That's what you get in NC
Hello guys:
Recently had one of my tickets reduced to an IMPROPER EQUIPMENT.... joy! the stupid thing is: the fine I paid for passing on the double yellow was LESS money......when it was 'reduced' to a 'lesser' charge, the fine went up over 70 dollars............:smash::smash::wwf::smash: what kind of back-arse-wards ****e is that??gotta love America.....or do we???:crazy: it's ALL about money.......and I though GRAVITY was making the world turn............ |
Originally Posted by hyperion667
(Post 5376495)
Hello guys:
Recently had one of my tickets reduced to an IMPROPER EQUIPMENT.... joy! the stupid thing is: the fine I paid for passing on the double yellow was LESS money......when it was 'reduced' to a 'lesser' charge, the fine went up over 70 dollars............:smash::smash::wwf::smash: what kind of back-arse-wards ****e is that??gotta love America.....or do we???:crazy: it's ALL about money.......and I though GRAVITY was making the world turn............ |
land of the free; provided you can pay for it
|
so your mickey mouse/skeleton was the improper equipment :confused:?
|
Originally Posted by BM2BZ
(Post 5377170)
so your mickey mouse/skeleton was the improper equipment :confused:?
it's pristene!! makes NO sense, actually I guess the dollar signs are the only thing that make CENTS around here....... another funny thing is when I went to pay the difference the bimbo's in the office told me it wasn't in the system yet!!!!:slap::y gotta love government:wwf: |
MO does similar stuff. One ticket was reduced to a muffler violation, and a second to a parking violation. I thought the second was somewhat ironic. It was on an interstate in STL. A helicopter (maybe more than one) was tracking a bunch of us doing 70 in a 55. Suddenly a whole FLEET of police cars appeared out of nowhere and pulled the whole bunch of us over. I had trouble finding a place to pull over and park because there were so many of us and the police cars. So it was fitting it got reduced to a parking violation.
|
Originally Posted by ttoE550
(Post 5377420)
MO does similar stuff. One ticket was reduced to a muffler violation, and a second to a parking violation. I thought the second was somewhat ironic. It was on an interstate in STL. A helicopter (maybe more than one) was tracking a bunch of us doing 70 in a 55. Suddenly a whole FLEET of police cars appeared out of nowhere and pulled the whole bunch of us over. I had trouble finding a place to pull over and park because there were so many of us and the police cars. So it was fitting it got reduced to a parking violation.
what are we fookin' cattle???????? how can they accuratly prove everyone was speeding???? |
Originally Posted by hyperion667
(Post 5376495)
Hello guys:
Recently had one of my tickets reduced to an IMPROPER EQUIPMENT.... joy! the stupid thing is: the fine I paid for passing on the double yellow was LESS money......when it was 'reduced' to a 'lesser' charge, the fine went up over 70 dollars............:smash::smash::wwf::smash: what kind of back-arse-wards ****e is that??gotta love America.....or do we???:crazy: it's ALL about money.......and I though GRAVITY was making the world turn............ http://www.ncdoi.com/_Publications/I...oints_CAU1.pdf I know that many insurance companies will increase your rates if you have had a speeding ticket. Until i moved to NC, that never happened to me. The SDIP system is in addition to the standard point system many states use. I learned about this system the hard way. Believe me, you are better off with the more expensive equipment violation. |
Officer did you a favor
Served on a city council once and had interesting discussions with police chief. They often gave reckless driving instead of speeding tickets because no points attached to reckless. Also does not go against your insurance.
BTW, in SC, the legislature has added a 110%+ "surcharge" to all tickets to finance government functions. So a $50 ticket is actually more than doubled by the time you pay it. Local governments and law enforcement get none of it - and very little of original fine as well. BTW again. Radar and other devices are very sensitive and can easily identify the violator. Bottom line though is - you broke the law. How many times have you broken it and got away with it? |
Originally Posted by mnje350
(Post 5377718)
Believe me you are better off with a more expensive equipment violation than a moving violation. NC mandates that your insurance co. surcharge your rates depending on the violation. If you went the other route, you would pay for the violation for three years in increased insurance costs. Google North Carolina SDIP and you will see the details. Or click this link.
http://www.ncdoi.com/_Publications/I...oints_CAU1.pdf I know that many insurance companies will increase your rates if you have had a speeding ticket. Until i moved to NC, that never happened to me. The SDIP system is in addition to the standard point system many states use. I learned about this system the hard way. Believe me, you are better off with the more expensive equipment violation.
Originally Posted by El Cid
(Post 5377721)
Served on a city council once and had interesting discussions with police chief. They often gave reckless driving instead of speeding tickets because no points attached to reckless. Also does not go against your insurance.
