Worthless Cops

[dmp]

...was reading a thread by an acquaintance in another forum...details are:

Guy driving down freeway...BOOM! Tire blows/goes flat. He takes the first exit off the freeway; there was no shoulder to pull onto. Just so happens this exit is 'carpool only'; WA State Trooper sees his car pull off. Cop follows, and Cites the kid for "Restricted Occupancy Lane Violation"; in spite of the cop being pointed towards and recognizing the blown/flat tire. "There is no excuse..blah blah blah", as he writes citation; $150.

Please - somebody - anyone - try to convince me Traffic laws are about anything MORE than generating revenue for government? Or - maybe just try to convince me traffic laws are MORE about safety than revenue generation....I doubt it can be done.

I'm convinced the cop in question should be fired; he clearly has VERY poor judgement.


(sigh).

 

[manu1959]

...was reading a thread by an acquaintance in another forum...details are:

Guy driving down freeway...BOOM! Tire blows/goes flat. He takes the first exit off the freeway; there was no shoulder to pull onto. Just so happens this exit is 'carpool only'; WA State Trooper sees his car pull off. Cop follows, and Cites the kid for "Restricted Occupancy Lane Violation"; in spite of the cop being pointed towards and recognizing the blown/flat tire. "There is no excuse..blah blah blah", as he writes citation; $150.

Please - somebody - anyone - try to convince me Traffic laws are about anything MORE than generating revenue for government? Or - maybe just try to convince me traffic laws are MORE about safety than revenue generation....I doubt it can be done.

I'm convinced the cop in question should be fired; he clearly has VERY poor judgement.


(sigh).

two things:

1. worthless cop is redundant

and

B. if it was a hot chick with a rack he would have changed it for her

 

[dmp]

two things:

1. worthless cop is redundant

and

B. if it was a hot chick with a rack he would have changed it for her

I'm more pissed off at that 'particular' cop..not cops in general, whom I believe to be generally good people, following money-grubbing policies of politicians.

 

[JOKER96BRAVO]

...was reading a thread by an acquaintance in another forum...details are:

Guy driving down freeway...BOOM! Tire blows/goes flat. He takes the first exit off the freeway; there was no shoulder to pull onto. Just so happens this exit is 'carpool only'; WA State Trooper sees his car pull off. Cop follows, and Cites the kid for "Restricted Occupancy Lane Violation"; in spite of the cop being pointed towards and recognizing the blown/flat tire. "There is no excuse..blah blah blah", as he writes citation; $150.

Please - somebody - anyone - try to convince me Traffic laws are about anything MORE than generating revenue for government? Or - maybe just try to convince me traffic laws are MORE about safety than revenue generation....I doubt it can be done.

I'm convinced the cop in question should be fired; he clearly has VERY poor judgement.


(sigh).

As a youngster, I would often get harrased by the cops in my very small
town. They would pull me over every night for any reason just to F&^k with
me. I got pulled over once for not using a turn signal to pull into my driveway.
I got a new truck and the pull overs stopped for a while till I was driving this
girl home and she was drinkin a beer (young mistake). She spotted a cop
and tossed the beer out the window, cops turned around (cause there are
only so many people to mess with at 4:00 am) and saw the beer rolling down
the street. I remember it like it was yesterday, officer Tom Benge walked
up and knocked on my window and said "Sean, you got a new truck". I was
lucky the girl had a warrant, so no ticket for me. The pull overs resumed as
normal after that night. To this day, anytime I go home I get pulled over by
the same dicks that used to bust my balls as a kid. I like cops and appreciate
the job they do, but that shit is uncalled for!

 

[manu1959]

I'm more pissed off at that 'particular' cop..not cops in general, whom I believe to be generally good people, following money-grubbing policies of politicians.

ok good people bad rules....but a hot chick with a big rack can generally bend the rules

 

[Gem]

The State Troopers proved conclusively to me that they have no interest in stopping traffic violations and are only interested in a source of money when, in Pennsylvania, they started using unmarked white, red, and steel blue cars to catch speeders on the PA Turnpike.

Studies have proven time and time again that MARKED POLICE CARS sitting on the side of the road slow drivers down between 5-15 mph. Studies have shown that UNMARKED police cars have no similar effect because they only catch ONE person...and everyone else drives by without paying much attention.

IF their goal was to slow people down, make the roads safer, etc. then they would ALWAYS use marked cars because it has the supposedly desired effect of slowing down the largest number of drivers.

But they are not interested in slowing people down, keeping people safe...they are interested in catching a speeder and giving him a $200 ticket...plain and simple.

 

[dmp]

The State Troopers proved conclusively to me that they have no interest in stopping traffic violations and are only interested in a source of money when, in Pennsylvania, they started using unmarked white, red, and steel blue cars to catch speeders on the PA Turnpike.

