^there's no real way to scientifically determine that someone is weaving in and out of traffic.

it's a visual determination.

not saying i agree with the law (i don't really fucking care, really) but many traffic offenses can be described as visual estimations.

6/7/2010 8:11:44 PM

^what is this guy talking about?

it is pretty easy to accurately determine if someone is weaving through traffic

the same can't be said about judging speed

6/7/2010 9:30:21 PM

yes it can.

speed = distance/time.

6/7/2010 9:34:14 PM

so accurately judging speed is difficult for everyone except sarijoul, who was born with a built in measuring device/stop watch/calculator

[Edited on June 7, 2010 at 9:39 PM. Reason : .]

6/7/2010 9:38:39 PM

It is not necessary to pinpoint a precise speed to determine whether someone is speeding or not. This ^ is why ultimately this was a good ruling, because of stupid lawyering and twisting of the law so that common sense can not be applied. I'm not saying in every instance that someone can accurately asses speeding, but I also don't think that you need a radar gun every time either.

6/7/2010 11:01:48 PM

Quote :

"F = ma. The faster you go has a geometric increase on the amount of kinetic force you're pushing around. Stopping distance also increases geometrically. You have less time to react to things getting in front of you and greater physical resistance to the mechanisms that bring your car to a stop."

LOL, I'm well aware of how physics operate. Here's a thought though: how much shit is out there for you to hit when you're flying down the freeway. Not a lot. And if you need to slam on the brakes you have a lot of space to do so. Not quite the same thing in a residential neighborhood with cars parallel parked and kids and animals running around. I'm aware of the distance required to stop from different speeds (I actually run my car out at the track and know what happens when you stand on the brakes at 120mph). The differences are the stakes involved.

6/7/2010 11:35:53 PM

I'd like to point out that in this specific case, the guy was clocked going 82.

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/Media/ohio-cops-radar-gun-ticket-drivers/story?id=10815868&page=1

Quote :

"The 5-1 ruling comes in a case involving motorist Mark Jenney, who was given a speeding ticket nearly two years ago by a policeman in Copley, Ohio. The officer said his radar had clocked Jenney traveling 82 mph in a 60-mph zone.... A lower court threw out the radar evidence because the officer was unable to produce the required certification for his training on the device. But the court ruled that the officer had the background and training to make an educated guess of Jenney's speed and found the motorist guilty."

6/7/2010 11:59:56 PM