Ticketed for High Beams

[infinitethrill]

9:30 pm. Just had gotten off work and was heading home. Passed Madera exit in Simi Valley, CA heading west on 118 freeway going legal speed in number two lane and there was an officer on the shoulder who had just finished pulling over a red bike. I passed as normal as the bike was pulling away. There was a large distance of dark road in front of me (approximately 3 miles until the next exit). I was riding along with my high beams on as per instructed in the motorcycle handbook and what was recommended in the safety course I took. A car passes me going ~85mph in number one lane, and when about 250 feet ahead decelerates quickly and gets behind me. Lights go on and I pull over. I turn off my bike and take the key out and set on rear seat, officer steps out and instructs me to remove helmet and step off bike. He tells me I am riding with high beams on and that it is "highly illegal". I tell him I do what I can to remain as visible as possible but he says it makes it worse to see me if I am blinding other drivers. I remove gloves and retrieve license as requested. He looks over license, and inspects right side of motorcycle with flashlight. Cosmetic damage (scratches) are visible on my plastic fairing from a low speed drop from earlier this year and he comments on them. I tell him I had a low speed tip over. He asked for registration and I hand it to him, to which he immediately goes back to car and waits for another 7 minutes. He returns saying that high beam must be off when following a vehicle from closer than 300 feet and that opposing lanes could be affected. I ask if there is a charge and he says this is a citation and paperwork will come in the mail. He then instructs me to turn on my headlights again so I start the bike and flip them on and off. I apologized for not knowing and was only following what the motorcycle handbook and my MSF instructor said before he walked away. He said no need to apologize and told me to put my gear back on. I remount bike and wait for a clearing when his loudspeaker startled me to accelerate on the shoulder. I speed up and merge back on freeway, he passes me and get off the next exit.

Note: I am wearing full gear - dot helmet, full jacket, gloves, over pants, and boots. I remained calm and did not do anything unless instructed to. I made sure to keep my hands still and visible while he was processing paperwork.

The entire stretch of highway between the exits has 100 feet between the #2 lane I was in and the opposing #1 lane. I doubt the spread of the stock little Ninja headlamp is wide enough to even be seen from that far apart.

I was not following anyone until the officer sped past me. I did not turn off my high beam as his rate of speed would be out of the 300 foot range within seconds and I did not turn off my high beam as I was focused on the road and avoiding a car that was making these maneuvers around me.



Page 20 of the California motorcycle handbook has this excerpt:
Headlight.
The best way to help others see your motorcycle is to always keep the headlight on. Studies show that during the day, a motorcycle with its light on is twice as likely to be noticed. Using your high beam during the day and at night increases the chances that oncoming drivers will see you. Use your high beam if it is legal and safe to do so. When it is foggy, use the low beam.

Page 23 of the California motorcycle handbook has this excerpt:
Use Your High Beam.
Get all the light you can. Use your high beam whenever you are not following or approaching another vehicle. Be visible. Wear reflective materials when riding at night.



Here is the specific citation which I was written up for. On the ticket it references part B.

V C Section 24409 Use of Multiple Beams
Use of Multiple Beams
24409.**Whenever a motor vehicle is being operated during darkness, the driver shall use a distribution of light, or composite beam, directed high enough and of sufficient intensity to reveal persons and vehicles at a safe distance in advance of the vehicle, subject to the following requirements and limitations:
(a) Whenever the driver of a vehicle approaches an oncoming vehicle within 500 feet, he shall use a distribution of light or composite beam so aimed that the glaring rays are not projected into the eyes of the oncoming driver.
The lowermost distribution of light specified in this article shall be deemed to avoid glare at all times regardless of road contour.
(b) Whenever the driver of a vehicle follows another vehicle within 300 feet to the rear, he shall use the lowermost distribution of light specified in this article.
Amended Ch. 37, Stats. 1965. Effective September 17, 1965.



So this just happened earlier tonight. I don't know what I am going to do yet about this but do any of you have any thoughts or experience with this? Thanks for reading through if you made it this far. I am just upset as I feel I was doing nothing but the safest thing possible at the time. It hadn't been 30 seconds since he finished issuing his last ticket.

- Billy

[Yasko]

Good luck...

