Speed Limit while passing

[Mr_RC]

Does anyone know if the speed limit is enforceable while you are passing? I'm debating on whether to fight or pay my 25mph speeding ticket.

Thanks in advance.

Ronnie

[~Barn~]

I don't know why it wouldn't be. :dunno:

[pilot]

Does anyone know if the speed limit is enforceable while you are passing? I'm debating on whether to fight or pay my 25mph speeding ticket.

Thanks in advance.

RonnieAbsolutely. That's why they call it a limit. Now a judge may provide some leniency, depending upon your story. Such as: your were past the car that was traveling below the speed limit and a car pulled into the oncoming lane from a side road. In order to clear the car you had to speed up. The lesser of two evils defense. I'm sure some of the legal eagles will be more than happy to pipe in.

[Bassil Duwaik]

It is legal to speed to pass a car being that it is safer to go over the speed limit then it is to maintain the speed limit while passing a car. Trust me I've been in court enough times to know!

[pilot]

It is legal to speed to pass a car being that it is safer to go over the speed limit then it is to maintain the speed limit while passing a car. Trust me I've been in court enough times to know!Bazz, you and I R 2 badddd examples for passing, ha. Well, at least since I went to the CSC passing in a no-http://www.footballspeakers.com/i/ramsey_passing.jpg zone class.

[Sortarican]

My last ticket the Judge specifically stated that there is no extension to the speed limit for passing.

The Limit is the Limit!:banghead:

In PA I think it was a 5mph extension, but no break in CO.:(

[Bassil Duwaik]

My last ticket the Judge specifically stated that there is no extension to the speed limit for passing.

The Limit is the Limit!:banghead:

In PA I think it was a 5mph extension, but no break in CO.:(

That's not what my attorney told me. but then again she could be wrong? I know that when she said that the judge reduced my ticket from 12 to 6 and I proly would have had it reduced more if my driving record wasn't so bad

[~Barn~]

:spit:

Well if your lawyer was right, and it wasn't/isn't illegal, you woulda thought the judge would reduced it from a 12-pointer to a "dismissed".

Or maybe that's just me making sense. :lol:

[pilot]

that's just cuz he was driving on the other side of the road-http://www.baldhalloffame.com/images/__britney%20spears%2001.jpgstyle

[Bassil Duwaik]

Being that all my tickets totaled 32 points I'm happy to have all of them reduced to 12. So she did a good job

[Munch]

Not Suspended??

[Bassil Duwaik]

nope just gotta stay clean for the next year or so. I lucked out being that my record has been clean for nearly 5yrs and then I got all 3 in the span of 3 weeks. Doesn't really bother me being that I moved to CA and they've got a totally different system then co

[mushin_man39]

Hmm, Pilot, thanks for the invite to add to this one-penny opera. I'll try to stay on topic! Anyway, in the United States, most crimes are required to have a culpable mental state, i.e., "knowing," as in, "I knew I possessed crack and it was crack." Some crimes, however, are strict liability, meaning you don't need a mental state to be in violation of these laws or codes. Speeding is one such example. "I didn't know I was speeding," is not an excuse or no one would receive speeding tickets. Strict liability does not apply to the passenger, however, that's why passengers do not receive tickets for speeding.

Bassil, your story does not seem accurate. In Colorado, a driver over the age of 21 is allowed twelve points in one year, or 18 points in two years. A Colorado driver cannot maintain driving privileges with 0 points. Additionally, under the interstate compact, a suspension in CO will be reported nation-wide and will suspend your privileges in any state, thus you cannot obtain or maintain a license from another state.

[pilot]

Hmm, Pilot, thanks for the invite to add to this one-penny opera. I'll try to stay on topic! Anyway, in the United States, most crimes are required to have a culpable mental state, i.e., "knowing," as in, "I knew I possessed crack and it was crack." Some crimes, however, are strict liability, meaning you don't need a mental state to be in violation of these laws or codes. Speeding is one such example. "I didn't know I was speeding," is not an excuse or no one would receive speeding tickets. Strict liability does not apply to the passenger, however, that's why passengers do not receive tickets for speeding.

Bassil, your story does not seem accurate. In Colorado, a driver over the age of 21 is allowed twelve points in one year, or 18 points in two years. A Colorado driver cannot maintain driving privileges with 0 points. Additionally, under the interstate compact, a suspension in CO will be reported nation-wide and will suspend your privileges in any state, thus you cannot obtain or maintain a license from another state.One-Penny Opera, :music: At its best, a weeknight show in Central City. One-Penny, LOL. It's late, and I needed that after reading stuff about "get in/out of Iraq". Gracias.

[Bassil Duwaik]

Then it's a good thing you didn't represent me.

[Dysco]

I happily ate a ticket once fore accellerating out of a bad situation- I never broke 45 in a 35 while passing an old lady trying to squish me against a fedex truck. Some cops will buy it and some won't. Wasn't big enough to argue so I took 2 points or something.

You can certainly talk it down with a judge. Whatever you do, don't not fight a 25 over ticket. And if you do fight it, be respectful and dress properly. Wearing a tie and carrying helmet, jacket, gloves, etc and setting them next to you couldn't hurt your cause, either. Perception is the name of the game.

[pilot]

Good advice. Saddam forgot to wear a tie http://www.saddamisnotdead.com/image/saddam_hussein.jpgand look what happened to him. ~The state gave him one at no charge.

[Matty]

Doesn't really bother me being that I moved to CA and they've got a totally different system then co

You are slightly correct.


In most states, different points are added for each moving violation -- A driver who gets too many points in too short a time can lose his or her driver's license. In some states, points are also assessed for accidents, even if no court has found you to be at fault.
While the details vary from state to state, most systems typically work in one of two ways.

State System A: Each ordinary moving violation counts as a single point, but two points are assessed for speed violations that are far in excess of the speed limit. A license is suspended when a driver receives four points in a year, six in two years, or eight in three years.

State System B: Two points are assessed for minor violations such as an illegal turn or slightly exceeding the speed limit. Three, four, or five points are assigned for more serious violations, such as illegally running a stop sign or speeding. A license is suspended if a driver gets 12 points over three years.



cali is considered "State System A." an infraction counts as one point (speeding, running red light, etc...) also if you get cited for speeding unless it's 35 over the limit it only counts as one point. and that's even up to the cop. Misdemeanors count as 2 points.

This is actually kinda hurting me out here. I moved out here from Cali last month with "3 Cali Points" out here it's considred higher, so i might be in jeopardy of losing my license if i get stopped once more. however, i think 2 of those points come off in November.

[mushin_man39]

Bassil, I don't think we've met, so you need to mind your manners.

http://www.revenue.state.co.us/mv_dir/wrap.asp?incl=faqdc/faqdc7

Pilot, thanks for letting me add my two cents to the one-penny opera--all is forgiven, come home.

[edj]

Does anyone know if the speed limit is enforceable while you are passing? I'm debating on whether to fight or pay my 25mph speeding ticket.
Ronnie

Nobody really answered the original question. It *IS* legal to exceed speed limit under certain circumstances while passing. Not a law the police (or judge) are likely to tell you about.

RCW 46.61.425
Minimum speed regulation--Passing slow moving vehicle.

(1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law: PROVIDED, That a person following a vehicle driving at less than the legal maximum speed and desiring to pass such vehicle may exceed the speed limit, subject to the provisions of RCW 46.61.120 on highways having only one lane of traffic in each direction, at only such a speed and for only such a distance as
is necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety.



-------------------------

RCW 46.61.120
Limitations on overtaking on the left.

No vehicle shall be driven to the left side of the center of the roadway in overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction unless authorized by the provisions of RCW 46.61.100 through 46.61.160 and unless such left side is clearly visible and is free of oncoming traffic for a sufficient distance ahead to permit such overtaking and passing to be completely made without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle overtaken. In every event the overtaking vehicle must return to an authorized lane of travel as soon as practicable and in the event the passing movement involves the use of a lane authorized for vehicles approaching from the opposite direction, before coming within two hundred feet of any approaching
vehicle.

[Cars-R-Coffins]

You're quoting law that does not apply in Colorado... BAD :scream1:

[edj]

Hmm. You are correct! I cut this text from a thread I was involved with on the Boulder.General newsgroup some years ago and assumed it was for Colorado. My apologies. So Colorado has no similar law? It seems like the gist of that thread was that it did, but perhaps we were all confused by this (apparantly WA) law being posted.

[Cars-R-Coffins]

Mushin Man39 is a lawyer, ask him.

[pilot]

Not trying to soil the waters here, but I do believe Mtnerrorlover (ha) just received a tickie from the feds for passing in a NPZ in RMNP. She mentioned this in a previous post.

[mushin_man39]

Ugh, you asked for it, so here we go....: Oh, for the record, I correct my earlier statement regarding choice of evils defense, however, maintain it will not apply in a general passing situation.

CRS 42-4-1101(2)
Except when a special hazard exists that requires a lower speed, the following speeds shall be lawful:
(a) Twenty miles per hour on narrow, winding mountain highways or on blind curves;
(b) Twenty-five miles per hour in any business district, as defined in section 42-1-102 (11);
(c) Thirty miles per hour in any residence district, as defined in section 42-1-102 (80);
(d) Forty miles per hour on open mountain highways;
(e) Forty-five miles per hour for all vehicles in the business of transporting trash, where higher speeds are posted, when said vehicle is loaded as an exempted vehicle pursuant to section 42-4-507 (3);
(f) Fifty-five miles per hour on other open highways which are not on the interstate system, as defined in section 43-2-101 (2), and are not surfaced, four-lane freeways or expressways;
(g) Sixty-five miles per hour on surfaced, four-lane highways which are on the interstate system, as defined in section 43-2-101 (2), or are freeways or expressways;
(h) Any speed not in excess of a speed limit designated by an official traffic control device.
CRS 42-4-1101(4)
Any speed in excess of the lawful speeds set forth in CRS 42-4-1101(2) shall be prima facie evidence that such speed was not reasonable or prudent under the conditions then existing.

CRS 42-4-1101(8
)(b) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed in excess of a maximum lawful speed limit of seventy-five miles per hour.
(c) The speed limit set forth in paragraph (b) of this subsection (8 is the maximum lawful speed limit and is not subject to the provisions of subsection (4) of this section. (prima facie evidence of reasonable and prudent speed)
(e) The provisions of this subsection (8 are declared to be matters of both local and statewide concern requiring uniform compliance throughout the state.
(f) In every charge of a violation of paragraph (b) of this subsection (8, the complaint, summons and complaint, or penalty assessment notice shall specify the speed at which the defendant is alleged to have driven and also the maximum lawful speed limit of seventy-five miles per hour.
(9) The conduct of a driver of a vehicle which would otherwise constitute a violation of this section is justifiable and not unlawful when:
(a) It is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no conduct of said driver and which is of sufficient gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding the injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the consequences sought to be prevented by this section; or
(b) With respect to authorized emergency vehicles, the applicable conditions for exemption, as set forth in CRS 42-4-108, exist.
(10) The minimum requirement for commission of a traffic infraction or misdemeanor traffic offense under this section is the performance by a driver of prohibited conduct, which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act which said driver is physically capable of performing.
(11) It shall not be a defense to prosecution for a violation of this section that:
(a) The defendant's conduct was not performed intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence; or
(b) The defendant's conduct was performed under a mistaken belief of fact, including, but not limited to, a mistaken belief of the defendant regarding the speed of the defendant's vehicle; or
(c) The defendant's vehicle has a greater operating or fuel-conserving efficiency at speeds greater than the reasonable and prudent speed under the conditions then existing or at speeds greater than the maximum lawful speed limit.
(12) A violation of driving one to twenty-four miles per hour in excess of the reasonable and prudent speed or in excess of the maximum lawful speed limit of seventy-five miles per hour is a class A traffic infraction; a violation of driving twenty-five or more miles per hour in excess of the reasonable and prudent speed or in excess of the maximum lawful speed limit of seventy-five miles per hour is a class 2 misdemeanor traffic offense; and a violation under subsection (3) of this section is a class A traffic infraction.

CRS 42-4-1101(7) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of subsection (2) of this section, any city or town may by ordinance adopt absolute speed limits as the maximum lawful speed limits in its jurisdiction, and such speed limits shall not be subject to the provisions of subsection (4) of this section.

POINT SYSTEM
CRS 42-2-127
DOR Point Suspension Regulation (http://www.gustafsonlaw.com/DMV-Address+Links.htm#DMV-6e)
Colorado uses a point system to suspend driving privileges
If you accumulate the following points, Colorado license or driving privileges will be suspended


PERIOD COVERED - POINTS CAUSING SUSPENSION

DRIVER CLASSIFICATION

AGE

12 MONTHS

24 MONTHS

PERIOD LICENSE ISSUED

Adult

21 and over

12

18

n/a

Provisional

18 - 21

9

12

14

Minor

16 - 18

6

n/a

7

12 MONTHS

24 MONTHS

48 MONTHS

Chauffeur

n/a

16

24

28


Questions? Yes, this will be on the final....

[Puck]

'Rado is pretty strict. I've gotten little leniancy during my three wonderful years of canyon carving here.
I guess the best option is not to get caught. If you're willing to take the chance, know the cheif in your town or make sure you've got a judge in your pocket. You can buy justice in the US. How sweet is that?

[Sortarican]

CRS 42-4-1101(4)
Any speed in excess of the lawful speeds set forth in CRS 42-4-1101(2) shall be prima facie evidence that such speed was not reasonable or prudent under the conditions then existing.

CRS 42-4-1101(8)
(a) It is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no conduct of said driver and which is of sufficient gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding the injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the consequences sought to be prevented by this section; or

Thanks MM,
CRS 42-4-11-1(8) subsection (a) was my basic defense for speeding in Grand County.
Got stuck in the passing lane between two cars with the broken yellow running out.
The DA liked the excuse, the Judge was less understanding.

Dysco's post sounds like the same situation, the speed or die defense.