DRIVERS risk being automatically slapped with $75 fines for going just 10mph over a highway limit – with a set of new warnings coming in a matter of weeks.
Motorists living in a US state heading through a major construction zone will soon face automated speed enforcement – after a worrying increase in accidents.
Drivers are being urged to watch their speed when using a major highway[/caption]
Automated speed enforcement has been implemented in a construction zone on Highway 119, located between Longmont and Boulder, Colorado[/caption]
As reported by 9News, vehicles travelling through the construction zone on Highway 119, between Longmont and Boulder, Colorado, will be forced to be extra careful with their speed.
According to officials with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), new “automated vehicle identification systems” will be activated to monitor speeding vehicles in the work zone.
Indeed, cameras will flag cars caught travelling at just 10 mph or more over the area’s speed limit.
To begin with, drivers who are caught will be sent warning letters beginning on Monday, July 21.
For the time being, that will be the only punishment motorists receive.
But by fall, CDOT has said the cameras will begin issuing $75 tickets to vehicle owners.
CDOT has reported that 31 people have been killed in work zone crashes across the state in 2023 – which was nearly double the number of fatalities from the previous year.
To that end, the new enforcement is part of a broader effort to protect construction crews, as well as drivers.
“Work zones are high-risk areas with narrow and shifting lanes, closures and sudden stops, making speeding especially dangerous,” said CDOT Chief Engineer Keith Stefanik.
“This program is about protecting lives, not punishing drivers.
“Enforcing compliance with posted speed limits means safer roads statewide for all.”
DAYLIGHT ROBBERY
Elsewhere, another state has brought in $660,000-worth of fines after a daylighting law came into effect at the beginning of the year.
The law, which is designed to make intersections safer, has caught out plenty so far.
The “daylighting” law, AB 413, went statewide across California on January 1 – but enforcement in San Diego only began on March 1.
It punishes those who park within 20 feet of the near side of any marked or unmarked crosswalk – in a bid to protect unsighted pedestrians from getting hit when trying to cross.
From March 1 through to May 31, San Diego police issued 6,429 citations – generating more than $660,000 in fines.
But that number could climb to $1.2 to $1.3 million by the year’s end, according to city officials.
In neighborhoods like North Park, the new rule has become a major headache for those looking to park – including local residents.
How to fight a speeding ticket
According to a legally reviewed post, there are five effective strategies to fighting a speeding ticket if it was wrongfully issued.
- If pulled over and issued a ticket, drivers can argue or dispute a driver’s personal opinion. When issuing a speeding ticket, an officer is required to write their opinion and come to an “objective” conclusion. If the ticket was written based on that judgment, it can be contested. An example would be if you were going 75 mph in a 65 mph zone because others were traveling at the same speed, you could argue that it would be more dangerous to travel at 65 mph.
- You can dispute the officer’s presentation of evidence. If you were ticketed for something like running a stop sign or making an illegal u-turn, you can’t contest that if an officer saw you, but you can call things into court like eyewitnesses, diagrams, or photos.
- Argue that the ticket was issued by a “mistake of fact.” This is tricky, but a “mistake of fact” is a mistake made by a driver about a situation that was beyond their control, or if a driver legitimately did not know they were violating the law. For example, you were driving in two lanes because the lane markers were so worn down that you could not see them.
- You could say circumstances justified your driving. You could say you were speeding to pass a possibly drunk driver, or avoiding an accident by rapidly changing lanes. However, the argument won’t work if there’s proof you continued to speed after passing.
- Similar to the above, it could be argued that speeding was necessary to avoid harm. The key is to argue that if you weren’t speeding, you or someone else could have been harmed.
- Consult a traffic attorney, if all else fails. Many have free consultations to decide whether or not there’s a case.
Source: FindLaw
