State Trooper in California pulled me over.......

[Larry1096]

18 minutes ago, 1moreroad said:

I don't think I've seen those studies.  Every study I've seen referenced shows that excessive speed causes higher rates of injuries which I understand.  But never that speed causes the accident.**  I know that MD state troopers used to say they focused on speed differentials - they were more interested in someone doing 80 when everyone else was doing 60 than everyone doing 65 or 70 in a 55.  There were PSAs when I was growing up that said that driving slow was almost as dangerous as driving fast.

 

** Within reason.  Years ago there was a bad wreck maybe 5 miles from my house where a moto was doing almost 100 mph in a 30 on a public road with a lot of pedestrian traffic.  Car pulled in front of the moto never expecting it to be doing 3x the limit.

Having been an LEO and now in large fleet management, there are a number of studies tying excess speed (what the industry calls 'speeding') and higher accident rates. Most are representing as 'injury rates' since the metrics for that are far more robust; it's easy to count folks going to the hospital vs. a fender bender. 

 

That said, if they 'only' cause higher injury rates, and not accident rates (which I'm not conceding, BTW) would that really be an argument FOR speeding?


Larry

Edited July 28, 2022 by Larry1096

[Ride365]

I have no respect for any leo who pulls anyone over for nothing, yes it has happened to me on more than a few occasions while out riding.........it's called FISHING. 

[bwringer]

I know "speed kills" is simple, easy to remember, and it's what a lot of people are taught, but the truth of the matter is far more complex. "Speed differentials kill" is closer to the truth, but I suppose is a more complex concept.

What I meant by "speeding is not dangerous" is the "normal" everyday speeding, the nearly universal civil disobedience that helps traffic flow efficiently and safely. I did not mean hooning along at 100mph on one wheel through a school zone.

As noted, speed differences (and of course distractions like diddling cell phones) and intoxication are far more dangerous. These are what cause accidents, and this is very well proven.

 

Back to the actual topic: what other explanation besides some kind of pretext stop is there? If the trooper genuinely thought the rider hadn't stopped, then why on earth would he issue a warning and not a ticket?

Conversely, if the trooper had any doubt, then what could the trooper have possibly learned during a stop to clarify what happened one way or the other?

It may be that he saw rapid acceleration, and made the decision to stop based on the high probability (90% plus, probably) that the rider would go on to exceed the speed limit. As we all know, that's pretty easy to do in second gear... I would count that as either a mistake or a pretext.

Or, he saw rapid acceleration and decided to stop the rider in hopes of damping the rider's enthusiasm for enjoying the Tracer's bounty. That's a pretext stop; we don't (yet) have pre-crime prosecution for traffic laws, or we'd all already be in jail just for owning fast motorcycles.

The fact of the matter is that there was no violation, and therefore it was either a mistake or misjudgement, or some brand of pretext stop.

 

One other bit of advice about warnings: many moons ago after a warning or two, I found a note scribbled on the back of my license with the velocity involved, date, and initials/badge number. Basically a sneaky warning to the next LEO that hey, we've got a serial violator here... I don't have a photo because oddly enough I lost my wallet shortly after this and had to get a replacement license.

Nowadays, it's all on the computer, including warnings. Warnings don't show up in your "official" driving record, but written warnings are saved in the state database and do show up on the officer's computer. From what I was shown, they can also see past officer queries for driving record, and can make inferences from there. How much of this is available across state lines I don't know. 

So yeah, there's only so far you can push your luck; if you have one recent warning, don't have much hope for another.

Edited July 28, 2022 by bwringer

[oregonian]

The US will continue to have problems with law enforcement officers as long as it disqualifies the ones who test too HIGH on the IQ entrance exams.

Just think about how idiotic that is.  

There are many institutional ways to guarantee bad leadership but that one is exceptional.  

[Larry1096]

16 hours ago, 1moreroad said:

I don't think I've seen those studies.  Every study I've seen referenced shows that excessive speed causes higher rates of injuries which I understand.  But never that speed causes the accident.**  I know that MD state troopers used to say they focused on speed differentials - they were more interested in someone doing 80 when everyone else was doing 60 than everyone doing 65 or 70 in a 55.  There were PSAs when I was growing up that said that driving slow was almost as dangerous as driving fast.

 

** Within reason.  Years ago there was a bad wreck maybe 5 miles from my house where a moto was doing almost 100 mph in a 30 on a public road with a lot of pedestrian traffic.  Car pulled in front of the moto never expecting it to be doing 3x the limit.

https://www.wreckintoacheck.com/faqs/how-does-speed-contribute-to-car-accidents/#:~:text=Yes%2C speeding remains a contributing,speeding still causes numerous accidents.

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08 - The Relation Between Speed and Crashes.pdf

 

https://attorneyguss.com/fatal-speeding-accident-percent/

Many more, Google's full of them. 

"According to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), speeding remains the number one factor in more than 25% of fatal accidents each year. Speeding while driving is a choice—a negligent choice that can result in thousands of preventable deaths each year." https://attorneyguss.com/fatal-speeding-accident-percent/

Again, most statistics focus on injuries, since the data is there to track (accidents with injuries get more documentation that minimal, property damage accidents) but you can tell just from the titles of these they're correlating more speed with higher incidence of accidents.

 

Larry

 

Edited July 28, 2022 by Larry1096

[Larry1096]

2 hours ago, oregonian said:

The US will continue to have problems with law enforcement officers as long as it disqualifies the ones who test too HIGH on the IQ entrance exams.

Just think about how idiotic that is.  

There are many institutional ways to guarantee bad leadership but that one is exceptional.  

Documentation to support this? Every test I've ever taken was 'highest score wins', essentially. 

 

Edited to add: looks like there was one department doing it?  There are about 18,000 police departments in the US.

 

Larry

Edited July 28, 2022 by Larry1096