VC-27400 is FRICKIN' STOOPID!!

[ro-monster]

The code that made it illegal to wear regular earplugs was rewritten since 2004. (I think it was 2006 or 2007.) It's now legal to wear earplugs designed to prevent hearing damage from excessive noise.

[duckwrench13]

Well, here's the regulations, right from the CA DMV site:

"Wearing of Headsets or Earplugs

27400.   A person operating a motor vehicle or bicycle may not wear a headset covering, or earplugs in, both ears. This prohibition does not apply to any of the following:

(a) A person operating authorized emergency vehicles, as defined in Section 165.

(b) A person engaged in the operation of either special construction equipment or equipment for use in the maintenance of any highway.

(c) A person engaged in the operation of refuse collection equipment who is wearing a safety headset or safety earplugs.

(d) A person wearing personal hearing protectors in the form of earplugs or molds that are specifically designed to attenuate injurious noise levels. The plugs or molds shall be designed in a manner so as to not inhibit the wearer's ability to hear a siren or horn from an emergency vehicle or a horn from another motor vehicle.

(e) A person using a prosthetic device that aids the hard of hearing.

Amended Sec. 45, Ch. 594, Stats. 2003. Effective January 1, 2004."

If you had one on each ear, then yes, you were in the wrong. But given the way the officer conducted himself, I think you should challenge his "you should know all 4200 of them" statement. It might wash this whole thing for ya.

[Kaveh]

All this recent harassment wants me to never leave the house and become a Hermit 

Usually before I am pulled over I know if I am getting a ticket or not.  If I am doing 15-20 mph over or blew a stop sign, I'm pretty much expecting a ticket & deserving one.  But most of the time I am driving within the law and if I am getting pulled over I know it is either a misunderstanding or something really trivial or the officer is fishing for something else (thinking DUI, not licensed, registered, insured, ect...)  Once it's obvious that I am sober and have all my paper work I get a 'drive safe' and I always respond "stay safe out there officer" (or something along those lines).

When I got pulled over today and the officer was a total prick right off the bat and gave me a ticket (right after the handsfree law went into effect  ) I thought about this local board (the MOB) and the recent trend of harassing incidents that's been popping up here.  (part of my motovation on snapping a pic, it was for you guys  )

I understand why you don't want drivers to wear headsets and listen to music, it can distract them.  I also understand why you don't want drivers to hold cell phones to their ears, it can distract them.    VC 27400 was written to stop drivers from being distracted from listening to Walkmans and such.  I had earbuds in my ears that weren't even on, I was trying to follow the new handsfree law    That was plainly, and painfully (to me, anyways) obvious!  I think my ticket is equal to a motorcyclist getting the same ticket for wearing hearing protection...by the letter of the law, you are breaking it, by the intention of the law, you are not...


FRICK FRICK!!!!!  I dont' want a stooopid point on my license and I am in a financial pinch right now and don't want to shell out a couple hundred bucks because some prick wanted to get his jollies off. 

[lucazuma]

....fight it.

Do a trial by declaration...i did it 3 times...ticket assassin.com

You have a good chance to get away with it.

[remy]

I'm glad the hands-free law is being enforced immediately after it has gone into effect. There was a lot of warning ahead of time and I'm actually really happy about this law. I also think it's a good thing to not allow drivers to have speakers of any kind in both ears while driving their cars. It's dangerous enough on the roads w/out drivers being potentially cut off from hearing things around them. That officer sounds like he conducted himself extremely poorly in this situation, but at least you know and can avoid this situation in the future. I think I remember the fine for this ticket (first offence) somewhere around $15. No sweat.

[Kaveh]

I'm glad the hands-free law is being enforced immediately after it has gone into effect. There was a lot of warning ahead of time and I'm actually really happy about this law. I also think it's a good thing to not allow drivers to have speakers of any kind in both ears while driving their cars. It's dangerous enough on the roads w/out drivers being potentially cut off from hearing things around them. That officer sounds like he conducted himself extremely poorly in this situation, but at least you know and can avoid this situation in the future. I think I remember the fine for this ticket (first offence) somewhere around $15. No sweat.

