|ACT NOW …
||ASSEMBLY BILL A.B. 564 GUTS THE SPEED TRAP LAW … |
RAISES FINE INCOME AND INSURANCE PREMIUMS
Now is the time to STOP this outrageous attempt to make California Drivers wrong for the purposes of raising municipal revenues – with only a minimal effect, if at all, on safety.
You need to call your elected officials and tell them that this is a bad piece of legislation and serves no one except the free-spending municipalities.
ASSEMBLY BILL A.B. 564 …
“Amends the definition of a "local street or road," under the speed trap law, for the City of Pasadena, to mean a street or road is either included in the latest maps submitted to the federal highway Administration (FHWA) or is not wider than 40 feet, longer than one-half mile, or more than one lane in each direction.”
EXISTING LAW :
“1)Defines a local street or road, under the speed trap exemption, by the latest functional usage and federal-aid system maps submitted to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). When maps have not been submitted, local streets and roads are defined as those not wider than 40 feet, or longer than one-half mile, or with more than one lane in each direction.”
“2)Defines a speed trap as a particular section of highway measured and marked with boundaries to determine the speed of a vehicle by calculating the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.”
“3)Defines a speed trap as a particular section of a highway with a prima facie speed limit that is not justified by an engineering and traffic survey (ETS) conducted within five years from the time of an alleged violation and where enforcement involves the use of radar or other electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects.”
“4)Prohibits the use in court of evidence of the speed of a vehicle obtained on any highway segment meeting the definition of speed trap.”
“ 5)Authorizes local jurisdictions to establish speed limits according to the result of an ETS. An ETS gauges prevailing speeds along a given route, takes into account accident records, and highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver.”
“6)Provides for the establishment of prima facie speed limits (i.e., in specified increments) in certain areas where it is deemed necessary (i.e., near schools, in business districts or in residential districts) without the benefit of a traffic survey.”
Somebody is lying …
“FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown”
This is complete and utter nonsense. Common sense will tell you that eliminating restrictions on electronic traffic enforcement devices provides a revenue windfall to municipalities, the courts, driver’s education vendors, the makers of automated enforcement devices – and most of all, the insurance companies which raise your insurance premiums for a rather innocuous infraction.
Bottom line …
The sole purpose of this law is to weaken existing legislation for purposes of revenue generation and not safety. By not requiring traffic surveys and other prudent measures involving setting safe speeds, any municipality could create their own “block by block” speed traps at will and enforce them with electronic means.
This may be your last chance to curb the self-serving actions of a government out of fiscal control and searching about for any means possible for funding their special interest legislation. With the next campaign cycle rapidly approaching, these corrupt and complacent politicians need more campaign money – and the special interests and lobbyists representing municipalities, equipment vendors and insurance companies are willing to shovel it out – if it returns big bucks to them – THE PUBLIC BE DAMNED!
Contact your elected officials NOW!
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius