Got a ticket today...
#1
05-30-2004, 09:52 AM
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Denver, CO
Age: 47
Posts: 2,065
Rep Power: 106 
Got a ticket today...
Well if you want to call it that! Riding passenger in my Brothers mini van. How can you do that? Well I found a way Driving in the 2nd lane on the 405 Nicole going the pace of traffic under 65 gets pulled over. She said what is he pulling us over for. My first question to my younger brother? Is your registration up to date? he said yes.... Well the CHP officer came up the car and was a ***** from the begining he had a very high and mighty attitude. He told me that I was the cause for being pulled over having my safety belt under my arm buckled in was not the proper way to wear a belt. He left with my Lic, reg, and ins. Came back 5 min later with a written ticket he cited me for "27315 (C) v.c.- Passenger not wearing seat belt as Manufacturer intended worn." I spent a few minutes telling the office how this was a big waste of his time and mine. I explained to him that the way he wrote the ticket was saying I did not have a seat belt on and I was not going to sign the ticket written like that because I did have it on. If you know me or drive with me I ALWAYS make my passengers wear Seat belts and I do not feel comfortable in a seat without one. In his case his seat belts were not adjustable and I have a shorter torso so the nylon belt was cutting against my neck so. I tucked it under my arm.
So he tells me that he will not revise the ticket to state the seat belt was connect/worn but not per the DMV's mandatory method of wearing the belt. So I can either wait for a Sergeant to arrive who will tell me the same, sign now, or go to Jail. I said I will wait. So 15 minutes later another officer comes up they are in the back going back and forth lots of hand movement, shaking of the head etc. The new officer comes over and rattles off the same BS and what would you like to do. I said I am glad I have a Sergeant involved to witness what a waste of time this is. He says well I am not the sergeant I was just in the area and Officer so and so thought I might be able to shed some light. Which he did nothing for the situation.... I said I will pass and wait for your sergeant. So he goes back shaking his head... another 20 minutes rolls around I have my Mother, brother and Nicole in the car... My Mom and I see eye to eye my brother and Nicole say sign the freaking thing and lets go... I said I won't go to jail I just want to waste their time as they are wasting mine. He will look extremely stupid to drag a superior out to the site for something as insignificant as this.
So the Sergeant finally arrived... He has the stripes. He was actually not that bad of a guy. He said we only write these as they are written in the vehicle code. The officer that pulled you over can write this as he wishes. I can't tell him how to write a ticket. I am just advising you that if you want you may fight this ticket if you wish. He also had a nice Rolex glad to see we are paying these guys well! I said fair enough and signed. He told us to be careful pulling onto the freeway and he was sorry to inconvenience us. Also I asked to see the vehicle code and he said he did not have the time to show me. he said to look it up on my time. It was funny fiddle dee and fiddle dum were in the background fiddling with the book.
Anyway am I stubborn? YES It was a matter of principal, If you drove by you would have thought we were smuggling 100 Kilos of crack or something down those lines.
So he tells me that he will not revise the ticket to state the seat belt was connect/worn but not per the DMV's mandatory method of wearing the belt. So I can either wait for a Sergeant to arrive who will tell me the same, sign now, or go to Jail. I said I will wait. So 15 minutes later another officer comes up they are in the back going back and forth lots of hand movement, shaking of the head etc. The new officer comes over and rattles off the same BS and what would you like to do. I said I am glad I have a Sergeant involved to witness what a waste of time this is. He says well I am not the sergeant I was just in the area and Officer so and so thought I might be able to shed some light. Which he did nothing for the situation.... I said I will pass and wait for your sergeant. So he goes back shaking his head... another 20 minutes rolls around I have my Mother, brother and Nicole in the car... My Mom and I see eye to eye my brother and Nicole say sign the freaking thing and lets go... I said I won't go to jail I just want to waste their time as they are wasting mine. He will look extremely stupid to drag a superior out to the site for something as insignificant as this.
So the Sergeant finally arrived... He has the stripes. He was actually not that bad of a guy. He said we only write these as they are written in the vehicle code. The officer that pulled you over can write this as he wishes. I can't tell him how to write a ticket. I am just advising you that if you want you may fight this ticket if you wish. He also had a nice Rolex glad to see we are paying these guys well! I said fair enough and signed. He told us to be careful pulling onto the freeway and he was sorry to inconvenience us. Also I asked to see the vehicle code and he said he did not have the time to show me. he said to look it up on my time. It was funny fiddle dee and fiddle dum were in the background fiddling with the book.
