So, I'm driving down the HOT Lanes today (as I have done twice a day, 5 days a week since the lanes opened) at 67mph which is 2 over the posted limit. There's nobody in my passenger seat and my 2 kids are in the backseat. Did I mention my EZPass Transponder is in the HOV position? I pass the Gallows Road interchange, pass a VASP trooper on the shoulder who promptly turns on his flashing lights and pulls me over.

My initial thought was, "Wow...they take the speed limit seriously here." Nope.

The trooper looks in my backseat, sees my spawn and says, "My apologies, sir. I read your vehicle coming through the gantry with the transponder in the HOV position and I couldn't see that you had 2 passengers in the backseat. You're free to go and drive safe."

So, is this the new norm? Every time I'm lawfully using these lanes, I can expect to be pulled over for a visual inspection? They really need to put x-ray cameras up that can detect the occupants in the vehicle. Such an inconvenience...

Did he offer you a refund on your trip?

I'm dumb, you had in the HOV mode.


Still sucks, he should have sucked you off or something for wasting your time.

Has anyone else seen cops pulling people over on the HOT lanes lately when they weren't speeding or is OP a Transurban scare troll? That guy on FFXU who drives alone but has been in HOV ON mode since the lanes opened should have gotten snagged. Anyone?

I was wondering the same thing. However, he has stated that the SP can tell which way the transponder is switched. But they have to pull you over to check - they didn't buy the infrared machines.

Beltway.Commuter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, I'm driving down the HOT Lanes today (as I
> have done twice a day, 5 days a week since the
> lanes opened) at 67mph which is 2 over the posted
> limit. There's nobody in my passenger seat and my
> 2 kids are in the backseat. Did I mention my
> EZPass Transponder is in the HOV position?


No, obviously you didn't mention it. You knew that you didn't mention it. After writing that you could have edited your post to just note it instead of asking if you had mentioned it.

Silver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was wondering the same thing. However, he has
> stated that the SP can tell which way the
> transponder is switched. But they have to pull
> you over to check - they didn't buy the infrared
> machines.

There's a light over each lane on the backside of the gantry that flashes when a transponder in HOV ON mode goes under. That's how the cop knows what mode you are supposedly in. But what if OP switched his transponder to non-HOV before the cop approached and he showed the cop? That would have really confused the cop.

Let me get this straight...the OP was driving and declaring he was a "HOV" vehicle. BUT because his kids are small and can not be seen he gets stopped by VSP because the cop thinks the OP is in violation of the HOV law. The cop walks up and sees the kids, explains to the OP why he was stopped, says sorry and tells the OP he was free to go?

OP IS A FUCKING DUMB ASS. If you want to bitch, then bitch about something that is really a travesty of justice

The cop had every legal reason to stop the OP. Once the cop discovered he made an error he let the OP go. This is how it should be done. If the cop detained the OP longer, asked for his License, or did anything else other then let him go once the cop discovered there really was no violation then the OP would have a valid complaint.

The cop couldn't see your kids. He actually did the right thing. I've been pulled over on 66 because the cop couldn't see my passenger in the back seat (they had spilled water in the front seat and it was still wet) and I didn't bitch about it.

But so many parents think they are entitled to special treatment, including X-ray vision by cops.

#entitlednovalivesmatter

Beltway.Commuter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, I'm driving down the HOT Lanes today (as I
> have done twice a day, 5 days a week since the
> lanes opened) at 67mph which is 2 over the posted
> limit. There's nobody in my passenger seat and my
> 2 kids are in the backseat. Did I mention my
> EZPass Transponder is in the HOV position? I pass
> the Gallows Road interchange, pass a VASP trooper
> on the shoulder who promptly turns on his flashing
> lights and pulls me over.
>
> My initial thought was, "Wow...they take the speed
> limit seriously here." Nope.
>
> The trooper looks in my backseat, sees my spawn
> and says, "My apologies, sir. I read your vehicle
> coming through the gantry with the transponder in
> the HOV position and I couldn't see that you had 2
> passengers in the backseat. You're free to go and
> drive safe."
>
> So, is this the new norm? Every time I'm lawfully
> using these lanes, I can expect to be pulled over
> for a visual inspection? They really need to put
> x-ray cameras up that can detect the occupants in
> the vehicle. Such an inconvenience...


Shut up you whiney little bitch ass pussy. The cop couldn't see your bastards in the back seat so what do you expect dickhead??

Yall seen the new VSP fords with some sort of square 6"x6" antenna on the rear windows? Saw it on HOT lanes around Woodbridge. Is that what they use to read EZ pass?

UULGV Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yall seen the new VSP fords with some sort of
> square 6"x6" antenna on the rear windows? Saw it
> on HOT lanes around Woodbridge. Is that what they
> use to read EZ pass?


I have seen those too, must be something for the express lanes. Only VSP, never seen a county cop with them.

I saw a VSP at the Springfield hot lanes entrance with one of those things.

UULGV Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yall seen the new VSP fords with some sort of
> square 6"x6" antenna on the rear windows? Saw it
> on HOT lanes around Woodbridge. Is that what they
> use to read EZ pass?


Yes, but I doubt they can read them standing still with you passing at >65mph. If they are in motion near you, they can read them and then look in your car for the passengers. When you see them near you, switch the transponder to non-HOV until they go away and then switch it back to HOV MODE before hitting the next gantry.

I've been in the same situation before. When the cop's lights came on, I had my kids raise their hands in the air and waive them. Cop turned his lights off and I was on my way without needing to pull over.

Beltway.Commuter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, is this the new norm? Every time I'm lawfully
> using these lanes, I can expect to be pulled over
> for a visual inspection?

Hopefully! You deserve every bit of the inconvenience.

The concept of HOV wasn't intended for people driving their stupid kids around anyway. So if it means the occasional dope like you gets pulled over unnecessarily, that's the breaks.

Yeah but that mean cop made my little Aiden late for prep school!

That is part of the hazard of traveling with dwarfs.

I know a lawyer who can get you $100000 from the cop for harassment! Leiserlaw.com

@Hmmm...: The user you're referring to is Lane.Meyer or Lane.Myer. Feel free to search for that user name to be brought up to speed on his saga...it is QUITE interesting.

@cxu: In addition to the light on the gantry, the troopers can read the status of every active transponder in real time on their in-cruiser laptops. As EZPass equipped vehicles enter the HOT lanes and drive under the sensor on the gantry, they get fed the EZPass transponder ID#, the year, make, model and color of the vehicle as well as the license plate information and the position of the HOV/non-HOV switch. As to the question in your post, it's a good one and is the substance of Lane.Meyer's/Lane.Myer's fraudulent free use of the HOT lanes.

@FireTheCop!!!: While I agree a stop like this is not exactly a travesty of justice, you must admit it's more than a bit of a pain in the ass to be pulled over unnecessarily simply because the Commonwealth failed to properly fund/equip the 495 HOT Express Lanes with cameras or whatever else is necessary to properly read vehicle occupancy at speed thus freeing up troopers to actually spend their time and our money interdicting ACTUAL criminals.

@Gvyr: Respectfully, the trooper didn't do the right thing. Traffic stops that don't lead to either revenue or a convicted criminal in jail/prison are classified by the Commonwealth as a waste of time and resources. Not to mention, the side of a highway with a posted 65mph speed limit can be a very dangerous place. Why should the trooper and motorists have to risk their lives unnecessarily at the side of the road due to the Commonwealth's inattention to detail and lack of project management?

@What I do...: Congratulations on raising your children to the age at which they are large enough for their hands to be seen over the tops of their car seats! Now where does that leave motorists transporting children who are not large enough for their hands to be seen above their car seats?

@Kilton: If the lanes weren't intended to be used by HOV motorists for free then why is it permitted at all? Why not charge everyone the same regardless of vehicle occupancy?

Huh??? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @Hmmm...: The user you're referring to is
> Lane.Meyer or Lane.Myer. Feel free to search for
> that user name to be brought up to speed on his
> saga...it is QUITE interesting.
>
> @cxu: In addition to the light on the gantry, the
> troopers can read the status of every active
> transponder in real time on their in-cruiser
> laptops. As EZPass equipped vehicles enter the HOT
> lanes and drive under the sensor on the gantry,
> they get fed the EZPass transponder ID#, the year,
> make, model and color of the vehicle as well as
> the license plate information and the position of
> the HOV/non-HOV switch. As to the question in your
> post, it's a good one and is the substance of
> Lane.Meyer's/Lane.Myer's fraudulent free use of
> the HOT lanes.
>
> @FireTheCop!!!: While I agree a stop like this is
> not exactly a travesty of justice, you must admit
> it's more than a bit of a pain in the ass to be
> pulled over unnecessarily simply because the
> Commonwealth failed to properly fund/equip the 495
> HOT Express Lanes with cameras or whatever else is
> necessary to properly read vehicle occupancy at
> speed thus freeing up troopers to actually spend
> their time and our money interdicting ACTUAL
> criminals.
>
> @Gvyr: Respectfully, the trooper didn't do the
> right thing. Traffic stops that don't lead to
> either revenue or a convicted criminal in
> jail/prison are classified by the Commonwealth as
> a waste of time and resources. Not to mention, the
> side of a highway with a posted 65mph speed limit
> can be a very dangerous place. Why should the
> trooper and motorists have to risk their lives
> unnecessarily at the side of the road due to the
> Commonwealth's inattention to detail and lack of
> project management?
>
> @What I do...: Congratulations on raising your
> children to the age at which they are large enough
> for their hands to be seen over the tops of their
> car seats! Now where does that leave motorists
> transporting children who are not large enough for
> their hands to be seen above their car seats?
>
> @Kilton: If the lanes weren't intended to be used
> by HOV motorists for free then why is it permitted
> at all? Why not charge everyone the same
> regardless of vehicle occupancy?


Shut the fuck up you whiney little bitch. Nobody gives a shit about you getting pulled over let alone crying about it on FFU.

I've been pulled over before because the officer couldn't tell I had a kid in the backseat during HOV.

It happens. Not a big deal.

Let's change the topic and talk about what should actually qualify as HOV. I honestly don't think kids in the car should count towards the HOV count. The purpose of HOV is to keep cars off the road and reward people for carpooling. In theory if an adult (or 16yr+) passenger doesn't have a driver's license I don't they shouldn't qualify either. Kids or people who can't drive in the vehicle don't contribute to keeping vehicles off the road.

Then on a related note.. if you are for kids/non-licensed folks counting.. then why not allow pregnant women? A pregnant woman cannot claim HOV2 with a fetus/baby in the womb. That's been taken to court and ruled upon.

HOVDISCUSSION Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Then on a related note.. if you are for
> kids/non-licensed folks counting.. then why not
> allow pregnant women? A pregnant woman cannot
> claim HOV2 with a fetus/baby in the womb. That's
> been taken to court and ruled upon.

The reason for that is because scientists and the courts cannot agree on where conception and life begin.

If a court were to rule that a pregnant woman...or more specifically a gestating fetus constitutes legal life and would count towards something like an HOV requirement then THAT would have over-reaching, over-arching consequences to other parts of the law related to life, conception, fetuses and pregnant women.

That's called unintended consequences. And people far smarter than you and I are very aware of this and would never allow a ruling related to a fetus and HOV to occur because they would not want that unintended consequence.

Now, that being said? No question...it's a fascinating concept.

I'd also add that in addition to relieving the traffic strain there's also an environmental element to the HOV and HOT lanes. Ideally, more people travelling in fewer cars means lower emissions and lower gas prices because demand for petroleum is decreased. And yet...my 1968 MG-B drophead coupe gets north of 35MPG on the highway but since it only can carry 2 people, I don't get an HOV exemption. By comparison, a 2015 Bentley Mulsanne gets 18MPG on the highway but because it can carry 3-5 people it could get an HOV exemption. Although, I don't know too many people buying a $300,000 car that are "into carpooling".

Are you black? You were being profiled.

Are you white? It was a mistake.

Can your spawn drive? If not, why do they count for HOV? They couldn't take a separate vehicle.

Huh??? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>@cxu: In addition to the light on the gantry, the troopers can read the status of >every active transponder in real time on their in-cruiser laptops. As EZPass >equipped vehicles enter the HOT lanes and drive under the sensor on the gantry, >they get fed the EZPass transponder ID#, the year, make, model and color of the >vehicle as well as the license plate information and the position of the HOV/non->HOV switch. As to the question in your post, it's a good one and is the substance >of Lane.Meyer's/Lane.Myer's fraudulent free use of the HOT lanes.

My understanding was that the trooper's computer gets fed the switch position at the point of entry (which is used for calculating the charge, regardless of whether it's later changed), so flipping the switch doesn't help you any. Is this true?

HOT cheater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Huh??? Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >@cxu: In addition to the light on the gantry, the
> troopers can read the status of >every active
> transponder in real time on their in-cruiser
> laptops. As EZPass >equipped vehicles enter the
> HOT lanes and drive under the sensor on the
> gantry, >they get fed the EZPass transponder ID#,
> the year, make, model and color of the >vehicle as
> well as the license plate information and the
> position of the HOV/non->HOV switch. As to the
> question in your post, it's a good one and is the
> substance >of Lane.Meyer's/Lane.Myer's fraudulent
> free use of the HOT lanes.
>
> My understanding was that the trooper's computer
> gets fed the switch position at the point of entry
> (which is used for calculating the charge,
> regardless of whether it's later changed), so
> flipping the switch doesn't help you any. Is this
> true?

And right there? You just hit on the loophole. Or a possible loophole. This is what Lane.Meyer/Lane.Myer and others looking to game the system have been talking about. Here's the scenario more fully illustrated...

You're driving in a vehicle alone. You enter the 495 HOT Express Lanes and the reader on the gantry registers your EZPass transponder in the HOV position (which is illegal...but they have to catch you, right?). After driving for a few minutes, you pass a stationary VASP trooper in his cruiser on the shoulder. You're doing 65mph and he's reviewing the EZ Pass data on his laptop. He's looking at a screen so, he's not going to be able to visually inspect your vehicle's occupancy.

As soon as you pass the stationary trooper, he makes the decision to try and ferret out whether you have 3 or more people in the car and should be running in those lanes with the EZPass transponder in the HOV position or if he's going to be able to provide his employer with some revenue. You see him pull out into traffic AND immediately throw your transponder into the non-HOV position and then come to a stop on the shoulder BEFORE passing another gantry with a reader. There's no way he is seeing you do this.

The trooper approaches your car and says, "You don't have 3 or more people in the vehicle...why is your transponder in the HOV position?" and that's when you shrug and say, "It's not in the HOV position officer...see for yourself."

What happens next? I really don't know...and THAT'S the loophole. There's obviously a lot of ifs there and it has to break right for one to escape a ticket but, it's completely plausible.

It has been mentioned further up this thread that some of the VASP cruisers have been equipped with an antenna array that can read transponders while your in motion. That's a smart move by VASP and there's no real citizen response to that...you're getting a ticket if you're caught by one of those specially equipped cruisers.

And yet...why is it there's money to buy special equipment for the VASP but there's not money to put cameras on the gantries?

You made the post Beltway.Commuter! Congrats!!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/electronic-tolling-okay-but-not-electronic-policing-of-carpoolers/2015/08/06/047bc422-3a28-11e5-b3ac-8a79bc44e5e2_story.html?tid=hpModule_99d5f542-86a2-11e2-9d71-f0feafdd1394

I was on the Dulles toll road in the hov lane with the spawn in the back seat. Cop pulls out. Lights on. I told the kids to wave. They raise their hands and the lights went out.

Beltway.Commuter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, is this the new norm? Every time I'm lawfully
> using these lanes, I can expect to be pulled over
> for a visual inspection? They really need to put
> x-ray cameras up that can detect the occupants in
> the vehicle. Such an inconvenience...


So I'm kinda amazed you took the time to write out this story, and then post it. The cops couldn't see your kids, so what did you expect? I'm sorry you were inconvenienced.

Three things:

1. I'm glad VASP is enforcing the law, and trying to catch folks who are using the lanes illegally.

2. I'm glad the VASP was polite. It seems like he treated you with undue respect and apologized for pulling you over. I'm sure he felt good about wasting his time dealing with your situation.

3. You need to get a life and quit your whining.

Same thing happened to me a few years back on east-bound 66 in Vienna during the morning restriction. I was riding in the HOV lane (HOV-2) with my infant daughter in her car seat in the back. A cop pulled me over. He walked up behind the car and when he saw her in the back seat, he just turned around an walked back to his cruiser. He didn't speak a word to me. It never happened again.

Scooter the Commuter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Same thing happened to me a few years back on
> east-bound 66 in Vienna during the morning
> restriction. I was riding in the HOV lane (HOV-2)
> with my infant daughter in her car seat in the
> back. A cop pulled me over. He walked up behind
> the car and when he saw her in the back seat, he
> just turned around an walked back to his cruiser.
> He didn't speak a word to me. It never happened
> again.

Did you just wait for him to drive off before leaving? He didn't even tell you sorry, you can go?