Of course it's a revenue scheme, otherwise they would have been enforcing this law years ago when they implemented it.
I'm ragging on the state because they claim this law is for "safety" when there's safety problems MUCH BIGGER than someone driving in the left lane they could tackle.
You know, growing up, we never really had evidence or saw my little brother actually pee on the toilet seat. But when you wake up in the morning and there's pee on the seat, it's pretty evident who did it, despite "evidence".
So you're saying the state should pass a law making crumbling infrastructure illegal?
BTW, by your own logic, there is no "pee" on the toilet seat.
A statistic would not show it is a revenue generating scheme. It has a built in revenue generating scheme with the fine you must pay for violating the law - a law and revenue generating scheme that did not exist until the law was passed, ergo, no existing statistics to base anything on if it were to be appropriate to base any such answer on statistics.
If the law didn't exist, there would never be a need to complain about a misapplication of the law. (In other words, more revenue for lawyers!)
Woody
Wow, your circumlocution skills are impressive!