Received most bullshit ticket in my life on the way back from WSOP

[Dan Druff]

I'll ask you naysayers this:

Why do you believe I was in the right lane?

Do you think I saw the cop up there and decided, "Hey, you know what? Fuck them. I'm going to be a complete asshole and go right by them and freak them out!"

Or do you honestly believe I felt uncomfortable in the center lane going 70, and moved over because I felt it was safest?

I think that's why we have certain people in this thread trying to doubt my story as to why I moved to the right -- because acknowledging that I did it for safety reasons mostly kills their argument that being in the right lane at the time was unsafe.

Good luck to you as a highway driver if you don't think it's dangerous to be substantially slower than most driving in your lane.

Yet they want you out of the right lane for safety reasons and you’re completely discounting it.

Yes, "safety reasons" they refuse to prove are effective.

I'll stick with the proven safety reasons regarding moving out of the way of faster traffic.

[Sloppy Joe]

Yes, I think I'll ignore.

2007 was my bad degenerate year at college. I figured it came and my parents just paid it, but it's still outstanding along with a speeding ticket (lol).

I'm surprised that it didn't come up - I've since been relicensed in North Carolina after a 2009 DUI (smh), in Wyoming in 2013 and now in Oregon since 2015. Nothing on insurance as well.

The court website lists my parents address from two homes ago. Perhaps got lucky for once.

So it's still showing up on the website? I thought it just vanished entirely.

If it's still showing up, it can eventually bite you one day, but still the best play is to do nothing and to only act if you hear something about it, or if you get stuck trying to renew or get licensed. It could be caught in some holding pattern where it's there but kind of dormant.

My bad; I went to look up someone who made an cryptic post and went to see if my old ticket would be there; it did, and as unpaid/pending.

Again, got license reinstated in NC in 2009, and got licensed in WY and OR in 2013 and 2015 respectively when I moved there.

Also nothing when I switched insurance in 2013.

Additionally was stopped in WA earlier this year and was mercifully let go with a warning, but they took my license back to the car to look up etc.

[Dan Druff]

I know nothing about Indiana, but it's possible that 2007 was just before they started sharing info with other states, and somehow their integration screwed up and didn't bring over old tickets to other states.

Just a guess.

It may just be spinning in the system without any kind of action, and it may stay that way for eternity. Also, if it hasn't changed itself into a warrant or a higher bail amount after all this time, that's another reason to believe it's stuck in some way.

[lol wow]

Honestly this would have been the point where tyde swoops in calls todge a mommas boy for some reason and this thing really takes off

[RealTalk]

Druff, in a vacuum, which do you believe a pulled over police officer or stranded motorist is more likely to be struck or have their vehicle struck by? A car traveling in the right lane or the center lane?

[Salty_Aus]

Yet they want you out of the right lane for safety reasons and you’re completely discounting it.

Yes, "safety reasons" they refuse to prove are effective.

I'll stick with the proven safety reasons regarding moving out of the way of faster traffic.

You were in the middle lane. Faster cars can easily pass you in the left lane.

I don't doubt you were not aware of this law, but it is YOUR responsibility to be aware of new laws. No matter how much you say otherwise.

Honestly, I believe you were in the right lane "appearing innocent" as you were more concerned with getting a speeding ticket then anything safety related. You admit you were speeding prior to seeing the flashing lights.

And now you're poorly arguing the law is garbage/not safe.... SHOW ME THE BODIES!

[simpdog]

Druff you’re worried about people going faster than you.

How about the cop going 0 and you going 70?

[RealTalk]

Druff you’re worried about people going faster than you.

How about the cop going 0 and you going 70?

He's much safer with Druff getting as close as possible rather than staying further away based on Druffs decades of driving experience

[limitles]

DMV handbook says to slow down but doesn’t say how much. Technically, 69 in a 70 should be fine, unless it says otherwise (which it doesn’t).

If you fight it, I’d go along the lines of, “I was in the middle lane and people were flying by so I moved to the right lane and then I didn’t have enough time to move to the left, which would have been very unsafe given the speed the other cars were going.”

You could also argue that above all, safety is the most important aspect of driving & road laws. You felt it was safest to be in the right lane due to the other cars going very fast. Even the cop agreed (or something along these lines) that you were being safe or whatever. The focus should be on that moving over would be less safe (not that staying in right lane is safe), forcing them to provide proof you could have moved over safely.

That's exactly the defense I was planning upon using.

But I'm guessing this is going to end up a reduction and a change to a parking violation, which while better than a $198 moving violation, still sucks.

Could you explain the bolded sentence above? What does a parking violation have to do with what you did?
Are you going to argue the cop was improperly parked.

Also how much money will you save if you're charge is reduced?
Also please post the date and location for your hearing. Seats may be hard to come by

[nunbeater]

Holy fuck that's a good point. I can't wait to see the mental gymnastics required to vault over it

No gymnastics required.

Officer #1 pulls over a car normally (in this case, a cell phone user while driving).

Officer #2 hears about this on the radio, knows he's close, comes over, and parks on the scene. Waits for the next car to pass in the right lane without substantially slowing down. As soon as it happens, jumps out and grabs them.

One ticket begets two.

Double $$$ for the county.

Easy to pull off because a lot of people aren't aware of this law and will happily pass by on the right, thinking they're obeying the law.

but that's kind of the point, there is no trap. Both cops are literally out in the open, no one is hiding behind a billboard on a slope waiting for someone to drive by - you act like this was premeditated but if you would have taken a different route it's possible that no one would have gotten pulled over at all. Cops pulling over to assist other cops on a traffic stop is super standard. Hell when I got extradited to a different county for unpaid traffic tickets (which were also the most bullshit tickets of my life) the cop taking me pulled over for some random cop that had some random ass person pulled over for who the fuck knows what. They weren't in the same department at all from what I could tell but he still stopped and helped him. I probably would have found the camaraderie touching if I hadn't wanted everyone to fucking die.

And moving over for vehicles on the road side has been common sense for fucking years if not decades. I mean even if I see someone just changing their tire I'll move the fuck over to give them some space. "Slowing down" to 69 mph (lol) really doesn't do a fucking thing for anyone stuck on the side of the highway if you stay in the right lane. Honestly in my experience not keeping with the flow of traffic is dangerous too but why not just stay with the flow of traffic until you pass the cops and then move to the right? What exactly was so dangerous about your situation?

[Dan Druff]

That's exactly the defense I was planning upon using.

But I'm guessing this is going to end up a reduction and a change to a parking violation, which while better than a $198 moving violation, still sucks.

Could you explain the bolded sentence above? What does a parking violation have to do with what you did?
Are you going to argue the cop was improperly parked.

Also how much money will you save if you're charge is reduced?
Also please post the date and location for your hearing. Seats may be hard to come by

Not sure how it works in Canada, but in the US, parking violations don't go on your driving record. So once you pay the ticket, it's like it never happened. Moving violations are points against your record, and greatly affects your insurance rates. Also, if you get too many points, your license gets in jeopardy.

Therefore, it's very valuable to get a moving violation changed to a parking violation, even if the fine remains the same.

[Dan Druff]

No gymnastics required.

Officer #1 pulls over a car normally (in this case, a cell phone user while driving).

Officer #2 hears about this on the radio, knows he's close, comes over, and parks on the scene. Waits for the next car to pass in the right lane without substantially slowing down. As soon as it happens, jumps out and grabs them.

One ticket begets two.

Double $$$ for the county.

Easy to pull off because a lot of people aren't aware of this law and will happily pass by on the right, thinking they're obeying the law.

but that's kind of the point, there is no trap. Both cops are literally out in the open, no one is hiding behind a billboard on a slope waiting for someone to drive by - you act like this was premeditated but if you would have taken a different route it's possible that no one would have gotten pulled over at all. Cops pulling over to assist other cops on a traffic stop is super standard. Hell when I got extradited to a different county for unpaid traffic tickets (which were also the most bullshit tickets of my life) the cop taking me pulled over for some random cop that had some random ass person pulled over for who the fuck knows what. They weren't in the same department at all from what I could tell but he still stopped and helped him. I probably would have found the camaraderie touching if I hadn't wanted everyone to fucking die.

And moving over for vehicles on the road side has been common sense for fucking years if not decades. I mean even if I see someone just changing their tire I'll move the fuck over to give them some space. "Slowing down" to 69 mph (lol) really doesn't do a fucking thing for anyone stuck on the side of the highway if you stay in the right lane. Honestly in my experience not keeping with the flow of traffic is dangerous too but why not just stay with the flow of traffic until you pass the cops and then move to the right? What exactly was so dangerous about your situation?

