What Would It Take to Make You Stop Speeding?

[dazzleman]

Most of us here are auto enthusiasts who are committed to driving fast, and have continued to do so despite being ticketed for it, in some cases numerous times.

How bad would the penalty for speeding have to be before you would actually swear off speeding?

I would say it would take a fine of about $1,000 before I would try a lot harder to follow the speed limit.  I don't think even a fine of that magnitude would really keep me from speeding, but I'd be more careful not to get caught.

Even more effective would be a community service requirement that lasted over several weeks, or at least two weekends in jail, for speeding.  I hate to give up my personal time for something I don't want to do, so these penalties might make me slow down.  I'd probably not be deterred by a short community service requirement (1 day), but a longer one would probably make me slow down.

[mazda6er]

I "speed" all the time, but no more than 10-15 mph over the limit, and have never been caught, and I believe the vast majority of people that drive 10-15 over the limit are never ticketed. Anyone that drives faster than that is seriously endangering everyone on the road, and clearly lacks a bit in the responsibility department. I only drive at that rate because more often than not, the speed of traffic mandates I do so, and if I was blowing people's doors off, I wouldn't go that fast.  I'm not pointing any fingers, just giving my opinion.

[Catman]

Most of us here are auto enthusiasts who are committed to driving fast, and have continued to do so despite being ticketed for it, in some cases numerous times.

How bad would the penalty for speeding have to be before you would actually swear off speeding?

I would say it would take a fine of about $1,000 before I would try a lot harder to follow the speed limit.  I don't think even a fine of that magnitude would really keep me from speeding, but I'd be more careful not to get caught.

Even more effective would be a community service requirement that lasted over several weeks, or at least two weekends in jail, for speeding.  I hate to give up my personal time for something I don't want to do, so these penalties might make me slow down.  I'd probably not be deterred by a short community service requirement (1 day), but a longer one would probably make me slow down.

There is a downside to raising fines as far as the powers to be are concerned.  Every time fines go up cops write less tickets.  Even though the speeding fines in MA are $100 for the first 10 over then $10 for every MPH over that, most of us only write for the minimum, $100.  Fines and surcharges are already high enough.  

[mazda6er]

Wow you're an easy-going cop, Catman. So if someone's doing 60 in a 40 you only slap them for $100 instead of $200? At what do you say "enough's enough" and bring in the extra $10/mph?

[Catman]

Wow you're an easy-going cop, Catman. So if someone's doing 60 in a 40 you only slap them for $100 instead of $200? At what do you say "enough's enough" and bring in the extra $10/mph?

I make a good salary and I don't want to have to pay $100.  When I was working patrol I would give a 15 mph buffer before I would cite on most roads.  School zones were less.  The majority of stops were between 15 and 20 over.  Once you get more than 20 over it's getting into reckless driving in my opinion, so I might ding you worse.  If I stop someone for 15 over and I get the, "I wasn't going that fast", followed by the predictable behavior, I will slam you.  Anyone going more than 10 over without realizing it is either a liar or negligent.

[mazda6er]

Wow you're an easy-going cop, Catman. So if someone's doing 60 in a 40 you only slap them for $100 instead of $200? At what do you say "enough's enough" and bring in the extra $10/mph?

I make a good salary and I don't want to have to pay $100.  When I was working patrol I would give a 15 mph buffer before I would cite on most roads.  School zones were less.  The majority of stops were between 15 and 20 over.  Once you get more than 20 over it's getting into reckless driving in my opinion, so I might ding you worse.  If I stop someone for 15 over and I get the, "I wasn't going that fast", followed by the predictable behavior, I will slam you.  Anyone going more than 10 over without realizing it is either a liar or negligent.

Sounds fair enough.  B)  Those fines are hefty.

[Raghavan]

Well, i always try to keep a clean record. Sort of a little 'thing' to see how long i can go  before i get a ticket, so any ticket would make me sad.

[Catman]

Well, i always try to keep a clean record. Sort of a little 'thing' to see how long i can go  before i get a ticket, so any ticket would make me sad.

If I catch you speeding I will summon Annabell to look at you.

[mazda6er]

God no! :o That ferocious beast! Who says cruel and unusual punishment has gone by the wayside? Rag could be licked to death!  :o  

[MX793]

I rarely travel at more than 5 mph over the speed limit.  On an interstate, I might cruise at 73 mph in the 65.  Higher speeds hurt fuel mileage, and with the price of gas I prefer to spend a little more time in transit and pick up a little bit better fuel mileage.

[Raghavan]

Well, i always try to keep a clean record. Sort of a little 'thing' to see how long i can go  before i get a ticket, so any ticket would make me sad.

If I catch you speeding I will summon Annabell to look at you.

What torture! is that even illegal!?!?! :o  :o
 

[dazzleman]

There is a downside to raising fines as far as the powers to be are concerned.  Every time fines go up cops write less tickets.  Even though the speeding fines in MA are $100 for the first 10 over then $10 for every MPH over that, most of us only write for the minimum, $100.  Fines and surcharges are already high enough.

Do higher fines make cops write fewer tickets because the higher fines cause more motorists to fight the tickets, which forces the cops to spend more time than they would like in court?

I agree -- if the goal is to raise revenue, a moderate fine, that the motorist will pay without fighting it, is more effective than a very high fine.  It's kind of like merchandising -- lower prices can mean higher profits if sales go up significantly.

I also think that with speed limits on the highways set relatively low, making speeders out of the majority of motorists, a really meaningful penalty for speeding is probably politically impossible, unless the person is going more than 30 mph over the speed limit.

I do think in certain cases, it is safe to go 20 mph or so over the speed limit; certainly not on city streets or in residential areas, but on the highway with good conditions and light traffic it can be safe to go significantly over the speed limit.  And the time when it is safest to speed is also the time when you're most likely to get busted, since there isn't a lot of other traffic to distract an officer looking for speeders.  This is the only time I ever get tickets -- on a nice empty roadway under great conditions, when I am unable to resist the temptation to take advantage of the opportunity and open it up.

[Rupert]

It would take a car that really isn't much fun at speed. Like a Trooper...

[dazzleman]

It would take a car that really isn't much fun at speed. Like a Trooper...

Good answer.  

I'd love to get L. Ed Foote's answer on this.  He's pretty much a "penalties be damned" type of speeder.

[ifcar]

It would take a car that really isn't much fun at speed. Like a Trooper...

I've never had a car that's enjoyable at high speeds and have never had a speeding ticket. That must be the secret formula.    

[giant_mtb]

If I get pulled over...I won't be able to get my license until I'm 18...

So basically, one ticket will make me stop speeding... :ph34r:  

[Raza]

To make me spot speeding, you've have to get rid of speed limits.

[Tom]

To make me spot speeding, you've have to get rid of speed limits.

To answer the question, I would stop speeding if fines/insurance premiums went up even more with a ticket.  Or if a cop is in the immediate area.  In that case, I would travel right at the speed limit, regardless of how low it is.

[Catman]

There is a downside to raising fines as far as the powers to be are concerned.  Every time fines go up cops write less tickets.  Even though the speeding fines in MA are $100 for the first 10 over then $10 for every MPH over that, most of us only write for the minimum, $100.  Fines and surcharges are already high enough.

Do higher fines make cops write fewer tickets because the higher fines cause more motorists to fight the tickets, which forces the cops to spend more time than they would like in court?

I agree -- if the goal is to raise revenue, a moderate fine, that the motorist will pay without fighting it, is more effective than a very high fine.  It's kind of like merchandising -- lower prices can mean higher profits if sales go up significantly.

I also think that with speed limits on the highways set relatively low, making speeders out of the majority of motorists, a really meaningful penalty for speeding is probably politically impossible, unless the person is going more than 30 mph over the speed limit.

I do think in certain cases, it is safe to go 20 mph or so over the speed limit; certainly not on city streets or in residential areas, but on the highway with good conditions and light traffic it can be safe to go significantly over the speed limit.  And the time when it is safest to speed is also the time when you're most likely to get busted, since there isn't a lot of other traffic to distract an officer looking for speeders.  This is the only time I ever get tickets -- on a nice empty roadway under great conditions, when I am unable to resist the temptation to take advantage of the opportunity and open it up.

Most don't care what happens after they write tickets.  Court time is fine for most since it's OT.

[dazzleman]

There is a downside to raising fines as far as the powers to be are concerned.? Every time fines go up cops write less tickets.? Even though the speeding fines in MA are $100 for the first 10 over then $10 for every MPH over that, most of us only write for the minimum, $100.? Fines and surcharges are already high enough.

Do higher fines make cops write fewer tickets because the higher fines cause more motorists to fight the tickets, which forces the cops to spend more time than they would like in court?

I agree -- if the goal is to raise revenue, a moderate fine, that the motorist will pay without fighting it, is more effective than a very high fine.  It's kind of like merchandising -- lower prices can mean higher profits if sales go up significantly.

I also think that with speed limits on the highways set relatively low, making speeders out of the majority of motorists, a really meaningful penalty for speeding is probably politically impossible, unless the person is going more than 30 mph over the speed limit.

I do think in certain cases, it is safe to go 20 mph or so over the speed limit; certainly not on city streets or in residential areas, but on the highway with good conditions and light traffic it can be safe to go significantly over the speed limit.  And the time when it is safest to speed is also the time when you're most likely to get busted, since there isn't a lot of other traffic to distract an officer looking for speeders.  This is the only time I ever get tickets -- on a nice empty roadway under great conditions, when I am unable to resist the temptation to take advantage of the opportunity and open it up.

Most don't care what happens after they write tickets.  Court time is fine for most since it's OT.

Understood.  But what I don't understand is why higher fines would make cops write fewer tickets.  Is it because of sympathy for what they're imposing on a motorist in a marginal situation?

[Catman]

There is a downside to raising fines as far as the powers to be are concerned.? Every time fines go up cops write less tickets.? Even though the speeding fines in MA are $100 for the first 10 over then $10 for every MPH over that, most of us only write for the minimum, $100.? Fines and surcharges are already high enough.

Do higher fines make cops write fewer tickets because the higher fines cause more motorists to fight the tickets, which forces the cops to spend more time than they would like in court?

I agree -- if the goal is to raise revenue, a moderate fine, that the motorist will pay without fighting it, is more effective than a very high fine.  It's kind of like merchandising -- lower prices can mean higher profits if sales go up significantly.

I also think that with speed limits on the highways set relatively low, making speeders out of the majority of motorists, a really meaningful penalty for speeding is probably politically impossible, unless the person is going more than 30 mph over the speed limit.

I do think in certain cases, it is safe to go 20 mph or so over the speed limit; certainly not on city streets or in residential areas, but on the highway with good conditions and light traffic it can be safe to go significantly over the speed limit.  And the time when it is safest to speed is also the time when you're most likely to get busted, since there isn't a lot of other traffic to distract an officer looking for speeders.  This is the only time I ever get tickets -- on a nice empty roadway under great conditions, when I am unable to resist the temptation to take advantage of the opportunity and open it up.

Most don't care what happens after they write tickets.  Court time is fine for most since it's OT.

Understood.  But what I don't understand is why higher fines would make cops write fewer tickets.  Is it because of sympathy for what they're imposing on a motorist in a marginal situation?

Because the huge fines and surcharges are bullshit.  People are getting screwed enough.    

[TurboDan]

I think that attitude is reflected more by local agencies, who are out serving a community in many different respects.  They know how fast traffic usually moves, are aware of how the driver was performing, and can judge things on a case-by-case basis.

The state agencies seem to put troopers on "speed enforcement" and that becomes their primary job, rather than the multitude of tasks local police are involved in during a given a day.  Alot of them seem to come down with "Officer Bob Syndrome" where speed enforcement is the be-all and end-all of their job, and they don't cut breaks, even in light traffic on a clear day on an open highway.

[TurboDan]

To make me spot speeding, you've have to get rid of speed limits.

Pretty much.  For the most part, you can't really raise the penalties for speeding any more than they are now, or else you'd have speeding tickets that carry harsher penalities than DUI or other "real" crimes.

Basically, you'd have every state become Virginia, where almost every speeding ticket automatically becomes "reckless by speed" and subject to a boatload of points.  A friend of mine was nabbed on I-95 in NoVa doing 78 in a 55 and was charged with "reckless by speed."  Since he had an out of state license, I don't think he sweated it too much, but he still had to work out some deal with them because that particular charge would have had him driving 5 hours down to VA to appear in court.

