Unfortunately this was too late for me. On January 1 of this year Nevada decriminalized traffic tickets and they are now classified as a civil infraction as opposed to a criminal misdemeanor.

I got a ticket last October for failing to stop at a stop sign, I had no clue at the time it would go on my record as a conviction for a criminal misdemeanor. So I just paid it unknowingly the repercussions of doing so. I was very surprised when I got an email in February telling me my TSA precheck and Global Entry were revoked. When I inquired they said it was due to a criminal conviction.

I called an attorney and he pulled my record and sure enough, it shows up as a "CRIMINAL MISDEMEANOR CONVICTION" for failing to stop at a stop sign.

I am terrified that this BS could prevent me from renting apartment etc...

I think the new law is a good move, the old law that is a criminal offense is a total abuse of power.

Now I am stuck with it,

https://mynews4.com/newsletter-daily/ne ... arson-city

IMO I think this is a bad move. I wouldn't want to walk on The Strip knowing drivers can go unchecked.

phatfarmlines wrote:

IMO I think this is a bad move. I wouldn't want to walk on The Strip knowing drivers can go unchecked.

I don't understand what you are saying. Drivers will still be subject to being stopped and cited for traffic violations, however most minor violations won't be considered a criminal offense. In most places I've been, only serious traffic offenses are considered criminal offenses, otherwise it is a civil infraction. Here in North Carolina, things like reckless driving, excessive speed (80mph+), or aggressive driving are all considered criminal offenses.

Not clear how reducing the penalties for motoring offences is a good idea.

I doubt that people would cheer if the penalties for non motoring offences were also reduced.

Are we talking speeding tickets or other minor moving violations here?

Where I live, minor offences like doing a few kms over the speed limit etc. are simple moving violations and having nothing to do with the Criminal Code of Canada - more serious violations such as DUI or driving without due care or attention can have criminal offence penalties depending on a court ruling.

Well in his case it's for blowing through a stop sign.

While that can be dangerous, it's also not criminal in my book.

Here in France (and in other European countries) we have points on our driving licenses, the same offense would cost 90€ if paid quickly, and 4 points on the license (license has 12 points so don't do it too often...). No involvement of the courts unless you cause a significant accident as a result.

A DUI (not just above the limit for alcohol but some more) is 6 points and you get a court date, it would be a "misdemeanor" although depending on the situation the judge can be lenient, for example if it's the first time, your job or something else is on the line, etc., you could get say a big fine and nothing else.

bennett123 wrote:

Not clear how reducing the penalties for motoring offences is a good idea.

How are the penalties being reduced? You still have to pay the appropriate fine or other penalty for a minor traffic offence, but you don't end up being branded a criminal. Not seeing the issue here.

scbriml wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Not clear how reducing the penalties for motoring offences is a good idea.

How are the penalties being reduced? You still have to pay the appropriate fine or other penalty for a minor traffic offence, but you don't end up being branded a criminal. Not seeing the issue here.

Because it is not regarded as a crime any more.

People will now think it is less serious.

People, this wouldn't mean that you are allowed to go berserk just because it's not a criminal offence anymore. What they need to do now is to increase the fine to $1000 per citation. And see how people would calm down.

bennett123 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Not clear how reducing the penalties for motoring offences is a good idea.

How are the penalties being reduced? You still have to pay the appropriate fine or other penalty for a minor traffic offence, but you don't end up being branded a criminal. Not seeing the issue here.

Because it is not regarded as a crime any more.

People will now think it is less serious.

Because in much of the civilized world, it isn't considered a crime. Didn't you tell us once that you don't even own a car? That could color your thinking.

ewt340 wrote:

People, this wouldn't mean that you are allowed to go berserk just because it's not a criminal offence anymore. What they need to do now is to increase the fine to $1000 per citation. And see how people would calm down.

Roll a stop sign in Vegas, its $395, that should be enough to stop you from doing it again for a while.

It's strange though, I rolled one maybe 10 years ago, paid the fine and nothing on my record from it.

That something like that would even be considered criminal to begin with is quite weird.

Here, if you run a stop sign, you get cited with a fine and have points against your licence (X amount of points equals suspension) - however, if running a stop sign results in an accident, then it could elevate to a criminal charge.

johns624 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

How are the penalties being reduced? You still have to pay the appropriate fine or other penalty for a minor traffic offence, but you don't end up being branded a criminal. Not seeing the issue here.

Because it is not regarded as a crime any more.

People will now think it is less serious.

Because in much of the civilized world, it isn't considered a crime. Didn't you tell us once that you don't even own a car? That could color your thinking.