Anyway am I stubborn? YES It was a matter of principal, If you drove by you would have thought we were smuggling 100 Kilos of crack or something down those lines.
Last edited by SANDOVAL; 05-30-2004 at 11:02 AM.
#2
05-30-2004, 10:02 AM
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Denver, CO
Age: 47
Posts: 2,065
Rep Power: 106
V.C.
Am I missing something?
27315. (a) The Legislature finds that a mandatory seatbelt law will contribute to reducing highway deaths and injuries by encouraging greater usage of existing manual seatbelts, that automatic crash protection systems which require no action by vehicle occupants offer the best hope of reducing deaths and injuries, and that encouraging the use of manual safety belts is only a partial remedy for addressing this major cause of death and injury. The Legislature declares that the enactment of this section is intended to be compatible with support for federal safety standards requiring automatic crash protection systems and should not be used in any manner to rescind federal requirements for installation of automatic restraints in new cars.
(b) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Motor Vehicle Safety Act.
(c) (1) As used in this section, "motor vehicle" means any passenger vehicle or any motortruck or truck tractor, but does not include a motorcycle.
(2) Until May 1, 2000, for purposes of this section, a "motor vehicle" also means any farm labor vehicle that was first issued an inspection certificate under Section 31401 on or after October 1, 1999.
(3) On and after May 1, 2000, for purposes of this section, a "motor vehicle" also means any farm labor vehicle, regardless of date of certification under Section 31401.
(d) (1) ( )1 A person may not operate a motor vehicle on a highway unless that person and all passengers 16 years of age or over are properly restrained by a safety belt. This paragraph does not apply to the operator of a taxicab, as defined in Section 27908, when the taxicab is driven on a city street and is engaged in the transportation of a fare-paying passenger. The safety belt requirement established by this paragraph is the minimum safety standard applicable to employees being transported in a motor vehicle. This paragraph does not preempt any more stringent or restrictive standards imposed by the Labor Code or any other state or federal regulation regarding the transportation of employees in a motor vehicle.
(2) The operator of a limousine for hire or the operator of an authorized emergency vehicle, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 165, ( )2 may not operate the limousine for hire or authorized emergency vehicle unless the operator and any passengers four years of age or over and weighing 40 pounds or more, in the front seat are properly restrained by a safety belt.
(3) The operator of a taxicab ( )2 may not operate the taxicab unless any passengers four years of age or over and weighing 40 pounds or more, in the front seat are properly restrained by a safety belt.
(e) ( )3 A person 16 years of age or over ( )2 may not be a passenger in a motor vehicle on a highway unless that person is properly restrained by a safety belt. This subdivision does not apply to a passenger in a sleeper berth, as defined in subdivision (v) of Section 1201 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations.
(f) Every owner of a motor vehicle, including every owner or operator of a taxicab, as defined in Section 27908, or a limousine for hire, operated on a highway shall maintain safety belts in good working order for the use of occupants of the vehicle. The safety belts shall conform to motor vehicle safety standards established by the United States Department of Transportation. This subdivision does not, however, require installation or maintenance of safety belts where not required by the laws of the United States applicable to the vehicle at the time of its initial sale.
(g) This section does not apply to a passenger or operator with a physically disabling condition or medical condition which would prevent appropriate restraint in a safety belt, if the condition is duly certified by a licensed physician and surgeon or by a licensed chiropractor who shall state the nature of the condition, as well as the reason the restraint is inappropriate. This section also does not apply to a public employee, when in an authorized emergency vehicle as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 165, or to any passenger in any seat behind the front seat of an authorized emergency vehicle as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 165 operated by the public employee, unless required by the agency employing the public employee.
(h) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) of Section 42001, any violation of subdivision (d), (e), or (f) is an infraction punishable by a fine ( )4 of not more than twenty dollars ($20) for a first offense, and a fine ( )4 of not more than fifty dollars ($50) for each subsequent offense. In lieu of the fine and any penalty assessment or court costs, the court, pursuant to Section 42005, may order that a person convicted of a first offense attend a school for traffic violators or a driving school in which the proper use of safety belts is demonstrated.