BTW, in SC, the legislature has added a 110%+ "surcharge" to all tickets to finance government functions. So a $50 ticket is actually more than doubled by the time you pay it. Local governments and law enforcement get none of it - and very little of original fine as well. BTW again. Radar and other devices are very sensitive and can easily identify the violator. Bottom line though is - you broke the law. How many times have you broken it and got away with it? yeah I 'broke the law', I'm a 'lawbreaker'.........that means very little in such a screwed system....... the fact that a charge was changed still makes no sense to me......I did something dangerous by 'passing on a double yellow line: no passing zone' and in exchange for that, "they" "reduce" it to a improper equipment?? they=the lawmakers reduce=completely just make some BS up?? and then tell me to pay more money.......that the 'officer' wrote in the first place.......that's right, the cops don't get it either........ :crazy: |
Originally Posted by hyperion667
(Post 5377755)
thanx for that link.......interesting.....
what officer did me what favor? yeah I 'broke the law', I'm a 'lawbreaker'.........that means very little in such a screwed system....... the fact that a charge was changed still makes no sense to me......I did something dangerous by 'passing on a double yellow line: no passing zone' and in exchange for that, "they" "reduce" it to a improper equipment?? they=the lawmakers reduce=completely just make some BS up?? and then tell me to pay more money.......that the 'officer' wrote in the first place.......that's right, the cops don't get it either........ :crazy: I honestly believe that this fine police officer actually tried to do a favor for you. Even though your pay went up on the ticket I think you are better off paying that $70 more than getting points etc in your record as the dangerous passing in a double solid line area could mean a lot more money later on. |
yes, cost went up
yes, broke the law but how did the officer do me a favor? that is still confusing me.... I got an attorney..... thanx |
Originally Posted by hyperion667
(Post 5378033)
yes, cost went up
yes, broke the law but how did the officer do me a favor? that is still confusing me.... I got an attorney..... thanx What if he wrote the ticket for the correct offence and it would involve 4 points in your record and a mandatory driving scholl or something like that? Would you trade all that for a $70? |
Originally Posted by hyperion667
(Post 5377361)
LOL, that's a good question........what the hell is improper on MY car????
it's pristene!! makes NO sense, actually I guess the dollar signs are the only thing that make CENTS around here....... another funny thing is when I went to pay the difference the bimbo's in the office told me it wasn't in the system yet!!!!:slap::y gotta love government:wwf: |
Originally Posted by hyperion667
(Post 5378033)
yes, cost went up
yes, broke the law but how did the officer do me a favor? that is still confusing me.... I got an attorney..... thanx And I think Hype's point is that, if what he did was so dangerous that it deserved being stopped and ticketed, why can he get it reduced to a mere $70 increase in the fine? I agree with that point. If it is not dangerous enough to warrant the punishment for the actual violation, then maybe it shouldn't be considered a serious violation. And there are times when perhaps it shouldn't be. I was with someone who crossed a double yellow to get out from behind someone who appeared to be inebriated - speeding up, slowing down, jerking from one side of the road to the other. We were the only two cars in the area (except the cop who saw the flasher about a block away). Did the cop care that we thought someone was DUI? Nah. Wouldn't even call one of his buddies to investigate while finishing our ticket. And regarding reducing tickets to avoid points, insurance, etc., I've thought for a long time it is easier to stay wealthy than to become wealthy. Stuff like this. It is easy for many of us to pay $70 (plus the lawyer) to avoid points, insurance increases, etc. It is probably impossible for, say, the guys who mow our lawns. Car insurance? My company likes me to pay the whole amount at the beginning of the year. If instead I did it monthly, I would pay 2% on the remaining balance. That's probably around 18% per year! PMI, checking fees, and so on. It's a tough world! |
Originally Posted by Arrie
(Post 5378059)
What if he wrote the ticket for the correct offence and it would involve 4 points in your record and a mandatory driving scholl or something like that? Would you trade all that for a $70?
I did have some points that were reduced too, hence taking the stupid class....
Originally Posted by BM2BZ
(Post 5378111)
wait a minute, the officer didn't at least tell you what is improper on your car :confused:? tint, sidemarkers, loud music, your car is too nice, you are too handsome, etc :rolf:?
Originally Posted by ttoE550
(Post 5378149)
I think you and Arrie are talking past each other. Arrie, I believe the officer ticketed Hype for crossing the double yellow, and then Hype took the ticket to a lawyer who got it reduced to an improper equipment violation.
