broken tail light ticket UPDATE NUMBER 2

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: CasioTech

Originally posted by: coldmeat

Originally posted by: CasioTech
1/3 broken brake lights isn't braking any laws.

Can you prove this?

316.221 Taillamps.--

(1) Every motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, and pole trailer, and any other vehicle which is being drawn at the end of a combination of vehicles, shall be equipped with at least two taillamps mounted on the rear

That says absolutely nothing whatsoever regarding how many are required to be illuminated. It simply means that, when fully functioning, a vehicle must have at least two tail lights (i.e. you are not permitted to build or sell a vehicle for on-road use that only has provision for one tail light). It does not mean that if you have three, you are permitted to have one burnt-out bulb.

It is further worth noting that a brake light is not a "taillamp". Tail lamps are the low-intensity red lights at the rear of your car that come on with your headlights. They are also sometimes called "running lights" or "parking lights", both of which refer collectively to all front, side, and rear low-intensity lights that can be activated as a group and which come on with the headlights. On many cars, the tail lamp shares a single dual-filament bulb with the brake light, using the low-intensity filament for the tail lamp circuit and the high-intensity filament for the brake light circuit. Sometimes, in this system, when a brake light fails, it takes out both filaments, leaving the car with two brake lights (the other side and the center) but only one tail lamp (the other side, as there is often no center tail lamp).

You fail at interpreting the law.

ZV

 

[thepd7]

Originally posted by: biggestmuff

Originally posted by: CasioTech
I wasted no time contacting my local PD and voicing my opinion on behalf of my g/f in this regard.

"An incompetent officer pulled me over and gave me a ticket for a faulty brake light. I later researched and found that in the state of Florida you are permitted to only have 2 out of 3 brake lights working. I did in fact have 2 out of 3 brake lights working and was still pulled over for 1 faulty brake light and issued a citation. Now I have to pay for dismissal and waste time going to a court house because of an officer's incompetence. This is both an outrage and waste of the systems resources. In addition my record is and always has been flawless in my 5+ years of driving.

the badge number is supposedly 7*** and the citation number is 2***-***.

Thank you,
J*****.

Making a false statement?


But seriously. Here seems to be the actual Florida State Statutes on brake lights:

Title XXIII Chapter 316.221 (1)

Title XXIII Chapter 316.222 (1)

EDIT: The officer should have written the statute number that was broken. What is it?

As other people pointed out.

"On vehicles equipped with more than one taillamp, the lamps shall be mounted on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable."

Unless your gf's center brake light is on the same level as her tail light she deserved the ticket. ACTUAL LAW >>>>>>>> FORUM

pigs -> +infinity
Danny Casio -> epic fail

 

[CasioTech]

I don't fail at interpreting the law, I fail at interpreting the difference between a brake light and a tail lamp. :roll:

but your post was genuinely insightful.

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: cherrytwist
this thread is going places. marked.

Dude...nice sig....so you just stole pretty much all of it from what I've posted? Nice.

-------------------------
8öD++*F--¦?O-¦¦¦¦¦
the internet is serious business

 

[CasioTech]

except your heatware.

 

[CasioTech]

316.222 Stop lamps and turn signals.--

(1) Every motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, and pole trailer shall be equipped with two or more stop lamps meeting the requirements of s. 316.234(1). Motor vehicles, trailers, semitrailers and pole trailers manufactured or assembled prior to January 1, 1972, shall be equipped with at least one stop lamp. On a combination of vehicles, only the stop lamps on the rearmost vehicle need actually be seen from the distance specified in s. 316.234(1).


???

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: CasioTech
316.222 Stop lamps and turn signals.--

(1) Every motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, and pole trailer shall be equipped with two or more stop lamps meeting the requirements of s. 316.234(1). Motor vehicles, trailers, semitrailers and pole trailers manufactured or assembled prior to January 1, 1972, shall be equipped with at least one stop lamp. On a combination of vehicles, only the stop lamps on the rearmost vehicle need actually be seen from the distance specified in s. 316.234(1).


???

It does not say that if your vehicle is equipped with 3 of them, that one of them is okay to be non-working.

 

[CasioTech]

I could have 6 brake lights, if only two work, according to that statute it is okay!

I am assuming they make 3 brake lights on a car because if ONE goes out, you have time to fix it... WITHOUT getting a citation.

 

[CasioTech]

you guys are helping me build up a really tight, solid case, genuine thanks to everyone!

 

[biggestmuff]

Once again, what is the violation? What statute did the officer reference on the citation?

Title XXIII Chapter 316.221 (1) covers taillamps (parking/running/city lights). This isn't the statute you're looking for if you say the ticket was for a brake light.

Title XXIII Chapter 316.222 (1) covers stop lamps (brake/stop lights), but also ties in with Title XXIII Chapter 316.234 (1).

316.222 and 316.234 don't have provisions for the lamps to be "mounted on the same level". Going by just these two statutes, you need two or more stop lamps and they need to be unobstructed and visible from 300 ft in normal sunlight.

 

[QED]

Originally posted by: CasioTech
I could have 6 brake lights, if only two work, according to that statute it is okay!

I am assuming they make 3 brake lights on a car because if ONE goes out, you have time to fix it... WITHOUT getting a citation.

Yes, I am sure the engineers who designed your car were not thinking about safety when the put a 3rd brake light on your car. I'm sure they were instead thinking soleley about Florida driving laws and how to design the car so that one can have a taillight burn out, be given a citation by a cop, and write a pissy little letter to the police instead of just replacing the damn bulb. Yes, yes... now that you mention it I'm certain that's why the have that 3rd brake light there....

 

[CasioTech]

the statute says 316.610 checked off 'improper or unsafe equipment' and then commented "passenger brake light out."

 

[CasioTech]

Originally posted by: QED

Originally posted by: CasioTech
I could have 6 brake lights, if only two work, according to that statute it is okay!

I am assuming they make 3 brake lights on a car because if ONE goes out, you have time to fix it... WITHOUT getting a citation.

Yes, I am sure the engineers who designed your car were not thinking about safety when the put a 3rd brake light on your car. I'm sure they were instead thinking soleley about Florida driving laws and how to design the car so that one can have a taillight burn out, be given a citation by a cop, and write a pissy little letter to the police instead of just replacing the damn bulb. Yes, yes... now that you mention it I'm certain that's why the have that 3rd brake light there....

lol... nice sig edit.


c'mon, if two brake lights aren't enough, plus being able to perceive a car slowing down without the aid of brake lights, you shouldn't be driving.

 

[OdiN]

316.610 Safety of vehicle; inspection.--It is a violation of this chapter for any person to drive or move, or for the owner or his or her duly authorized representative to cause or knowingly permit to be driven or moved, on any highway any vehicle or combination of vehicles which is in such unsafe condition as to endanger any person or property, or which does not contain those parts or is not at all times equipped with such lamps and other equipment in proper condition and adjustment as required in this chapter, or which is equipped in any manner in violation of this chapter, or for any person to do any act forbidden or fail to perform any act required under this chapter.

(1) Any police officer may at any time, upon reasonable cause to believe that a vehicle is unsafe or not equipped as required by law, or that its equipment is not in proper adjustment or repair, require the driver of the vehicle to stop and submit the vehicle to an inspection and such test with reference thereto as may be appropriate.

(2) In the event the vehicle is found to be in unsafe condition or any required part or equipment is not present or is not in proper repair and adjustment, and the continued operation would probably present an unduly hazardous operating condition, the officer may require the vehicle to be immediately repaired or removed from use. However, if continuous operation would not present unduly hazardous operating conditions, that is, in the case of equipment defects such as tailpipes, mufflers, windshield wipers, marginally worn tires, the officer shall give written notice to require proper repair and adjustment of same within 48 hours, excluding Sunday.


Catch-all. You're screwed.

 

[FallenHero]

I love people like you in court. Come in, all high and mighty...even if I am wrong, I still win. I get paid overtime for court, you took your time, got all worked up emotionally, wasted tons of resources, for what? To pretend you beat the system? If I am wrong, I'm wrong, no big deal. Ticket it dropped, person walks free, I learn and don't make the mistake again. Its the people like you, which make a mountain out of a mole hill, which make traffic court oh so entertaining.

 

[CasioTech]

why don't you shed some insight on this, mr. officer?

And it is a big deal if you are wrong. I heard it is consequential to you if too many of your tickets/citations get dismissed, is it not?

I guess you should be VERY happy people like me exist, so you can get that big shot overtime.

 

[FallenHero]

Originally posted by: CasioTech
why don't you shed some insight on this, mr. officer?

And it is a big deal if you are wrong. I heard it is consequential to you if too many of your tickets/citations get dismissed, is it not?

I guess you should be VERY happy people like me exist, so you can get that big shot overtime.

I get paid to go to court regardless of your actions. You don't seem to understand this...but I don't care. I really really don't. I don't take a win in court personally, I don't take a loss personally. I am there to swear to what I did if I am needed. I am just mocking your attitude, not the overall action of knowing the law and going to court with said knowledge.

Bring on the big clock.

 

[CasioTech]

good for you that you don't take losses personally, last time I won a speeding ticket in court last year for speeding in a school zone (because the ticket was issued 10 minutes before the school zone began) the officer turned red was ready to shoot the judge.

 

[FallenHero]

Originally posted by: CasioTech
good for you that you don't take losses personally, last time I won a speeding ticket in court last year for speeding in a school zone (because the ticket was issued 10 minutes before the school zone began) the officer turned red was ready to shoot the judge.

ok

 

[biggestmuff]

Originally posted by: CasioTech
the statute says 316.610 checked off 'improper or unsafe equipment' and then commented "passenger brake light out."

Ah, then your girlfriend has lost. Fix the light. I seriously doubt she'll get fined. Have her take the receipt (time/date stamp on the receipt) for the bulb to court and it may help her cause and show the court that she worked to correct the fault.

 

[CasioTech]

that is what we will do. Is there a dismissal fee when you go to court to see a judge as there is when you take it to an officer for approval and then to court for dismissal???

 

[biggestmuff]

Originally posted by: CasioTech
that is what we will do. Is there a dismissal fee when you go to court to see a judge as there is when you take it to an officer for approval and then to court for dismissal???

Call the courthouse tomorrow and ask the traffic division that question.

 

[gorobei]

1) your link to some cop forum with some unidentified poster listing his personal policy and understanding of the code isn't likely to get you much in court and doesn't really qualify as legal proof/research. Calling the Officer incompetent in your letter wont affect the standing of the cite, probably won't even reach the traffic court judge. So you can relax on that part, but it was probably a little foolish to do if you don't know the law 100%.

2) OdiN is correct, you are being cited on general operation/safety of the vehicle code. You are basically required to have a properly working car whenever you drive it. In California at least (and in the rest of the states I suspect), this code also exists and is used during citations. FL Section 316.222 covers the equipping of Stop(brake) lamps not the operation of the lamps. The part you are misinterpreting is the "two or more stop lamps ....." This simply requires the vehicle to have as many WORKING stop lights as the manufacturer designed and equipped it with (so at least 2 but as many as 3 if so equipped). [I don't know how led lights affect this now i.e. how many dead leds in a tail cluster can be dead before you have to replace it] The same principle applies to front lic plates. If you have a car with a place to mount the front plate, you are required to use it regardless if it "doesn't look nice" or "ruins the lines of that super exotic sports car you bought". Only older cars made decades ago when only one plate was issued or some of the 'sporty' cars of the 80's (Fiero was one I think) that weren't made with front plate holes or threading can get away with only having one plate.

3) these are usually fix it tickets. Before you just had to fix it and get an officer to sign off on the ticket that the specified equipment was functioning correctly and then send it in or take it to court. When the 90's hit and all the departments were strapped for cash, they started charging a processing fee for signing off to raise revenue. My department did that early so I never got a chance to sign off on a fix it by the time I got out of the academy. Don't know what FL laws are on the court fees, but you are safer calling your county court office and getting the exact information rather than relying on the word of someone in a forum.

 

[EGGO]

If your girlfriend gave the cop the same type of attitude you're giving them right now, I can see why he gave her the ticket. Just like when my friends get caught for going 5 over the speed limit.

 

[Scarpozzi]

....another form of a wheel tax that goes straight to the man.