Speed trap "Flashing Lights" Warning OK!

[kstar]

Some may have been following this issue lately . . .

Apparently many police folk have been writing tickets to folks who flash their headlights to warn other motorists of a speed trap.

Well, at least one judge in TN has ruled that such a flash is "free speech" and that officers have been told to issue no more tickets for the flashing.

http://www.newschannel5.com/content/news/2637.asp

BR,

Kurt

[RoninLB]

nice info

[Rick Lee]

This should make us all happy.

http://www.newschannel5.com/content/news/2637.asp

[911boost]

I am also going to pull over and park my big a$$ Tahoe right in front of the next undercover suv with the tailgate up radaring and taking pictures of people speeding and am going to call the local radio station and tell them where the camera is parked.

These camera/radar vehicles are totally worthless, they don't force anyone to slow down, and are only useful in generating revenue.

Ok stepping of the soapbox...


(I do have a couple good pictures of me in the 911 with my speed printed on them though on my fridge....)

Bill

[dean]

You can tell the cop that you were flashing at a friend

[D Hanson]

AFter working for judges on both the Tennessee Court of Appeals and the Tennessee Supreme Court, I would hope use of judicial time would be better spent on other areas, but for some unknown reason, I can see this one going up. It is not so much the facts in this case, but the impact it would have in other areas of the law.

[Dantilla]

Cops will tell you they just want people to slow down. Isn't this accomplished by the flash?

On a related note, the other day I saw one of the fine men in blue who had the radar gun out along side the freeway- In a construction zone where traffic was so heavy, no one could get even close to freeway speeds. I wonder how long he sat there wondering why he was unable to issue any tickets?

[Zeke]

Originally posted by Dantilla
Cops will tell you they just want people to slow down. Isn't this accomplished by the flash?

Since when was anything so logical?

[Porsche]

Flashing your lights in Australia is still considered illegal unfortunately.

[tkrefeld]

I'm in a Porsche and I'm supposed to flash.....Now i get a ticket for saying Hi? That's just plain mean.

[RoninLB]

Originally posted by D Hanson
. It is not so much the facts in this case, but the impact it would have in other areas of the law.

I don't understand what you mean?

[cassisrot]

Me neither

[cowtown]

The last guy I flashed looked down to see if his lights were on, then was promptly busted by the cop who had just caused my V1 to do the "jackpot."

The freedom-of speech thing is good to know, though.

[MRM]

Originally posted by RoninLB
I don't understand what you mean?

What D Hanson means is that the judge's ruling may create a precedent that if applied to other facts could have unexpected and unwelcome results. It may weaken the local DA's ability to prosecute other, more important cases. The facts of the case don't matter so much as the rule of law used to make the decision. If a rule applies to speeding drivers it will apply equally to other cases.

In this case, the legal principle the judge used as the basis for his decision is the proposition that drivers have a First Amendment right to freedom of expression that overrides the State's interest in enforcing traffic laws. I suspect the judge made that ruling because he thought the police and courts had better things to do with their time that busting speeders and people who flash at them to slow them down.

But could someone use the same principle and argue that the lookout on a bank robbery is just exercising his free speech rights when he stands (unarmed) outside bank and does nothing more than shout a warning when the cops come? Or the lookout on an organized mugging whose only job is to kick over a can of Coke if someone gets too near while the rest of the gang rifles the mark's pockets?

Those are clearly verbal acts that are themselves crimes. Just as the First Amendment doesn't protect someone who shouts fire in a crowded theater (it really doesn't, there's a case that says so) the right to self expression doesn't protect otherwise illegal activity.

The issue that could be teased out of this set of facts is where is the line between lawful protest and civil disobedience, free speech versus verbal acts.

I'm not saying this is necessarily a good case to explore those questions, just that these weighty questions are bound up in the seemingly silly proposition that a statute outlaws warning anyone of a speed trap can be overturned on First Amendment grounds. Heck, there is an entire series of US Supreme Court cases in which people engage in what is discretely called indecent acts in the video booths of adult bookstores and claimed First Amendment right to free expression. So this is as good of a case to decide these issues as any.

Clear as mud?

[RoninLB]

Originally posted by MRM
claimed First Amendment right to free expression. So this is as good of a case to decide these issues as any.

Clear as mud?

WOW

[Randy Webb]

"WOW"

Yup -- that's why law school costs so much....

[UK Carrera]

The situation here in the UK with respect to speed enforcement has become ludicrous. Now blatantlt about revenue generation, not driver education. Money not safety. Interestingly the accident statistics were in steady decline here until the introduction of the cameras - trend has now been reversed.

There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.

BTW if you were in a bar, and your friend had been drinking and you made sure he didn't drive, would that also be perverting justice, in the same way as flashing to warn your fellow motorists, as above??

[DonNewton]

There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics. I thought that was "There are liars, damned liars, and battery engineers." Could be wrong. . .

[Rick Lee]

I don't think this ruling is gonna get cited in stopping the police from acting in more serious crimes. Anyone warning a bank robber that the cops are coming has already committed some type of conspiracy before they see the first cop. Driving the getaway car is not usually called "giving a lift to a hitchiker" or something along those lines. A passing driver, OTOH, has nothing to do with some other offense and really could be signalling others to slow down. Why not? Everyone slows down when they see a cop, so flashing ones lights should be seen as helping the cops - unless they're just out to raise revenue, which never happens.

[MotoSook]

A good engineer can make statistics lie

..forgot the topic...I flash to warn others to slow down in case the cop decides to pull out. It's a matter of safety, you see. I wouldn't want my villiage tax dollars used to fix a squad, because I wasn't being a good citizen and preventing an accident...minimizing the risk of an accident. Flashing makes you a good citizen, see. Must be why I get hassled less in my 911, then I do in any other car Flash away!