Finally, I've found my perfect defense while driving.

[CoolBreeze]

Supreme Court upholds ruling on DUI, turn signals
By The Associated Press


CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- The state Supreme Court says motorists don't have to use turn signals if other traffic isn't affected by the driver's action.

Monday's unanimous ruling upheld a November 2007 Hampshire Circuit Court decision that rejected the Division of Motor Vehicles' suspension of Chad Clower's driver's license for six months for driving under the influence.

Clower was charged after a State Police trooper pulled him over in June 2006 for not using his signal to make a right turn. The trooper was about a block behind when Clower turned.

During a hearing, the trooper said he only stopped Clower because he hadn't used his turn signal.

The high court ruled that turn signals are only necessary when other vehicles might be affected.

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200905040275

[Lester]

So they've eliminated one more tool of probable cause. I feel safer already.



Now we get to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars more in courtroom debates about whether or not another motorist was affected.

In the mean time, we still pimp out our police to the insurance companies by enforcing click-it or ticket.

There is something very wrong with this picture.

[Hoosier Daddy]

I agree, Lester. This court ruling opens a gray area the size of several football fields. When is another driver affected? Define "affected" - is it a minor inconvienence, or does someone need to damn near wreck their car? And, of course, the defense attorney will require the prosecution to PROVE IT. Yup. I feel safer on the highways. Party on, Garth.

[Jet Black]

Another case of courts making the rules where the legislature has made none. Power to the people.

[Hoosier Daddy]

Another case of courts making the rules where the legislature has made none. Power to the people.

Yup.

[AmpedNow]

Blinkers? That's that fancy-smanchy stuff them city slickers use to impress people.

They can't read our minds, that's their fault.

[Jet Black]

People used to tell me never to use my turn signals in Pittsburgh traffic, drivers up there would just use that information to counter you.

[Arp2]

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- The state Supreme Court says motorists don't have to use turn signals if other traffic isn't affected by the driver's action.

That's how I've been doing it as long as I've been driving; there's no need to pass irrelevant information to anyone.

[CoolBreeze]

Does that mean you don't need to turn on headlights when it rains... if no other vehicles are affected?
How about headlights at night?

[Bar Rat]

Blinkers? That's that fancy-smanchy stuff them city slickers use to impress people.

I always thought they were an option, and I chose not to have them.

[Bob Campbell]

God, somebody had to do this.

Arp wrote;

there's no need to pass irrelevant information to anyone.

Isn't that everything you post?

Just kidding, but too good to pass up.

[OldSkool]

It's only irrevelant if it doesn't affect anyone else...

[Ace Purple]

So they've eliminated one more tool of probable cause.

It's a rare win for the Fourth Amendment.

[Scott Reppert]

Power to the people.

Right on. And don't worry, Kyoko. Mommy's only looking for her hand in the snow...

[Jet Black]

Over my head!

[Scott Reppert]

Over my head!

Nah. That was Fleetwood Mac.

We're talking John Lennon here...