Glad to hear you're ok.


As for the car...that'll buff right out

 

and I completely see your point. However, I still feel like this type of ticket is pure . I can certainly see a ticket being issued where a person made a purposeful decision to break a law which resulted in a crash (speeding, drunk driving, etc.). I can almost see a ticket being issued if another party suffered injury and/or property damage, thus ensuring that the person at fault will go through a process to correct the situation.

But in cases like this...
1) No laws were broken.
2) No other parties suffered injury/property damage.
Issuing a ticket is just insulting. What purpose does it have? The person obviously made a mistake that is already going to cost them dearly. In this case it was extensive property damage and it had very good potential for serious injury. Is that not enough to teach a person that a mistake was made? Is a $100 fine on top of all that going to change the person's learning?

It smells of pure revenue to me. Who can argue against a ticket for "too fast for conditions" when the car is in the ditch. The sad part is, while a government agency is going to take a few bucks just because, the insurance company is going to raise rates for the points added (on top of any rate increases for the accident), and their decision about rate increases based on the accident could change depending on whether a ticket was issued.
_____________________________

Sorry for the rant. That's just my opinion, despite that I've never received a ticket like that.

1AP12NV, please don't take this is an attack toward you. Again, I agree with your statement, I just personally do not agree with the logic for the ticket in the first place.
_____________________________

OP. I'm certainly glad you're okay.

 

sorry man glad you're ok

please explain to me why the tropper would write you up for Driving too fast for conditions and then come to court to try and reduce it to Improper Driving why wouldn't he just write you up for that to begin with??

 

Well it sgood you are safe since thats whats most important.

After that, however, we should all offer a moment of silence to one of our fallen S2000s....it paisn the heart to see another one of them meet their demise

 

the carnage is almost to much to bear... hide the kids!

 

Oh man ... glad you came away alright!!

 

You could wrap the roll-cage with some thick foam in the areas where its around your head. And driving around with a helmet doesn't sound like too bad of an idea now . But regardless, I'm surpirsed how well the s2k's soft-top holds up in roll-overs.....like seriously.

 

I wouldn't take it as an attack You make a very good point and I'm inclined to agree. In a situation where there is no damage to anyone's property / person except for the driver, then it does smack of revenue making.

In this particular case, I'm sure the insurance hike as a result of his accident and the trauma of werecking his new ride and almost hurting himself would be more than enough incentive to keep speeds down in wet conditions in the future, so I don't see how the ticket could be acting as a deterrent either.

Good points, and I think



All that aside though, the important thing is that you're ok and that you come away from the incident having learned something!!

-J

 

i'd say you're probably lucky you had a muddy/grassy landing.

i totalled my S last year and my biggest injury was to my head from the metal bar that raises and lowers the soft top (top was up when i wrecked)...so maybe we all should be wearing helmets..

as far as you needing another S...there are plenty in the for sale forum..good luck and careful in the rain!


--oh...and pretty impressive you didn't stall!!!