Got an e-mail from one of my dad's secretaries with this disclaimer at the bottom.. (original e-mail was from another insurance company)

"E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, copying, or storage of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited."

First off as you will see a new cell phone fine was implemented (along with many other "new" fines as of July 1, 2007) but wouldn't you think the media who have made a huge spiel about something like this? Did I miss a nightly news cast or something? Can someone confirm ANY of these fines..?


1. As of 07/01/07 cell phone use must be "hands free" while driving. Ticket is $285. They will be looking for this like crazy - easy money for police department.

2. Cell phone use in the construction zone. - Double fine as of 07/01/07. Cell phone use must be "hands free" while driving.

3. Carpool lane - 1st time $1068.50 starting 7/1/07 (The $271 posted on the highway is old). Don't do it again because 2nd time is going to be double. 3rd time triple and 4th time license suspended.

4. Incorrect lane change - $380. Don't cross the lane on solid lines or intersections.

5. Block intersection - $485

6. Driving on the shoulder - $450

6. Passengers over 18 not in their seatbelts - both passengers and drivers get tickets.

7. Speeders can only drive 3 miles above the limit.

8. DUI = JAIL (Stays on your driving record for 10 years!)

 

really... that seems a bit harsh.

I'm having a hard time believing it.

 

not true as far as i know.

 

not in this state!!

 

ill pick up and move

 

Man, I do 4 or 5 of those things at a time some days!

 

haha aint that right..probably break more rules than are listed lol

 

It's a spoof email. Ever hear of snopes.com?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/traffic/california.asp

But you can search Florida laws here. http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...1&Tab=statutes

 

That's what I figured, just was looking for confirmation!




As for the specific laws listed above: California Laws

1. Carpool lane - 1st time $1068.50 starting 7/1/07 (The $271 posted on the highway is old). Don't do it again because 2nd timeis going to be double. 3rd timetriple, and 4th time license suspended.</I>

The minimum suggested fine for a carpool lane violation (i.e., driving solo in a carpool lane) has increased from $271 to $380 (not $1068.50). There is no provision for automatically increasing the fine or suspending licenses for subsequent violations.

(In mid-June 2007, California was warned by the Federal Highway Administration that the state was not meeting federal guidelines for carpool lanes that require a minimum 45 mph speed at least 90% of the time during rush hours, so the CHP has been asked to step up enforcement against carpool-lane violators.)

2. Incorrect lane change - $380. Don't cross the lane on solid lines or intersections.

The recommended fine for an unsafe turn or illegal lane change is $146, not $380. (Incidentally, according to the California Highway Patrol, "it is not illegal to change lanes in an intersection if it is safe to do.")

3. Block intersection - $485

The recommended fine for blocking an intersection (i.e., gridlock) is $190, not $485

4. Driving on the shoulder - $450

The recommended fine for unsafe passing on the right shoulder is $146, not $450

5. Cell phone use in the construction zone. - Double fine as of 07/01/07. Cell phone use must be "hands free" while driving

California law already allows for all traffic infraction fines to be doubled when an infraction occurs in a construction zone. The law requiring that motorists who engage in phone calls while driving must use "<A HREF="http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/09/15/BAG75L6BJC1.DTL" TARGET-free>hands-free</A>"</NOBR> devices does not take effect until July 2008.</LI>

6. Passengers over 18 not in their seatbelts - both passengers and drivers get tickets

According to California law, any child under the age of 6 weighing less than 60 pounds must be secured in a federally approved child passenger restraint system and ride in the back seat of a vehicle. Children at least <NOBR>6 years old but less than 16, and children under age 6 who weigh more than <60 pounds must be properly secured in an appropriate child passenger restraint system or safety belt which meets federal safety standards. The driver and all other passengers must be restrained by safety belts.

If a passenger under the age of 16 is not restrained with a proper safety belt, a citation may be issued to the vehicle's driver or the child's parent or guardian (if present). If a passenger 16 or older is not restrained with a proper safety belt, the driver and/or the passenger may be cited.

7. Speeders can only drive 3 miles above the limit.

Drivers in California can be cited for speeding for driving at <U>any</U> rate (even just 1 MPH)over the maximum posted speed limit (and even for driving under the maximum posted speed limit, if current road conditions make that speed unsafe). Although police may not typically cite motorists until they exceed posted speed limits by a certain amount (e.g., 3-7 MPH no California law sets a minimum amount of excess speed required for citation issuance

8. DUI = JAIL (Stays on your driving record for 10 years!)

Being taken into custody and brought to a police station (and spending a few hours in jail) is the typical experience for a motorist who is found to have a blood alcohol content over the state limit (or who refuses to take a sobriety test). How much jail time an offender might be sentenced to after a DUI conviction depends upon a number of factors (e.g., severity of the offense, previous driving record). Courts look back <NOBR>10 years</NOBR> for assessing increased penalties against those with one or more previous convictions for DUI offenses on their records.

The current <A HREF="http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11_5/vc23536.htm" TARGET=dui>penalty</A> for a first DUI conviction in California is "imprisonment in the county jail for not less than 96 hours, at least 48 hours of which shall be continuous, nor more than six months, and by a fine of not less than three hundred ninety dollars ($390), nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000)." (Additional fines, temporary license suspension, community service, and mandatory DUI class attendance are also common <A HREF="http://www.california-drunkdriving.org/dui_penalties.html" TARGET=penalty>penalties</A> for first-time offenders.)</LI>

9. As of 07/01/07 cell phone use must be "hands free" while driving. Ticket is $285. They will be looking for this like crazy - easy money for police department.

As noted above, the law requiring that motorists who enage in phone calls while driving must use </A> HREF="http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/09/15/BAG75L6BJC1.DTL" TARGET-free>hands-free</A>" devices does not take effect until July 2008 and calls for "a base fine of $20 for a first offense and $50 for each subsequent offense."

 

holy **** its true...

 

Not in Florida.

 

Exactly, not here. There are highly publicized new fines for certain zones in Florida where fines are doubled. In Jax, it's on I-95 between Baymeadows and University. I also saw that it's in Brevard County, in the Melborn area, also on I-95 where the construction zone is near exit 201.

They have increased FHP presence in those areas. There were three near JTB today with people pulled over during rush hour.

I'm too lazy to find the link, but I think it started in June and is supposed to last a few months. It's some sort of study on reducing traffic speed relative to excessive fining...

 

i give up =(

i heard it all on the radio the other day.

 

take a look at this link and see if you see any similarities?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/traffic/california.asp

Repost btw.

 

Just saw someone else listed the same site