3 Fix-it Tickets at Once

[RM7]

Originally Posted by FC

I think it's one of those cases of calling too much attention.

Yep, the straw that broke the camel's back was probably the tinted license plate cover. That's basically asking to be pulled over.

[EBM4]

Originally Posted by shoei

Not sure I agree with this... What does a drunk driver's husband being a cop have to do with this story? Like the husband being a cop automatically requires you to be an upstanding citizen...

Also, it took a drunk driver to plow into a parked car on the side of the road... While you deem it unsafe, there's a shoulder on the side of the road for a reason, where it leaves ample room for a non visually impaired person (and by visually impaired I mean incapacitated person) to avoid with ease. If we want to use your story for example, the entire story could've been avoided if your windows weren't tinted... If your pull over caused a 10 car pile up on the freeway - hate to break it to you but it's not the officer's fault... If you hadn't tinted your windows, you wouldn't be on the side of the road where a drunk driver didn't swerve to avoid you and ended up causing a pile up...

With that said, I don't love it but I have no one to blame but myself if I get pulled over for tints / no front plates / speeding / driving in the car pool lane when I'm the only occupant and anything of the sort...

I think your missing the point, fix it tickets are a part of pay to play period. Are front plate laws or others frivolous yes! Is it worth pulling somone over on a freeway where the speed limit is 65mph plus just for a frivolous ticket that does not jeopardize the safety of the public NO! Leave that to the thousands of City Cops. The point of the drunk driver is there is no real safe time to pull someone over on a freeway, anything can happen at anytime (a cop being her husband was simplify additional information).

[RandyC54]

Clan, I have to say, I give you huge respect for exposing yourself as a cop on this thread. Props for that. I know you have a tough job, thanks mostly to laws you don't write and idiots and assholes behind the wheel.

I've talked my way out of every ticket I can think of, going back at least 10 years. If you show cops respect and common courtesy, they will give it back in most cases. That's for local cops anyway, VA state troopers seem to work in a culture where they really seem to despise the public, and are generally just robots when on duty. That seems to come from the rules of engagement they are working under from management. Like I said previously, they will lock you up for driving 86mph!! I know a guy that got 30 days for doing 105 on a deserted interstate with a posted limit of 70!!! 30 DAYS, and impounded car!!!

[RABAUKE]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

The only risk you run about continuing to disregard the CVC 5200(a), etc. citations that you received is that we can see the history, and next time the officer will/may choose not to mark any of them correctable. You will then be required to just pay the full fine rather than the correctable fee. It's your choice to roll the dice.


P.S. FWIW, I don't run a front plate either, and I only write it if the registered owner of the vehicle is giving me attitude.

As a former enforcer of the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, i'd concur with that. Front plate tickets are often a form of attitude adjustment. Having said that, some officers get shall we say hard on's for certain offences such as tinted windows, plate covers and no front marker.

[BoxKing]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

This is a gross exaggeration (..and laughable) to be honest. EVERYBODY speeds, so it would be fairly easy to be pedantic about posted limits (..and other minor infractions such as following too closely, not signaling before changing lanes, etc.), and cite people all day long. Most officers don't want that much paper, so they aren't generally going to write a whole bunch of tickets (...the exception being new officers who are excited and eager or a specified focus on a particular type of violation; C-Watch/graveyard shifts is/are almost always narrowly focused on DUI enforcement with the CHP), and with regards to the CHP, if an officer is taking T/C's all day long, that officer won't want the additional citation paper on top of having to investigate crashes and write the subsequent reports. It's very time consuming.

Laughable... you use this term too loosely from what I have read. Revenue no matter how it is brought in by law enforcement is monitored, so if there had/is a dramatic drop to one of these streams of cash flow, then someone is out there looking to make changes, or even worse, looking to point the finger at something/someone else. Now mind you I would say that a majority of law enforcement should be focused on DUI, and "reckless" driving, which are real hazards of day-2-day drivers who comply to the guidelines. As for being cited for other infractions non-moving related... well you run the risk of getting cited for them, and these are usually visual mods to appeal to the owners tastes and how they want to personalize there vehicle.

Im not going to get into any debate, bc the only real thing thats laughable are those drivers that feel they are entitled to do as they wish to their cars (or even drive) without penalty when doing something that is non-conforming to the law.

ps. My comments were not pulled from think air, and I cited what was written in an article covered nationally - with the primary there in CA.
Your reply: "Lets see this so called article you speak of"
My reply:

[Carl L]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

There are ride height requirements (...although it is rare for an officer to actually measure your vehicle and write you a citation over ride height).


