A small triumph of sanity

[jrandom]

A couple of weeks ago my wife got a $150 ticket in the cage.

Naturally, I wrote a letter. It was successful; the ticket was dropped.

I attach the letter as (hopefully) a good example of what works in these situations. I'll let it speak for itself. Of course, this was a prime example of a rather frivolous ticket, and I don't recommend wasting police time by writing letters when an infringement notice constitutes a fair cop. Of course. :shifty:

[greenhorn]

Impressive
Saddam could use a bloke like you right now :msn-wink:

[spudchucka]

Good to see that you researched the relevant regulations and didn't just appeal on the grounds of it being "unfair". I wonder if that might have helped the decision makers sway your way?

[vifferman]

Well done.
It helped that in this case there were extenuating circumstances.
I make it a point to always write in for tickets (haven't actually had one for a while) and it usually helps somewhat. The last one was the wife's (first ever for her) and she was quite upset about it, as (a) she didn't realise she was speeding, (b) she was actually going slower than the other traffic on the motorway, and (c) it was her first ticket, and unlike me she is not a habitual law-breaker.:whistle:
But... the extenuating circumstances (as mentioned above) didn't help.

I've had three tickets:

In 1974? 1975?: Doing 41 mph in a 30 - got followed for MILES by a cop. Wrote in, got a $10 slap on the wrist, and had to attend a defensive driving course.
In 1975: Doing 38 in a 30 (was doing about 75 at 11:30 PM, thought better of it, and braked a lot, then saw the cop. He had the radar on manual, was ticketing someone else, and by the time he put it on hold, I was being more sensible). Didn't write in, just paid up ($16, IIRC)
In 1977: Not having a mirror on my bike. I argued with the cop about this, as they'd only just changed the regulations, and I thought they applied only to new vehicles. He gave me a copy of the Road Code. Oh. Ooops...
I wrote in, explained my mistake, added that I always looked around anyway, as the mirrors vibrated so much as to be useless, but had to pay the fine (some trivial amount I can't recall.) The law is THE LAW. Ended up selling my bike, as I was a poor starving student, and the fine was my last few shekels.
So for most things, apart from maybe speed camera tickets (and even then they do waive a certain percentage), it pays to write in.

[Hitcher]

[Mounts hobby horse]. "Park" lights are park lights and vehicles should not be able to be driven with them on. In many cases they are ineffectual for making a vehicle visible and drivers use them in the (mistaken) belief that they do. The park lights switch should be hidden in the bottom of the car's glove box, and the main lights switch should only be able to turn off and on the car's main driving lights. There is a strong case to be made for hardwired headlights (like Volvos of old and like most bikes).

[vifferman]

Good to see that you researched the relevant regulations and didn't just appeal on the grounds of it being "unfair". I wonder if that might have helped the decision makers sway your way?Indeed, and I think it was good that they waived it given that there was no real safety issue. But OTOH, if they hadn't, that too wouldn't have been unreasonable.

[Hitcher]

When I saw the title of this thread I was reminded of the Rocket III -- a large Triumph of insanity...

[jrandom]

Indeed, and I think it was good that they waived it given that there was no real safety issue. But OTOH, if they hadn't, that too wouldn't have been unreasonable.

TBH I agree; I wasn't too sure what the outcome of my letter would be.

Presumably the conservative fuddy-duddy tone managed to convince them that I was a Law Abiding Citizen in need of a Break.

I think, were I a traffic cop, I would have strongly considered ticketing a driver in similar circumstances. But the fact that it was an easily-committed mistake, and that this incident has (as you would expect) made Sarah very aware of checking the status of her headlight controls, should make it obvious that the greater public good would be served by simply warning the driver.

In this situation the payment of a fine would have had no extra benefit as a deterrent to the offender. But I wasn't going to argue the finer moral points of the situation in the letter.

[jrandom]

When I saw the title of this thread I was reminded of the Rocket III -- a large Triumph of insanity...

:laugh:

I KNEW you'd find a Triumph joke in there somewhere.

[Devil]

Good to see a reasonable letter gets a reasonable response, however...

Out of habit I check that things like this are on, especially if im in a well lit area. I have one of those cages that the dash lights are always on, even when the headlights are off, so you need to make sure that the headlights are actually on when they should be.

As stated above, I want to get out and slap people who think driving along (intentionally) with their park lights on is a good thing!

[FROSTY]

I must say I agree with hitcher about the sidelights thing.Headlights off or on should be the only option.

[Ms Piggy]

Well done mate, it's good to see that fairness & logic prevailed eventually!

[What?]

I must say I agree with hitcher about the sidelights thing.Headlights off or on should be the only option.
Has something changed that I missed? When I sat my license test (mid 70's) it was not legal to drive with park lights on. It was headlights or no lights, as park lights on is indicating to other road users that your vehicle is parked. Simple, really...

[jrandom]

Has something changed that I missed? When I sat my license test (mid 70's) it was not legal to drive with park lights on. It was headlights or no lights, as park lights on is indicating to other road users that your vehicle is parked. Simple, really...

