Last night I got very lucky. I was on a back "country road" returning from my hockey game. I was unaware that a short stretch of road I travel has a speed limit of 30. I thought it was 55 (most back country roads I travel are) so I was going 57. So I got pulled over.
The officer informed me of the speed limit and my speed. I did not argue. I would never. Not knowing the speed limit is not a good excuse.
The last time (and only time) I got a speeding ticket, it was the end of the month. I'm not sure if there is any truth to this but I have heard you are more likely to get a ticket towards the end of a month when officers are trying to meet their monthly quota. It was September 26th. I was sure he was bringing me back a very expensive ticket.
So I was shocked when he informed me that he was giving me a warning. I thanked him and drove away...surprised.
My question is, why did I get a warning instead of a ticket? What makes a police officer decide between the two when he/she pulls over a driver?
I have no idea. Perhaps, for me:
1. He looked at my record and saw that I have never been arrested and have never had a speeding ticket before (the first one was wiped off my record...long story). He knew I was generally a law-abiding citizen and let me go.
2. He noticed the hockey bag and sticks in my truck bed. He happened to be a fellow hockey fan and decided to let me go.
3. He was just a real nice guy being nice.
I really cannot think of any others. I broke the law. I was exceeding the speed limit by 27 miles an hour. All logic suggests I should have received a ticket. All I can do now is wonder why...and consider myself very lucky.
-wj
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Duh,
ReplyDelete# 2 is the only explanation. As a law abiding citizen, 27 is still too much to exceed the limit. Hockey, however, transcends logic. Or, maybe, he smelled your hockey bag and decided that, at 27 over, he would have to impound your vehicle. Perhaps, the hockey bag saved you for a different reason.
Ron