Judge Rules Flashing Headlights to Warn Drivers of Speed Trap is Protected Free Speech

[Richard Cranium]

A circuit court judge in Florida has ruled that flashing your headlights is a protected form of free speech.

That means that police can not ticket drivers for signaling their presence to other oncoming drivers. That's the action a man took in Florida when he noticed a deputy parked near his house, setting up what is often referred to as a "speed trap."

The ruling could cause departments across the country to take a fresh look at their approach to the issue. Some departments view a "warning flash" as inappropriate use of headlights, and thus worthy of a ticket. But the Florida judge's ruling is likely to spark fresh legal challenges if departments persist in issuing tickets.

The judge wrote, ""If the goal of the traffic law is promote safety and not to raise revenue, then why wouldn't we want everyone who sees a law enforcement officer with a radar gun in his hand, blinking his lights to slow down all those other cars?"

[Acid Trip]

A circuit court judge in Florida has ruled that flashing your headlights is a protected form of free speech.

That means that police can not ticket drivers for signaling their presence to other oncoming drivers. That's the action a man took in Florida when he noticed a deputy parked near his house, setting up what is often referred to as a "speed trap."

The ruling could cause departments across the country to take a fresh look at their approach to the issue. Some departments view a "warning flash" as inappropriate use of headlights, and thus worthy of a ticket. But the Florida judge's ruling is likely to spark fresh legal challenges if departments persist in issuing tickets.

The judge wrote, ""If the goal of the traffic law is promote safety and not to raise revenue, then why wouldn't we want everyone who sees a law enforcement officer with a radar gun in his hand, blinking his lights to slow down all those other cars?"

That's a smart judge.

[PorkChopSandwiches]

We dont seem to have many smart people in charge anymore

[Godfather]

That's awesome, makes perfect sense. Funny that flashing your lights could be illegal, when the radio has frequent updates on speed traps around town :lol:

[Pony]

Yep, and there are websites and listings in newspapers warning where DUI checkpoints will be.

[Godfather]

Yep, and there are websites and listings in newspapers warning where DUI checkpoints will be.

Maybe a little hypocritical, but that I don't agree with.

I'm all in favor of getting drunk drivers off the road and severely punishing them. Up here they're set up at random so you never know ahead of time, and the radios don't warn drivers of their locations. Fine by me :thumbsup:

Big difference in giving someone a $197 ticket for going 10km/h over the speed limit, and driving drunk though.

[KevinD]

The problem I have with the DUI checkpoints is for example, in areas like Houston, they have "No refusal" checkpoints. While I am against drunk driving, but will admit to having done it, I have a problem with if I go out to dinner, have a drink or two get caught in one of these and then get charged with DUI. With my body weight, 2-3 beers, or 1-2 mixed drinks in an hour, and I could be legally drunk ( .08%BAC is limit here) With that amount, I am in no way a danger to any one else on the road.

[Pony]

Maybe a little hypocritical, but that I don't agree with.

I'm all in favor of getting drunk drivers off the road and severely punishing them. Up here they're set up at random so you never know ahead of time, and the radios don't warn drivers of their locations. Fine by me :thumbsup:

Big difference in giving someone a $197 ticket for going 10km/h over the speed limit, and driving drunk though.

True, but it does seem to be effective, more people just drink less or don't go out and take the chance when they know ahead of time. or make alternate plans for a DD. Why bust a few people when you can modify the behavior of hundreds? They still get the drunks off the roads, no matter how much they publicize the checkpoints and the stats of how many DUIs don't really seem to change. They mostly just set up extra patrols on the alternate routes and get them that way.

[Acid Trip]

In the United States they have to post where DUI checkpoints will be. If they don't it violates the 4th Amendment protection against illegal search and seizure.

[Pony]

Of course on the other side of things, my buddy works at a large bar and grille with really only one main direction where everyone comes from to eat. Two weeks ago they set up 500 feet away from the bar. They ended up sending 80% of the staff home and lost nearly the whole nights revenue because people were to afraid of getting stopped after having 2-3 drinks with dinner.

[KevinD]

True, but it does seem to be effective, more people just drink less or don't go out and take the chance when they know ahead of time. or make alternate plans for a DD. Why bust a few people when you can modify the behavior of hundreds? They still get the drunks off the roads, no matter how much they publicize the checkpoints and the stats of how many DUIs don't really seem to change. They mostly just set up extra patrols on the alternate routes and get them that way.

The city of Houston did a review of the effectiveness of the current DUI/DWI measures a year or two ago. What they found is that reall drunk driving, especially involving accidents or fatalities has not gone down (percentage wise) meaningfully in the last 10 years. What has changed is the amount of $$ generated by the arrests. That has quadrupled.

[PorkChopSandwiches]

The city of Houston did a review of the effectiveness of the current DUI/DWI measures a year or two ago. What they found is that reall drunk driving, especially involving accidents or fatalities has not gone down (percentage wise) meaningfully in the last 10 years. What has changed is the amount of $$ generated by the arrests. That has quadrupled.

Yeah, DUI has become more about generating revenue then anything else.

[KevinD]

Of course on the other side of things, my buddy works at a large bar and grille with really only one main direction where everyone comes from to eat. Two weeks ago they set up 500 feet away from the bar. They ended up sending 80% of the staff home and lost nearly the whole nights revenue because people were to afraid of getting stopped after having 2-3 drinks with dinner.

Exactly my point. 2-3 drinks (for the vast majority of folks, with food) may result in a DUI conviction ( over .08%) but not rally impair their ability to drive or react. Personally, if they were to raise the limit back to .1% BAC, I would have no problem with the checkpoints. The whole issue of "No Refusal" where they can and do take your blood without your consent is a whole different argument.

[Pony]

Yeah, DUI has become more about generating revenue then anything else.

Exactly why they keep pushing to lower the legal level. .08 is nothing to a regular drinker.

[Hal-9000]

Yep, and there are websites and listings in newspapers warning where DUI checkpoints will be.

I don't agree with this either...you're just giving the drunk drivers a heads up on where not to drive.