[dazzleman]

Understood.  But what I don't understand is why higher fines would make cops write fewer tickets.  Is it because of sympathy for what they're imposing on a motorist in a marginal situation?

Because the huge fines and surcharges are bullshit.  People are getting screwed enough.  

It's good to see an officer thinking this.  I think TurboDan is right that this attitude is more prevalent among community officers than state troopers.

Connecticut has a strange system of fines.  Fines are significantly jacked up for highway speeds, though arguably, this is the safest speeding within a certain zone.

For example, I got tagged for doing 52 mph in a 35 mph zone, and the nominal fine on my ticket was $131.  But when I got nailed for going 78 mph in a 55 mph zone, it was $239.  83 in a 55 was $279.

The funny thing is that I only actually paid the nominal fine once, when I would have had to travel a good distance to go to court, and I had too much going on to take the time.  Otherwise, I have gone to court, and without any question, they have reduced the fines to $35 in the case of the $131 ticket, and $100 for the $239 ticket.

It's a catch-22 because it encourages people to go to court, and believe me, a lot do in Connecticut.  The line to get into the courthouse was out the door and down the street.  This forces the system to lower fines to "get rid of" people who contest their tickets, rather than having them take the whole stupid thing to trial.

For a system meant to raise revenue, there is a "sweet spot" where the fine needs to be to encourage the highest number of people to pay without contesting.  Once people contest, it's only a question of cutting losses.

I tend to agree with you that some who are basically safe drivers get screwed by tickets.  I also think there's not enough distinction made between minor and major offenses.  I'd rather see higher speed limits, fewer tickets given out, but more severe penalties for truly dangerous driving.

[Catman]

Sound good to me.  If you really want to make a dent make it a civil infraction for anything under 20 over.  Over 20 would be a criminal offense requiring a court appearance.  The courts wouldn't like that though.  Highways could have a different standard.  

[dazzleman]

Sound good to me.  If you really want to make a dent make it a civil infraction for anything under 20 over.  Over 20 would be a criminal offense requiring a court appearance.  The courts wouldn't like that though.  Highways could have a different standard.

Catman, in Massachusetts, how much above the speed limit does somebody have to be going when ticketed in order to be required to make a court appearance?

[Catman]

Sound good to me.  If you really want to make a dent make it a civil infraction for anything under 20 over.  Over 20 would be a criminal offense requiring a court appearance.  The courts wouldn't like that though.   Highways could have a different standard.

Catman, in Massachusetts, how much above the speed limit does somebody have to be going when ticketed in order to be required to make a court appearance?

That's officer descretion.  It would be a criminal charge under reckless operation or operating to endanger (slightly different elements).  There really is no magic number, it's circumstantial.

[Champ]

The state agencies seem to put troopers on "speed enforcement" and that becomes their primary job, rather than the multitude of tasks local police are involved in during a given a day.  Alot of them seem to come down with "Officer Bob Syndrome" where speed enforcement is the be-all and end-all of their job, and they don't cut breaks, even in light traffic on a clear day on an open highway.

Off topic a bit, how many officers will give out tickets (on highways, mostly) for people doing bad habbit things like: merging too slow, sitting in the left lane, blocking the left lane of traffic (it really irks me when the limit is 70, and you have one guy doing 70, and another guy doing 70.5, and there is a line of cars behind them that's 10+ cars long.)  Granted they are speeding, but is there a ticket for impeding the flow of traffic?  And about the merging thing, a top 3 pet peeve of mine is people who merge onto highways going 35.  They have this looong entrance ramp, at least get up to 55 or more appropriatly get going the speed of traffic.  It seems like someone merging at 35 is more dangerous than the guy going 15 over the limit.


On topic, I haven't been caught yet for speeding so I'm not sure what it would take.  I would assume anything over 500 + court time would get me to slow down a bit.

[Raza]

I'm slowing down now, but only because most of my commute comes with plenty of merciless cops who have nothing better to do than just harass kids on the way to campus.  The look for Penn State parking stickers.  

[Colonel Cadillac]

If it just starts getting expensive to speed I would stop speeding as much. At some point, there is no reason to waste that much money on having a little more fun.