[Xoulrath]

Yeah, good luck. Several years ago, as my wife and I were coming out of a rough slump financially, we drove around in a Dodge Neon that we purchased from my father and his wife.

So, one Saturday night, my wife and I are driving home at night when a cop passes us headed opposite our direction. I was doing roughly 5mph over the speed limit, nothing that isn't considered normal in my area of Georgia. The next thing I know, the officer pulls us over and, long story short, tickets us for a headlight being out. I know without a doubt the headlight just went out that day because the night before we got a flat and I had to change the tire in the pouring rain in the dark. I explained this to the officer and told him I appreciated the warning and told him I would go straight to a parts store to pick up the light. He said he wasn't giving me a warning, he was giving me a ticket for operating an unsafe vehicle on a public road.

There are a lot of good officers out there, but these types of tickets are pure revenue generation, just like most speeding tickets. He passed you, and then didn't even give you time to switch off the high-beam. Unless there was a car in the opposing lane, you were following the law.

[gophurr]

Hmm, I would take that to court and try to contest it. I would argue that you had your high beams on because there were no cars in front of you at the time, but by the time the officer got in front of you. You first had to make sure that the road ahead was safe enough to before focusing your attention on turning the high beams off. If the judge then says that you should know the controls on your bike well enough to be able to turn off the high beams. Then say an accident can happen within a fraction of a second, and thats just about the same amount of time it takes to turn the high beams off.

Or you can argue that when the officer passed you going 85mph, you did not know it was a police officer and thought it was someone driving recklessly because they sped past you and, suddenly decelerates to get behind you. You did not want to turn your high beams off because if it was a reckless driver you wanted to make sure you were visible to them, to avoid an accident.

Good luck with everything. Hope things work out in your favor. Seems like crap for an officer to give you a citation for something like that

[sixer]

Eh 300 or less is illegal from behind as soon as any 1 passes U - turn yer high beams off- .
Posted via Mobile Device

[BISH]

Sorry to hear about your run in the law In all honesty though I dont think there is anything you can do as by the letter of the law you were in the wrong. Unfortunately common sense doesnt really come into it i'm afraid

[Cazper]

Unfortunately the law states that you were in the wrong. He was technically in the right for issuing you the ticket. Does it suck... yes... is it wrong... no.

I tell my Marines this all the time and feel it fits here so here you go. There comes with every decision a consiquence. You must always consider the most severe consequence for each action and evaluate if the consequence is worth the risk of the decision. In this case... is it worth it to keep my high beam on while traveling behind an individual vice switching it off until they are out of my high beams path or do I mind potentially getting a ticket for leaving it on even though the law states that I should turn it off?

You decided to go against the actual law the way it is written and the officer called you on it. You really have no ground to stand on as far as getting upset about it or trying to argue the point. I'm really not trying to be a jerk about it... just trying to help you see it from another perspective. Thank you for your time and consideration... ride safe

[Boom King]

The ticket sucks and nothing you can really do unless you take it to court to fight it. Consider it a learning experience. From your point of view, you may not think your high beams are that strong but from the view of an approaching vehicle on the other lane or a car in front of you, it can be incredibly distracting.

The scale on your map, if we are to take it as accurate definitively shows that approaching traffic on the other lane is within 500 feet. Your other mistake was to assume that a cop wouldn't mind having your high beams in his rear view even if he was at the point of accelerating pass the point of 300 feet within a few seconds. He clearly was observing what your reaction would be and when you didn't take the hint, he booked you. You also mentioned another car within your vicinity.

It also doesn't really matter that he just handed a ticket to another rider 30 seconds ago. If anything, he was in the mood that night to get his pay cheque. I've seen State Troopers pull over 3 cars at the same time in one shot and told each driver to wait while he went down to them in a line giving each a ticket. Know your local highway laws and don't assume anything when it comes to Cops. Costly learning experience but one to remember nonetheless. Best of luck.

[infinitethrill]

Originally Posted by Boom King

You also mentioned another car within your vicinity.

Just to clarify, the other car was the officer. This was the only car I was near when I was passed.

[Green Streak]

I always run high beams during the day, but during the night I run low beams when there are oncoming cars or if I am about 500ft ft or so behind someone. (even though the law says closer is ok) I hate getting blinded at night myself, so I try not to do it to others. It can be dangerous, since you can't see as effectively when you have high beams blinding you.

