License suspensions

[bigtex]

Part of me wants to say: "well, you screwed up 3 times in 10 years what do you expect?"

but then I remember the mentally disabled kid getting a ticket for fishing without a license, never mind he didn't have a hook or bait or whatever..there was zero chance he'd catch anything.

and then I know of a recent story where a guy reported a possible elk poaching, WDFW police couldn't find the carcass so they called the guy so he buzzed down there on his quad to show them, they thanked him for his service then handed him a ticket for riding without a helmet. 

I know of other asinine stories of people getting citations for this or that, so I won't bust the OP's balz without knowing the specifics, knowing what *some* WDFW officers will cite for.

And in each of those circumstances laws were broken weren't they? Now does that mean they deserved a ticket, well in case of the fishing license scenario I will say no.

Fact is, everybody has their right to a trial for any offense in WA. In fact the kid who got cited for no license had his ticket rightfully dismissed. In the scenario this post was made about the individual has either pled or been found guilty three times. The back of WDFW's tickets (those that are handwritten) are different then any other citations issued by agencies in WA in that it actually states you may lose your hunting/fishing privileges if you accumulate multiple convictions.

As far as "asinine tickets" officers in every agency write tickets for things that many may consider "asinine" it's not limited to one agency.

I really like that you post here, its nice to have someone "in the know" explain stuff to us, but....dont you think its assanine that the guy got a no helmet ticket?

Its kind of like when people accidently drift onto the shoulder of the road, overcorrect and have a wreck. Cops give them a "Wheels off the road" ticket. That one really ramps up the hate for law enforcement.

Since the op brought the subject up....what are your 3 infractions?

The OP has yet to say what the 3 violations are (are they infractions or misdemeanors, there is a difference) or send me a message about it.

As far as your wheels off the road statement. State law requires the at-fault driver be cited when there is an LE response to a wreck. That being said do LEOs always follow that law, no. But then they are in a hard place where the LEO isn't following the law as well.

For the no helmet situation we don't know the facts. It's the typical "I heard that....." It could be as simple as KF stated or it may not. Heck I've heard stories of tickets I've written but I've never even written the ticket! But besides the point if the guy was riding an ATV without a helmet the law was broken. Every officer has different discretion, some WSP Troopers start citing speeders at 10 over the limit, others start at 15. But like I said before, the guy could fight it in court. I can tell you in the counties I patrol a no helmet ATV ticket will not be tossed by the judge without some evidence showing that the entire incident was a fabrication, there's just been too many ATV accidents in the area.

Thanks for responding. I always respect your posts.

One of these days I'm going to get a ticket for not having a helmet on while I'm riding around the farm on my motorcycle(two wheels). And I will be pissed.

 I've been riding around without a helmet for almost 40 years and been just fine. I'm not going fast. I make frequent stops and to have a helmet on would be rediculousy hot and uncomfortable as I deal with irrigation, etc. Though I see the local mega orchards make their employees wear silly half helmets while they ride 4 wheelers around. They are often over the top of a cap and not secured. The employees look thrilled.

Anyways, its beside the point, sorry for the thread hijack. Just curious how bad his infractions were. Misscounted his limit of trout? Barbed hook? Hunting on the Hanford reservation? Fishing with a pitchfork at the hatchery?

You do not need to wear a helmet on your own land nor do those involved in agricultural and timber products activities need to wear them.

(3)(a) Except for an off-road vehicle equipped with seat belts and roll bars or an enclosed passenger compartment, it is a traffic infraction for any person to operate or ride an off-road vehicle on a nonhighway road without wearing upon his or her head a motorcycle helmet fastened securely while in motion. For purposes of this section, "motorcycle helmet" has the same meaning as provided in RCW 46.37.530.
(b) Subsection (3)(a) of this section does not apply to an off-road vehicle operator operating on his or her own land.
(c) Subsection (3)(a) of this section does not apply to an off-road vehicle used in production of agricultural and timber products on and across lands owned, leased, or managed by the owner or operator of the off-road vehicle or the operator's employer.