Well, that makes sense.

Although - when I read through the traffic regulations to check out that particular offense, I did notice that parking lights were referred to as 'sidelamps' throughout, and I didn't see any requirement for them *not* to be used when the vehicle was being driven.

But I agree that a good control design would have a separate toggle on the dash for parking lights, and an on/off switch on the steering column for main headlights. I know I've done the drive-with-just-parking-lights thing before for exactly the same reason as above.

By the way, folks, www.legislation.govt.nz is your friend. Also, try looking up the relevant stuff when you're involved in something less straightforward than a traffic offense, and you'll quickly realise why most lawyers were either just born boring, or spend every weekend escaping from reality with large quantities of illegal substances.

[Dr Bob]

I get pissed off at people driving around with hazard lights on. Or even parked at the side of the road with them on. In fact next time I come along mayoral drive and find a courier or taxi parked in the left hand lane with hazard lights on, I think I will stop my bike and stop the traffic, until the hazard has been identified.

[vifferman]

I get pissed off at people driving around with hazard lights on. Or even parked at the side of the road with them on. In fact next time I come along mayoral drive and find a courier or taxi parked in the left hand lane with hazard lights on, I think I will stop my bike and stop the traffic, until the hazard has been identified.Or eliminated... heh heh...

My pet peeve (although I agree with you on this one) is wankers who drive around with their fog lights or driving lights on. I can't see any reason for this apart from (a) they're feckin eedjits who don't realist they're on, or (b) they're feckin eedjits wh have them on to say, "Look at me! LOOK AT ME!! I HAVE DRIVING LIGHTS!! MY KNOB IS VERY SMALL!!! But I do have DRIVING LIGHTS."

[Devil]

Or eliminated... heh heh...

My pet peeve (although I agree with you on this one) is wankers who drive around with their fog lights or driving lights on. I can't see any reason for this apart from (a) they're feckin eedjits who don't realist they're on, or (b) they're feckin eedjits wh have them on to say, "Look at me! LOOK AT ME!! I HAVE DRIVING LIGHTS!! MY KNOB IS VERY SMALL!!! But I do have DRIVING LIGHTS."
You saw them clearly though didnt you? :p

[Eddieb]

I get pissed off at people driving around with hazard lights on. I think I will stop my bike and stop the traffic, until the hazard has been identified.

I always thought hazard lights indicated that the person driving was a hazard to other road users.

[Hitcher]

Or eliminated... heh heh...

My pet peeve (although I agree with you on this one) is wankers who drive around with their fog lights or driving lights on. I can't see any reason for this apart from (a) they're feckin eedjits who don't realist they're on, or (b) they're feckin eedjits wh have them on to say, "Look at me! LOOK AT ME!! I HAVE DRIVING LIGHTS!! MY KNOB IS VERY SMALL!!! But I do have DRIVING LIGHTS."
And why, pray tell, does such behaviour irk you so?

[vifferman]

And why, pray tell, does such behaviour irk you so?Coz I'm an intolerant old prick?
Nah - it's because the fooking things are too bright! Why are they needed around town?

[vifferman]

You saw them clearly though didnt you? :pNo, I was dazzled by the glare.
Actually, the worst thing is it's become a habit to be pissed off about it and do my little rant...
Time to have another pet peeve.... hmmmmm....

[Drunken Monkey]

Coz I'm an intolerant old prick?
Nah - it's because the fooking things are too bright! Why are they needed around town?

They were supposed to be of standard 50-60W in the past, with equivalent brightness to low-beams. This doesn't necessarily appear to be the case anymore.
In general, I would think that permanent dipped or low wattage drive lamps would be a good thing - some report(s) posted earlier indicated around a 10% reduction in accidents through this practice alone?
But yes, some of those very very bright blue drive lights, angled up to dazzle you, can be annoying.

[LB]

We drive our Commodore with the driving lights on all the time - it's a dark blue car, and not easy to see. When I see another car our colour, especially if it's a bit gloomy, or not a really bright day, it reminds me that it is fairly easy to miss our car at a glance.

Sorry Firestormer........

[Lou Girardin]

I can't understand how people can drive with no lights on, surely they can see that there's no dash lights!
Equally I can't understand why a cop I know of, pinged a truckie for no headlights on the Sth M/Way. He'd just left the container terminal where's it's lit like daylight and his truck had more marker lights than Franklin Rd on Xmas eve. There's no way that even the blindest driver could have missed it.

[Devil]

Improperly aligned lights is one thing that fucks me right off. Its such an irritation.

Firestormer: Exactly what kind of lights are you talking about? I havent seen any driving lights that have been dazzling. Yes incorrectly aligned lights are a penis, but the problem is they're incorrectly aligned, not that they're driving lights :p

[sAsLEX]

the newer euros are annoying with those HID lights they are bloody bright and they vary/flash in color from blue to white so can be mistaken as plod at night!

[Hitcher]

The numbers of cars that drive with just one headlight too is amazing. Must have seen a couple of dozen at least last night between Bulls and home.