Actually I think jumping a red light is serious.

Doing 35 in a 30 zone probably less so.

bennett123 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Because it is not regarded as a crime any more.

People will now think it is less serious.

Because in much of the civilized world, it isn't considered a crime. Didn't you tell us once that you don't even own a car? That could color your thinking.

Actually I think jumping a red light is serious.

Doing 35 in a 30 zone probably less so.

Who jumped a red light?

ACDC8 wrote:

Are we talking speeding tickets or other minor moving violations here?

Where I live, minor offences like doing a few kms over the speed limit etc. are simple moving violations and having nothing to do with the Criminal Code of Canada - more serious violations such as DUI or driving without due care or attention can have criminal offence penalties depending on a court ruling.

Except when you drive 40 km/h over the limit where you live or 50 km/h over the limit where I live. It is considered criminal offense and you could end up in jail around here. Or using some advanced driving techniques - such as powerslide. Heck, cops are bragging all over Facebook that they charged pickup truck drivers with stunt driving (criminal offense) because their truck fishtailed when departing from an intersection and turning.
There is something rotten in this Danish kindom.

bennett123 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

Not clear how reducing the penalties for motoring offences is a good idea.

How are the penalties being reduced? You still have to pay the appropriate fine or other penalty for a minor traffic offence, but you don't end up being branded a criminal. Not seeing the issue here.

Because it is not regarded as a crime any more.

People will now think it is less serious.

No, you've completely missed the point.

You shouldn't be branded a criminal with all the consequences of that, just because you commit a minor traffic offence. It's up there with being branded a sex offender for taking a piss behind a dumpster in an alley.

WildcatYXU wrote:

ACDC8 wrote:

Are we talking speeding tickets or other minor moving violations here?

Where I live, minor offences like doing a few kms over the speed limit etc. are simple moving violations and having nothing to do with the Criminal Code of Canada - more serious violations such as DUI or driving without due care or attention can have criminal offence penalties depending on a court ruling.

Except when you drive 40 km/h over the limit where you live or 50 km/h over the limit where I live. It is considered criminal offense and you could end up in jail around here. Or using some advanced driving techniques - such as powerslide. Heck, cops are bragging all over Facebook that they charged pickup truck drivers with stunt driving (criminal offense) because their truck fishtailed when departing from an intersection and turning.
There is something rotten in this Danish kindom.

Flip side we’ve got the Toronto Police Service not having a traffic enforcement team for something like 10 years and pretty much only doing automated tickets (red light and speed cameras) and DUIs, and even then they’ve dropped RIDE stops (“random” DUI checkpoints)by over half.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

johns624 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Because in much of the civilized world, it isn't considered a crime. Didn't you tell us once that you don't even own a car? That could color your thinking.

Actually I think jumping a red light is serious.

Doing 35 in a 30 zone probably less so.

Who jumped a red light?

My mistake.

johns624 wrote:

bennett123 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

How are the penalties being reduced? You still have to pay the appropriate fine or other penalty for a minor traffic offence, but you don't end up being branded a criminal. Not seeing the issue here.

Because it is not regarded as a crime any more.

People will now think it is less serious.

Because in much of the civilized world, it isn't considered a crime. Didn't you tell us once that you don't even own a car? That could color your thinking.

At least people expecting (and getting) sympathy when caught DUI has ended.

So at least to that extent the attitude of motorists has changed.

WildcatYXU wrote:

Except when you drive 40 km/h over the limit where you live or 50 km/h over the limit where I live. It is considered criminal offense and you could end up in jail around here. Or using some advanced driving techniques - such as powerslide. Heck, cops are bragging all over Facebook that they charged pickup truck drivers with stunt driving (criminal offense) because their truck fishtailed when departing from an intersection and turning.
There is something rotten in this Danish kindom.

That's why I said minor offences

Not sure about other Provinces, but in BC there has to be intent for a criminal charge to stick and even with intent, some times the recommended charges get thrown out of court or take years and multiple court cases to get convicted.

We had one high profile case here where a driver was doing 140kmh in a 50 zone, ended up t-boning another car, killing the driver and he was acquitted as the judge ruled a "momentary lapse in driving". The same driver got caught doing 100kmh in a 50 zone just a few blocks away from where he killed the other guy. His case went to appeals a few times and it took 4 years but he finally got a jail sentence.

On the flip side, we had an incident at work a few years ago where one driver killed another driver - the case went to court and was found to be an accident and while the driver was charged with driving without due care and attention, there was no criminal intent and the driver only received a $1500 fine.

All depends on the judge around here.