[KFhunter]

Does that include FS roads Bigtex?  Like a rancher checking his cattle on a national forest lease?

[KFhunter]

As far as "asinine tickets" officers in every agency write tickets for things that many may consider "asinine" it's not limited to one agency.

That's my point, we don't know the circumstances of the OP's tickets.  They could be an example of this comment (all agencies have *some* officers with little discretion or common since) or they could turn all our stomachs and none would feel any sympathy for his suspension. 

[Rainier10]

  Just here for the good information.  Thanks Bigtex.

[bigtex]

As far as "asinine tickets" officers in every agency write tickets for things that many may consider "asinine" it's not limited to one agency.

That's my point, we don't know the circumstances of the OP's tickets.  They could be an example of this comment (all agencies have *some* officers with little discretion or common since) or they could turn all our stomachs and none would feel any sympathy for his suspension.

And if he received three "asinine" tickets he could have fought them. And if that's the truth he also has pretty bad luck. An asinine ticket to one may be completely legit to others. There's lots of things officers could cite for but never do, yet some on here think tickets are written for it everyday.

Lets hold off on determining if they were good tickets until the OP actually tells us what he was cited for. 

[bigtex]

Does that include FS roads Bigtex?  Like a rancher checking his cattle on a national forest lease?

Ha. That's a good question. In reality it would all depend on whether a judge sees taking care of livestock as "production of agriculture." The state ATV code does not define "agriculture" so it's a gray area (it doesn't matter if other codes define it in a certain way). Some judges would say agriculture is simply plants, others would say it includes grazing. Until the state includes a definition it is a gray area.

I'd say wear the helmet. 

[pianoman9701]

I suppose someone could get three infractions or violations for one stop by LE. I would like to hear from the OP what exactly happened, since he opened up this can of worms. I've never had an infraction or violation, so at face value, this seems a bit odd. Admittedly, I'm a Boy Scout and read the regs meticulously, several times for the seasons and species that apply to my pursuits. 

[bigtex]

I suppose someone could get three infractions or violations for one stop by LE. I would like to hear from the OP what exactly happened, since he opened up this can of worms. I've never had an infraction or violation, so at face value, this seems a bit odd. Admittedly, I'm a Boy Scout and read the regs meticulously, several times for the seasons and species that apply to my pursuits. 

It doesn't work that way.

If you receive 100 tickets off one stop it counts as 1 conviction in terms of license suspension. It's essentially one incident. If it was simply the amount of tickets you received and were convicted of there would be a lot more suspended anglers/hunters.

[KFhunter]

As far as "asinine tickets" officers in every agency write tickets for things that many may consider "asinine" it's not limited to one agency.

That's my point, we don't know the circumstances of the OP's tickets.  They could be an example of this comment (all agencies have *some* officers with little discretion or common since) or they could turn all our stomachs and none would feel any sympathy for his suspension.

And if he received three "asinine" tickets he could have fought them. And if that's the truth he also has pretty bad luck. An asinine ticket to one may be completely legit to others. There's lots of things officers could cite for but never do, yet some on here think tickets are written for it everyday.

Lets hold off on determining if they were good tickets until the OP actually tells us what he was cited for. 

Agreed

[Rainier10]

I too would love to hear the rest of the story before we get to far into passing judgement on what is fair or not.

If the OP doesn't want to share that I totally get it as well.

At that point I go back to my first post of hire a lawyer and have them get you cleared.

[Oh Mah]

The helmet part @bigtex  does that mean if wearing seat belts.with a roll bar in a side by side no helmet is required?

[bigtex]

The helmet part @bigtex  does that mean if wearing seat belts.with a roll bar in a side by side no helmet is required?

Correct

[2MANY]

If you are wearing a helmet should you lick the windows, chew on crayons, or both?

[Oh Mah]

The helmet part @bigtex  does that mean if wearing seat belts.with a roll bar in a side by side no helmet is required?

Correct

 

[Woodchuck]

If you are wearing a helmet should you lick the windows, chew on crayons, or both?

For you, both and wear a bib.