That is the fine for the hands free violation.  That is not what I got a ticket for.  I got a ticket because my hearing was being impaired 
cough cough *bullshit* cough cough.

I totally agree with the handsfree advice, that's why I had one on!

If you re-read my posts, you'll see what/why/how I got a ticket.  I wasn't in violation of the handsfree law, I was falling it.  I got slapped with a defunct law that was used in a different manner than the lawmakers intended.

[Kaveh]

....fight it.

Do a trial by declaration...i did it 3 times...ticket assassin.com

You have a good chance to get away with it.

I will definitely fight it if it is either a moving violation or a big fine.  I have nothing to lose at this point, I am not eligible for traffic school, and can't really afford a big fine right now. 

First I'm going to ask for an extension, then I am going to request a trial by written declaration.





ps.  you have no spelling erros in your post...who are you and what did you do with Luca/Amy/no-pants-man/captain morgan/Borat?

[Grampa]

scofflaw

ya should have shown him yer cock and balls.

[BWClark]

  He even gave me shit for not knowing the whole V.C., (and I quote) "it is your responsibility as a licensed California driver to know ALL 4200 vehicle codes, every one"    ...

You should have brought your finger up to your mouth, bitten on it just a little, and seductively said "Can you teach me?"

[Popeye the Sailor]

You should have brought your finger up to your mouth, bitten on it just a little, and seductively said "Can you teach me?"

[BikerGoddess]

It's rumored that DPT eats their young. If that's true, then traffic enforcement LEOs must eat the surviving DPT, as well as their own!

You know that DPT stands for Don't Park There, right? 

[BikerGoddess]

I will definitely fight it if it is either a moving violation or a big fine.  I have nothing to lose at this point, I am not eligible for traffic school, and can't really afford a big fine right now. 

I'm curious about the hands-free device's manufacturer. Try contacting the company and complain that their device cost you a ticket, even though you were attempting to comply with the new law.

[hbliam]

He didn't cite you for the cell phone law (or handsfree law) (23123 (a) CVC) he cited you for the headset/earplug law.

If they are part of your handfree system you can try court, pled your case, and ask for a reduced fine if found guilty. The cop might not show up which would negate the whole trial anyway. 

Trial by declaration works depending on the department. I've never not filled one out and it gives me the opportunity to perfectly show guilt. The only chance you have of winning those is if they don't get filled out and returned.

[Kaveh]

He didn't cite you for the cell phone law (or handsfree law) (23123 (a) CVC) he cited you for the headset/earplug law.

If they are part of your handfree system you can try court, pled your case, and ask for a reduced fine if found guilty. The cop might not show up which would negate the whole trail anyway. 

Trail by declaration works depending on the department. I've never not filled one out and it gives me the opportunity to perfectly show guilt. The only chance you have of winning those is if they don't get filled out and returned.

Thanks for the advice Scott  , I am hoping that the person hearing the case (I know they aren't judges, but I forgot what they are called...) understands what the lawmakers were intending when they wrote VC 27400 and dismisses the case.  I know if you lose your trial by written declaration that you can request a in-person trial, that kinda gives me a 'free' chance and winning.  Right now I have more time than money, so I'm willing to use every opportunity I have. 

[hbliam]

Thanks for the advice Scott  , I am hoping that the person hearing the case (I know they aren't judges, but I forgot what they are called...) understands what the lawmakers were intending when they wrote VC 27400 and dismisses the case.  I know if you lose your trial by written declaration that you can request a in-person trial, that kinda gives me a 'free' chance and winning.  Right now I have more time than money, so I'm willing to use every opportunity I have. 

It's usually a commissioner. And yes, you get to have a trial if you lose the declaration.

As far as what was "intended", you violated that. They intend for you to not cover both of your ears while you drive. I still think you could get some mercy but you never know.