.

Do these apply to "too high" as well. I drive a 1-ton 4x4 diesel pickup yet when I'm sat at a light the bumpers of some lifted pickup trucks are close to my shoulder level. I would think they are a far greater safety hazard than cars that are too low.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by BoxKing

Laughable... you use this term too loosely from what I have read. Revenue no matter how it is brought in by law enforcement is monitored, so if there had/is a dramatic drop to one of these streams of cash flow, then someone is out there looking to make changes, or even worse, looking to point the finger at something/someone else. Now mind you I would say that a majority of law enforcement should be focused on DUI, and "reckless" driving, which are real hazards of day-2-day drivers who comply to the guidelines. As for being cited for other infractions non-moving related... well you run the risk of getting cited for them, and these are usually visual mods to appeal to the owners tastes and how they want to personalize there vehicle.

Im not going to get into any debate, bc the only real thing thats laughable are those drivers that feel they are entitled to do as they wish to their cars (or even drive) without penalty when doing something that is non-conforming to the law.

ps. My comments were not pulled from think air, and I cited what was written in an article covered nationally - with the primary there in CA.
Your reply: "Lets see this so called article you speak of"
My reply:

You paint with too broad a brush. Look, citation fines are revenue, just like victim restitution fines, weed abatement fines (....e.g...fines for having an unkempt front yard), etc. There's a punitive dollar amount assigned/attached to just about every type of broken law however frivolous that written law may be. Why you guys seem to focus so much on vehicle fines (...and tend to funnel law enforcement away from focusing on them) is beyond me. While important, DUI/reckless driving enforcement aren't the end all, be all of law enforcement. Like I stated in an earlier post, minor traffic violations OFTEN lead to major apprehensions of criminals. There IS a rhyme and reason to it regardless of whether or not you/others agree with it. I don't think you are in a position to tell me what the "real" hazards of day-to-day driving are. I don't intend that to come across antagonistic in any way, shape or form, but it is the truth. You don't know how many traffic collisions any particular station handles per day/month. You don't know about causality (..aka..PCF, or Primary Collision Factors), nor do you have any idea about the additional repercussions of those accidents (..i.e...injuries or death to innocent parties, property damage, etc.). My main purpose in replying to some of the comments is to dispel any perceptions that aren't legitimate, and confirm others. Granted, there are always variances in what officers do from other departments and that patrol other areas (...we are dealing with people here....and people are organic), so take what I say with a few grains of salt.


As for the article, I'm not too concerned with what an article says. It doesn't mirror what I experience, so I give little credence/weight to it.

Originally Posted by Carl L

Do these apply to "too high" as well. I drive a 1-ton 4x4 diesel pickup yet when I'm sat at a light the bumpers of some lifted pickup trucks are close to my shoulder level. I would think they are a far greater safety hazard than cars that are too low.

That's a good question. Let me check into that.

[chill82]

similar experience's & also live in Bay Area, but CHP actually are nicer than local in our area - so the warning $50-ish penalty (hopefully not per infraction - if so take it to Superior to get reduced - be nice to the ladies @ counter)

When I got the CHP warning's, I explained reasoning for tint which is more than aesthetics ims & I did ask officer if I paid the full $150 & keep it on would there be a record of it - kept it for 10+ yrs - 1 CHP stop w/ warning due to expired tags but until a yr or so ago then SC officers weren't having it - 3x's pull over LP, tint & suspicious car

undecided w/ current f10 to tint, LP delete etc. due to commute & past experiences

[bmrwrld]

Originally Posted by m4recruiter

Before I begin let me just say, I know the law. The California Vehicle Code is clear, and I was in the wrong. That said, I want to: 1) share my experience, 2) vent a little, and 3) ask a few questions.

My Experience

For those familiar with the Bay Area, I was driving Northbound on I880 and merging to the right, preparing to exit at 238 Eastbound in San Lorenzo. As I changed lanes, I noticed a CHP cruiser in my rearview mirror with red light on, so I continued signaling and pulled safely to the shoulder. The shoulder was quite wide, so I was approximately twenty feet from the roadway. Traffic was fairly heavy in the area - stop and go, but not a complete standstill. I had my wife as front passenger and 10 year old son in the back.