(i) ( )5 In a civil action, a violation of subdivision (d), (e), or (f) or information of a violation of subdivision (h) ( )2 does not establish negligence as a matter of law or negligence per se for comparative fault purposes, but negligence may be proven as a fact without regard to the violation.( )6
(j) If the United States Secretary of Transportation fails to adopt safety standards for manual safety belt systems by September 1, 1989, no motor vehicle manufactured after that date for sale or sold in this state shall be registered unless it contains a manual safety belt system which meets the performance standards applicable to automatic crash protection devices adopted by the Secretary of Transportation pursuant to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208 (49 C.F.R. 571.208) as in effect on January 1, 1985.( )7
(k) Each motor vehicle offered for original sale in this state which has been manufactured on or after September 1, 1989, shall comply with the automatic restraint requirements of Section S4.1.2.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208 (49 C.F.R. 571.208), as published in Volume 49 of the Federal Register, No. 138, page 29009. Any automobile manufacturer who sells or delivers a motor vehicle subject to the requirements of this subdivision, and fails to comply with this subdivision, shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500) for each sale or delivery of a noncomplying motor vehicle.( )8
(l) Compliance with subdivision ( )9 ( j) or (k) by a manufacturer shall be made by self-certification in the same manner as self-certification is accomplished under federal law.( )10
(m) This section does not apply to a person actually engaged in delivery of newspapers to customers along the person's route if the person is properly restrained by a safety belt prior to commencing and subsequent to completing delivery on the route.( )11
(n) This section does not apply to a person actually engaged in collection and delivery activities as a rural delivery carrier for the United States Postal Service if the person is properly restrained by a safety belt prior to stopping at the first box and subsequent to stopping at the last box on the route.( )12
(o) This section does not apply to a driver actually engaged in the collection of solid waste or recyclable materials along that driver's collection route if the driver is properly restrained by a safety belt prior to commencing and subsequent to completing the collection route.( )13
(p) Subdivisions (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) shall become inoperative immediately upon the date that the United States Secretary of Transportation, or his or her delegate, determines to rescind the portion of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208 (49 C.F.R. 571.208) which requires the installation of automatic restraints in new motor vehicles, except that those subdivisions shall not become inoperative if the secretary's decision to rescind that Standard No. 208 is not based, in any respect, on the enactment or continued operation of those subdivisions.
Amended Ch. 1101, Stats. 1994. Effective January 1, 1995.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 365, Stats. 1995. Effective January 1, 1996.
Amended Sec. 78, Ch. 1154, Stats. 1996. Effective September 30, 1996.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 153, Stats. 1997. Effective January 1, 1998.
Amended Sec. 67.5, Ch. 877, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999. Supersedes Ch. 471.
Amended Sec. 3, Ch. 557, Stats. 1999. Effective September 29, 1999.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 521, Stats. 2003. Effective January 1, 2004.
The 2003 amendment added the italicized material, and at the point(s) indicated, deleted the following:
"No person shall"
"shall"
"No"
", including all penalty assessments and court costs imposed on the convicted person,"
"For any violation of subdivision (d), (e), or (f), in addition to the fines provided for pursuant to subdivision (h) and the penalty assessments provided for pursuant to Section 1464 of the Penal Code, an additional penalty assessment of two dollars ($2) shall be levied for any first offense, and an additional penalty assessment of five dollars ($5) shall be levied for any subsequent offense.
All moneys collected pursuant to this subdivision shall be utilized in accordance with Section 1464 of the Penal Code.
"(j) If any"
"(k)"
"(l)"
"(m)"
"(k) or (l)"
"(n)"
"(o)"
"(p)"
"(q)"
Am I missing something?
27315. (a) The Legislature finds that a mandatory seatbelt law will contribute to reducing highway deaths and injuries by encouraging greater usage of existing manual seatbelts, that automatic crash protection systems which require no action by vehicle occupants offer the best hope of reducing deaths and injuries, and that encouraging the use of manual safety belts is only a partial remedy for addressing this major cause of death and injury. The Legislature declares that the enactment of this section is intended to be compatible with support for federal safety standards requiring automatic crash protection systems and should not be used in any manner to rescind federal requirements for installation of automatic restraints in new cars.
