Speaking of the whole video…what’s with that woman who twice walks between the suspect and the officer?
Giving a blowjob is a lot better than going to jail and losing your license.
Haw haw haw! That’s fucking priceless. I don’t know if I should ask you if it’s dark under that bridge, or just say “no u”.
BTW, am I the only one who, when hearing the word “taser” immediately thinks of Beavis and Butthead?
Beavis: Yeah! Yeah! The taser-zap him! Zap him in the butt! Ehehehehe…yeah!
Oh, what the hey, might as well ask these questions.
Did anyone else get a laugh out of the driver telling the officer how to do his job? And what about her assertion: “You can’t clock someone while you’re driving!”
Yup, Monty, I laughed a lot after I decided I shouldn’t be pissed off at just another entitlment artist.
Perhaps it’s a vice of mine, but I sincerely hate people like this silly bitch and have no sympathy when the real world beats on them.
Denis,
When seeing such individuals (“entitlement artist”–good term!) or reading about them, wish to ask them (could I stand being around such a person), “What was the rest of your plan?”
Given the way radar speed detection works, wouldn’t it show the relative speed difference between the two moving vehicles and therefore make it rather difficult to be absolutely sure of the speed of the vehicle hit by the radar gun?
If the cop is head on with a car, and the radar gun detects a speed of 100 mph, that means both cars could’ve been going 50 mph, but it also means one could’ve been going 60 and the other going 40. How do you prove to any degree of certainty which car was doing 60 and which was doing 40?
We all know that no cop would ever lie about it in court…
Your cynicism aside, did you ever think that perhaps (and, yes, I admit this is just speculation on my part) the detection unit is wired along with the speedometer?
Wait, wait. I share your confusion. How did you get from “Men, as a gender, are routinely traduced and discriminated against” to “Policemen, being men, can do no wrong”? A–>?–>B, but what’s the “?” stand for?
I have no reason to assume that it is. I Googled, but found only one non-referenced statement that some of them are. Which doesn’t seem reason to assume that there’s a high probability that any given radar gun is wired to the speedometer of the police car.
Of course a lot of factors can affect whether or not the speedometer in a car is even accurate, such as the size and wear level of tires. It’s possible to not even know that the speedometer is off, and I’ve seen personally speedometers that were off by as much as 11%. Angle of incidence and other factors like rain and reflictivity of the object in the radar gun’s path can also lead to inaccurate readings.
It seems to be fairly dubious that, especially since radar guns can be quite inaccurate when they are stationary, the results are even more likely to be suspect when the radar gun and the target are both moving.
catsix, I may have missed it, but have you weighed in on this particular incident?
I’m not going to argue the ratio of bad cops to good cops, or the efficacy of using radar detection for speeding. As near as I can tell, the stop was perfectly legal, and the officers followed the prescribed course of action from start to finish. At the end, we had two officers unharmed, a suspect subdued with non-lethal force, and a minimum of the public’s tax dollars and time wasted. And on top of that, we have a video documentary of the entire incident. I don’t see where the objection might be other than the usual 'well, they could have done ‘something’ differently.
Thanks to our own Q.E.D this is how a radar gun works. Heres a quick quote:
Damn Catsix you must have had some terrible experiences with the law. Do you go through life this bitter and distrustful of everyone, or just a choice few? I guess a better question is when you first meet someone; do you give them the benefit of the doubt and not immediately assume they’re a jerk? If so, do you extend the same courtesy to police officers? If not, why?
If I may rephrase your question to "Does radar work in a moving vehicle?, Q.E.D.says yes.
(My bolding)
catsix, I get it that police are evil, sadistic, bullying brutes, but do you really think that they are stupid enough to stop a motorist for speeding if they do not have the proper type of radar and are not certified to use it? What would be the point? It would be thrown out of court.
Are you suggesting that nobody ever got a speeding ticket prior to the invention of radar and that all speeding tickets must be proven by radar? If so, you are wrong.
Cops without radar units give out speeding tickets all the time.
They do, and it doesn’t matter if the person was really speeding or not, anyway. The police officer can give you a ticket based on whatever guidelines they are supposed to use, and you can fight it in court if you think that the guidelines weren’t followed or met in some way. On the side of the road with the officer is not the place to argue about it.
Uh, no, not at all. How the hell did you get that from my post? I was responding to **catsix’**s comments about radar. Radar was the topic. Radar was used in the video. You know, the one in the OP? The one this thread is about? The one where he clocks her going 51 in a 35?
It was a lame joke, but I didn’t think it warranted troll accusations or AOLspeak.
Well, then we’re back to whether the definition of “good cop” covers one who gives a pat on the hand to a female driver who was too drunk to keep her car on the road. :dubious:
Well, he was good to me. Didn’t even flirt or imply that we might be able to ‘work something out’ like some do. My car was totalled, I guess he figured I’d suffered enough that night, and I was already out of the car and wandering around when he picked me up so he might have had trouble getting the DWI to stick.