VA Reckless Driving, need traffic lawyer referrall - Page 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by RYCeT 

It's nice to know the old timers still giving a useful advice while the new one post from their ##$. It was on July 4th weekend, 4 lane highway, at noon, driving a civic. Stupid - Yes, Dangerous - you've got to be kidding me.

What gives you or your sister the right to grossly break the law, as for *your* attitude if you post a "my sister is a law-breaking idiot who got caught going 27mph over the speed limit, it is so unfair, how do I help her weazle out of facing up to the consequences of her actions" you have to expect a few folks will consider that you are condoning breaking the law and comment on the foolishness of speeding.

What if the law says: If you drive 27mph over the speed limit, you deemed, automatically, to have intended to cause injury to other drivers and bystanders.  Let's throw in a 6-month jail time.

Do you think that's ok? 

What would our founding fathers say?
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by nick_charles 

What gives you or your sister the right to grossly break the law, as for *your* attitude if you post a "my sister is a law-breaking idiot who got caught going 27mph over the speed limit, it is so unfair, how do I help her weazle out of facing up to the consequences of her actions" you have to expect a few folks will consider that you are condoning breaking the law and comment on the foolishness of speeding.

Clearly most reasonable and informed people would agree that the Constitution was intended to provide guidelines and allow for future change.  No argument there, never has been (from me).  However, my response was taken out of context...rather than commenting on the fitness of the Constitution, note how it is ridiculous to claim that speed limits on interstate highways COULD BE constitutional or not.  Any argument there must be based on an interpretation, and suggesting that it is a clear-cut legal issue was misleading.  Yay, threaded discourse on the internet.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert 

Plus, any state's randomly lowering of the speed limit on interstate highway is unconstitutional.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega 

There was no interstate system when the constitution was framed.  Go ahead, show us where the founding fathers wrote about interstate highway speed in an automobile...

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik 
The Constitution and laws were designed to mutate and change over time. They knew that 200+ years ago and made it so the system would change over time. It does so reasonably well. The founders knew that the times would change, so they created a living document that allowed it. You can go down the road of several legal philosophies from here, but the language is quite plain in leaving things open for modification and change. They knew what they were doing.
 

super short answer:
 

1. Constitution vests power to regular interstate commerce with the Congress

2. Congress has exclusive right to control interstate commerce

3. States may not enact laws that would unduly burden interstate commerce (the negation of the commerce clause)

4. States randomly lowing speed limit on interstate to, let's say, 50mph when all surrounding states are at 70mph.

5. Trucks now have to take 40% longer time to cross the state, or would have to go around the state.

6. State law unduly burdened interstate commerce without a compelling justification

7. State law is unconstitutional.

I thought this is pretty well settled. I could be wrong though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega 

Clearly most reasonable and informed people would agree that the Constitution was intended to provide guidelines and allow for future change.  No argument there, never has been (from me).  However, my response was taken out of context...rather than commenting on the fitness of the Constitution, note how it is ridiculous to claim that speed limits on interstate highways COULD BE constitutional or not.  Any argument there must be based on an interpretation, and suggesting that it is a clear-cut legal issue was misleading.  Yay, threaded discourse on the internet.
 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert 

What if the law says: If you drive 27mph over the speed limit, you deemed, automatically, to have intended to cause injury to other drivers and bystanders.  Let's throw in a 6-month jail time.

 

Do you think that's ok? 

 

What would our founding fathers say?
 

 

Nothing in that about intent !

The state has the right to impose its own penalties ?

Whether I, individually,  think that is a fair penalty is not an issue that will move state law makers on way or another. For the record I regard time in the pokey where no injury has occured as inappropriate and wasteful of resources, I would support loss of driving priveliges and a fucking big fine as sufficient, but I do not make the laws...(looks like the swear filter is off)

Personally, I think the death penalty is an apalling, brutal, inhumane penalty, however if I willfully murder someone in one of the states that has the death penalty I have to expect to be put to death.

Strict liability, punishable for up to 1 yr in "pound-your-ass prison" for doing 20 over? (I am loving the swear filter, as you can see ;)

I can understanding strict liability for having sex with a 12yr old, but this is quite insane.

Maybe the legislatures have more knowledge of the dire consequences of traffic fatalities than you do chesebert.  It is very much my experience that people who have never been involved or touched by a fatal road accident have different views from those who have.

Your guessing what the founding fathers would have to say is interesting. Since they wanted the right to bear arms with the knowledge of increased deaths by accident, suicide and in the commission of crime that brings, maybe they do want people to speed and cause more deaths.

In the UK we have significantly fewer deaths by firearms and road accidents than the US. Looks like our 'founding fathers' got it right and yours did not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man 

.

 

In the UK we have significantly fewer deaths by firearms and road accidents than the US. Looks like our 'founding fathers' got it right and yours did not.

Perfectly true , more to the point it is **less deaths per capita** for road accidents. However, for firearms you need to take into account 1,  that the UK has a much smaller population and 2, what is the gun ownership per capita in the UK, without adjusting for those numbers the comparisons cannot be reliable, NB I am not supporting gun ownership, far from it but to make accurate comparisons you need all the facts... I'll research that question.

Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated): 

So in England where gun ownership is rare and difficult therre are 1/27th of the number of gun deaths per capita compared to the USA where gun ownership is common and easy, Scotland is even more impressive. but of course this is not a causal link

Quote:

Originally Posted by RYCeT 

It's nice to know the old timers still giving a useful advice while the new one post from their ##$. It was on July 4th weekend, 4 lane highway, at noon, driving a civic. Stupid - Yes, Dangerous - you've got to be kidding me.

In Australia a speed of 18mph/30kmh over the speed limit is instant loss of license plus a big fine.It sure makes you think before doing it.

Exact penalty is::

RYCeT.

Too bad. She did wrong thing in wrong place.

Speeding is something you shouldn't do. Speeding in northern VA, especially in fairfax county and shennadoah county while holiday weekend is not exactly what I would do. Fairfax county has full of undercover cops, most of them are authoritative as hell, and they won't give you a damn about anything. I-395 to DC both sides and I-95 northbound to Baltimore near Van Dorn st to Telegraph road are the prime spots for those traffic cops.

If she has to go trial, it must be held either at alexandria court or at fairfax city court. If it is alexandria court, I suggest that she contact a local lawyer and at least listen what he/she has to say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik 

Oh heck, $130 is pretty damned reasonable compared to California's fines. I know someone who was popped by a red light camera here and the fine was close to $500. With traffic school, she forked out around $700. Congrats to you sister for resolving this!

You appear to have forgotten the $300 for attorney + court fee.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RYCeT 

Hi guys, an update for this thread:

After looking for attorney to handle the case, we found the quote was too high for us. So we decided to go to the court and retained lawyer on the appeal if the first hearing does not satisfy us. However, 30 minutes prior the court hearing, my sister in law was able to retain a lawyer in much less attorney fee (around $300) and the attorney able to drop the reckless driving charge to minor traffic violation ($130 fine + court fee) She did bring his clean driving record from PA DMV. It's still the most expensive speeding fine among my family but considering the risk she faced on reckless driving charge, we are pretty happy with the result.

Wow, "he is more than a lawyer, he is a human being."

love the quote from a commercial of a PI firm in MI.