I got dinged for 62 in a 30 once. It was a road I don't travel regularly, which had been 55 my entire life. The week before, they'd dropped it to 30.

The conversation went like this:

Cop: Sir, do you know why I pulled you over?
Me: No, sir, I don't.
Cop: I clocked you at 62 in a 30.
Me: You're kidding.
Cop: The 62?
Me: No, the 30.

To be fair, I had passed a speed limit sign, but in my defense, it was in a place where you have to merge left, so you're probably not looking to your right. I guess I should be grateful he didn't ding me for reckless driving, because he could have.

My worst was 115 in a 70 on I-45 in Madison County. Had to post a $500 Bond. Glad I had someone along with me to drive the car to the Police Station.

(08-01-2013 12:23 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  My worst was 115 in a 70 on I-45 in Madison County. Had to post a $500 Bond. Glad I had someone along with me to drive the car to the Police Station.

Madison County where? I was doing 150-160 in a 65 on I-75 south out of Atlanta around 1995. Only took 2 hours to get to the Florida border. As soon as I crossed, FHP pulled me over(Hamilton county) and said "you were doing about 100 weren't you?" I wasn't sure how to respond to that as it was obvious that he did have the radar gun on. I think he had me around 100 while I was trying to slow down. Anyway, he gave me a ticket for doing 100 in a 65 and let me continue on my way. I had a $300 ticket and had to take a driver's safety class.

This is a non story.

I-45 runs between Galveston (Houston) and Dallas. Madison County is in a stretch of road where there aren't any towns more than 10k probably for 60 miles in any direction.

(08-01-2013 12:37 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 12:23 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  My worst was 115 in a 70 on I-45 in Madison County. Had to post a $500 Bond. Glad I had someone along with me to drive the car to the Police Station.

Madison County where? I was doing 150-160 in a 65 on I-75 south out of Atlanta around 1995. Only took 2 hours to get to the Florida border. As soon as I crossed, FHP pulled me over(Hamilton county) and said "you were doing about 100 weren't you?" I wasn't sure how to respond to that as it was obvious that he did have the radar gun on. I think he had me around 100 while I was trying to slow down. Anyway, he gave me a ticket for doing 100 in a 65 and let me continue on my way. I had a $300 ticket and had to take a driver's safety class.

(08-01-2013 12:44 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  This is a non story.

In the sense of it being unimportant, yes.

In the sense of the media paying attention to it, no.

(08-01-2013 12:44 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  This is a non story.

Yeah, but we can't put the toothpaste back in the tube now. The guy will forever be a lightning rod.

(08-01-2013 01:33 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 12:44 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  This is a non story.

Yeah, but we can't put the toothpaste back in the tube now. The guy will forever be a lightning rod.

Thanks to the now hordes of low information citizens and the blood thirsty liberal media.

(08-01-2013 02:32 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 01:33 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 12:44 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  This is a non story.

Yeah, but we can't put the toothpaste back in the tube now. The guy will forever be a lightning rod.

Thanks to the now hordes of low information citizens and the blood thirsty liberal media.

Fox News: George Zimmerman pulled over for speeding in Texas
Fox News: George Zimmerman rescues family from truck crash last week, police say
Fox News Search: George Zimmerman

Wanna try another bogus talking point?

(08-01-2013 11:33 AM)Smaug Wrote:  I got dinged for 62 in a 30 once. It was a road I don't travel regularly, which had been 55 my entire life. The week before, they'd dropped it to 30.

The conversation went like this:

Cop: Sir, do you know why I pulled you over?
Me: No, sir, I don't.
Cop: I clocked you at 62 in a 30.
Me: You're kidding.
Cop: The 62?
Me: No, the 30.

To be fair, I had passed a speed limit sign, but in my defense, it was in a place where you have to merge left, so you're probably not looking to your right. I guess I should be grateful he didn't ding me for reckless driving, because he could have.

My Brother who lives in Texas just told me about a ticket he had gotten out of..

He was doing 70 down a dirt road (45mph) when he passed a cop going the other way. He saw the cop start to turn around and he pulled over before the lights went on.

When the cop got to the window he said "I can't believe you stopped"

My brother said "I was going 70 when I passed you and there is no point in trying to pretend otherwise when you started to turn around"

Cop laughed and gave him a warning.