(b) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Motor Vehicle Safety Act.
(c) (1) As used in this section, "motor vehicle" means any passenger vehicle or any motortruck or truck tractor, but does not include a motorcycle.
(2) Until May 1, 2000, for purposes of this section, a "motor vehicle" also means any farm labor vehicle that was first issued an inspection certificate under Section 31401 on or after October 1, 1999.
(3) On and after May 1, 2000, for purposes of this section, a "motor vehicle" also means any farm labor vehicle, regardless of date of certification under Section 31401.
(d) (1) ( )1 A person may not operate a motor vehicle on a highway unless that person and all passengers 16 years of age or over are properly restrained by a safety belt. This paragraph does not apply to the operator of a taxicab, as defined in Section 27908, when the taxicab is driven on a city street and is engaged in the transportation of a fare-paying passenger. The safety belt requirement established by this paragraph is the minimum safety standard applicable to employees being transported in a motor vehicle. This paragraph does not preempt any more stringent or restrictive standards imposed by the Labor Code or any other state or federal regulation regarding the transportation of employees in a motor vehicle.
(2) The operator of a limousine for hire or the operator of an authorized emergency vehicle, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 165, ( )2 may not operate the limousine for hire or authorized emergency vehicle unless the operator and any passengers four years of age or over and weighing 40 pounds or more, in the front seat are properly restrained by a safety belt.
(3) The operator of a taxicab ( )2 may not operate the taxicab unless any passengers four years of age or over and weighing 40 pounds or more, in the front seat are properly restrained by a safety belt.
(e) ( )3 A person 16 years of age or over ( )2 may not be a passenger in a motor vehicle on a highway unless that person is properly restrained by a safety belt. This subdivision does not apply to a passenger in a sleeper berth, as defined in subdivision (v) of Section 1201 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations.
(f) Every owner of a motor vehicle, including every owner or operator of a taxicab, as defined in Section 27908, or a limousine for hire, operated on a highway shall maintain safety belts in good working order for the use of occupants of the vehicle. The safety belts shall conform to motor vehicle safety standards established by the United States Department of Transportation. This subdivision does not, however, require installation or maintenance of safety belts where not required by the laws of the United States applicable to the vehicle at the time of its initial sale.
(g) This section does not apply to a passenger or operator with a physically disabling condition or medical condition which would prevent appropriate restraint in a safety belt, if the condition is duly certified by a licensed physician and surgeon or by a licensed chiropractor who shall state the nature of the condition, as well as the reason the restraint is inappropriate. This section also does not apply to a public employee, when in an authorized emergency vehicle as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 165, or to any passenger in any seat behind the front seat of an authorized emergency vehicle as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 165 operated by the public employee, unless required by the agency employing the public employee.
(h) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) of Section 42001, any violation of subdivision (d), (e), or (f) is an infraction punishable by a fine ( )4 of not more than twenty dollars ($20) for a first offense, and a fine ( )4 of not more than fifty dollars ($50) for each subsequent offense. In lieu of the fine and any penalty assessment or court costs, the court, pursuant to Section 42005, may order that a person convicted of a first offense attend a school for traffic violators or a driving school in which the proper use of safety belts is demonstrated.
