The following sample letter may be used as is or modified to your preferences. It should be prepared in hard copy (handwritten or typed) and mailed with first class postage to your state legislative representatives (usually two, a state senator and a state representative, sometimes called a delegate or assemblyman-woman). If you do not have contact information for your state legislative representatives, click here to find that information. You should be prepared to explain and defend the positions outlined in this letter. For help in this regard check here.

Dear (Senator or Representative) Last Name

As your constituent I am requesting your assistance to address what I believe is a growing problem in the state of (your state). This is the practice of using traffic enforcement, primarily speed traps, as a means to generate government revenue. I fully support speed enforcement for the purpose of traffic safety, but when the real purposes are revenue generation, harassment of targeted populations, or a pretext for some other agency objective, I find the practice repugnant.

Speed traps come in many varieties, the most common being heavy enforcement of a posted speed limit that is far below normal and safe traffic speeds. Posting significantly different speed limits on similar roads, rapidly changing speed zones, and confusing or unmarked speed zones are additional problems that lead to undeserved tickets and fines.

Public officials, local residents, and the traveling public may each have a different opinion of what constitutes a proper speed limit. However, these differences can be resolved by doing a traffic engineering study and setting the speed limit based on the findings of that study. Too often speed limits are determined by political expediency, "ease of enforcement" or arbitrary decisions, and not for reasons of safety.

I respectfully ask you to sponsor an anti-speed trap bill for the state of (your state). This bill would ideally include the following provisions:

• Within two years of passage all posted speed limits should be based on a documented traffic engineering study.
  
  
• Unless the traffic engineering study identifies mitigating factors, the speed limit shall reflect the 85^th percentile speed of existing free-flowing traffic.
  
  
• If mitigating factors require a speed limit below the 85^th percentile speed of free flowing traffic, that speed limit shall not be posted below the 67^th percentile speed of free flowing traffic.
  
  
• Traffic engineering studies should be updated no less than once every ten years or whenever a major improvement has been made to the subject roadway.
  
  
• If a speeding ticket is issued in a speed zone that was not determined by a documented traffic engineering study, after two years from the date of passage, the ticket shall be dismissed on the verbal or written motion of the recipient/defendant.
  
  
• If a speeding ticket is issued in a speed zone for which there is a traffic engineering study, but in which the speed limit does not reflect the 85^th percentile speed of free flowing traffic, or if there are documented mitigating circumstances that justify a lower speed limit, but that posted limit is below the 67^th percentile of free flowing traffic, the ticket shall be dismissed on the verbal or written motion of the recipient/defendant.
  
  
• The minimum requirements for a qualified traffic engineering study to meet the purposes of this statute are as follows:
  1. Measurement of vehicle speeds for no fewer than 100 vehicles in each direction limited to free flowing vehicles, during daylight hours, and clear weather conditions.
  2. There be clear written documentation of mitigating factors that justify a speed limit below the 85^th percentile of free flowing traffic.
  3. Speed surveys to be conducted without an enforcement presence.
  4. Speed measurements conducted with undetectable measurement devices.

I apologize for the length of this letter. In simple terms this proposed legislation says that speed limits should be reasonable and based on sound traffic engineering principles. It further says that police officers should be reasonably trained in the use of speed measuring devices like RADAR and LASER and that those devices should be maintained to insure their accuracy. I really don’t think that’s asking too much.

I look forward to your reply and I hope you will become the primary sponsor of this legislation.

Sincerely,