Is getting your moving violation reduced to a non-moving one a sin?

Is it a pie, even if you missed the stop sign due to looking somewhere else at the moment, thus not done on purpose? There were even no cars anywhere around, but the police car and mine. I have been so self-conscious with my speed, seatbelt, and turn signals, though I have given into distractions for a second. That violation isn’t like a felony or somewhere just slightly less than one is it, because I have just paid off the loose handful of speeding tickets in my lifetime, before I finally quit it, and been done with it and could do it (pay it, that is) again. Thank you!

It is not a sin to negotiate such terms as the law allows. The civil and criminal codes are built for such negotiation and bargaining.

Sounds to me like you have some scrupulous tendencies if you think this would be a sin at all, let alone mortal one.

As long as you’re not dishonest in how you go about this, I don’t see anything inherently wrong in attempting to get a fine waived or downgraded. Especially if it was an honest mistake in the first place.

At other times, for say deliberate and serious offenses (eg reckless speeding), accepting the fine/punishment may be an entirely appropriate part of our penance. But your case seems minor and inintended.

I got my speeding ticket reduced to the non moving violation of coasting. The cop told me about it, and the judge offerred it.

That’s what judges do. Administer the law as they see fit.

Nothing remotely sinful about it.

Saved me a ton on car insurance! Especially for us with commercial licenses in California. We cannot do traffic school even if pulled over in our personal cars.

If it is really was a genuine mistake you are good. No sin.

I may be sxrupulous, but it seemed it could be like a lie, because it was a moving violation. Unfortunately, even if I wanted to downgrade it, the court date would be during my vacation. A family member, who is a lawyer, helped the first time, by going in my place and with a prosecutor friend in the city in question. I don’t think I could ask her to pull that off again.

A Priest told me once that just laws are always have compassionate. For example, in the Church - if you married outside the Church without permission, you can always have it convalidated or even a Radical Sanation to come in line with the Church.

He actually used the example, if it’s the middle of the night and no one is at a red light and you need to rush someone to the hospital… do you wait at the red light, or do you run it? You run it. But it’s the middle of the day and there are tons of cars, then running the red light isn’t a good idea because it puts others at risk.

So I wouldn’t worry too much about it, unless your motivation to get out of the ticket is unmoral.

l guess it all depends whether or not you lie about wh
at you actually did or not. If you lie about your actions it is sinful, if you get the offence downgraded without lying about your actions then it is not sinful.

Why do you think you’d be lying??

In my case.

Judge: “you were pulled over for speeding, a vehicle code violation ,
Me: “yes your honor”
Judge: “the officer is here, do you want to fight the violation or go to traffic school?”
Me: “I am unable to attend traffic school because if my commercial license…”
Judge: " oh you’d like to plead guilty to coasting then”
Me: yes your honor"
Judge: " it is so ordered, bail is forfeited"

There is no lying involved.

Similarly, the murderer who is offerred a manslaughter plea bargain, admits his crime and acknowledges he is guilty if taking a life. No lie, in fact quite the opposite.

You should fight it. You can move the date . If the officer doesn’t show up you get off since there’s no one there to “prosecute” you. In southern California you have a 50% chance they won’t show.

Also, there is no reason you have to receive the default maximum sentence. Even the worst criminals often get lighter sentences at the judges discretion.

It seems like lying, because, whether totally not my fault or not, I did break a law, while in motion, and having something saying it didn’t happen that way seems like I would be participating in a lie, even if it were the justice, who made the change. If they lightened the nature of the offense (like, “yeah, you did it, but not on purpose, so we’ll not report it to your insurance”) or threw it out, that would simply be their not choosing to punish me as much or at all. Why does the insurance get involved, anyway, in such things? If they don’t have to clean up your messes, such as hitting someone or property or just helping cover repairs, what is it to them? Why can’t I just pay the fine and be on my way?

It’s not lying. It’s not saying it did not happen. It is participating in the justice system as it is set up. Everyone knows what is happening and what happened.

Most importantly no one is disenfranchised or “sinned against”

Did you claim to be doing something that you were not? If you didn’t make such a claim then you have not told any lie. So you broke a law while in motion, that’s not such a big deal. You didn’t lie about it either, so there is no guilt attached to you.

If the authorities chose to downgrade your offence, then just be thankful and move on. You haven’t lied about it so why beat yourself up over it? This does strike me as a case of scrupulosity on your part.

If you haven’t told a lie, then you haven’t told a lie. It’s that simple really.

Why is it scrupulosity to wonder if having what you did be considered something you did not do could be a sin and why does it matter if you directly hurt anyone by it? I am asking about its technical nature, before proceding with it, though clarifying what I mean could be mistaken for that. The scrupulous fret. I was just asking, but want the answer based on all the circumstances.

Sin has a negative consequence. For example lying involves deceiving someone.

Who are you deceiving?

The fact that you are thinking this is possibly sin is what people are calling scrupulous.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit