Posted on 05/07/2008 2:01:31 PM PDT by Sopater
ELLICOTT CITY, Md. — The Howard County State's Attorney's Office says a driver who struck and killed a county police officer last year has paid her traffic fines.
Prosecutors say Stephanie Grissom of Columbia paid $310 in fines for speeding and negligent driving. She also received three points on her driving record.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
And you believe that those percentages are the most important yardstick of measurement with respect to this issue? You should really re-read what you posted and ask yourself why you think this is important.
Whether the speed limit is an arbitrary number set to generate revenue or not, the woman exceeded the posted speed limit and an officer lost his life because of her decision and poor driving. Arguing that the posted speed limit is for revenue generation has no bearing on the events in this case. If you choose to ignore the posted speed limit (whether you like that posted limit or not) and are involved in a traffic accident due to excessive speed, then you will need to be prepared to accept the consequences. IMHO, the woman got off way too light.
Children’s toys are know to go out into residential streets on a regular basis in our neighborhood. If some fool is exceeding the speed limit and has an accident when a ball or other such toy goes into the roadway, that’s on them. There will be no sympathy from my neighbors or our local LE for the moron who can’t abide by the posted speed limit on a residential street. I’m not worried in the least.
I beg to differ with you. Having taken a course in CA Motor Vehicle Codes, I know that a violation of a vehicle code is a "crime". Perhaps not at the same level of, say, burglary, but it is still considered a crime. When an officer writes you a ticket (in CA at least) it is considered to be an arrest warrant, but in most cases the person is released ORO after signing the ticket as an indiction that they promise to appear in court. Try not signing that ticket and see what happens. With respect to this case, the woman violated the vehicle code, and when a duly sworn officer attempted to stop her, he was struck and killed. That means IMHO, that she committed manslaughter. Were this to have happen somewhere else (CA for example) she would not have received just a $310 fine.
do you throw the ball at them?
OK, done that.
Now what?
"Individual's" should be "Individuals'", as both the motorist's and the officer's choices played a role in the events. It is the tradeoff between the two roles that likely resulted in the no-bill from the grand jury.
“Whether the speed limit is an arbitrary number set to generate revenue or not, the woman exceeded the posted speed limit and an officer lost his life because of her decision and poor driving.”
No, that's not true. The officer lost his life because he stepped out into traffic speeding by at roughly 70 mph. Not a terribly safe thing to do. At least in terms of legal accountability, a grand jury cleared this woman of responsibility of the officer's death.
“If you choose to ignore the posted speed limit (whether you like that posted limit or not) and are involved in a traffic accident due to excessive speed, then you will need to be prepared to accept the consequences.”
The consequences, in this case, were appropriate and proportionate. I don't know whether you realize it or not, but in Maryland, 16 mph over the speed limit isn't even considered a major speeding offense. 1 - 9 mph over the limit is punished by one point on one's license. 10+ mph over the limit is punished by two points on one's license. 30+ mph over the limit where the speed limit is less than 65 mph brings a five point penalty, and 20+ mph over the limit where the speed limit is 65 mph (the artificially and arbitrarily defined upper speed limit in Maryland) brings five points, as well.
Reckless driving brings six points.
Thus, by the STATE'S definition, driving at 71 mph in a 55 mph is a relatively minor traffic infraction.
“MHO, the woman got off way too light.”
It seems that you're the one not entirely prepared to deal with the ACTUAL consequences of this case - that the woman was NOT prosecuted for a felony, that a grand jury did NOT consider her actions even close enough to felonious to warrant the finding of probably cause required to prosecute her, and that her punishment amounted to a $310 fine and likely a couple of points on her license.
I'm fully prepared to accept that as the consequences of this woman's speeding. What about you?
sitetest
Not hardly. That would be against the law.
then I don’t get it? What’s the rubber ball for? Sorry I’m lost. I got a road by my house that speeders hit every day. Stop sign runners as well, it’s horrible. I’ve put cones out. Those stupid kids at play signs...etc but no help. The cops come once every 10 months when the neighborhood complains but nothing.