A trap doesn't mean the cop is hiding. A trap means that they artificially engineer a situation in order to catch "violations". For example, a speed trap is often something with an artificially low speed limit where they aggressively enforce the area, knowing that many people will violate it (knowingly or unknowingly). If the second cop came over specifically to wait for the next guy to go by in the right lane to ticket him, then yes, it's a bullshit trap.

Anyway, I was in the right lane early because I detected they were using radar, and it's hard to tell exactly where they're going to get you with that. So it's safer just to slow down in that spot -- better safe (from a ticket) than sorry. Not that I was speeding much before that, but I slowed down to 70 to be sure.

I moved to the right lane because plenty of cars were still zooming by, and I didn't want to be in their way and possibly cause an accident. Seriously, that was why.

Someone here suggested that I was in the right lane just to "look innocent". That's bullshit. I don't need to be in the right lane to look innocent. Driving 69 in a 70 zone is good enough. You don't need to "look" anything.

I was in the right lane for safety reasons.

[limitles]

but that's kind of the point, there is no trap. Both cops are literally out in the open, no one is hiding behind a billboard on a slope waiting for someone to drive by - you act like this was premeditated but if you would have taken a different route it's possible that no one would have gotten pulled over at all. Cops pulling over to assist other cops on a traffic stop is super standard. Hell when I got extradited to a different county for unpaid traffic tickets (which were also the most bullshit tickets of my life) the cop taking me pulled over for some random cop that had some random ass person pulled over for who the fuck knows what. They weren't in the same department at all from what I could tell but he still stopped and helped him. I probably would have found the camaraderie touching if I hadn't wanted everyone to fucking die.

And moving over for vehicles on the road side has been common sense for fucking years if not decades. I mean even if I see someone just changing their tire I'll move the fuck over to give them some space. "Slowing down" to 69 mph (lol) really doesn't do a fucking thing for anyone stuck on the side of the highway if you stay in the right lane. Honestly in my experience not keeping with the flow of traffic is dangerous too but why not just stay with the flow of traffic until you pass the cops and then move to the right? What exactly was so dangerous about your situation?

A trap doesn't mean the cop is hiding. A trap means that they artificially engineer a situation in order to catch "violations". For example, a speed trap is often something with an artificially low speed limit where they aggressively enforce the area, knowing that many people will violate it (knowingly or unknowingly). If the second cop came over specifically to wait for the next guy to go by in the right lane to ticket him, then yes, it's a bullshit trap.

Anyway, I was in the right lane early because I detected they were using radar, and it's hard to tell exactly where they're going to get you with that. So it's safer just to slow down in that spot -- better safe (from a ticket) than sorry. Not that I was speeding much before that, but I slowed down to 70 to be sure.

I moved to the right lane because plenty of cars were still zooming by, and I didn't want to be in their way and possibly cause an accident. Seriously, that was why.

Someone here suggested that I was in the right lane just to "look innocent". That's bullshit. I don't need to be in the right lane to look innocent. Driving 69 in a 70 zone is good enough. You don't need to "look" anything.

I was in the right lane for safety reasons.

This will be your biggest challenge in court. The safety of an officer is important in the eyes of the law. You said it yourself, if the officer came with the intent of ticketing a right lane driver. How can you prove the intent of an officer. It's his word against yours and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. Did you see several other cars being pulled over for unsafe motoring?

[RS_]

Is this the most one-sided thread against Druff ever?

It's actually not, but the people on my side are mostly not willing to keep posting here and arguing with all of the people fervently insisting I'm wrong. There's even a few people who have said they got basically the same ticket (and feel the same way I do).

^ This.


I'm not going to re-read through all this crap, but from my understanding -- 1) Druff did what he thought was the safest thing to do in the given situation (cars flying by), and everyone damn well knows there are cars going 85-90+ on that road, especially weaving in and out of other cars. 2) Cop told Druff something along the lines of him believing Druff was driving safely, or something like that.

As far as I'm concerned, that should be the end of it. Give Druff a warning and log it in the system and let him go on his way. The primary purpose of driving laws is...or rather SHOULD BE...about safety. I obviously wasn't there, but doing what Druff did could very well have been the safest thing to do. Should he have slowed down to 60 or 50? Possibly. But again, slowing down significantly like that (with other cars flying by) could be even less safe, since it's likely to cause more people to weave around him or potentially have them veer into the right shoulder if the car(s) behind Druff can't slow down quickly enough.

Above all -- laws be damned, you should do whatever is the most safe.

[MumblesBadly]

It's actually not, but the people on my side are mostly not willing to keep posting here and arguing with all of the people fervently insisting I'm wrong. There's even a few people who have said they got basically the same ticket (and feel the same way I do).

^ This.


I'm not going to re-read through all this crap, but from my understanding -- 1) Druff did what he thought was the safest thing to do in the given situation (cars flying by), and everyone damn well knows there are cars going 85-90+ on that road, especially weaving in and out of other cars. 2) Cop told Druff something along the lines of him believing Druff was driving safely, or something like that.

As far as I'm concerned, that should be the end of it. Give Druff a warning and log it in the system and let him go on his way. The primary purpose of driving laws is...or rather SHOULD BE...about safety. I obviously wasn't there, but doing what Druff did could very well have been the safest thing to do. Should he have slowed down to 60 or 50? Possibly. But again, slowing down significantly like that (with other cars flying by) could be even less safe, since it's likely to cause more people to weave around him or potentially have them veer into the right shoulder if the car(s) behind Druff can't slow down quickly enough.

Above all -- laws be damned, you should do whatever is the most safe.

Inagree with most of what you said here, but there may be an institutional reason why the LEO gave Druff a ticket versus just a formal warning: Per the electronic highway signs, that stretch of road is a “Zero Tolerance” zone. The policy of the police department monitoring that zone may have a policy that requires the LEOs who stop motorists for a violation to give them the higher form of correction (ticket).

[Dan Druff]

^ This.


I'm not going to re-read through all this crap, but from my understanding -- 1) Druff did what he thought was the safest thing to do in the given situation (cars flying by), and everyone damn well knows there are cars going 85-90+ on that road, especially weaving in and out of other cars. 2) Cop told Druff something along the lines of him believing Druff was driving safely, or something like that.

As far as I'm concerned, that should be the end of it. Give Druff a warning and log it in the system and let him go on his way. The primary purpose of driving laws is...or rather SHOULD BE...about safety. I obviously wasn't there, but doing what Druff did could very well have been the safest thing to do. Should he have slowed down to 60 or 50? Possibly. But again, slowing down significantly like that (with other cars flying by) could be even less safe, since it's likely to cause more people to weave around him or potentially have them veer into the right shoulder if the car(s) behind Druff can't slow down quickly enough.

Above all -- laws be damned, you should do whatever is the most safe.

Inagree with most of what you said here, but there may be an institutional reason why the LEO gave Druff a ticket versus just a formal warning: Per the electronic highway signs, that stretch of road is a “Zero Tolerance” zone. The policy of the police department monitoring that zone may have a policy that requires the LEOs who stop motorists for a violation to give them the higher form of correction (ticket).

The "institutional reason" I was given a ticket instead of a warning was because the local government wants more money.

[FRANKRIZZO]

That's exactly the defense I was planning upon using.

But I'm guessing this is going to end up a reduction and a change to a parking violation, which while better than a $198 moving violation, still sucks.

Could you explain the bolded sentence above? What does a parking violation have to do with what you did?
Are you going to argue the cop was improperly parked.

Also how much money will you save if you're charge is reduced?
Also please post the date and location for your hearing. Seats may be hard to come by

If you have a clean record court will reduce to a parking fee which saves you points on your license and is less then the original violation. Off course your record has to be pristine. I have not had a ticket for20 years and got going thru a red light reduced to parking ticket. I went on orange btw so it still stung to pay 120 but beat insurance going up with speeding ticket.

[jsearles22]

Could you explain the bolded sentence above? What does a parking violation have to do with what you did?
Are you going to argue the cop was improperly parked.

Also how much money will you save if you're charge is reduced?
Also please post the date and location for your hearing. Seats may be hard to come by

If you have a clean record court will reduce to a parking fee which saves you points on your license and is less then the original violation. Off course your record has to be pristine. I have not had a ticket for20 years and got going thru a red light reduced to parking ticket. I went on orange btw so it still stung to pay 120 but beat insurance going up with speeding ticket.

Druff clearly has a pristine driving record. I mean he obviously has never done anything wrong.

[Dan Druff]

Actually my driving record is pristine

[jsearles22]

Actually my driving record is pristine

Yep, we already knew that. You’ve clearly only ever been caught in revenue traps.

I mean really I doubt you’ve ever been wrong.