Whoa! Hold on here!

Here is some news that may interest some of you. You all know the story of how I watched and waited while they came to take away my friends..... and then it was too late...... The way it is now: The signs you see on the highways and streets all across the country are authorized by a federal document called the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Their size and placement as well as the text used on them and their color, are all governed by this document. To qualify for use of these signs, and to qualify to receive federal highway construction and repair funds, states must meet certain standards. You should be happy that they must meet these standards because they are intended to insure safety on the roads where the standards apply. First, and most important among these standards is the requirement that an engineering and traffic study must be performed prior to setting speed limits, which are then displayed on one type of sign listed in the MUTCD. No engineering and traffic study: no signs. No engineering and traffic study : no radar may be used to enforce the speed limit on the subject road, and if it is used, that practice constitutes a �speed trap� which is illegal. That seems clear, right? Now why would anyone want the powers that be to conduct an engineering and traffic study before the speed limits were set? Well, let�s examine what constitutes an engineering and traffic study: First, the study must be conducted by �traffic engineer�. The police, the judges, the prosecutors, the traffic violations bureau clerks, even attorneys are NOT traffic engineers. Second, the study must be conducted scientifically without bias, including measuring the traffic as it is flowing on a particular segment of roadway during various times of day and over a period of days as a representative sample. �Flowing� means just that: it must be observed as �free flowing�, unimpeded by bends and curves, or by jurisdictional cautions visible to the drivers such as speed limit signs, or other warning signs that would interupt the normal flow of traffic, and this includes the sight of police officers, or of road workers or traffic guidance personnel. In other word, as drivers would feel comfortable driving without thinking about all of those other concerns or being observed. Yes the engineers are supposed to be invisible while gathering data. The studies must also include a representative sample of past accidents and their perceived causes on that particular section of roadway, obviously over a period of time to include differing weather conditions for different times of the year. There are other criteria for performing these studies, but the point is they are to be performed under the direction of traffic engineers using sound engineering and scientifically based priciples, not emotional or arbitrary methods. Finally, the engineers are to determine the freely flowing speed traveled by the 85th percentile of drivers over the subject roadway. The definition of freely flowing is critical because it is based on the above mentioned conditions and perceptions of drivers on that particular roadway over vaious periods of the day. These studies take considerable time to conduct properly and are to be done at least within the last 2 years to be the valid basis for the speed limit you see on the signs. Then, unless unusually limiting circumstances exist unique to this roadway, the limit is to be set 5% above the 85th percentile speed. The intent is to let traffic flow as it feels comfortable and avoid congestion and frustration. As cars and roadway design improves and drivers become more mature and skilled, as well as educated about vehicle dynamics, speeds tend to increase. And as speeds increase, highway fatalities decrease. Don�t even think about it, because it has been proven time and again and documented in study after study all over the world. The autobahn is a case in point and also studies on the autostradas of Italy have also confirmed this fact. Well.....that is just a crock, right?? We all know that is not the way it is. And besides, who are we as mere citizens to use our reasoning powers and intelligence to quesion anyone in authority? But it is the law and the signs you see are not legal unless the above procedures are followed. And we should be glad it is the law, because unless the various jurisdictions follow the law they are powerless to enforce the speed limits that are set and claimed to be violated. Well, that is fine and dandy, but how are the cities supposed to enforce laws that are not routinely broken? And it follows that no citations = no revenue. Hey, that raises some eyebrows, especially since some cities are teetering on the brink of financial disaster. And what would happen to the insurance rates if the accident rate dropped? Uh oh!! Hold on here. Can�t have any of that, and besides, those studies or surveys or whatever those egghead scientists call them are costly to perform every two years. Right? Right. Next thing you know someone will want stricter licensing laws like they have in those furrin countries, right? Right. Can�t have any of that. Why the next thing you know someone might march into court and find out no studies were performed and the road where they were cited was a speed trap and get off because the police lacked jurisdiction. Whew! Definitely can�t have any of that. So............. The way it is going to be: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has been re-written to eliminate the requirement for any engineering and traffic studies to determine the safe 85th percentile of free flowing traffic on any roadway anywhere in America, land of the �free� (?) and home of the �brave�. Now the states and cities will be able to use whatever arbitrary speed limit sign and display whatever arbitrary speed on it they wish. No sound or safe engineering practice foundation whatsoever necessary. Just whatever they feel like setting. And no legal defense against it whatsoever. And never mind that it might produce more violations and more accidents. Cities need funds, period. And troopers need to eat, period. And better than donuts, that�s for sure. Enough of this legal mumbo jumbo and traffic court expenses and fair trial nonsense. Smokey says it is so and therefore it is so. After all, who knows more about traffic safety (or any other safety) than Smokey, right? Bettter believe that. Ya buy that? Ya feel like laying down for that? Well they do in England, and speed cameras are everywhere and coming to a city or town near you soon. And the vendors of those speed cameras process the violations and take a share of the revenue generated. Great game, eh? Ya gonna sit still for that? Well it is almost here. Brace yourselves because it is the truth and is only as far away as the adoption by the various cities and states of the NEW Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Now on the hopeful chance that you still have some American blood left in your veins and wish to challenge that �revision� in the law meant to leave you defenseless against a tyrannical wave of suppression of your common sense, you may either email me, Ron_H at [email removed] , or [email removed] and we will direct you to an effort to effectively challenge the legality and adviseability of adopting the latest Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. If we wait it will be a much higher hill to climb. A legal challenge to this newest scheme to rob you blindly is being formulated now and frankly we need your help. Or we need you to figure out a way to smuggle files into jails. Face it, you will be �caught� and �punished�. You will be rendered subservient. And traffic safety will have received a blow like we have never known. Just as personal safety has been jeopardized by rising crime rates by banning weapons, traffic safety will be further compromised by this ominous threat. Contact us now and we will tell how to help. Do it for your children.

