Traffic Law Loopholes!

Hello, it’s your boy kerbal with your boring monthly traffic report. This is in response to A Bill to Amend “Firestone Traffic Revision Act [Part 1]” and it’s a clarification of Updated Citation/Towing Laws!

It has taken the community a full 2 months to find out that there’s a few critical errors with the Firestone Traffic Revision Act because no one apart from me proof reads it! Due to English not being my mother tongue, there’s a few errors which, even if I’d proofread it a million times, I would not have been able to see.

  1. Speeding and Failure to Drive on the Correct Side of the Road
    The wording of these two charges specify: ““driving or operating a bicycle” which, in my eyes, is to be interpreted as ‘driving’ (the act of driving a car) or ‘operating a bicycle’ (the two have no correlation). However, it’s pretty vague and leaves room to be interpreted that speeding and failure to drive on the correct side of the road are both only applicable for bicycles. An amendment for the speeding charge has already been proposed.

  2. Parking, Stopping, and Waiting
    While I’ve ranted a few times about being allowed to park on the side of the roadway and on the grass, I advise people not to do this despite these rants as, again, there’s a grammatical error, which specifies that “Vehicles cannot park in any area not designated for parking (to be indicated by signage or road markings).” In my mind, this is to be read as ‘you aren’t allowed to park in an area where signage or road markings indicate that you can’t park’, not as ‘you aren’t allowed to park ANYWHERE except for areas designated for parking’. Again, this is vague and, therefore, I advise everyone to only park, wait, and stop in areas specifically designated for such.

  3. Driving Backwards into Traffic
    The wording in this charge specifies that “$70 citation and $120 citation on roads with a speed limit at or above 70s/s.”, which, in my mind, is pretty clear. If you’re on a road w/ speed limit at or above 70s/s, it’s $120. If not, it’s $70. However, it can definitely be interpreted as being $120+$70 on roads with a speed limit at or above 70s/s.

I would like to note that speed limits still apply!!! There’s a charge of ‘Violating Road Markings or Signage’ which can and will be used in cases of speeding, ranging anywhere between $25 and $125. General charges like Reckless Driving, etc., still apply.

Finally, I would like to urge Congress not to fix issues other than the Speeding error as I have always wanted to keep the amendments to the Traffic Act to a limited amount. I will be proposing a once again revised version of the Traffic Act during or at the end of 2020 Q1. There are currently already 3 pages of revision plans and amendments which will be included therein.

If you have any questions as to traffic law or anything stated here, don’t hesitate to comment or DM me.

2 Likes

Update: The Stapleton County Government has proposed a temporary Speeding law which will illegalize it as it was before until the State catches up with their law. Currently in voting, voting ends tomorrow.

2 Likes

I WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE THAT: Speeding IS illegal under the charge of ‘Violating Road Markings or Signage’. If you’re operating a motor vehicle, one could argue that Speeding doesn’t apply to you, hence you use the more vague charge. If you were cited for Speeding before, DO NOT BELIEVE that it’s a free chance to sue the cop for False Citation. This is simply the safest interpretation of the Speeding charge as is.

2 Likes

while ur all here pls read over my criminal code https://trello.com/b/EGN3OQzQ/firestone-criminal-code-r

4 Likes

who cares about the county government

3 Likes

No advertising

2 Likes

Congress: Amend all of the former criminal and driving law to fix any loophole.
Create more loophole than the previous one
Congress:

3 Likes

its not ADVERTISING

1 Like

As mentioned above, speeding is now officially illegal.

2 Likes

i dunno what ur smoking, it isn’t advertising lmao

2 Likes

I’m being humoristic

1 Like

My is my gut giving me the feeling that the county can’t make something unlawful that is already unlawful… or am I misreading this whole situation? (I’ll look at this tomorrow when I can think clearer)

2 Likes

According to C.V.VIII and themasterofall670 v. City of Redwood, as long as the inferior government’s laws don’t infringe on that of the State, it’s completely fine. As ‘driving or operating a motor vehicle’ above the speed limit is not specifically legalized or illegalized by the State, the county can fill the gaps.

Furthermore, even if Speeding was completely illegal with the proper definition, the county is still authorized to make the severity of Speeding citations higher as long as they do not legalize something which is illegal or make the citation for something lower than that in the State law.

2 Likes

Oh and one last thing, if anyone finds any other loopholes, please DM me so I can put it in my list of planned revisions.

2 Likes

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

2 Likes