zlacker

Your first comment said "being under the speed limit gives him the right to make the stop". Here you've followed up with "if there is a minimum and you are under it that is a violation". I agree with the latter statement, but being under the maximum is not a violation, and it was never stated that the driver was going under a minimum posted speed limit. The post you were replying to says they were doing 65 in a 70, which seems highly unlikely to be under the minimum - what would the minimum be in that case, 67? (Assuming good intent, perhaps this derives from yoir misreading of the post you originally replied to, or from some other factor I'm missing.)

>>andrew+(OP)
This stop occurred in NC and we don’t have all the facts about the stop...but NC is 1 of 6 states to have laws on driving to slowly. While it is true most states might have a minimum sign posted and 65 in a 70 would be unusual, some of the statutes are unfortunately subjective...for example I think in NC they prohibit “driving to slowly in the passing lane on a highway” so potentially an officer might pull someone over for going the Actual speed limit in the passing lane (presuming they weren’t passing).

Anyway I think you might be missing the point where the poster stated:

>”under is suspicious according to your thinking...”

I never said driving under the speed limit is suspicious, and I specifically said I think this stop was ridiculous...still I don’t think we can say he was stopped for being black (it’s possible) but more likely due to being a rental car driving under the speed limit.

>>throwa+05
Not sure why facts are downvoted, I am not even for the law, just stating it exists...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.newsobserver.com/news/polit...