Should We Challenge a Speeding Ticket if We Know We're Guilty?

[Pete Kraus <Pete_Kraus@Emory.Org>]

Steve Bigelow and Dwayne Cosby raise lots of interesting philosophical
questions in a recent dialog.  Not specifically Audi related - apologies in
advance for BW - but certainly of interest to anyone who begrudges the
speed limit laws and/or regards with dismay changes that seem to be
occurring in our judicial system and sense of personal responsibility.

>From Steve:
> You admit you (sorry, your _car_) were speeding. Why on earth
>would you  take it to court if you are guilty?  Forgive me if I'm missing
>something here....

>From Dwayne:
>. . . The center of any "rational" judicial system is that I am innocent
>UNTIL proven guilty. It is not up to me to prove my innosense in the
>charge, it is up to the prosecution to prove my guilt. . . 
>. . . I am exercising my right to a fair trial, a right equal to the right
>vote. . .

Are there not reasonable grounds to question the ethics and motivation
of someone who privately admits guilt but nonetheless asks the
government to prove it?  I'm not talking about exercising legal rights here,
that's conceded.   Nor am I suggesting there aren't lots of understandable
explanations for taking such action:  i.e. challenging  the law, believing
that it's okay to disobey laws you don't respect; believing that authority
should always be questioned, simply trying to get away with something,
etc.  

How we as citizens and human beings respond to such issues speaks
volumes about our perceived relationship to society and sense of right
and wrong.   I for one think they are well worth contemplating, though
perhaps not any further in this venue.  Off line, maybe?

Pete
Pete_Kraus@emory.org
Stone Mountain, GA
'85 4KSQ
et al