How much does a 'ticket' cost?

[Lord Orwell]

i would go for a really harsh punishment first, then an equal, or harsher punishment for each additional time. If people are afraid of the punishment, then they wont do it, and there wont be a next time. I think, if any, the DUI consequences should be as extreme as possible. Especially now that i have been driving a lot later at night, I would rather not have to worry about going into an intersection and having a drunk drive t-bone me.

That happened to my friends mom. She broke several vertebrae, was in the hospital for a few months, and in critical condition. She was close to breaking her spinal cord, killing her. She tried to sue the guy for everything he owned, unfortunately, he owned nothing. He lived with his mom, and she was even in debt.

not to take anything from her, but how did someone determine she "almost" broke a bone? Plus suing, what would that have accomplished? He already would have lost his license for a year minimum with a two thousand dollar reinstatement fee after that, if he didn't go to jail outright for causing an injury.
the simple fact that most people go to prison more than once shows this to be false. But for that matter numbers show that drunk drivers are less likely to cause accidents at night than sober drivers. They manipulate the numbers but i can do it too: http://www.jointogether.org/news/res...e-of-most.html says 25% of drivers are drunk during peak hours.
http://www.edgarsnyder.com/drunk-dri...tatistics.html says that 33% of fatal accidents involve drunk drivers. Let's do a number breakdown on that.
there are 4 types of accidents possible at night.
a single car with a sober driver
a single car with a drunk driver
a dual car collision with two sober drivers
a dual car collision with two drunk drivers
a dual car collision with one of each (twice as likely)
if drunk drivers were EQUALLY likely to cause an accident as a sober driver, then you would see 60% of the accidents contain a drunk driver. Since there are half as many drunk drivers as this projection, i will lower this to 30%, which almost exactly matches their 33%. Conclusion? drinking doesn't impair you nearly as much as being up at 2am in the first place. I am not merely spouting numbers either. This was thoroughly tested on mythbusters. Being tired by their results made you a much worse driver than being drunk.
http://mythbustersresults.com/arrow-machine-gun "tipsy vs tired"

The point is that I wasn't driving 45 mph at all time. I was just doing so while overtaking. If you ask me, completing an overtake in as little time as possible is the safest thing to do. If someone is driving 25mph I'm sure as hell wont take 2 minutes driving 29 to overtake him. I put on the gas, get it done and return to driving at normal speed. Here, by law, you are required to finish overtaking in as little time as possible and you have to be driving at least 10mph faster than the person you are overtaking.

the law doesn't make allowances for situations when speeding. You were speeding when overtaking.

while still being reasonably within the speed limit, I assume. That would mean if you have to exceed the speed limit in this situation, you shouldn't be overtaking.

Over here, on 'expressways', I have been frustrated so much by the truckers in each lane playing a game of 'who drives the slowest', that I can sympathize with you, empathize with you. I am even grateful sometimes the cops here don't go for speed radars.

.

don't forget that for some inane reason the speed limit for trucks is usually at least 10mph slower on an expressway than for cars, and they are not only more likely to get a ticket for speeding, their tickets start out in the hundreds of dollars. I had a cdl and i can tell you that truckers have a whole other set of rules to follow when driving, including only being allowed in certain lanes, or on certain roads with colored signs, etc.

This is a prime case of where I think penalties should start easier and be stacked. This was the first time in over 20 years of driving that my wife had ever been pulled over. She should have gotten a warning at most. In fact, the police officer should have gotten a ticket for not yielding to oncoming traffic.....

Of course, my last ticket was for failing to yield while making a turn (this was also 20 years ago). I was turning left in traffic and people waved me to turn left in front of them. In the third lane, a car actually accelerated to hit me. Because I was turning left, it was automatically my fault even though the other car actually caused the accident. I was in a rental car and the people that hit me had already called the rental agency to say they needed to provide a car for them-- they did this before we were even done talking to the police officers. The cop even apologized for writing me the ticket. He told me that there are many cases where people will wave someone to turn left in front of them (cross traffic), and then accelerate to hit the car. Even though they are waving you on, you are still at fault because you crossed into the oncoming lane. Gotta love people.....

Brad!

two points: One: she could have gotten a ticket for passing in the slow lane, which is a much higher fine than speeding, and two: You need to get in the habit of pretending to not see those people. I never, and i mean NEVER move if someone else has the right of way no matter if they are waving me on or not. I've been known to shake my head no, open a book, etc. It becomes clear to them.

Nope, not in the US. There's no such system here, and any emergency service is forbidden to run red lights by law, no exceptions. Although this is almost never enforced. I've seen ambulances go through red lights, although not at full speed but with great caution. I think it's ok, but if you want to go by law, then it's not.

I don't think that is the rule everywhere. Not every city has the auto-change lights. Mine doesn't. I however was behind an ambulance last week going to a pick up and i swear he wasn't even speeding.

I had the pleasure of a long Ambulance ride in the UK. I asked about what the deal was with running red lights and speed cameras etc. It turns out they get fines just like everyone else. One of the chaps spends a day or so each month writing appeals for all the received penalty notices, in each case he must justify exactly why the offence was made and even then there is no guarantee the fine will be dropped.

A friend of mine got fired for getting a ticket while driving an ambulance. Evidently the rules are stricter here. He passed a school bus.

And make the drivers dumber? You are probably gonna say they are already as dumb as they could be, but still automating everything would make the humans rely too much on technology. There's a risk people will not be able to make the right decisions because too many decisions are made by computers.

.

i would say that it is more than this reason. It's most likely to clear the intersection in the direction the ambulance is going so they can actually get through the intersection in the first place. I have seen more than once where an emergency vehicle had to wait for the light to change green because traffic was in every lane and they couldn't get around it.