posted
Comment: I have been told by more than one policeman that Ohio does not have speed limits as such, that the signs posted are prima facie limits, i.e. they are not absolute. It follows that when one gets a ticket, the box "unsafe for conditions" is ALWAYS checked, since THAT is the charge. The "65 in a 55" is merely a substantiating assertion.
That being said, it is the common practice for cops to ticket when the prima facie limits are exceeded by some margin, so it does not mean that one can go as fast as one wants in Ohio.
Posts: 36029 | From: Admin | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, Clueless Joe. Maybe you ought to put down your Gameboy and pay attention. Those rectangular signs you keep seeing? The ones saying 'Speed Limit"? Yeah, those are real.
-------------------- Let's just pretend we're normal for a minute ~ New favorite T-shirt quote Posts: 1193 | From: Ohio | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
I don't think that is the question though. The question was whether or not the violation is "speed exceeding the statutory limit" or "driving unsafely for the conditions." Since I have never had a moving violation in Ohio, I don't know.
-------------------- I think that hyperbole is the single greatest factor contributing to the decline of society. - My friend Pat.
posted
Basically, what we've got here is... failure to communicate.
quote:Originally posted by snopes: Comment: I have been told by more than one policeman that Ohio does not have speed limits as such, that the signs posted are prima facie limits, i.e. they are not absolute.
This is correct, the posted limits are not absolute. You can get a ticket for doing 55 in a 55 or even for doing 45 in a 55 if the weather and road conditions do not allow for safe 55 mph travel.
quote:It follows that when one gets a ticket, the box "unsafe for conditions" is ALWAYS checked, since THAT is the charge.
It does not follow. If you do 65 in a 55, then that is the charge. If you do 45 in a 55 when the road is covered with ice and there is blowing snow, then the charge is unsafe for conditions.
quote:The "65 in a 55" is merely a substantiating assertion.
No, the 65 in a 55 is the crime.
quote:That being said, it is the common practice for cops to ticket when the prima facie limits are exceeded by some margin, so it does not mean that one can go as fast as one wants in Ohio.
This is correct.
To sum up, a 55 mph speed is the maximum allowed speed if road and weather conditions permit. It is not the maximum speed no matter what. So you can get a ticket for doing the limit or doing below the limit if the road or weather conditions are adverse enough that (in the opinion of the cop) it is not safe or prudent to do the limit. But perfect road and weather conditions do not permit you to do above the limit.
-------------------- IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
GenYus are you writing based on a knowledge of Ohio Traffic Laws, or are you applying knowledge of someplace elses laws to Ohio?
-------------------- I think that hyperbole is the single greatest factor contributing to the decline of society. - My friend Pat.
quote:(C) It is prima-facie unlawful for any person to exceed any of the speed limitations in divisions (B)(1)(a), (2), (3), (4), (6), and (7) of this section, or any declared pursuant to this section by the director or local authorities and it is unlawful for any person to exceed any of the speed limitations in division (D) of this section[...]
ETA: Here is the main site for the link. There was no way to link to a particular section with the frames intact.
quote:This is correct, the posted limits are not absolute. You can get a ticket for doing 55 in a 55 or even for doing 45 in a 55 if the weather and road conditions do not allow for safe 55 mph travel.
I think the OP understands that. His claim, as best I can make out, is that posted Ohio speed limits are not maximum speed limits, they're advisory speed limits. Therefore, if you're ticketed for going 65 in a 55 MPH zone, the specific portion of the vehicle code you're cited for breaking is "unsafe speed for conditions," with the posted speed limit merely being a substantiating piece of evidence.
quote:Originally posted by Rhiandmoi: GenYus are you writing based on a knowledge of Ohio Traffic Laws, or are you applying knowledge of someplace elses laws to Ohio?
AFAIKnew, what I posted is the rules of the road in all states. Based on Kev's link, it appears Ohio uses the law as I posted it it appears that Ohio's laws are different.
ETCorrect because prima-facie lawful is a lot different than prima-facie unlawful
-------------------- IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:This is correct, the posted limits are not absolute. You can get a ticket for doing 55 in a 55 or even for doing 45 in a 55 if the weather and road conditions do not allow for safe 55 mph travel.
I think the OP understands that. His claim, as best I can make out, is that posted Ohio speed limits are not maximum speed limits, they're advisory speed limits. Therefore, if you're ticketed for going 65 in a 55 MPH zone, the specific portion of the vehicle code you're cited for breaking is "unsafe speed for conditions," with the posted speed limit merely being a substantiating piece of evidence.
- snopes
If that is what the claim is, then that would seem to be correct. The laws from Kev's post says that it is prima-facie lawful only as long as you don't exceed a list of speeds based on what zone you are in. So if you exceed that speed, you are no longer prima-facie lawful. But since the only section that says it is unlawful is the section that says that you are exceeding the reasonable or proper speed.
-------------------- IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I understand it, exceeding the post speed limit is a direct crime in some states, while here in Texas, it is not. If you can prove to the judge that the speed you were doing was reasonable, safe and prudent despite being above the posted limit, you win. (PS fat chance) Friends at TxDOT complain about having to provide the 85% speed for people making this arguement. Texas law I am sure about. Ohio, I am not.
Posts: 129 | From: Dallas | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:§ 4511.21. Speed limits. (C) It is prima-facie unlawful for any person to exceed any of the speed limitations in divisions (B)(1)(a), (2), (3), (4), (6), and (7) of this section, or any declared pursuant to this section by the director or local authorities and it is unlawful for any person to exceed any of the speed limitations in division (D) of this section.
D) No person shall operate a motor vehicle, trackless trolley, or streetcar upon a street or highway as follows:
(6) At a speed exceeding the posted speed limit upon a freeway for which the director has determined and declared a speed limit pursuant to division (I)(2) of this section.
In fact, it looks like they have it both ways!
quote:(F) When a speed in excess of both a prima-facie limitation and a limitation in division (D)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), or (6) of this section is alleged, the defendant shall be charged in a single affidavit, alleging a single act, with a violation indicated of both division (B)(1) (a), (2), (3), (4), (6), or (7) of this section, or of a limit declared pursuant to this section by the director or local authorities, and of the limitation in division (D)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), or (6) of this section. If the court finds a violation of division (B)(1)(a), (2), (3), (4), (6), or (7) of, or a limit declared pursuant to, this section has occurred, it shall enter a judgment of conviction under such division and dismiss the charge under division (D)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), or (6) of this section. If it finds no violation of division (B)(1)(a), (2), (3), (4), (6), or (7) of, or a limit declared pursuant to, this section, it shall then consider whether the evidence supports a conviction under division (D)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), or (6) of this section.
Section (B) outlines the prima-facie limits (prudent limits that exist in most jurisdictions), while Section (D) outlines exceeding a posted limit. If I read this correctly, the person would be charged with both - driving unsafely and exceeding the limit. The person is tried on the charge of driving unsafely. If that is dismissed, then they can be tried for exceeding the posted limit!
James Powell
Posts: 588 | From: Michigan | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
