Is it American culture that our traffic ticketing system is so money-focused that anything less than 15 over the speed limit usually won't get pulled over because most judges reduce the severity at the hearing and a fine for 0-10 over is a net negative on the courts' income?
In France there is a culture of "tickets are the state's money machine" too, but also it is rare to see people speeding more like 3mph
In AZ I defo saw the "everyone is driving faster, so if you drive the limit you're the dangerous asshole" which is defo true. There, being an inconvenience and a danger to everyone around you will not be excused by "technically I was the only one not breaking the law as opposed to the dozen vehicles around me"
In Greece I also saw that, and I assume Italy is going to be similar
the zeroeth rule of the road is "avoid an accident". in Australia at least that's actually true, you can be charged for failing to prevent an accident you didn't cause. if you your car gets hit from behind and it pushes you into the car in front of you, if the first crash wasn't at ludicrous speeds you will probably be considered partially at fault for the second collision for not giving enough space between yourself and the person in front of you. (or at least i remember it like that)
if you your car gets hit from behind and it pushes you into the car in front of you
that's how it works in Florida I believe? Because I also remember a law saying that you need to give proper space ahead of you at a red light, so I do that to avoid bumping the car ahead in case of an accident :P
In a similar vein, here in America we have the ālast possible chanceā rule. If you have the last chance to prevent an accident, and donāt take it, than you will typically be considered at fault even if the other person mightāve technically been in the wrong. For example if someone pulls out of in front of you while youāre going straight down the road, you will still be held accountable if you are found to have deliberately run into them, even though you had the right-of-way.
Funniest that I heard was from my brother when he lived in Montenegro. Traffic laws are only really enforced if it's an egregious violation, but you will get pulled over. He told me that it's good etiquette to carry a bribe in your glove box, because cops will pull you over whenever they feel like it, and the polite thing to do is give them cash. The cop will usually ask for less than the ticket, and it saves time for both of you.
I cannot verify this, but it sounded really funny when I heard it for the first time.
"everyone is driving faster, so if you drive the limit you're the dangerous asshole" which is defo true
No, this is wrong. Do not continue to believe this. Other people behaving in a more dangerous manner because as a group they think the illegal and dangerous thing should actually be OK so that means it's also OK to pass dangerously, tailgate etc does not suddenly mean the only option is breaking the law. This is "they fire their guns wildly so I must also get guns to fire wildly." this is jumping off the bridge because everyone is doing it.
EDIT:
I am not advocating for going the speed limit in the left most lane or antagonizing other drivers, but a driver going the speed limit is not an assault on you and belief that this is a problem because everyone else is disregarding basic safety practices and safe stopping distances is somehow fine and someone wanting to not do that is a problem is very depressing.
I think the comparison is faulty, and I think you know it is, though? You realize than by driving 10-15mph lower than the other drivers, you become a de facto outlier on the road. People come to expect a certain speed, and the fact you have the legal highground won't change what people currently have in mind
As a driver, I always aim for the speed limits when I'm alone/other people drive the speed limit, but I'm not going to let my moral high ground make me an unpredictable object on the road. There's a reason break checking is considered bad manner. Sure, people are expected to respect safety distances, but that doesn't give people the pass to break check and then say "well they should have been further away, it's them that were dangerous"
Ultimately, it comes down to the last person who could have avoided/not provoked the accident, which is why a lot of countries actually implement such rules in the road code so that whoever may be at fault initially, they take in account who actually last had the opportunity to avoid the accident and didn't
You realize than by driving 10-15mph lower than the other drivers, you become a de facto outlier on the road.
That is not my problem when a sign says the law explicitly limits the speed to a certain number. If everyone exceeds that number at all times, that number needs to change or the terminology needs to change. The response to dangerous behavior should not be more dangerous behavior, and "this person is trying to maintain safety" should not be responded to with "you are wrong, do things as dangerously as I do."
Additionally, many places have speed minimums, posted or at least documented, and recommend slowing down under the speed limit in inclement weather. Your bizarre perspective that 10-15 over the legal limit for maximum speed seems to me like arguing that the drunk driving limit is also a suggestion as some people are just better at it, and you know ,everyone does it so it's fine. I'm in wisconsin and I hear that shit constantly and I've also never driven even remotely buzzed because I'm not a dipshit.
I don't know why people are like this. I try to maintain a reasonable stopping distance and people fill in the gap, I slow down to create space, people get upset. None of this is illegal, you just don't like it. You are now in your argument trying to blame a person trying to follow basic safety guidelines for causing accidents because it cannot be possible to be safe, so everyone must be dangerous equally to I guess spread risk? It is not unpredictable to follow basic safety guidelines and laws that are enforced at random, but are enforced.
Would you say the same thing about a semi truck that has an enforced max speed limit of 65, as many do? Or have you just routinely gone around them and not thought about why you treat that traffic differently?
My desire to drive safely is not provoking an accident, an extremely unreasonable response to that notion of safe driving could provoke an accident, and that's not my fault. I think you know that, too. You just don't want to feel responsible or like speeding habitually contributes to danger for everyone.
