Ya know, sailor, I have always admitted when something was bad law, like the recent gay marriage flap, for instance.
I think this is a situation of bad law as well. Should it be enforced? Yes. Do I think it’s stupid? Yes.
Don’t try to misrepresent my positions, my prior actions, or my thoughts with your backhanded rhetoric.
Actually, it’s more important as a source of revenue than fighting crime. Notice how the fine amounts are carefully calculated to be high enough to make the effort worthwhile but low enough that it usually isn’t worth missing the time off work to fight them.
Don’t get me started on the “Now, if you pay an extra $200 and take our traffic safety course, there won’t be any points against your license” moolah enhancement technique. If I’m such a danger to myself and others, they SHOULD lift my license.
My point was traffic patrol serves several important functions, including fighting real crime.
And using it as a source of revenue is just fine and dandy too.
Nothing wrong with making law violators pick up the tab.
That’s interesting, because I often do. Some do speed, for reasons probably ranging from responding to an important call to using a perk of the job. Saying that all of them speed strikes me as an exaggeration, much like the idea that everyone is doing 75 on a highway where the limit is much less. I’ve never seen that - maybe the majority (especially in the passing lane), but in my part of the world there’s a lot more variability in obeying the limit.**
Well, if we’re talking about cops sitting in the median with ostentatious radar guns, I’ll at least partially agree with you. It’s especially annoying when area law enforcement stages a holiday enforcement show on the loop highway in my city, with units setting speed traps or pulling people over every couple of miles. I suspect that the goal is to pacify the media, who run big Holiday Traffic Death Toll stories to make up for the fact that there is little news otherwise. Apparently it is more acceptable to have crashes during non-holiday periods.
As for traveling speeds, I find it a lot more restful to go no more than a couple of miles over the limit, rather than risk 10 mph or better. I don’t feel the need to look over my shoulder, don’t have to constantly weave around slower vehicles or invest in a radar detector. Makes travel a whole lot less stressful.
Yes! This is it, exactly! Very Well Put!
Just one addit’l point: cops “bust(ing) those they don’t like” (or of whom they disaprove) is one bad effect. Another is that these laws can be used for bringing in revenue.
I think the point is that we should not have laws that are not necessary. If traffic can move at 70 (or whatever) MPH with no problems, we should not have a law that sets a lower limit. If speed limits either did not exist or were reasonable, the problem described in the OP would not occur.
I mourn the loss of the concept of probable cause.
Yes, if the cops can pull any driver over that they want, or stop and frisk any pedestrian they want, for any reason or for no reason, they will sometimes find that there is a real (but unrelated) reason to arrest the person. But I’d prefer that they not pull people over, or stop and frisk people, unless they have real, actual, probable cause to believe that a real, actual crime is in progress.
I bitched about the national 55 and then, later on, 65 mile per hour speed limits for 20+ years. I didn’t like driving them, I didn’t like having to enforce them. I was the happiest American alive in 1995 when congress gave authority for speed limits back to the states. And several states set their limits at 70 & 75. So your point is mute in many instances. You posted 70. Many are already at 70.
Something simple like a burned out brake light IS probable cause for a stop. It is a violation of law. Also, it is important to inform a motorist that his brakelight is burned out. For his own safety. If the other one burns out, he will have no brake lights and could get in a terrible rear-end accident.
As for your opposition to stop and frisk…take it to SCOTUS.
Oh, wait…someone already did.
Not always. I am a lifelong non-driver. I’ve never owned a car, never had a drivers license. Yet please note my comments in my previous posts.
Erislover said, “We shouldn’t have created a society where if you follow a person around for any period of time you’re virtually guaranteed to be able to ticket them for something.” I agree, but would expand this. I’d say, we shouldn’t have created a society where if you watch a person for any period of time you’re virtually guaranteed to be able to find that they’re breaking some law or regulation. If the authorities want to “get you” for something, they won’t have much trouble finding a way to do so. When the authorities want to bring in money, they don’t have any trouble finding people doing things for which they can be hit with fines: speeding, jaywalking, failing to pick up litter left in front of one’s property by other people, failing to cut one’s grass, failing to ask for ID before selling a tobacco product to a 25 year old, etc.