I think everybody on here needs to just slow the heck down! Keep it within 5-7mph above and you shouldn't be bothered. Save gas, avoid DMV points, higher insurance, and court fines. Have you ever noticed that you often arrive at the next stoplight and the guy speeding, passing dangerously, and otherwise driving recklessly is still sitting there.

I got tired of tickets, so I bought faster vehicles. Gotta haul my 'shine in something.

(Free trivia - The real J.F.'s dad was a moonshiner)

Texas is a good place for Zimmerman. They have the "Stand your ground law" here too. LOL

(08-01-2013 05:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Texas is a good place for Zimmerman. They have the "Stand your ground law" here too. LOL

Stand your ground had nothing to do with the case.

(08-01-2013 05:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Texas is a good place for Zimmerman. They have the "Stand your ground law" here too. LOL

Stand your ground had nothing to do with the case.

Not according to one of the jurors. She said she found Zimmerman not guilty because of the Stand your ground law.

He will probably leave Texas now before Spike Lee Tweets his address again.
Lee was wrong last time.

(08-01-2013 05:18 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Texas is a good place for Zimmerman. They have the "Stand your ground law" here too. LOL

Stand your ground had nothing to do with the case.

Not according to one of the jurors. She said she found Zimmerman not guilty because of the Stand your ground law.

Stand your ground had nothing to do with this case.

So, what exactly do Stand Your Ground laws have to do with Zimmerman and Martin? Absolutely nothing, of course. Outside your own home, common principles of self-defense dictate that unless you have reasonable fear of deadly force or harm, you must flee if possible rather than use deadly force. But a “duty to retreat” rests on the ability to retreat. And “duty to retreat” was irrelevant in Zimmerman’s case because — pinned to the ground with Martin on top of him, bashing his head on the concrete — he was unable to retreat.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article...19255.html

(08-01-2013 05:23 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:18 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Texas is a good place for Zimmerman. They have the "Stand your ground law" here too. LOL

Stand your ground had nothing to do with the case.

Not according to one of the jurors. She said she found Zimmerman not guilty because of the Stand your ground law.

Stand your ground had nothing to do with this case.

So, what exactly do Stand Your Ground laws have to do with Zimmerman and Martin? Absolutely nothing, of course. Outside your own home, common principles of self-defense dictate that unless you have reasonable fear of deadly force or harm, you must flee if possible rather than use deadly force. But a “duty to retreat” rests on the ability to retreat. And “duty to retreat” was irrelevant in Zimmerman’s case because — pinned to the ground with Martin on top of him, bashing his head on the concrete — he was unable to retreat.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article...19255.html

We've gone over this but since you haven't gotten over it I guess I will explain it to you again.

There was no evidence that Teyvon was beating Zimmerman's head into the ground.

Please stick to the facts of the case.

(08-01-2013 05:26 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:23 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:18 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Texas is a good place for Zimmerman. They have the "Stand your ground law" here too. LOL

Stand your ground had nothing to do with the case.

Not according to one of the jurors. She said she found Zimmerman not guilty because of the Stand your ground law.

Stand your ground had nothing to do with this case.

So, what exactly do Stand Your Ground laws have to do with Zimmerman and Martin? Absolutely nothing, of course. Outside your own home, common principles of self-defense dictate that unless you have reasonable fear of deadly force or harm, you must flee if possible rather than use deadly force. But a “duty to retreat” rests on the ability to retreat. And “duty to retreat” was irrelevant in Zimmerman’s case because — pinned to the ground with Martin on top of him, bashing his head on the concrete — he was unable to retreat.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article...19255.html

We've gone over this but since you haven't gotten over it I guess I will explain it to you again.

There was no evidence that Teyvon was beating Zimmerman's head into the ground.

Please stick to the facts of the case.

Except for the neighbor witness..

(08-01-2013 05:18 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:16 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-01-2013 05:13 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Texas is a good place for Zimmerman. They have the "Stand your ground law" here too. LOL

Stand your ground had nothing to do with the case.

Not according to one of the jurors. She said she found Zimmerman not guilty because of the Stand your ground law.

I guess it depends on whether you consider the juror deliberations to be "part of the case" or not. If it is, then virtually any thought that crosses a juror's mind is "part of the case".