a repost but a good one....http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1207662073.jpg

I pass cops when they are going slow all the time. On the street all the time and less frequently on the freeway. CHP cars seem to roll about 80 mph on the urban freeways, and as long as you are going slower, you're OK. I hate it when a busy street come to a near-halt because nobody dares pass a slow-moving patrol car. If the "body language" of the cop car says that he might be about to bust a U-turn to respond to something I will hold back, but most times they are just patrolling and expect traffic to move normally around them. Usually I am left wondering, "am I the only one out here w/ a valid DL and insurance who isn't afraid to drive by a freaking cop?!" :mad:

Thats it. But then if I go to fast, someone, somewhere will accuse me of thinking that I'm above the law. I was going to work a few weeks ago and it seemed like traffic was really heavy. I'm working my way thru traffic, expecting to see a broken down car or traffic accident to deal with. I get to the front of the pack and what do I see? A local notorious CHP motor officer doing I swear dead on the speed limit. It looked like he was doing a traffic break on the freeway. Traffic was backed up for miles and was clear in front of him. I got on my PA and asked him what he was doing, what's going on and he said "Nothing" I just shook my head and rode away.

Denis, that is so true. Thats funny.

There was a tactic that was used by the MA State Police a few years ago where they'd run three patrol cars down the freeway at exactly the speed limit next to each other - effectively creating a rolling road-block and forcing traffic to obey the speed limit. IIRC this was declared an illegal tactic in the courts - I'd love to know why. I suspect if it was done judiciously and in targeted areas, it might actually HELP, rather than hinder traffic - working in much the same way as a "traffic break" that's used out here sometimes. . .

Ever see some idiot try to run a traffic break? I did a couple of weeks ago. A CHP guy was running a break and this knucklehead actually tries to squeeze past the cop who's doing "S" turns in the road. Needless to say, the guy got stopped by a VERY pissed-off looking CHP officer. I can imagine that's on the top 5 list of how to guarantee yourself a very long and unpleasant morning. . .

GRAND RAPIDS -- Some of the sidestreets you drive on, and the city streets you travel, have unsafe speed limits. They may be too low.

And if you've been ticketed for speeding -- maybe a $100 fine plus higher insurance rates -- a change in state law might mean your ticket isn't valid.

The Michigan State Police pushed this little known law, a minor change in the traffic code in November 2006 that could have major consequences for both drivers and cities. The law changes the way cities are supposed to set speed limits. The goal is to make roads safer. When the speed limit is too low, motorists ignore it, and drive at a variety of speeds that can make traffic safety worse instead of better.

"Some of the speed limits, and in some cases a lot of them, need to be adjusted to meet state law," said Michigan State Police Lt. Gary Megge. "Everytime we get different speeds, we tend to create conflicts, tailgating, lane changes, passing maneuvers, and many of those can potentially lead to a crash."

Under the new law, cities are now supposed to set their limits based on what 85 percent of drivers travel under normal, free-flowing conditions. The law spells it out exactly by writing what the local spped limit should be, based on access points -- driveways and intersections -- in a half-mile stretch.

24 Hour News 8 took the new law to the streets, counting access points and clocking drivers, and didn't need to look far to find questionable limits. On two roads we tested, the posted speed limits wer 25 and 35. But according to the law, the posted speeds should have been 45 and 55, the speed most people were driving.

On Walker Avenue, nobody was driving the posted 35. Yet, "People are operating safely," Lt. Megge said. "We don't see any swerving, we don't see any bouncing off the curb, or locking up the brakes."

24 Hour News 8 did find that kind of driving behavior when we tried to drive the speed limit on certain streets. The posted speed throughout East Grand Rapids is 25. The van behind ours was fine, but the car behind him was so close it could barely be seen.

Our investigation came up empty when we looked for any evidence cities have changed their limits based on the new law. When cities set speed limits, they have to file a Traffic Control Order. 24 Hour News 8 found orders so old they were pounded out on typewriters.

Cities either don't know about the new law, or don't want to know. "Some cities now depend on traffic ticket revenue," said Jim Walkeer, who has studied speed limits for decades. "If you write the limit at the 18th percentile, then you have 82 percent of the people defined as criminal and you can ticket at random."

Walker testified in favor of the new law, and is trying to get cities to change limits by fighting his own ticket. "It will take challenges from the public," he said. "Perhaps people who get traffic tickets and taking it to a formal hearing, not one who is a magistrate, but in front of a judge who is qualified to read the fine points of the law." You might be abel to question a local speeding tickets if you received one in the past year. If you pled guilty, you'll have to ask the district judge to reopen your case.

