Skip to main content

The need for speed

News recently broke about a woman in Maryland who was ticketed for going 63 mph in a 65 along Interstate 95 while in the left-lane.

The cop who issued the ticket said she was ticketed more due to her being in the left-lane, which is reserved for speedier commuters, than for going 2 mph under the speed limit.

The driver has never been ticketed before and said the area was experiencing very heavy winds, which is why she was going a bit slower than usual.

She said, "Sometimes when it's dangerous, you have to do what you can to stay safe."

John Townsend of AAA Mid-Atlantic appears to be backing the driver in this case, as he said the following:

"The reason [the ticket] is silly because it's sending the wrong message. And that is, 'We will tolerate you driving at more than the speed limit, but if you drive below the speed limit, then you're penalized for that.'"

I can see both sides' arguments here. On the one side, even if there were heavy winds, the driver probably shouldn't have been in the left-lane. However, in any kind of inclement weather, do the speed limit laws truly apply to those kinds of conditions in the same way they would for most average days? When my girlfriend and I were driving on the interstate in snowy conditions a week ago and were more focused on staying on the road and avoiding an accident than which lane we were in, should we have been ticketed for not doing 65 as the sign suggests if we were in the left-lane? Also, let's get something straight here - the speed limit is 65. "Speedier commuters" may break the law and go above and beyond the number placed on the speed limit sign at their own risk, but may get pulled over as a result. So why is the speed limit 65 along the interstate or why do we have speed limits at all if the left-lane is viewed as the lane to exceed that very speed limit?

Now, I'll be the first to admit that when in a hurry, I can sometimes get frustrated when I'm stuck behind someone going exactly the speed limit or a little under it. However, in the end, it's myself that I'm angry with, since I was the one at fault for running late in the first place. On that note, while I don't think this woman should have been in the left-lane, I also don't think she should have been ticketed. The cop should have just pulled her over, given her a warning, and hoped that in the future, inclement weather or not, she avoided the left-lane when going slightly under the speed limit. Being cautious in inclement weather, even when interfering with others' need to break the law by exceeding the speed limit in an attempt to make up for their own time-management problems, isn't a good reason for a ticket. If people can get ticketed for that, I may forever be paranoid about driving my car again.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/woman-gets-ticket-driving-2-miles-per-hour-211957738.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"