or clarify that.

I am a lawyer, but I have never fought a traffic ticket, so I am no expert on this. But my understanding is that the rule is exactly the opposite-- going over the posted speed limit is always a violation, but going under the posted limit can also be a violation if the prosecution can prove you were going faster than conditions warrant (e.g., going 65 mph in a blinding snowstorm).

I think I'll go with the Doctor on this one. The only time a speed limit is a suggestion is if it is on a yellow sign, like for a curve or other type of obstacle. Those are indeed suggested speeds based on whatever entity that decided what a safe speed is for that obstacle. If it is on a white sign then it is indeed the limit which you are allowed to drive legally. The only thing different I am familiar with is the way Kentucky does theirs, as you should be too Gregg. If there is no speed limit sign then the speed limit is assumed to be 55. Signs tell you when the limit drops below 55 and tells you when the speed restrictions ends but doesn't always tell you what the limit is.

[Llwellyn]

Actually the speed limit varies.. based on the FLOW OF TRAFFIC.. (most have this as a drivers lesson/guide line) IE.. if the traffic is doing 10mph.. then you need to do 10mph.. (until it is safe to pass etc) If the traffic is doing 100mph, then you must do 100mph to keep the flow of traffic.. it' one of those odd situational things.. However, while being OVER posted speed limits, you can still be ticketed etc. So simple rule is.. drive the speed limit, or, have lots of extra money hanging about.

[noblepa]

I remember from my driver training classes, many years ago, that, in Ohio at least, you CAN be cited for exceeding safe speed limits, even if you are going well below the posted speed limit signs, if traffic, weather or road conditions make your speed unsafe. The case of a blinding snowstorm is a perfect example.

OTOH, I have never heard "keeping up with traffic" successfully used as a defense against a speeding ticket, although I see the logic in it. I employ a less extreme form of that principle when driving. If I am on an interstate and traffic is doing 65 in a 60 zone, I will probably do 65. I would not do 90 or 100, even if prevailing traffic was. I would merely get into the rightmost lane and do whatever speed I felt comfortable with.

I also believe (IANAL), that if there is truely a justification, such as rushing an injured party or a pregnant woman to a hospital, moderate speeding (but probably not reckless driving) would not be prosecuted, even though it is techically a violation. I don't know if this exception is codified in the traffic laws or not.

[JamesVincent]

I remember from my driver training classes, many years ago, that, in Ohio at least, you CAN be cited for exceeding safe speed limits, even if you are going well below the posted speed limit signs, if traffic, weather or road conditions make your speed unsafe. The case of a blinding snowstorm is a perfect example.

OTOH, I have never heard "keeping up with traffic" successfully used as a defense against a speeding ticket, although I see the logic in it. I employ a less extreme form of that principle when driving. If I am on an interstate and traffic is doing 65 in a 60 zone, I will probably do 65. I would not do 90 or 100, even if prevailing traffic was. I would merely get into the rightmost lane and do whatever speed I felt comfortable with.

I also believe (IANAL), that if there is truely a justification, such as rushing an injured party or a pregnant woman to a hospital, moderate speeding (but probably not reckless driving) would not be prosecuted, even though it is techically a violation. I don't know if this exception is codified in the traffic laws or not.

The "keeping up with traffic" rule was taught at drivers ed classes in MD but, the same as you, I have never heard it used as winning defense. I think the whole idea behind is that if you are in a group of vehicles speeding then the officer is supposed to pull every one of the group over and cite them. Which, in most cases, is an impossibility. I have seen state troopers do it out on 70 going through MD but anywhere else, with multiple lanes of traffic, it wouldn't be feasible. At least in MD it was taught that if you are merging onto an interstate, for example, and the flow of traffic is moving above the speed limit then you are to match speeds to merge and then slow down to the speed limit. It would take a lawyer who really knew traffic laws and was a practicing traffic attorney to know for sure but I feel the "keeping up with traffic" is mostly another urban myth.

[Arthur Rubin]

IANAL, and have never been ticketed for obstructing traffic. However, when I was in traffic court in California many years ago (I was ticketed for running a red light, and was already past the limit line when the light turned red), I did see someone who had been ticketed for "obstructing traffic" when he was exceeding the speed limit.

[Judge Roy Bean]

In the states I've been licensed to drive in, the "keeping up with traffic" defense is little more than an urban legend and the only time you could be ticketed for obstructing traffic at or slightly above the speed limit is if you were in the left (passing) lane and not actually overtaking slower vehicles.

But as they say, your mileage my vary.

[noblepa]

In Ohio, there is a little-used statute that prohibits "cruising in the fast lane". Many people here are not aware of this statute, and some don't believe me. However, I got such a ticket about twenty years ago, on the Ohio Turnpike (I-80).

[Gregg]

Yes, you are right. On interstates in Ohio there are signs posted that say "stay right except to pass" and "left lane for passing only", as well as the "slower traffic stay right" signs you see in other states. I know of at least two speed trap like places where the cops make some easy money trolling the hi-way to ticket left lane drivers....