Cities aren't flinching. Kentwood wrote 3,000 speeding tickets in 2006, one of the top communities outside the Grand Rapids city limits. There are four Kentwood police officers who do nothing but traffic enforcement. "I'm sure there are many (tickets) we didn't get to write," said Chief Richard Mattice. Asked if he ever thought the speed limit might not be high enough, he said, "I think if you polled our residents, they would disagree."

East Grand Rapids knows drivers don't pay attention to their speed limits. But instead of increasing them as the new law suggests, the city tries to slow down traffice by shrinking lanes or telling residents to park on the street. And that's perfectly legal.

"Just changing the speed limit can cause more problems than you think," said EGR Chief Mark Herald, which include angry residents who don't want higher limits on their street.

But they may no longer have a say. "Road authorities, whether it's a city, a county or MDOT, have the obligation to follow Michigan law," Megge said.

Me too. Did pass one in my red Carrera with straight exhaust once - he was going ten under. He promptly pulled me. Told me I was speeding. Told him NFW, I paced him at ten under and went by legit. He says 'funny you're the second car to tell me that today'. DUH. Time for a speedo calibration on that Crown Vic, officer. Off I went. Didn't faze me, I still do it all the time. What's funny is when I do it, then other people slowly start making a break for it, too.

One of local communities (Lake Stevens) actually changed its speed limits based upon the 85% rule. It was formerly one of the more congested little towns in our area. We saw a noticeable improvement when they did this.

It's such a simple concept. It's based upon the idea that most citizens are responsible, and will drive in a reasonable manner, and really don't want to hit anything or cause accidents. They just want to get safely where they are going. Most folks will exercise good judgment when behind the wheel. Most folks feel comfortable at about the same speed as everyone else on the same road. What a great concept; citizens voting with their right foot on just how fast they should be allowed to drive on a given road. And gubmint bureaucrats trusting them to do so. Implementing the will of the people they govern. Wonderful idea; and it seems to work. When 85% of the population at large can agree on anything, they are probably right...

Jeff - those are dangerous thoughts you are thinking..

What is this utopia he's talking about?

They're either extremely visionary or extremely stupid for not realizing how much money they're throwing away by listening to the constituency. Not sure which.

I would love that 85% rule in the Chicagoland area. Many of the speed limits (during non congested driving) would jump up to about 85mph.

I heard that in Texas if there was not an engineering study to determine the correct speed limit that the posted speed limit was not enforceable. I subpoenad an engineering study for a speeding ticket in Austin (all I received was a letter stating there was no study) but I didn't get to try the technique because the prosector decided not to go to trial. This was after he put me at the defendants table and brought in potential jurors :mad:

I kind of doubt it would have worked. Any lawyers out there know for sure?

This is technically the case in CA too (although I'm not a lawyer and it might only apply to certain sections of the vehicle code or there might be exceptions). Look up "prima fascie speed limit". I got out of what otherwise would have been a nasty ticket a few years ago because of this - I started with the section of the code I was charged with violating and it eventually led me to a requirement for a traffic & engineering survey within the last 10 years being a requirement to establish this "prima fascie" speed limit on that particular stretch of road. Subpoenaed the traffic & engineering surveys in question and NONE EXISTED.

The state banks on most people's unwillingness to research this stuff and/or go out of their way to go to the DOT and pull traffic & engineering surveys to keep the revenue generators honest. Not me. Far as I see it, they want my money, they're going to get through every last ounce of fight I have in order to obtain it UNLESS I'm clearly being an a-hole and endangering others, etc. (which I don't), in which case I'd gladly pay it and probably kick myself in the ass for being an idiot. For the case in question I was on my motorcycle on a mostly deserted stretch of road and happened to get clocked by a revenue generator where the speed limit stepped down. B*stards.

When it comes to B.S. tickets like I got, I'll research, stay up for hours, etc. (I did in that case), hire attorneys, whatever it takes to win. I don't buy into the "roll over and pay it" game UNLESS one clearly should because they were out endangering the public, driving reckless, DUI, unsafe vehicle condition, etc. In my case, I was "endangering" nobody, it was a B.S. ticket based on a technicality and CLEARLY intended to just generate $$$ for the man, so the gloves come off. Maybe B.S. "enforcement" of that type will succeed on extracting money from 90% of the populace, but it'll be a cold day in hell before I don't count myself as part of the other 10%.

So long story short, I got off for that one. It might not work in all cases, but I got lucky to have been pulled over on a stretch of road that probably hasn't seen the attention of a Public Works van, much less a DOT Engineer, in decades. That's what compelled me to research it. Turns out I was right.

our legislature is in the extremely stupid column...they are well known to not follow the word of the constituency. their vision is pretty tunnel like

but what they did in Lake Stevens is something that should be applauded. and definitely not the norm for local politics.