Paybacks a bitch!!!

[Army_of_One]

Sec. 144. When Lighted Lamps Required; Visibility
Distance and Mounted Height of Lamps.
(a) Every vehicle, except as provided in subsection (b),
upon a highway within this state, at all times shall display
lighted head and other lamps and illuminating devices
as required for different classes of vehicles, subject to
exceptions with respect to parked vehicles:
(1) From sunset to sunrise;
(2) When due to insufficient light or unfavorable
atmospheric conditions, including smoke or fog,
89
persons and vehicles on the highway are not clearly
discernible at a distance of 1,000 feet ahead; or
(3) When windshield wipers are in continuous use as
a result of rain, sleet, or snow.
Stop lights, turn signals, and other signaling devices shall
be lighted as prescribed for the use of such devices.
(b) Motorcycles, motor-driven cycles and motorized bicycles
manufactured after January 1, 1978, shall display lighted
head and tail lights at all times that such vehicles are
operated on any highway.
(c) Law enforcement officers shall issue a warning citation
to anyone violating subsection (a)(3). (K.S.A. 8-1703,
as amended)

[The Joker]

All I know is that in the fog, I don't necessarily have the lights on for me to see but for the fellow drivers so they can see me, that is just polite.

I concur with Lurker when he says:
"It would have been much easier to see them if their lights were on."

The Joker

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by Detector

More like sorry officer I thought they were on. Warning not a ticket right?

I would go to court on the headlight ticket and take the pictures as evidence. I would say you are pretty much screwed on the seatbelt portion of the ticket.

PS. It might help that you wait until about 24 hours before the court appearance date on the ticket and call the court and tell them you can't make the appearance date, and need it rescheduled. It might just get everything thrown out if the officer can't make the rescheduled date. It doesn't always work, but it can help.

[mommiedearestx3]

I found this on the KHP web sight on New Road Laws under the subheading:
Improved Visibility

Another amendment requires headlights to be used during distances when persons and vehicles on the highway are not clearly discernible at a distance of 1,000 feet ahead, or when windshield wipers are in continuous use because of rain, sleet, or snow. (2006 HB 2748 amendment to K.S.A. 8-1602, 8-1703, K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 8-1,146 and 8-1606)

[Firedog]

Originally Posted by Highwayman

They’re also known as “running lights”.

Neve thought about the name running lights. That was a good point. But in Webster's New World Dictionary "running lights" the lights a ship or aircraft must display at night.

[TexKan]

I would take the pictures too - don't look like ya needed the headlights for visibility - unless your wipers were on............ what a wierd law! Is that right motorcyles have to have lights on no matter what????

[TexKan]

I would say she nailed him for the seatbelt and added the lights as a courtesy for his attitude.

[NoLongerInRadioGuy]

Ok bottom line is....yes there is a new law that says you must have your HEADLIGHTS (not just fog lamps) on when your windshield wipers are being used. I have even noticed some cars are built in with this - if you do just the intermittent one-time across the windshield thing, your lights will turn on and off as you do it. Now, there is also a time period when we are supposed to issue only warnings for this violation, and not a ticket. I am really not sure what this time frame is but I will look into it. Personally, think I would most likely give just a warning anyway unless there was no insurance, no DL, etc. Also, dont expect a written warning - we just dont do em. If you are getting a warning, it is verbal - if you got a piece of paper, you got a citation.

Officers have discretion on writing tickets for minor traffic ordinance violations. Some officers will only cite for traffic violations if there is something more to go along with it. Other will cite the driver for every infraction he sees. Most of us are somewhere in the middle - we look at the totality of the circumstance and decide from there.

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by mommiedearestx3

I found this on the KHP web sight on New Road Laws under the subheading:
Improved Visibility

Another amendment requires headlights to be used during distances when persons and vehicles on the highway are not clearly discernible at a distance of 1,000 feet ahead, or when windshield wipers are in continuous use because of rain, sleet, or snow. (2006 HB 2748 amendment to K.S.A. 8-1602, 8-1703, K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 8-1,146 and 8-1606)

I would say that intermittent wipers do NOT constitute continuous use.

[Bubba]

About 3 weeks ago I had a broken headlight (pheasant flew into headlight), and when the moisture hit the hot lamp, the lamp burned out. I ordered a new headlight, but got stopped going to work one midnight by the KHP, I explained the broken glass and the moisture popping the lamp, showed him my high beam worked. He came back with a written warning for the headlight and the fact that I wasn't wearing a seatbelt. Please note I wrote written warning, it may be different for city police, but you CAN receive a written warning.