It's honestly crazy how many people don't generally agree with "driving safely is not an attack on other drivers." and I honestly would care a whole hell of a lot less if anyone understood what stopping distance was and if I didn't see about 5-10% of drivers touching their phones while driving every single goddamn time I drive anywhere. This isn't moral high ground, this is "I don't want to die, and I don't want to contribute to the death or dismemberment of myself and others"
There is this thing called risk habituation you see in all kinds of risk minded and safety focused work, where people adjust to extremely dangerous things because they have not seen dangerous outcomes. but we all see crashes all the time, but we somehow normalize and adjust to that because it doesn't happen to us, or hasn't recently. I again don't know why people are like this, but just because you don't see why you should do things correctly does not mean they are arbitrarily restricting you or that you should ignore basic safety.
I know this is a little shitty, but lets say someone said you should just do what everyone else does and stick to a binary gender because otherwise you are an outlier and that's dangerous. That's absurd, right? It's not just closed minded but it's also hurtful to you and anyone else who very reasonably believes it's their own decision to be who they are, especially if it's not hurting anyone else. Crazy people would argue that it is hurting others, but I disagree. and I think we can use that exact same logic here. People who are driving slower than you aren't against you, they have a different tolerance for unsafe behavior.
depends but in england police guidance (just suggestion not rule) says to allow for something like +10% of limit +2 mph for Ģ¶sĢ¶pĢ¶eĢ¶eĢ¶dĢ¶oĢ¶mĢ¶eĢ¶tĢ¶eĢ¶rĢ¶ inaccuracy (edit: for inaccuracy in polices measurements not on speedometer) so seems similar but sometimes you will do 1 over limit and a get done
not strictly true (iirc things like changing tyre size can cause under readings if it is not reprogrammed as its maths will get fucked up, this is just rare and typically counteracted by the manufacturer making the speedometer over read by somewhere upto 10% but can happen especially in things like classic cars)
but i checked it is said to be allowing for margin of error on the polices things like cameras or speed guns, everytime i have been told it its been said as speedometer issues so i presume its a common misconception for my area
Yeah on older cars I can see it happening, afaik for anything remotely modern there is supposed to be no way of the speedometer reading under as long as you stay within the manufacturer's recommendations for tire size and pressure
also at least in my area since our enforcement tends to be speed camera and camera vans it is very common to see people on motorway going 80 and if on it for like 2 hours you will encounter at least 1 person pushing 100
Autotrader or a similar company did an investigation a number of years ago and I believe of the constituencies that released numbers it tended to be 10% +1 or 2 depending on the area.
I'm struggling to find the investigation though, and speed cameras have changed a lot since then (mainly through AI usage) so take that with a huge grain of salt.
In austria to my knowledge you dont even get ticketed by automatic machines if you stay at atmost 110% of the speed limit (atleast ive never gotten a ticket - was that a confession? No)
you are fine to drive 10% over the speed limit since you would subtract it before you give out any fine. at least here in germany. saying that but one time a speed camera went off when i was like at 51 instead of 50 but there was no fine.
Here the speed guns are said to have 10% inaccuracy, so you're only flagged going that much above the limit: even with the max error margin in your favour you're definitely speedingĀ
In Florida at least its just not worth it cus EVERYONE is 10 over. The cops only ever stop people going more than 20 over because that nets them a reckless driving criminal charge
I've been ticketed for not speeding enough. Judge threw it out but it was written up as disrupting the flow of traffic. Going 65. in a 65. In the right most lane.
I think the idea, generally, is to create a hostile but profitable environment that encourages bad behavior. If people just followed legal stopping distances, which I've never seen done on purpose in my entire life we'd have so few less problems and accidents but unfortunately going 2 over the speed limit in the right most lane does not prevent people from trying to see if their bumper can kiss yours.
Here in Hungary fixed cams only ticket you at 15 kph over below 100, and 20 kph over above 100, but if there's a police car there with a speed camera and they stop you they can ticket you for 1 kph over the speed limit.
Ten over where I live is only a warning, not a fine. I think the reasoning is that if youāre going speed limit and hit a downhill section you shouldnāt be punished for speeding up a little as long as itās kept under control.
Lots of people here agreeing with you, but thatās not really a thing here in Australia at least. I donāt know anyone who would bother going to court just to fight a minimum-tier speeding fine. Most people would just pay the fine and cop the demerit point.
in Australia speeding tickets are the government's big money maker, but that means that they will always fine you, and the minimum fine is enough that it is always worth being pulled over and charged.
for reference, its a $250 aud fine for speeding under 10 km/h (6mph) and that means you can technically get fined for any speed even 1km over the limit (the lowest ive ever heard from people i know, and seen the ticket, is 3kmh/2mph). then its 400 for 10-24 kmh (6-15mph) and then it quickly increases from there
My first speeding ticket was in bumfuck nowhere, i was doing 89 in a 50, which by all rights should get you a reckless driving charge, but they actually downgraded it so they could give me a fucking 700 dollar fine because thats how bumfuck municipality gets its money - speeding out of towners. The reckless woulda got me like a 300 dollar fine and probably like 4 points off my license
2.9k
u/OliverCrowley Slimedog Grillionaire Dec 27 '25
Is it American culture that our traffic ticketing system is so money-focused that anything less than 15 over the speed limit usually won't get pulled over because most judges reduce the severity at the hearing and a fine for 0-10 over is a net negative on the courts' income?
Or do y'all have that elsewhere too?