[UCANSEE2]

“rather than the unjust nature of the law. “

So, isn’t a courtroom the proper place to make that argument, rather than to a cop on the side of the road?

Cop: Did you see the speed limit signs?
Driver: You mean the ones with red flags on them?
Cop: Yeah.
Driver: No, I didn’t.

[Wallace T.]

Again, the issue is neither the cop nor the driver, but the law. As far as traffic tickets go, most magistrates will side with the lawmen, especially if the accused is from out of town. Traffic tickets are a profitable business, and most police officers are under de facto quotas. Perhaps they are not told to write x number of tickets, but they know that keeping up volume will keep them on the good side of their superiors, who are in turn dependent on the favor of the city or county officials that need the revenue for the local coffers. In a way, it is like the war on smoking. The politicians and bureaucrats rail against smoking and pass innumerable restrictions on it, but if everyone stopped smoking, tax revenues would fall. The same is true with traffic violations. If 100% compliance with all traffic laws were achieved, many cities and counties would suffer financially.

The best thing to do if you are stopped for a traffic violation, whether the call is fair or not, is to hand over your license, registration, proof of insurance, etc., shut up, sign the ticket, and pay the fine before the deadline. The other choices are to take a day off from work and hire an attorney at considerable expense for a court case or get in the face of a police officer who can inflict pain and humiliation and a short stay at the local jail at his whim and definitely face a court case. The system is unfair in many respects, but this is no longer the land of the free and the home of the brave.