Studies have proven time and time again that MARKED POLICE CARS sitting on the side of the road slow drivers down between 5-15 mph. Studies have shown that UNMARKED police cars have no similar effect because they only catch ONE person...and everyone else drives by without paying much attention.

IF their goal was to slow people down, make the roads safer, etc. then they would ALWAYS use marked cars because it has the supposedly desired effect of slowing down the largest number of drivers.

But they are not interested in slowing people down, keeping people safe...they are interested in catching a speeder and giving him a $200 ticket...plain and simple.

Very accurate - except speed doesn't mean danger. It's simply not true; the slogan they pass on to a willing public: "Speed Kills". On the surface it sounds great! But according to actual DATA it's not true.


Taxation thru Citation. Pure and simple. And we eat it up. We allow it. Cops for for The Public; If this were a TRUE democratic nation, governments would hear the voice of the people. A voice which screams "We WANT to drive 70 or 80 on the freeway.".

Instead of creating 'better' drivers, we simply try to 'slow drivers down'. Instead of teaching kids to be conscious, active drivers, we add airbags and traction control. :-/

And we put up with it.

 

[Gem]

-d-

worse than taxation through citation...how would you feel if, through a random system, you had to pay your taxes this year, but your neighbor (who is of equal income level, lifestyle, familysize, etc) didn't have to pay any taxes whatsoever...so youre chatting over the fence and you say, "I hate taxes!" and he said, "hmm...yeah, I didn't have to pay any taxes this year at all...."

Cops pull over only one speeder in 100...teaching people NOT that speeding is caught and punished...but that getting caught speeding is a bit like paying a "speeding tax." You have to pay it once in awhile for the right to speed.

And of course, if you are young, male, and are driving a "fast" looking car...you might get "taxed" more than the mom in the mini-van who passed you going 90...

 

[JOKER96BRAVO]

-d-

worse than taxation through citation...how would you feel if, through a random system, you had to pay your taxes this year, but your neighbor (who is of equal income level, lifestyle, familysize, etc) didn't have to pay any taxes whatsoever...so youre chatting over the fence and you say, "I hate taxes!" and he said, "hmm...yeah, I didn't have to pay any taxes this year at all...."

Cops pull over only one speeder in 100...teaching people NOT that speeding is caught and punished...but that getting caught speeding is a bit like paying a "speeding tax." You have to pay it once in awhile for the right to speed.

And of course, if you are young, male, and are driving a "fast" looking car...you might get "taxed" more than the mom in the mini-van who passed you going 90...

Speeding tax huh...
Never thought of it like that.
I sure have paid my fair share of those!

 

[5stringJeff]

...was reading a thread by an acquaintance in another forum...details are:

Guy driving down freeway...BOOM! Tire blows/goes flat. He takes the first exit off the freeway; there was no shoulder to pull onto. Just so happens this exit is 'carpool only'; WA State Trooper sees his car pull off. Cop follows, and Cites the kid for "Restricted Occupancy Lane Violation"; in spite of the cop being pointed towards and recognizing the blown/flat tire. "There is no excuse..blah blah blah", as he writes citation; $150.

Please - somebody - anyone - try to convince me Traffic laws are about anything MORE than generating revenue for government? Or - maybe just try to convince me traffic laws are MORE about safety than revenue generation....I doubt it can be done.

I'm convinced the cop in question should be fired; he clearly has VERY poor judgement.


(sigh).

I hope he takes that one to court!

Where did this take place? Not too many HOV-only exits that I'm aware of around here.

 

[dmp]

Kirkland.

 

[dmp]

...but even WITH an attorney....this guy has to spend MONEY taking off work...Hiring said Attorney; simply due to a cop with poor judgement. I'd love financial recourse from the state to pay back the costs of citizens wrongly cited.

 

[Johnney]

cant think of an excuse 'cept theres a douche bag in every police force

 

[-Cp]

If this were a TRUE democratic nation, governments would hear the voice of the people........

It's not... we're a national republic...

 

[Bonnie]

Well like anything else in this world we have the good and the bad. I think most cops are fair, and there are some that give all cops a bad name. I have seen both in my life. I do have to agree that most traffic laws are for the sole purposes of generating revenue for the municipalities, my father recently donated 180.00 dollars for just that cause, for going 7 miles over the limit, we figure 180.00 was the cost of not getting any points on his license and the rest went into the kitty to buy the judge a new leather wing backed chair :tng:

 

[freeandfun1]

IF their goal was to slow people down, make the roads safer, etc. then they would ALWAYS use marked cars because it has the supposedly desired effect of slowing down the largest number of drivers.

Last time I was in Korea, we were trucking (45 MPH woo hoo) down the highway from Seoul to Suwon to go visit some customers. Along the highway, I noticed fake police cars that are used to slow drivers. They would put them along the side of the highway and just move them around every once in a while. They would keep em up for about a week move em, leave em up a week, move em etc. Pretty good deterent as long as they don't leave them in the same place for too long.

As a side note, I do always laugh though at the fact that the traffic cameras they use on the highway always have signs letting you know they are coming up. They have "warning signs" that say, "Traffic Camera - 1,500, 1,000, etc., meters". Pretty kind of em to give ya a warning. But it is more a deterent than a "collection system" although they still issue a lot of tickets even with the warning signs.

 

[Jeff]

Very accurate - except speed doesn't mean danger. It's simply not true; the slogan they pass on to a willing public: "Speed Kills". On the surface it sounds great! But according to actual DATA it's not true.


Taxation thru Citation. Pure and simple. And we eat it up. We allow it. Cops for for The Public; If this were a TRUE democratic nation, governments would hear the voice of the people. A voice which screams "We WANT to drive 70 or 80 on the freeway.".

Instead of creating 'better' drivers, we simply try to 'slow drivers down'. Instead of teaching kids to be conscious, active drivers, we add airbags and traction control. :-/

And we put up with it.

I agree with ya for the most part here d... in states such as Ohio the speed limit for trucks is less than it is for cars( even though 90% of truck- car wrecks are the 4 wheelers fault) but in Ohio they have upped the speed for trucks ( only on there turnpike) & last I have heard there was no change at all in wrecks involving trucks.( ooo by the way the only reason for the up in the speed limit & I forgot to mention they also went down on the toll , was to get more traffic on the pike!)hmmm seems that kind of narrows down the motives ...lol...
Jeff

 

[CivilLiberty]

Please - somebody - anyone - try to convince me Traffic laws are about anything MORE than generating revenue for government? Or - maybe just try to convince me traffic laws are MORE about safety than revenue generation....I doubt it can be done.

I'm convinced the cop in question should be fired; he clearly has VERY poor judgement.

1) Yes, traffic violations are an major source of revenue.

2) I'll assume that cop was Highway Patrol - the most useless of cops.

3) Cops rarely get fired even when they kill people inappropriately.

4) In case you missed last week's Supreme Court Rulings that further protect police actions while limiting citizen rights, here's my article on the subject:


From my Civil Liberties site:
----

A Bad Day For Civil Liberties

America died a bit last week, as the Supreme Court ruled against a citizen's right to sue a police officer for wrongful arrest, or for inappropriate use of deadly force.

This is the latest nail in the coffin of our once free nation, handed down by a Supreme Court that seems more interested in enabling an expanding government than protecting our constitutional rights.

Earlier this year the court ruled against citizens, allowing police to use torture and violence in interrogations, and they ruled that citizens don't have the right to remain silent in requiring them to identify themselves. These rulings were frightening enough, but today the court now says that individual police officers can't be held accountable in court for their misdeeds - that is, the court has limited the ability of citizens to sue police officers for misconduct.

By eliminating a citizen from suing for false arrest, or improper use of deadly force, police have been given a virtual "license to kill" - a license to act without fear of retribution.

Now, let be the first to say that law enforcement is a difficult and dangerous job, and the majority of officers are good, decent, honest Americans. However, that does not dismiss the instances of cops that abuse their power, or act out of bigotry or prejudice.

Despite good officers and well meaning politicians, corruption does run through police departments in our nation. Corruption unchecked will grow like a weed, consuming everything until all that is left is the dark shadow of a police state. And now, with citizens further restricted from filing against these abuses, and prevented from standing up for their rights, that weed has fertile ground to grow.


A

See also:
http://www.valleystar.com/editorial_more.php?id=56070_0_28_0_M

 

[Johnney]

and they ruled that citizens don't have the right to remain silent in requiring them to identify themselves.

you know that drivers license/ id card you think is yours? its not, its the states. you can remain silent and give it to them.
and for those of you who think your being harassed when a cop stops you and wants to ID you... :

Can The Police Stop And Question People Who Are Not Under Arrest?

The police can stop a person, and ask questions, without "arresting" the person. Upon seeing suspicious activity, the police may perform what is called a "Terry Stop," and may temporarily detain people to request that they identify themselves and to question them about the suspicious activity. The scope of a "Terry Stop" is limited to investigation of the specific suspicious activity, and if the police detain people to question them about additional matters, the stop can turn into an "arrest." For their own safety, the police can perform a "weapons frisk" on the outside of a person's clothes (sometimes called "patting down the suspect") during a "Terry Stop." During this frisk, if they feel something that may be a weapon, they may remove it from the suspect for further examination. However, they are not entitled to remove items from person's pockets that do not appear to be weapons, even if they believe that the items are contraband.

its not harasment, its perfectly legal. if your smart enough to keep yourself out of trouble,then there shouldnt be any problem IDing yourself.

and before you ask, yes i am very pro-law enforcement

 

[dmp]

they ruled that citizens don't have the right to remain silent in requiring them to identify themselves.

That was a VERY Good ruling. Remain Silent = 5th Amendment type issues.