(i) ( )5 In a civil action, a violation of subdivision (d), (e), or (f) or information of a violation of subdivision (h) ( )2 does not establish negligence as a matter of law or negligence per se for comparative fault purposes, but negligence may be proven as a fact without regard to the violation.( )6
(j) If the United States Secretary of Transportation fails to adopt safety standards for manual safety belt systems by September 1, 1989, no motor vehicle manufactured after that date for sale or sold in this state shall be registered unless it contains a manual safety belt system which meets the performance standards applicable to automatic crash protection devices adopted by the Secretary of Transportation pursuant to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208 (49 C.F.R. 571.208) as in effect on January 1, 1985.( )7
(k) Each motor vehicle offered for original sale in this state which has been manufactured on or after September 1, 1989, shall comply with the automatic restraint requirements of Section S4.1.2.1 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208 (49 C.F.R. 571.208), as published in Volume 49 of the Federal Register, No. 138, page 29009. Any automobile manufacturer who sells or delivers a motor vehicle subject to the requirements of this subdivision, and fails to comply with this subdivision, shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500) for each sale or delivery of a noncomplying motor vehicle.( )8
(l) Compliance with subdivision ( )9 ( j) or (k) by a manufacturer shall be made by self-certification in the same manner as self-certification is accomplished under federal law.( )10
(m) This section does not apply to a person actually engaged in delivery of newspapers to customers along the person's route if the person is properly restrained by a safety belt prior to commencing and subsequent to completing delivery on the route.( )11
(n) This section does not apply to a person actually engaged in collection and delivery activities as a rural delivery carrier for the United States Postal Service if the person is properly restrained by a safety belt prior to stopping at the first box and subsequent to stopping at the last box on the route.( )12
(o) This section does not apply to a driver actually engaged in the collection of solid waste or recyclable materials along that driver's collection route if the driver is properly restrained by a safety belt prior to commencing and subsequent to completing the collection route.( )13
(p) Subdivisions (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) shall become inoperative immediately upon the date that the United States Secretary of Transportation, or his or her delegate, determines to rescind the portion of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 208 (49 C.F.R. 571.208) which requires the installation of automatic restraints in new motor vehicles, except that those subdivisions shall not become inoperative if the secretary's decision to rescind that Standard No. 208 is not based, in any respect, on the enactment or continued operation of those subdivisions.
Amended Ch. 1101, Stats. 1994. Effective January 1, 1995.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 365, Stats. 1995. Effective January 1, 1996.
Amended Sec. 78, Ch. 1154, Stats. 1996. Effective September 30, 1996.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 153, Stats. 1997. Effective January 1, 1998.
Amended Sec. 67.5, Ch. 877, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999. Supersedes Ch. 471.
Amended Sec. 3, Ch. 557, Stats. 1999. Effective September 29, 1999.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 521, Stats. 2003. Effective January 1, 2004.
The 2003 amendment added the italicized material, and at the point(s) indicated, deleted the following:
"No person shall"
"shall"
"No"
", including all penalty assessments and court costs imposed on the convicted person,"
"For any violation of subdivision (d), (e), or (f), in addition to the fines provided for pursuant to subdivision (h) and the penalty assessments provided for pursuant to Section 1464 of the Penal Code, an additional penalty assessment of two dollars ($2) shall be levied for any first offense, and an additional penalty assessment of five dollars ($5) shall be levied for any subsequent offense.
All moneys collected pursuant to this subdivision shall be utilized in accordance with Section 1464 of the Penal Code.
"(j) If any"
"(k)"
"(l)"
"(m)"
"(k) or (l)"
"(n)"
"(o)"
"(p)"
"(q)"
#4
05-30-2004, 11:02 AM
"(e) ( )3 A person 16 years of age or over ( )2 may not be a passenger in a motor vehicle on a highway unless that person is properly restrained by a safety belt."
Hopefully you don't know have three cop witnesses to show up and say you and your family was lying and you weren't wearing a belt at all. BTW, it's not much of a stretch to infer "properly retrained" is as intended by the manufacturer of the belt/car which probably isn't under your arm :-)
Hopefully you don't know have three cop witnesses to show up and say you and your family was lying and you weren't wearing a belt at all. BTW, it's not much of a stretch to infer "properly retrained" is as intended by the manufacturer of the belt/car which probably isn't under your arm :-)
#7
05-31-2004, 01:18 AM
What a crock. I'd never sign that, and I'd hire a lawyer, knowing I'd spend hundreds to drag this boneheaded officer into court.
What a shame they have to waste so much taxpayer money on needless crap like this. There had to be at least three Porsche owners speeding on the other side of the road.
What a shame they have to waste so much taxpayer money on needless crap like this. There had to be at least three Porsche owners speeding on the other side of the road.
Trending Topics
#8
05-31-2004, 02:08 AM
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Denver, CO
Age: 47
Posts: 2,065
Rep Power: 106
Ha ha that was my comment I told everyone in the car I was helping my fellow motorist by keeping these idiots off the road. It truly is a waste especially when the base Salary of a CHP officer is $75K a year a sergent can make twice that.
He should have showed me the proper way to wear it and why. Then he should have given me a warning. He was kind of shocked when I told him I did not like the way the ticket was written as it was not stating my seat belt was buckled. I think it probably makes him look foolish to bring out a peer and superior for something as meaningless as this.