And I think Hype's point is that, if what he did was so dangerous that it deserved being stopped and ticketed, why can he get it reduced to a mere $70 increase in the fine? I agree with that point. If it is not dangerous enough to warrant the punishment for the actual violation, then maybe it shouldn't be considered a serious violation. And there are times when perhaps it shouldn't be. I was with someone who crossed a double yellow to get out from behind someone who appeared to be inebriated - speeding up, slowing down, jerking from one side of the road to the other. We were the only two cars in the area (except the cop who saw the flasher about a block away). Did the cop care that we thought someone was DUI? Nah. Wouldn't even call one of his buddies to investigate while finishing our ticket. And regarding reducing tickets to avoid points, insurance, etc., I've thought for a long time it is easier to stay wealthy than to become wealthy. Stuff like this. It is easy for many of us to pay $70 (plus the lawyer) to avoid points, insurance increases, etc. It is probably impossible for, say, the guys who mow our lawns. Car insurance? My company likes me to pay the whole amount at the beginning of the year. If instead I did it monthly, I would pay 2% on the remaining balance. That's probably around 18% per year! PMI, checking fees, and so on. It's a tough world! and man!!! I mow my own grass!!!! LOL:y thanx for the comments guys |
Originally Posted by hyperion667
(Post 5378033)
yes, cost went up
yes, broke the law but how did the officer do me a favor? that is still confusing me.... I got an attorney..... thanx |
Two people killed in my area two days ago. They tried to pass a tractor-trailer on a two lane road and ran head on into a pick-up. The deceased were considered at fault, but no charges since driver (and his passenger) both died. Two people from innocent pick-up were sent to hospital with serious injuries.
|
that's too bad......any info on if it was a passing area or not?
or was it an illegal pass? |
Originally Posted by El Cid
(Post 5382715)
Two people killed in my area two days ago. They tried to pass a tractor-trailer on a two lane road and ran head on into a pick-up. The deceased were considered at fault, but no charges since driver (and his passenger) both died. Two people from innocent pick-up were sent to hospital with serious injuries.
|
Illegal - yes
Originally Posted by hyperion667
(Post 5382882)
that's too bad......any info on if it was a passing area or not?
or was it an illegal pass? Reports don't say if was in a no passing zone or not. Pictures from scene show both vehicles sitting on road with a solid yellow center line. |
Originally Posted by ttoE550
(Post 5378149)
I think you and Arrie are talking past each other. Arrie, I believe the officer ticketed Hype for crossing the double yellow, and then Hype took the ticket to a lawyer who got it reduced to an improper equipment violation.
And I think Hype's point is that, if what he did was so dangerous that it deserved being stopped and ticketed, why can he get it reduced to a mere $70 increase in the fine? I agree with that point. If it is not dangerous enough to warrant the punishment for the actual violation, then maybe it shouldn't be considered a serious violation. And there are times when perhaps it shouldn't be. I was with someone who crossed a double yellow to get out from behind someone who appeared to be inebriated - speeding up, slowing down, jerking from one side of the road to the other. We were the only two cars in the area (except the cop who saw the flasher about a block away). Did the cop care that we thought someone was DUI? Nah. Wouldn't even call one of his buddies to investigate while finishing our ticket. And regarding reducing tickets to avoid points, insurance, etc., I've thought for a long time it is easier to stay wealthy than to become wealthy. Stuff like this. It is easy for many of us to pay $70 (plus the lawyer) to avoid points, insurance increases, etc. It is probably impossible for, say, the guys who mow our lawns. Car insurance? My company likes me to pay the whole amount at the beginning of the year. If instead I did it monthly, I would pay 2% on the remaining balance. That's probably around 18% per year! PMI, checking fees, and so on. It's a tough world! Ok, then I misunderstood. I thought the officer giving the ticked changed it to "lesser" violation. But then even more clearly, hype should take the $70 higher pay and be happy if indeed his lawyer got it done for him. Obviously the lawyer thinks it is better situation to pay the $70 more for it that take the whole brunt of the points and other things from crossing the double solid lines. Or he needs to get a new lawyer... |
hype - welcome to America where our taxes are high but still do not satiate the never ending growth of bureaucracy. Once you get past the "did I do something wrong" part it all makes sense. The traffic police (those assigned to traffic duty) are a revenue generating organization, that's it and that's all. I had an accident where I was rear ended... no police showed up, no report taken. Why not? They haven't figured out a way to charge for it of course.. I'm not bitter just a realist. Forget whether it's about safety or legal compliance...
|
Originally Posted by norcal_cyclist
(Post 5384780)
hype - welcome to America where our taxes are high but still do not satiate the never ending growth of bureaucracy. Once you get past the "did I do something wrong" part it all makes sense. The traffic police (those assigned to traffic duty) are a revenue generating organization, that's it and that's all. I had an accident where I was rear ended... no police showed up, no report taken. Why not? They haven't figured out a way to charge for it of course.. I'm not bitter just a realist. Forget whether it's about safety or legal compliance...
hope that one ended up working out:y |
Originally Posted by El Cid
(Post 5382715)
Two people killed in my area two days ago. They tried to pass a tractor-trailer on a two lane road and ran head on into a pick-up. The deceased were considered at fault, but no charges since driver (and his passenger) both died. Two people from innocent pick-up were sent to hospital with serious injuries.
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:29 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands