Rep Power: 676

I've noticed a lot of threads on speeding tickets, but very few that have been charged with racing.

What does a cop need to prove you're racing?
Peeling tires?
High rpms?
Going over the speed limit?
Flashing your hazards?

Suppose you launch your car hard, peel your tires, redline your engine and all that, but before go over the speed limit, you see the cop and hold ur speed steady. Since you can't be convicted with speeding, does he still have enough to convict you on racing?

 
Rep Power: 716

You don't have to be breaking the speed limit to be charged with racing. A cop can go by the visual elements associated with racing to justify laying a racing charge even without any reading of vehicle speeds.

 
Rep Power: 0

peeling tires is an offense all in its own! its called "unnecessary noise" ive gotten it before...i think it was like a 80 dollar ticket

 
Rep Power: 725

what exactly would be these visual elements?

 
Rep Power: 656

Ive had this ticket given to me last year aswell. I think mine was about 110..no points given.
:thumbsup: lucky because I got and still have 3 points for speeding 1 month before that ticket.

 
Rep Power: 703

ya wut are the penalties

 
Rep Power: 716

What do you think? What does a typical red light street race look like?

You can argue that "there is no proof they were racing", but keep in mind that a large part of convictions made in the courts are based not on "absolute proof of intent" but on circumstantial evidence and how things "looked" to an uninvolved observer. When that uninvolved observer is a cop, and the cop makes a case that you appeared to be racing, that can make a much stronger impression on the court than you claiming you weren't racing.

But if you want, try explaining to a judge that you weren't racing when you both squealed your tires the instant the light turned green, both accelerated as hard as your two cars could possibly accelerate while red-lining each engine to the top of each gear, until you each reached the speed limit, at which point the car in front for some reason just happened to activate the 4-way flashers, give a wave, and then speed off, or better yet, both cars then pull off into a parking lot to high-five each other.

 
Rep Power: 0

Unnessary Noise and I think theres a charge like Unnessary exibition of speed they can give you for going from 0-the posted speed in no time (aka Jackrabbit Start)

 
Rep Power: 676

Yes it is very easy to determine visually what is a street race. But in the eyes of the law, there has to be a clear line that is crossed in terms of evidence before you can be convicted. Just like it can be very obvious to you and I that somebody is speeding, but unless a cop can determine an exact speed that you were either travelling at or exceeding, you can't be convicted.

But Radar only measures speed, not accleration. And there are no limits for acceleration. There is also no way to prove definitively that you were accelerating as fast as you could. Besides, each car has different acceleration. E.g. a Civic may be trying its hardest to race a Ferrari, but the Ferrari is not racing at all, but they accelerate at the same rate. So what happens then? only the civic driver gets convicted based on his car?

But my point is, where does the law draw the line between two cars side by side that are speeding (or accelerating hard) and two cars who are directly racing against each other? How does the law link the two drivers esp if there is no apparent communication (like 4-ways and high fives, revving at the light, etc.) For example, when you rev up your engine to pass someone for a lane change. The other driver doesnt want to let you in so he also hits the gas. Picture the two cars as two modified Civics with loud exhausts. From a typical observer's point of view, it now looks like a race. Picture two minivans doing the same thing, and it just looks like normal everyday road rage, but not racing. Do you see how the line can get blurry?

 
Rep Power: 716

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, then there's reasonable basis to take a shot at the duck.

Of course the lines can get blurry, but a cop doesn't have to be absolutely sure of your guilt before he or she can charge you - they only need reasonable belief that an offence has occurred. That's why the cop only lays the charge, and the actual determination of guilt or not is left to the courts to determine after evaluating witness evidence. And if you think the courts need a sharp dividing line to differentiate between guilt an dinnocence, well, you should try to attend more court, as a spectator of course and not as a participant.

However, it costs time, money and aggravation just to go to court and defend yourself, and it only gets worse if you're unsuccessful and get convicted.

The smart money says that only an idiot would wilfully drive in such a manner as to invite being charged with such a serious offence. Those who push the envelope of acceptable driving behaviour have a far greater risk of getting cut when they get too close to the edge.

 
Rep Power: 728

the fact is, not too many charges of race a motor vehicle are laid, because in order to convict there must be proof that both drivers agreed to a race. this would mean there is someone flagging, or and exchange of money, honking to indicate a start etc...

usually you will be charged with careless/reckless/dangerous driving depending on the severity of the offence, as the burden is much lighter, and a conviction is more certain.

 
Rep Power: 722

as sad as it might sounds.. "innocent until proven guilty doesnt work with traffic tickets" u have to prove that u werent racing, the cop doesnt.. tats is BS and i have been charged with stuff i wasnt even doin and had to prove my case..i no im not the only one.. so much for the judicial system...

ps keep it off the streets.. ur riskin to much...

 
Rep Power: 701

When we used to Street race in durham region there was a strip that hundreds of people would stand on the roadside and watch.

the undercover cops were filming the races and the involved parties were busted...

They actually played the tape trial.

you were pretty much Sunk.....

oh yeah, they impound you car immediatly. and your insurance company drops you too....