He should have showed me the proper way to wear it and why. Then he should have given me a warning. He was kind of shocked when I told him I did not like the way the ticket was written as it was not stating my seat belt was buckled. I think it probably makes him look foolish to bring out a peer and superior for something as meaningless as this.
#9
05-31-2004, 03:50 AM
Sandoval - sorry about your ticket! In the end, you will spend a lot of time and frustration to reach one of two realistic results: your ticket withdrawn without a fine or your ticket will be confirmed.
I really can't see a scenario where the issuing officer(s) get into trouble, etc. You have a better change accomplishing that by calling their supervisor and lodging a complaint.
From a legal standpoint, I think you have a compelling case. It would be nice to get clarification from a court as to how the seat belt law applies. I'm sure a "traffic" attorney will give you some guidance; who knows, an attorney might take this case for you on the cheap if he/she sees an opportunity to clarify a law and make a name for his/herself.
Good luck either way.
-bobby g
I really can't see a scenario where the issuing officer(s) get into trouble, etc. You have a better change accomplishing that by calling their supervisor and lodging a complaint.
From a legal standpoint, I think you have a compelling case. It would be nice to get clarification from a court as to how the seat belt law applies. I'm sure a "traffic" attorney will give you some guidance; who knows, an attorney might take this case for you on the cheap if he/she sees an opportunity to clarify a law and make a name for his/herself.
Good luck either way.
-bobby g
#10
05-31-2004, 04:30 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 67
Rep Power: 24
I had a similiar citation two years ago ( I had a really bad sun burn) but the *** hole insisted and I also insisted that he wrote down that I was buckled or I would not sign & reluctantly he did, when he was leaving, I told him " T-h-a-n-kyou officer, I'll see you in court." But I never received my traffic court summon, I called, the clark of the court said they have no record of the citation, after further inquiry, she said, either the officer did not turn-in the citation or the case sergent dropped it. I think they'll drop your citation too bc I just don't see the judge will be happy to see craps like that. 
#11
05-31-2004, 09:52 AM
I fought a J-walking ticket out of principal and won. I went to court instead of my lawyer (he advised me against it- waste of time and money) but I was so mad at the way this officer treated me and my girl and I that I wanted to go to court and tell the storey in a serious manner but mocking him at the same time, so I did and it worked. Not only did I win but I had all the other cops (waiting for their cases) laughing at him. When he walked out of the courtroom he looked like a kid that lost his dog! Revenge can be oh so sweeeeet!
#12
05-31-2004, 09:53 AM
I fought a J-walking ticket out of principal and won. I went to court instead of my lawyer (he advised me against it- waste of time and money) but I was so mad at the way this officer treated me and my girl that I wanted to go to court and tell the story in a serious manner but mocking him at the same time, so I did and it worked. Not only did I win but I had all the other cops (waiting for their cases) laughing at him. When he walked out of the courtroom he looked like a kid that lost his dog! Revenge can be oh so sweeeeet!
#13
05-31-2004, 01:31 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: irvine, ca
Age: 59
Posts: 44
Rep Power: 22
couple of things
Eric..On Friday I was watching the news and the Headline YES the headline was that the cops will be Ticketing Seatbelt offenders the Memorial Day weekend..so there was a Seatbelt Drive going on.......
Interesting to know how our tax money is being wasted....while in east la gangs are getting out of control and stray bullets are taking the lives of innocent people,,,,and Arnie is cutting school and college budgets.......Traffic Police has 60 minutes to waste on someone not wearing a seat belt properly...
Good Job Eric..fight the Ticket
Interesting to know how our tax money is being wasted....while in east la gangs are getting out of control and stray bullets are taking the lives of innocent people,,,,and Arnie is cutting school and college budgets.......Traffic Police has 60 minutes to waste on someone not wearing a seat belt properly...
Good Job Eric..fight the Ticket
#15
06-02-2004, 04:54 AM
Sandoval, did you get the names of the second officer and the seargent?
I think you should sepoena both of them (and waste their time) when you fight this thing. They would be good witnesses that you were wearing your seatbelt.
I think you should sepoena both of them (and waste their time) when you fight this thing. They would be good witnesses that you were wearing your seatbelt.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
B8_RDC
Automotive Parts & Accessories For Sale/Wanted
1
09-22-2015 10:36 PM