Okay, pull people over when their break light is out – and simply let them know about the problem. But don’t ticket them. Informing them of the situation is helpful. But if you ticket them, it seems likely that your motive is not very savory. Your motive could be a desire to bring in money by hitting people with fines, or a desire to look good to your superiors by bringing in money by hitting people with fines, or by a desire to boss people around.
You mean like your trying to boss me around by telling me how to do my job?:rolleyes:
If you don’t like the law, complain to your elected reps, or run for office yourself.
Besides, most equipment violation stops resulted in a “5 day” ticket, meaning if the part is repaired the ticket is dismissed by the simple signature of any inspecting police officer. (at least here that’s the way it works).
My major point was, while I’m pulling someone over for a simple traffic violation, I’m also going to run them through the computer to see if their wanted for anything. I’ve picked up tons of warrants on traffic stops and taken a good many of dirt bags off the streets, all from a contact originating from a traffic stop. Maybe one of those wanted people were on their way to burglarize your home, or abduct and rape your children.
That sounds extreme, but in 2001 I stopped a guy with nothing more serious than a loud muffler. I observed several cans of gasoline in the back of his pick up, and realized that he was high on something.(it turned out later to be meth). This guy was on his way to burn down his ex-wifes house while she AND his daughter were in it. Had I not stopped him for that simple violation, he would have made it to his destination. Some people on these boards would strip cops of the authority to make such a stop.
Yep, you can always count on a cop to give you a sunny outlook on things.
No, it’s a hard, cold fact. People who are are there way to, or from, doing something criminal are usually driving. Sometimes a minor traffic stop turns into a major arrest. It’s not the only justification for traffic enforcement, but it’s one of many.
Wasn’t Timothy Mcveigh captured because he got pulled over on a simple traffic violation while driving away frim Oklahoma City?
Not having a valid plate I believe.
Wasn’t the “son of Sam” killer caught because of a parking ticket?
I’ve seen cops going five under that wave at you as you pass. Then, I’ve seen cops going 100 to Popeyes. I’ve seen cops make up a speeding violation to justify a pretext stop. Cops save lots of lives, etc. It’s a mixed bag.
Really? Where? What department did they work for?
You really know of an officer(s) who were actually going 100 miles an hour to lunch?
Tell me the details about the cops who “made up” the violations.
Did they testify about these “violations” in court? That’s perjury.
Were you involved in these cases that you know about them?
These are serious allegations.
A bank robbery I was a juror for had an interesting twist on this.
About 2 months after the robbery took place they aquired evidence implicating this defendant. They showed up at his house to pick him up and found out from his wife he was currently in the county jail. He was awaiting trial for a DUI related injury traffic accident he caused, that she could not afford to bail him out on.
Kinda a hijack but what would your feelings be on camera enforcement.
I think it would be nifty if they just had a standard say non-point $20 ticket for anyone tagged speeding by the system on the freeway. Just enough to be irritating but not enough to really hurt the guy who was running a little late to work. Kinda a little “prod” to encourage good habits. The neat thing is everyone gets a ticket but no “traffic hazard” Too tough to monitor/process thousands of speeders? Just randomly assign 10%, 20%, 50% of the cameras to be active at any given time. Nobody on the freeway knows which ones are running so you have to play nice or pay the fine.
No- this is quite obviosly just your opinion. None of things actually happened in these cases. Follow the quotes…
I’ve seen Sacramento City cops doing 100+ on the freeways for no apparent reason. No lights no sirens. On some occassions I’ve seen them take the exit for the downtown PD. I’ve never seen them pull anyone over when going that fast without lights. I can’t think of any excuse to drive 100+ on a freeway without lights or sirens. So they may not have been headed to lunch, but whats the difference?
I’ve seen 60-70mph chases through neighborhoods where 1 cop is trailing the main pack by 30 seconds or so without lights or sirens.
No. Thats not what I’m saying. I said follow the quotes, because it was a hassle to get the thread together, but here we go:
pkbites:
Maybe one of those wanted people were on their way to burglarize your home, or abduct and rape your children
Varlos responds:
Yep, you can always count on a cop to give you a sunny outlook on things.
pkbites responds:
No, it’s a hard, cold fact.
So, what part of ‘Maybe one of those wanted people were on their way to burglarize your home, or abduct and rape your children’ is cold hard fact? Thats what your asserting.