That being said, I do think that he should have let you off with a warning. That would have been the decent thing to do, since it sounds like you were not aware of the law at the time. But unfortunately for you, from your exerpts, the law states that when he passed you, you should have gone to low beams as he was within the 300ft limit. So technically he was within the law to issue you the citation. Maybe he was having a bad day and took it out on you. Either way, I think it is going to be tough if you are planning to fight it.

Especially since it only takes a sec or so to switch your high beams off and you said he was going about 85, and even assuming you were going 55 mph, that would put him traveling at 44 fps faster than you. That means that it would take him 6.8 seconds to get out of the 300 ft minimum. Which is plenty of time to switch down to low beams. And it is even longer than that if you were going over 55. It sounds like your instructor did you a disservice if he told you to run your high beams all of the time at night. That is not safer, it could blind an oncoming driver and he could end up in your lane. My

[rusninja]

i dont get why police can break the law and speed :S i mean really if theres no flashing lights and emergency there should be no speeding S:

["A"]

Damn the man, but you will likely loose. Sucks when whole CA is hurting for revenue.

[RedCromwell]

Originally Posted by rusninja

i dont get why police can break the law and speed :S i mean really if theres no flashing lights and emergency there should be no speeding S:

I agree. I see a lot of cops speeding without their lights on.

To the OP, I think it sucks and feel you should try to fight it. You may get lucky and get a judge who'll see your side of things.

[Liber]

I would contest it, but you will more than likely lose. As it has been stated, CA needs money badly and they have no qualms about raking you over the coals to get it. Who knows though, maybe the cop won't show up in court and the judge will be forced to rule in your favor.

My dad is a LEO. He hasn't been a traffic cop in decades, but I'll still ask him about stuff. He said he knows several officers that go out of their way to write tickets when they are in a crappy mood. It's a power trip in some cases, and in others it's just 0 tolerance. I would contest it if possible, as LEO's aren't robots, and the guy may be a little embarrassed about being a tool to so many drivers that night.

Then again, sometimes you just have to bite the bullet. Though I'm sure everyone is aware of this, life isn't fair, prepare accordingly.

[ricochet08]

Good luck man!

[CC Cowboy]

I hate it when people ride, or drive, with their bright lights on. I also hate when their lights are not aligned correctly. I hate the strobe (pulsing) lights also (I usually just flash my brights at the same rate towards them). I find all these situations distracting and dangerous.

I hate that some police think they are above the law and break the law with speeding, not wearing seat belts, putting their flashing lights on to run a traffic light, not using their turn signals, and any other occurance that they like to give tickets to the public for.

[Xoulrath]

[Too40gawlf]

Bill,

I grew up in Granada Hills and went to Moorpark CC for a bit. I've blasted down that stretch of 118 from 23 to Sylmar, both east and west. I know the particular bit youre talking about and it is dark at night. The 118 used to be an awesome stretch of high speed highway. There were mornings that I literally commute to school at a sustained 100mph with no worries. However, nowadays the commisars in Sacramento have made it such that CHP is nothing more than a tarrif collection agency. Chalk up your ticket to the cost of doing business, and continue riding with your high beam on. Your safety isnt worth the assuaging of an ignorant cop or a Sacramento communist.

Unfortunately, you're most likely screwed as far as fighting the ticket in court. One possible means of addressing this is to request and get a court date. Once you have a date established, call the clerk and request to change to a different day of the week. In some agencies, traffic cops have certain days they are billeted to show up to court. By making a request for change of hearing date, you might get lucky and schedule yourself outside of the cop's court window.

Otherwise, pay the ticket and continue riding as safely as you can (with high beams on). As far as chickenshit tickets go, this is high on the list so odds are you should be good in the future. One day, if I run for office, one of my major agenda items will be to strip local jurisdictions of the ability to use law enforcement to generate revenue. Why the people put up with this kind of stuff throughout the country amazes me.

[Cuongism]

I personally hate high beams and don't understand their use unless they're no lights at all in the boonies. It's illegal to have them near anyone (500 approaching, 300 following) so it defeats the purpose of making yourself more visible if you can't use them near anyone. If you are using them near others, you're doing so illegally and knowingly. Here's a nice read of how my experience with it as well:

http://twowheelsoapbox.com/?p=26

IMO, there are many other ways to make yourself more visible. Brighter/reflective gear, headlight modulator, or if you are are going to use your high beam, re-aim it so it doesn't shine into people. You can even get HID's for your low beam to increase intensity. You should also ride like no one can see you regardless as well

[Kevin2109]

After trailing a cop with my high beams for a couple miles there was a red light so i pulled in the lane next to him. he asked me if my head lights were HID's, trying not to talk myself into a ticket i said "eh, they came this way" He then proclaimed that they were very bright. I said yes I drive with my High Beams on so people notice me. He said that he defiantly noticed me more and thought it was a great idea!

[phr3ek]

you will encounter different lawmen with different beliefs
you just happen to come across one that wasnt having a good day

you CAN NOT do anything to fight the citation(?)

its just a lesson learned

ive learned on my commute that unmarked, "ca exempt" crown vics wont pull you over, so i pass them up
i only slow down for the CHP and sheriffs

ps. what is a citation?
i got one too for crossing a double yellow line.......

[kaiserz]

wow. MSF said to turn your highbeams on... but that was an @hole move from the leo, not even a warning geez. /:

[Rebel M9tn11]

In the 250 I run an ebay h4 90/100 watt bulb and keep it on low, never had anything said. Gf of mine has stock 55/60 bulb and runs her bright's 24.7 and hasn't has anything said to her in a year.
I always run low in town, but I ride out in the sticks and having the extremely bright high benifits me a lot.. Im sure if I ran it in town Id be pulled for it pretty quickly.
I've learned through the years if you cant talk your way out of the ticket on the spot, you usually dont have a chance. Good luck to you though bud.

[kkim]

Originally Posted by kaiserz

wow. MSF said to turn your highbeams on... but that was an @hole move from the leo, not even a warning geez. /:

at night????

[Boom King]

I'm a big proponent of the MSF course, however, it's purpose is to teach you basic riding skills and not to necessarily teach you the rules and laws of the road. In my course, we were all expected to know the laws in depth by the time you signed up for the course as they required you to pass your written motorcycle test first. Not sure if it works the same down there. When you're in that parking lot during the course, it's MSF rules; however, out on the actual road MSF rules do not hold precedence over the law.

[phr3ek]

Originally Posted by Boom King

I'm a big proponent of the MSF course, however, it's purpose is to teach you basic riding skills and not to necessarily teach you the rules and laws of the road. In my course, we were all expected to know the laws in depth by the time you signed up for the course as they required you to pass your written motorcycle test first. Not sure if it works the same down there. When you're in that parking lot during the course, it's MSF rules; however, out on the actual road MSF rules do not hold precedence over the law.

joining the MSF class doesnt require you to have full knowledge of the law
you only need to know that for the written test at the DMV

MSF only taught safe practices and common knowledge about riding, nothing about the law

[Kevin2109]

Originally Posted by phr3ek

joining the MSF class doesnt require you to have full knowledge of the law
you only need to know that for the written test at the DMV

MSF only taught safe practices and common knowledge about riding, nothing about the law

[Bo0stZomb13]

If it makes you feel better I was pulling on base the other day at around 1030 and the head light on my 250r pop'd a fuse as I was handing my ID over. The GLPD cop sitting right there saw it die and gave me a ticket on the spot. He even said "I watched your head light on your bike turn off, while handing your ID over". 90$ ticket I get to fight the day I xfer out of this place.

[Boom King]

Originally Posted by phr3ek

joining the MSF class doesnt require you to have full knowledge of the law
you only need to know that for the written test at the DMV

MSF only taught safe practices and common knowledge about riding, nothing about the law

So it is different down there. Where I am, all these courses require you to have passed the written test first. That being said, my point still stands. When you go riding, you should have a clear understanding of your local highway laws. You won't have your friendly MSF instructor around any more to point out mistakes to you. Unfortunately, out on the road it's a cop handing you a ticket to advise you of your mistake. Use the teachings learned in the MSF course to make yourself a better and safer rider within the framework of your local laws.

One of the big things they teach you in the course is having respect for others on the road. Remember this the next time you're riding up behind someone with your high beams on or when there's oncoming traffic. Be safe everyone.

[kkim]

Originally Posted by Boom King

So it is different down there. Where I am, all these courses require you to have passed the written test first. That being said, my point still stands. When you go riding, you should have a clear understanding of your local highway laws. You won't have your friendly MSF instructor around any more to point out mistakes to you. Unfortunately, out on the road it's a cop handing you a ticket to advise you of your mistake. Use the teachings learned in the MSF course to make yourself a better and safer rider within the framework of your local laws.

One of the big things they teach you in the course is having respect for others on the road. Remember this the next time you're riding up behind someone with your high beams on or when there's oncoming traffic. Be safe everyone.

sounds reasonable to me.

[Too40gawlf]

Originally Posted by Boom King

I'm a big proponent of the MSF course, however, it's purpose is to teach you basic riding skills and not to necessarily teach you the rules and laws of the road. In my course, we were all expected to know the laws in depth by the time you signed up for the course as they required you to pass your written motorcycle test first. Not sure if it works the same down there. When you're in that parking lot during the course, it's MSF rules; however, out on the actual road MSF rules do not hold precedence over the law.

Thats all well and good. But laws arent made by infallible benevolents. In fact many times laws are made by incompetents. The spirit of the high beam law is to prevent the douchebag in the lifted F150 from blinding half the highway at night. Hoever, when this law was written, I bet no one gave two squirts of camel piss about the well being of a rider on a Ninja 250.

In all honesty, I cant recall a single time while driving my cage where I've been bothered by a motorcycle highbeam. However, I can recall times where a motorcycle high beam has made me take notice of a rider likely earlier than I wouldve otherwise (both at night and during the day). I can say unequivocally that the 250's high beam is not something thats going to blind a driver. Its really a pretty small headlight and doesnt have the same effect as a pair of larger car headlights (which the laws was intended to address).

As anyone that has ridden on the street for any period of time can testify, the streets are full of cretins that not only dont care about your well being but theire incompetence presents a clear and very real threat to your safety and well being. Why not use ever shred of advantage available to you to ensure safety? If a dickhead cop wants to ticket you, pay it and move on. Most cops arent going to pull you for a BS thing like that.

Some people act like the statutes written in the vehicle code are decrees passed down from God after he finished giving the 10 Commmandmants to Moses. Use some common sense: when driving the cage, dont use highbeams in traffic, when riding the bike: use highbeams.

[kkim]

motorcycles shouldn't be exempt from laws that are on the books, just because they're bikes. if you don't like how the laws are written, petition/lobby to have them changed. until then, you are subject to the same laws that apply to all other vehicles on the road.

[Boom King]

You're right that some laws are not made by infallible omnipotent beings nor are they decrees handed down by a universal maker. This is all obvious. Nonetheless, this is all immaterial when a Cop is handing you a ticket. This reasoning also won't hold much water in a court of law.

Unless there's an exemption in the law for motorcycles where you live, I'm not sure what to say to someone who feels they need to break the law in order to ride more safe and be visible. Have you explored all the other legal reasonable alternatives first? Why would I just stop at high beams then if I were to use every option available? I could also put a very loud pipe on my bike that will wake up the whole neighbourhood but some localities around here have a decibel law. I could break that law as well for my own safety and visibility but I won't play the assumption game with Cops or have them black list my plate for multiple offences. I'd rather not deal with the hassle but that's just me. If I obey the law, I expect all others whether they be cagers or riders to do the same as well. Call the cops dickheads or call it BS but at the end of the day, the ticket appears on your record that you end up having to pay it and you're just another number on his quota.

[Too40gawlf]

Originally Posted by Boom King

You're right that some laws are not made by infallible omnipotent beings nor are they decrees handed down by a universal maker. This is all obvious. Nonetheless, this is all immaterial when a Cop is handing you a ticket. This reasoning also won't hold much water in a court of law.