Heck with the kids, I'm doing this for myself. Good to see another Sunnyvale person ranting about things I care about. Other than the damn egg throwing kids, it's a great city to live in.

About the Speed Camera's in London...people aren't laying down...Some people have taken the law into their own hands and started blowing them up with explosives...They also spray paint them bright pink or yellow. It has also come to the point that so many people have lost their license's who've had a clean one for more than 10 yeas the Members of Parliment are responding to their local populations request to stop this crazyness. Now the Chief of Police for London announced that their would be an end to the installtion of speed Cameras and that 75% of them will be removed. Leaving only the ones that really are in accident prone areas....

i found out first-hand that it doesn't always really matter what the MUTCD says anyway. i tried to use that to my defense in a speeding ticket case where the sign was a tiny little thing that didn't even say "speed limit" or "max speed" on it, just said "30 mph" in tiny little letters on a tiny little sign. according to the MUTCD, the sign wasn't legal. also, per state laws, the town speed limit wasn't posted at the town border like it has to be by law. you know what the judge said? "do you have anything worthwhile to say? this is a question of law which should be brought up to the appeals court." i thought judges enforce laws. i was proven wrong...

keep in mind I'm a non-practicing lawyer I have technical degrees and then an MBA/JD later on, but never even took or passed the bar in California, and I concentrated in transactional law, not litigation. That very huge grain of salt said, judges don't enforce laws, they interpret them. Legislature branch makes laws, Judicial interprets the laws, and federal/municipal agencies (FBI, Police, HUD, etc) enforces the laws. If I was your lawyer standing right there when the judge stated "do you have anything worthwhile to say? this is a question of law which should be brought up to the appeals court.", I would have asked for an automatic recusal given his admission that it is a matter of law but is not willing to hear the foundation of that case, and if denied, then ask for an appeal, and if denied, then official protest for the record. That sets up your appeals on pretty good solid ground. IMHO, this judge is why people get burned and then turn all cynical on the law when personally I believe it works in the great majority of the time as long as you're basically in agreement with the foundation of law which we currently have - e.g. the Magna Carta and an adversarial system of justice. Which some of course interpret as "the best money can buy justice". In some cases though, even if the sign is wrong, you can still easily be found guilty without much recourse. For example, in california there are intrinsic speed laws such as the Basic Speed Law of never exceeding a speed than is safe to do so, or 25 MPH in school zones. Even if a sign wasn't posted as required or in error, the Basic speed law could get you, or in the case of a non-posted school zone, the limit of 25 MPH is completely enforceable without a sign.

Teflon and Mozhacker: I think Mozhacker is right about the appeal. I have one case in California on appeal wherein the judge stated that it had always been that way, and though the law said it was wrong, why should it be any different now. Instant appeal filed. Another case of mine in Oregon, and the judge ignored the legal basis for declaring the practice of the police illegal and said it has always been that way. Another instant appeal. I think the judges realize that they have to drive the streets that we do and face the police as well as we do. That might influence their thinking. Anyway, the law is clear in both cases and appeal is the answer. If you can do some or most of the work the cost is not excessive. The cost of not appealing is tremendously more menacing in my opinion.