On a highway posted for 55 mph, traffic is speeding by at 70+ mph with a know traffic stop at that location and you want to blame the officers who are there to slow down the speeders. Where's does the responsibility for those driving on that roadway lie? If I see up ahead of me that there are highway patrolmen stopping traffic for speeding, I'm going to drive accordingly, aren't you?
There are many children who play in our neighborhood. They have various toys, like rubber balls, that often go rolling into the street. A neighbor friend of mine and I have discovered that speeding vehicles tend to hit their brakes when a child’s toy goes rolling into the street in front of them.
In similar cases of this sort in other states the outcome has been different. In CA drivers who are driving above the posted speed limit who then are involved in such an incident are held to a higher standard than what they apparently do where this incident took place. Simply because this one case fell out as it did does not mean that the outcome was appropriate.
Not only do I not deny the officer bears responsibility for his part in this case, but I’ve stated that in earlier posts. In reading the details of this case it is my understanding that the process these officers used in stopping speed violators involved a front vehicle who tagged vehicles with radar and then radioed the discriptions of those vehicles to officers down the road who waved the vehicles to a stop while standing on the side of the road. Why they did not use vehicles to stop the speed violators I can’t say. IMHO this tactic was a disaster waiting to happen. But, still, any driver who fails to notice such activity taking place ahead of them and strikes and kills one of those officers is, in my judgement, guilty of more than a simple speeding infraction.
“On a highway posted for 55 mph, traffic is speeding by at 70+ mph with a know traffic stop at that location and you want to blame the officers who are there to slow down the speeders.”
1. The police don't always set up speed traps at that location. In fact, in all the years I've driven through that area, I've only seen them a handful of times. I might well forget the next time I'm out there.
2. Stepping out into 70 mph traffic is likely to get you killed, whether or not you have on a uniform.
3. Depending on the time of day and circumstances, it might be difficult, even dangerous, to drive 55 mph on that stretch of road, as one would not be keeping up with the flow of traffic, and would be creating a serious speed differential between oneself and other drivers. Large speed differentials are more dangerous than driving 70 mph on a road designed for cars to drive 70 mph.
4. In that most cars were that day in that place likely traveling well in excess of the posted speed limit of 55 mph, and thus, likely overall were traveling reasonably safely, left unmolested, it is likely the officer who created the primary hazard that day by stepping out into the roadway. It's a damned shame that his jackass superiors saw fit to order him to commit such a dangerous action. The state of Maryland has now drastically modified its policies on "step-outs." I'm sure some of my tax money will be used to pay his family for the stupidity and pure greed of his superiors, right up to our stupid, greedy governor.
5. One might argue that perhaps all the drivers together had some group blame to share for creating an environment where to keep up with traffic, one had to drive significantly in excess of the (arbitrarily set too low) speed limit.
6. However, as one who has studied human factors engineering, and actually worked along folks who'd done traffic engineering, I know that drivers’ behaviors are significantly shaped by the design parameters of the road on which they're driving. If the state of Maryland actually wanted folks to drive 55 mph on that stretch of road, there are road parameters that they could change that would generally cause the average speed to decline. Subtantially.
But, of course, that would reduce the revenue the state garners from “enforcement.”
So, you didn't answer - do you fully accept the consequences incurred by this woman for driving 71 mph on that stretch of road?
sitetest
If the police car was marked as such and not appearing to be a civilian vehicle, you are correct. Common sense would indicate that if you were going 16 mph above the posted speed and saw a police car, you slow down, and take your chances of either bring pulled over or not.
thanks, I’ll try that then. :-)
Since I can only give my opinion, it would not matter whether I "accept the consequences" this woman incurred. My opinion is that she got off too light. But, my opinion hardly matters, now does it?
The problem with common sense is that it is not all that common. With respect to driving, anyone driving on the road has the responsiblity to be alert to potential hazards, which does not just mean vehicles or pedestrians that are near you, but also down the road. And, the faster you are traveling, the farther down the road you should be looking for hazards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.