As for rolling through a stop sign, I honestly think we should just do what they do in Europe, get rid of the majority of stop signs and just put in yield signs or no signs and just have "right before left" - what a gong show that would be here

I have to wonder if you can appeal to the local Court for a downgrade of charges. It might be worth it , rather than waiting out the 7 year TSA expunge for criminal offenses.

casinterest wrote:

I have to wonder if you can appeal to the local Court for a downgrade of charges. It might be worth it , rather than waiting out the 7 year TSA expunge for criminal offenses.

I have an attorney working on it. Its more difficult since I originally just paid the fine. I was NEVER informed by the court system the way it would be charged. I thought it was a civil infraction and not a big deal. So I have to motion to the courts to withdraw my guilty plea (paying the fine) then assign the case to a district attorney to prosecute, then plea not guilty and see if a plea deal can be reached.

Had this happen 60 days later, it would be a civil infraction. Speaking to my attorney, the whole reason they changed the law was it was seen as an overreach. Imagine going to Las Vegas on vacation, get a minor speeding ticket then finding out you end up with a criminal misdemeanor.

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

casinterest wrote:

I have to wonder if you can appeal to the local Court for a downgrade of charges. It might be worth it , rather than waiting out the 7 year TSA expunge for criminal offenses.

I have an attorney working on it. Its more difficult since I originally just paid the fine. I was NEVER informed by the court system the way it would be charged. I thought it was a civil infraction and not a big deal. So I have to motion to the courts to withdraw my guilty plea (paying the fine) then assign the case to a district attorney to prosecute, then plea not guilty and see if a plea deal can be reached.

Had this happen 60 days later, it would be a civil infraction. Speaking to my attorney, the whole reason they changed the law was it was seen as an overreach. Imagine going to Las Vegas on vacation, get a minor speeding ticket then finding out you end up with a criminal misdemeanor.

No doubt it is unfair. and it highlights some rather gaping holes in the judicial process as it applies through city,county,state,federal levels.

ACDC8 wrote:

That's why I said minor offences

Not sure about other Provinces, but in BC there has to be intent for a criminal charge to stick and even with intent, some times the recommended charges get thrown out of court or take years and multiple court cases to get convicted.

We had one high profile case here where a driver was doing 140kmh in a 50 zone, ended up t-boning another car, killing the driver and he was acquitted as the judge ruled a "momentary lapse in driving". The same driver got caught doing 100kmh in a 50 zone just a few blocks away from where he killed the other guy. His case went to appeals a few times and it took 4 years but he finally got a jail sentence.

On the flip side, we had an incident at work a few years ago where one driver killed another driver - the case went to court and was found to be an accident and while the driver was charged with driving without due care and attention, there was no criminal intent and the driver only received a $1500 fine.

All depends on the judge around here.

As for rolling through a stop sign, I honestly think we should just do what they do in Europe, get rid of the majority of stop signs and just put in yield signs or no signs and just have "right before left" - what a gong show that would be here

You said minor offences, but your examples go far beyond traffic violations. Accidents, especially involving fatalities, are a complete different league than driving 150 km/h here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... ay_402.jpg
And yet it is possible to end up it jail for doing it. As you're saying, it all depends on the judge. But even before the case gets to the court, one has to deal with a week of license suspension with a week of vehicle impoundment. And I still don't understand why should be a fishtailing back considered illegal stunt driving.

WildcatYXU wrote:

And I still don't understand why should be a fishtailing back considered illegal stunt driving.

I don't get it, either. So if, in the winter, somebody loses control and starts fishtailing, that would be considered illegal stunt driving?

WildcatYXU wrote:

You said minor offences, but your examples go far beyond traffic violations.

The examples are the point. Doing 140kmh in a 50 zone through town is in a completely different ballpark than doing 120kmh in a 100 zone on an open highway. I specifically said doing a few kilometres over the limit in my original comment, not doing 3 times the limit.

AirKevin wrote:

WildcatYXU wrote:

And I still don't understand why should be a fishtailing back considered illegal stunt driving.

I don't get it, either. So if, in the winter, somebody loses control and starts fishtailing, that would be considered illegal stunt driving?

There's a difference between your back end breaking out in slippery conditions and intentionally putting your vehicle in a potentially unsafe driving attitude that may upset the vehicles dynamics. Years ago, there was a couple of guys with a couple of Subaru WRX's in a completely empty parking lot doing some drifting after a big snowfall - they ended up getting their cars impounded - to me I think that's ridiculous as they intentionally picked a big, empty parking lot with nothing around versus doing the same thing out on the roadway in traffic.