Doing it because they are a cop, however, is unethical. Not illegal, not against policy, but shitty nonetheless.
It is corruption if cops are more likely to be let off than your average Joe Blow. Obviously, in the grand scheme of things this is not a big deal. Still, it should be frowned upon, as this sort of favoritism is not a healthy thing.
If I were a cop, and that were my job, I would start by speeding around the city, in order to get pulled over. If the stop ended immediately with an apology after I showed my ID, I’d say there was a good case to be made for unwarranted favoritism.
Theres bigger fish to fry though, so I wouldn’t recommend many resources be wasted on something this petty.
That said, yes, it is worse if a cop gets off because they are a cop. They are supposed to know better, and are supposed to be the ones upholding the law. A cop giving or expecting preferrential treatment due to their status is making a mockery of the very system they are supposed to be upholding.
NFL stars don’t always get the kid-glove treatment: Police officer delays Ryan Moats of Houston Texans in hospital parking lot as family member dies - ESPN
And being a former U.S. Attorney or even Governor of New Jersey is not necessarily going to get you out of tickets: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/08/neither_gov_corzine_nor_chris.html
Nowhere did I say I approve of professional courtesy or that it’s ok for officers to be going around committing traffic offenses.
But one officer not writing up another is not corruption. Most traffic violations are not criminal offenses, most departments give officers discretion as to which violators they can write up and which they can give warnings to, and there are no laws regulating that.
If we were talking about cops committing actual crimes and others letting them off, if we were talking about a violation of departments policy, if we were talking about one officer telling another he was going to write him up unless he got paid (blackmail), THEN it would be corruption.
If the OP were to argue that cops letting other cops off with a warning on traffic offenses was a crappy thing and shouldn’t be allowed, I wouldn’t bother with this thread. But calling it corruption as if it were an illegal act, is grossly incorrect.
Under the law it’s really no different than businesses that give discounts to police/fire/military personnel and nobody else.
Fine. Then punish it. That’s how the real world works. You screw up, you get busted.
No, that is NOT how the real world works. We allow millions transgressions a day, because it is not worth it to police for every single transgression. I drove the 405 to the office today. I, and most around me, were above the speed limit for a period of time. Now, we could have had police every 20 meters, but instead we allow this to happen. When it is done right in front of someone, the police pull us over. At that point, the officer’s discretion kicks in and I STILL might not get a ticket.
That is reality.
How are you going to prove that an officer gave a warning JUST because the other person was a cop? How much money and time are you willing to spend on stopping this scourge of inappropriate use of discretionary powers? How much damage to the department are you willing to take once the cops are hunting each other for transgressions? Oh yeah - don’t forget that EVERYONE will now get a ticket for every interaction with police. After all, there are so many laws on the books that odds are the police can find a reason to add a few bits onto every ticket if they are in a mood to apply every tool in their arsenal.
I prefer police who are paid to think, and who have the freedom to act with discretion. There is a price, and I am happy to pay it. It does not change my view of the police one bit to hear (with no statistical cites) that they let fellow cops off most of the time.
That’s not the same thing at all. Letting someone off because he is a cop is not discretion. It’s favoritism. Or cronyism. Call it what you will. But ticketing everyone who speeds when everyone is speeding is impossible, as you point out. Not showing favoritism is very possible.
It could be done the way one poster suggested. Who was that? Oh yeah.
That’s some imagination you got there. How about we make it department policy that every stop involving a fellow cop needs to be cleared by a supervisor? That eliminates your nightmare scenario, and leaves you and your fellow Marines free to scoff at laws all you want.
Try to get your head around this : Thats not discretion. That’s favoritism. Discretion involves weighing each particular incident for mitigating factors. Letting cops skate involves no such judgment.
Yes, it is discretion. It’s discretion possibly based on favoritism and cronyism, but it is still discretion as the stopping officer does have the option to write the cite, as in the example I gave earlier. But it’s not corruption as it’s not illegal. And unless a department has a specific written policy about it, it’s not a fireable offense.
Whee, semantics games! I say that it’s an improper use of discretion. Slice that up as you will.
What, don’t police superiors have discretion in their assement of whether the favortism-based application of discretion has transgressed into “not doing your job”? Suppose you have a cop who used his discretion and never gave anyone tickets, regardless of what they were doing when pulled over? Would that be fireable?
Regardless, some might argue that if there isn’t a specific written policy about it, there should be - since some police apparently can’t do their jobs right without it.
If the option is never or almost never taken, it’s not discretion. Technically, it may occur because he *has *this discretionary power, but if you put no more thought into whether or not you will issue a ticket than glancing at a badge, you are simply rubberstamping it. Discretion should involve evaluating each situation for reasons that mitigate responsibility. No such evaluation happens when you simply give every cop a pass. For that matter, as I have argued above, if cops always give other cops a pass, than any particular cop would be hard pressed not to do so as well, effectively taking the matter out of his hands. If it is de facto mandatory, it is not discretion at all.
I believe that is the boat, although it is often parked very close to the corner, making it a PITA to see around. At least you know I wasn’t making it up.
This says it all and then some, there is nothing else to be said.
** Originally Posted by Nobody View Post**
*So, either people who speed a few miles over aren’t endangering anyone, in which case no-one should get a ticket, or speeding is dangerous, in which case cops allow other cops to endanger people’s lives.
*
Nope, it doesn’t.
I’ve given people warnings for going 19 over because they had a crummy driving record and another ticket would get their license yanked and I decided to give them a break. On the same day I gave a person in the same situation a ticket for going 14 over at the same location. Neither of them were cops, doctors, had big tits, etc…
Every stop is unique, every persons response to the stop is unique. And this thread seems to suggest that cops are going around violating traffic laws like crazy. In 27 years I recall less than 8 showing me their badge, and I work in a high population area.