The first thing I did was turn off the Escort 9500ci, and roll down both front windows. I then placed both hands on the steering wheel so the Officer could approach from either side. He approached from the right-side (passenger).

The Officer informed me that the reason he pulled me over is because I have a plastic cover on my license plate. I acknowledged it and played dumb that I didn't know it was illegal - I told him I would remove it since he informed me to this. The cover is actually smoke-tinted. He then stepped back and looked the car up and down, and front to back, leaning from one side to the other looking at my wheels (which are stock). Then he told me to roll-up one of my windows. I rolled up the driver side (since he was on the passenger side). He then proceeded to tell me I could not have tint on my front windows. My response was simply, "Ok." Then he stepped back again, and walked around the back of the car, and up the driver's side, often bending down to look around my wheels again, and to the front. He came back by the passenger side and told me he would be right back. I was also certain he saw I have no front plate.

Upon his return, he gave me a citation for 1) rear plate cover, 2) window tint, and 3) missing front plate.

Venting

As I stated, I get it - I'm wrong here. I think if I had not had the rear cover, everything would have been fine. There was a lot of traffic and I made a safe lane change. My wife thought he was a rookie and writing his first citation on his own. I think what is most upsetting about this was the way he scanned my car for everything he could find. Walking around and asking me to roll-up the windows did not sit well with me. I'm getting over it - after all, he was doing his job. People in the Bay Area can sleep easier at night knowing Officer Dent is on the job! Ok, venting done (this is more tongue-in-cheek than anything)

Questions

Front Plate - Are there any specific tow-hook license plate holders that are recommended? Any to avoid?

Rear Plate - I will remove the plastic cover - lesson learned here.

Tint - I am planning to leave the tint. Does anyone know or have experience with multi-infraction tickets? Is it possible to correct 2 out of 3 and get just the 2 signed off? I understand there will likely be a fine for the third.

Thank you for reading!

Sounds like some rookie must have went home happy, he really got you. Wooooo Hooooo!

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by RABAUKE

As a former enforcer of the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, i'd concur with that. Front plate tickets are often a form of attitude adjustment. Having said that, some officers get shall we say hard on's for certain offences such as tinted windows, plate covers and no front marker.

Indeed. I know tint is a big one for me simply due to officer safety (...that, and following too closely).

[Gamb1t]

I've always been curious why some jurisdictions mandate front licence plate and some don't.

[f80er]

Originally Posted by Gamb1t

I've always been curious why some jurisdictions mandate front licence plate and some don't.

Its so they can generate revenue from the people who don't run them under (citations, tolls, etc..) the guise that it "makes cops jobs easier."

Money grab plain and simple.

[cruisingdownthestreet]

are there front bumper license plate hole covers if i want to use the tow hook? i can't find them or i don't know what to call them on ebay... does it look tacky with 4 holes plugged up?

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Gamb1t

I've always been curious why some jurisdictions mandate front licence plate and some don't.

Originally Posted by f80er

Its so they can generate revenue from the people who don't run them under (citations, tolls, etc..) the guise that it "makes cops jobs easier."

Money grab plain and simple.

I agree with it being a money grab for the most part. Red light camera implementation, toll cameras, traffic cameras, etc. all benefit.

[FaRKle!]

Originally Posted by EBM4

On my end I have never been let go for a ticket, 75% of which according to the letter of the law I was in he wrong. The 25% (3 tickets) I was pulled over 1 time on 580 in my M6 to give a slew of fixit tickets and to ask me if I really owned the car (apparently young minorities can't afford M6's) 2nd ticket I was driving my Nissan Titan going the speed limit and the officer decided I was going to be pulled over and ticketed and then failed to show to court. and the 3rd time was on 880 while In the slow lane behind a group of cars exiting Alvarado Niles headed south bound was driving 60 mph and I knew the CHP patrol car was in the fast lane and passing me until he slowed down and pulled me over my wife and 2 year old were in the car I was driving a Blk/Blk 750i sport package just bought the car and he pulled me stating I was speeding and then went on to question if I owned the vehicle (again I don't understand why CHP thinks I can't afford a BMW) he asked 3 times then reached through the passenger window and tore the registration off the window. This went back on forth for a few minutes I finally just told him to give me the ticket and I will see him in court.

I show up in court and the cop runs down the ticket and says flat out lies according to him I was pulling on the freeway from the exit prior to Alvarado Niles with two young males in the car at a high rate of speed. Really I was in the car with my wife and 2 year old, he flat out lied to the judge. I went on to call him a lier in court and the judge asked if I have a way to prove who was in the car and I said of course my wife was in the car, but she would not grant me an extension to another court date to bring my wife in to court. She stated that I should have brought her with me in the first place. I said how was I to know the CHP officers was going to lie under oath.

Bottom line is some cops are Pricks (despite our fellow member who is a cop stating the use of the word is wrong) but most cops are not. In OP's case and mine in my M6 it is simply unsafe to be pulling people over on a Bay Area freeway just to give fix it tickets (or any freeway for that matter). The officers that are doing this have a disregard for their own safety and the safety of the car they are pulling over period. Either life is not worth the revenue from fixit tickets, especially cops like the one who pulled me over (M6 time) and pulled me out of the car on the side of 580 to have me pop my hood and look under the car etc. A driver not paying attention could easily have plowed into us like the family that was hit along 680 near Walnut Creek recently two kids died when the mothers car broke down on the freeway. A drunk driver plowed into them in the middle of the day and the drink drivers husbaind was a cop also.

That's my 2 cents.

Sounds like you need a dash cam. Would've paid itself over plenty from the sound of your experiences.

Originally Posted by EBM4

I think your missing the point, fix it tickets are a part of pay to play period. Are front plate laws or others frivolous yes! Is it worth pulling somone over on a freeway where the speed limit is 65mph plus just for a frivolous ticket that does not jeopardize the safety of the public NO! Leave that to the thousands of City Cops. The point of the drunk driver is there is no real safe time to pull someone over on a freeway, anything can happen at anytime (a cop being her husband was simplify additional information).

City cops don't care since the city gets hardly any money from the ticket.

[whats77inaname]

For those of you in Minnesota, you should buy this guy a beer:
https://www.sayanythingblog.com/entr...license-plate/

There's really a simple solution for all of this front license plate stuff: a few years ago, I read an article about legislation that was being presented in some state (can't remember which now) that would allow those *not* wanting to run a front plate to pay an extra fee when registering their vehicle yearly (somewhere in the $50-$100 range) and they would receive a different colored registration sticker which would signal to LEOs that this vehicle didn't have to have a front plate. Most car guys would happily pay that fee, the states would have another source of revenue, and everyone would be happy. I'll have to do some digging to find that information again.

But yeah....simple problem, simple solution.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by FaRKle!

City cops don't care since the city gets hardly any money from the ticket.

Correct. Much of the revenue is diverted into the state's general fund, which pays salaries for state employees, infrastructure repairs, etc.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by whats77inaname

For those of you in Minnesota, you should buy this guy a beer:
https://www.sayanythingblog.com/entr...license-plate/

There's really a simple solution for all of this front license plate stuff: a few years ago, I read an article about legislation that was being presented in some state (can't remember which now) that would allow those *not* wanting to run a front plate to pay an extra fee when registering their vehicle yearly (somewhere in the $50-$100 range) and they would receive a different colored registration sticker which would signal to LEOs that this vehicle didn't have to have a front plate. Most car guys would happily pay that fee, the states would have another source of revenue, and everyone would be happy. I'll have to do some digging to find that information again.

But yeah....simple problem, simple solution.

That would be a well implemented system.

[Red Bread]

Never ran a front plate in CA, and haven't in TX either. However when I first moved here, got a ticket for no front plate and had to submit a picture of the car with the plate mounted. Ran out with the plate and some double sided tape, took a picture and pulled it right back off. Saved $150.

[eluded]

Bummer. The tinted license plate cover will get you every time. Everything after that are just bonus points. Next time it happens, there will be multipliers

[nrgy]

What I don't get with CA drivers are the ones running with no plates at all. Everytime I travel there I always see bimmers and mercs etc running with black placeholders and no temp tag anywhere to be seen.

Can someone explain this? I'm all for rebeling against front plates but no plates, really?

[jkoral]

Originally Posted by cruisingdownthestreet

are there front bumper license plate hole covers if i want to use the tow hook? i can't find them or i don't know what to call them on ebay... does it look tacky with 4 holes plugged up?

https://www.bumperplugs.com/

They claim they are the "first and original". Although I'm curious what their "19-stage proprietary finishing process" entails.

No affiliation, but I recall reading good reviews for them (perfect color match, etc). $28 for a couple piece of plastic, if color match is perfect, is worth it. YMMV.