Posted on 08/12/2007 4:30:08 PM PDT by RDTF
The labor pains were coming, so Jessica Hodges got going. The 26-year-old bank teller from Burke sped toward Inova Fairfax Hospital, but before she got there, the law got her -- 57 mph in a 35 zone. Reckless driving.
Hodges's labor pains subsided -- they turned out to be a false alarm -- but the agony from her ticket is mounting. She was found guilty of the July 3 offense and given a $1,050 civil fee on top of a judge-imposed $100 fine and court costs, making her one of the first to be hit with Virginia's new "abusive driver fees," which have been greeted by widespread public outrage.
-snip-
Anger and exasperation have been common sentiments recently in Fairfax General District Court, where fee-facing drivers such as Hodges have started to join the daily swarm of traffic offenders. After waiting hours to give their side of the story to judges -- several of whom seemed just as annoyed with the fees as defendants -- many nevertheless left owing enormous sums that they said would be difficult to pay.
-snip-
The fees, which range from $750 to $3,000, were passed by the General Assembly in the spring as part of a package aimed at funding scores of transportation projects. Backers said the fees would both raise money and improve highway safety by targeting the state's worst drivers -- those guilty of severe traffic offenses such as DUI, reckless driving and driving on a suspended license.
But the fees have since been vilified by an angry public (more than 170,000 people have signed an online petition to repeal them), denounced by lawmakers who once supported them and ruled unconstitutional by judges in two localities who said they violate equal protection rights guaranteed under the 14th Amendment.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
An interesting perception on the part of a former Californian. You appear to have lived in Texas at some point? However like Califonia, Texas continues to vote for Republicrats. I'm a native Texan but am in the process of selling all of my Texas property (commercial and residential) because of the nickel and dime way the State brings in revenue. My Texas county not only assesses absorbitant property taxes on land and buildings but also on vehicles.
It's interesting to note the tremendous disparity in real estate prices that has grown between Texas and New Mexico but the Austin Republicrats either can't figure it out or they don't care.
Rats and RINOs.
Basically, your average politicians.
You have no quibble from me on your points. That said, how is this law very different from your point, “what’s wrong with paying for what you use?”
Abusive drivers use A LOT of public resources (I won’t repeat my previous posts, but emergency services, medical services, etc.). What’s wrong with making them pay for what they cause to be used?
The political scheme is an entirely different issue and, in my view, doesn’t bear one way or the other on the reasonableness (or lack thereof) of the law.
If it’s viewed as a tax by those who didn’t want taxes raised no matter what, them’s the breaks. So let the political repercussions begin.
But that in no way undermines the premise that if you don’t want to pay this “tax,” take personal responsibility for how you drive and quit wailing about how “unfair” it is. (Not aimed at you personally.)
No, it means exactly what it says.
People will for the most part agree with speeding tickets, but not $1200 for an 80/55 when that's the prevailing speed. Instead the cops will almost always give out a 79/55 for about $150 because that makes more sense for everyone involved.
I agree with you if it were only about “paying” the fines. But as far as I’ve read, it is more about the assessment in the first place.
IOW, whether you get one of these fines, depends not only on the incident in question, but on your previous driving record.
Anyway, if the state’s rationale is “laughable,” it will be laughed out of court. So what? All that will happen is that the law will have to applied to everyone and, as I stated from the beginning, you’ll still only get fined for stupid driving if you drive stupidly.
Oh, and once the law gets applied to everyone, you’ll still get AAA running “speedtrap” campaigns-—and what’s wrong with that anyway?
Not for the case I gave 80/55. It is a "reckless" regardless of your record and you get the fine. In lesser speeding cases it will take two or three tickets to get the fine.
Sorry I meant 80/65, not 80/55
Well, I’m still waiting for flaglady, but whatever.
Thank you, at least, for making some points. And I couldn’t agree with you more. But don’t you agree that this is a matter of degree?
IOW, the law has to have some ability to match fines to violators, even though at some point this becomes corruptive.
So, if you are arguing that the law provides a financial incentive to the extent that enforcement inevitably becomes corrupt, that’s worth evaluating.
However, most here have simply wailed that it’s “unfair” and “ridiculous.” That is too much like how liberals argue.
As I have stated from the beginning, the assumption here is that the fines are assessed against those who violate the law, not “innocents.” And that-—that one is personally responsible for whether or not one “has” to pay these fines-— is exactly what has generated the wailing.
If it could be shown that the law causes “innocents” to pay and have no redress for paying, then, of course, that is a different matter.
Of course. Courts never tell the legislatures how to “fix” the law.
But if a court were to rule that a law violated the Equal Protection Clause because it did not apply to out-of-staters, even your average congresscritter knows enough to realize one way to fix the law is apply it to out-of-staters.
We saw a cute situation one morning taking I95 South to Woodbridge VA. Just before you get to the Occoquan bridge (between Fairfax and Prince William counties) there's a wide spot just around the curve where the State Police set up shop to catch speeders.
The established speedlimit at that spot is 55 MPH. (The speed limit on the adjacent HOV lanes is 65 MPH).
Anyway, the day the law with the heavy fines went into effect the traffic slowed to 55 MPH just before getting to the rise over which you can see the Bears with their radar tracking you.
Used to be (before the new law) that folks usually did 80 MPH at this point just so they could hump their cars at the rise and give themselves a sick feeling as they came back down on the pavement.
And oh, yeah, there were at least 20 state troopers there in the wide spot just waiting for the speeders.
You’re right, there are some offenses that are immediate fine-bait. And you’re also right that LE usually exercises some discretion based on the actual circumstances. Not that that’s always good or always bad, but it’s just the way it is. Tickets are usually given by human beings who evaluate the situation.
Thanks for that clarification. I have to admit I was sitting here thinking, “Hmm, 80/55, maybe that should be automatically reckless.”
True and I think a cop in the median should be able to see if you are speeding and gabbing on the cell phone. So hopefully common sense wins out in this whole debate.
True 80/55 is deserving. OTOH I did some 80/65 and 72/55 on the way to work today and I wasn’t the fastest person on route 66 especially in the 55mph section closer to DC.
Using your logic, we could fine those going only 1 mph over the speed limit $10,000!
Talk about safe, pleasant roads!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.