Unless there's an exemption in the law for motorcycles where you live, I'm not sure what to say to someone who feels they need to break the law in order to ride more safe and be visible. Have you explored all the other legal reasonable alternatives first? Why would I just stop at high beams then if I were to use every option available? I could also put a very loud pipe on my bike that will wake up the whole neighbourhood but some localities around here have a decibel law. I could break that law as well for my own safety and visibility but I won't play the assumption game with Cops or have them black list my plate for multiple offences. I'd rather not deal with the hassle but that's just me. If I obey the law, I expect all others whether they be cagers or riders to do the same as well. Call the cops dickheads or call it BS but at the end of the day, the ticket appears on your record that you end up having to pay it and you're just another number on his quota.

You know what the funny thing is? The cop is ensconsed in his 3800 lb Crown Victoria and will happily show up on scene to write a PR in favor of the idiot soccer mom that just plowed into you because she has no concept that driving a vehicle is akin to handling a deadly weapon and has so little value for your life as to scan ahead at an intersection. Sure, having a highbeam on is not going to make a difference in many accidents, but certainly it will in some.

Im not arguing that a highbeam ticket is legally defensible (from the rider's perspective) in court or that the cop is not technically within the law to give you a ticket. However, as a rider, you have to make the decision as to whether to balance blind obedience of a law that may be shortsighted to the detriment of motorcycle riders or err on the side of safety. I maintain that most cops are not going to give a crap about your highbeam. In those rare instances you run into a jerk cop, and yes a highbeam ticket on a rider is chickenshit no matter how you slice it, you eat the consequences. Trust me, unless you live in a tiny town with a miniscule PD that knows you and targets you, you will not be getting highbeam tickets on a regular basis. If your high beam prevents just one accident in your riding career, it will far, far, far outweigh the costs of a 100 high beam tickets.

[Too40gawlf]

Originally Posted by kkim

motorcycles shouldn't be exempt from laws that are on the books, just because they're bikes. if you don't like how the laws are written, petition/lobby to have them changed. until then, you are subject to the same laws that apply to all other vehicles on the road.

Kim, I agree with you in principle. But there are two points Id like to add to that. One, motorcycle riders are and will always be a minority and its always going to be a struggle to represent the interests of riders when passing legislation. Remember, elected officials will almost always defer to the Mothers of America types over any reasoned argument of a minority.

Second, like I said before, blind obedience to laws without any type of logical input is not reasonable. For example, its 5 AM and youre out on your bike waiting on a red light. There's no traffic and your bike isnt triggering the light signals. Technically, in some jurisdictions, its illegal for you to treat the interection as a stop sign. Do you run it or do you sit there?

[CC Cowboy]

Originally Posted by Too40gawlf

Kim, I agree with you in principle. But there are two points Id like to add to that. One, motorcycle riders are and will always be a minority and its always going to be a struggle to represent the interests of riders when passing legislation. Remember, elected officials will almost always defer to the Mothers of America types over any reasoned argument of a minority.

Second, like I said before, blind obedience to laws without any type of logical input is not reasonable. For example, its 5 AM and youre out on your bike waiting on a red light. There's no traffic and your bike isnt triggering the light signals. Technically, in some jurisdictions, its illegal for you to treat the interection as a stop sign. Do you run it or do you sit there?

Turn right, then U turn.

[Too40gawlf]

Originally Posted by CC Cowboy

Turn right, then U turn.

And commit two violations instead of one?

I.) illegal lane change (provided there is 3 or more lanes on the road youre on): moving from the left turn lane to the furthest most right lan in one motion.

II.) suppose after you make youre right, the road you're own has double yellow lines - now your U-turn is illegal.

[kaiserz]

Originally Posted by kkim

at night????

yes at night XD

[phr3ek]

Originally Posted by Too40gawlf

Second, like I said before, blind obedience to laws without any type of logical input is not reasonable. For example, its 5 AM and youre out on your bike waiting on a red light. There's no traffic and your bike isnt triggering the light signals. Technically, in some jurisdictions, its illegal for you to treat the interection as a stop sign. Do you run it or do you sit there?

Originally Posted by CC Cowboy

Turn right, then U turn.

the law, in CALI (idk about whole US), states that if that were the case, after 3 min. has elapsed of you waiting there, you MAY run a red light, given that it is safe to do so

[Too40gawlf]

Originally Posted by phr3ek

the law, in the US, states that if that were the case, after 3 min. has elapsed of you waiting there, you MAY run a red light, given that it is safe to do so

In the US? Is that Federal law? If so, I would be really, really curious to see the Federal code for that.