[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Cops: Can't Live With Them, Can't Live Without Them



Jamie Yanak (JamieYanak@oai.org) wrote:
# In article <3mhnt9$dcd@cmcl2.NYU.EDU>, msf4063@ACFcluster.nyu.edu wrote:
# > Jamie, you're in a dream world if you think that speeding tickets are
# > intended for anything else than revenue.  You think cops write tickets
# > for 60 in a 50 because think it is unsafe? BS!  If cops just wanted
# > to stop people from driving recklessly. .. they'd give tickets
# > for reckless driving, not speeding.
#
# They give tickets for wreckless driving too, and for the same reason they
# give them for speeding: to prevent anarchy on the road.

No,  they *occasionally* give tickets for reckless driving, failing to
yield, etc. to prevent anarchy on the road.  Mostly they only give tickets
for these if there's an accident and they have to.

Speeding is for revenue generation.   If it wasn't for photo radar the
police wouldn't ticket for 120 in a 100 on the 401 at all because the
police aren't stupid enough to believe Bob Rae when he says that it's
a safety issue.

# Besides, if you go far enough
# over the limit, it's considered Wreckless Driving, and you'll get a ticket
# for it along w/your speeding one. 

And without photo radar or radar traps that's just about the only time
that a police officer would stop you - when you're speeding excessively
or speeding and driving dangerously.

# Tickets cost money because there is no other viable way of punishing
# people for such an infraction.

No.  There is no other way that improves general revenue as efficiently.

The best way to prevent driving infractions is with better training and,
instead of just handing out fines, force the driver to reattend a drivers
education class and retest for their license.  Then all those rich guys
in their Lexi and Mercedes who get tickets couldn't just hand them to
their secetaries to "handle".  Plus the bad drivers they stop would get
better instead of just being let go to drive like an idiot again.

But that kind of system wouldn't improve revenues would it.

# Would you rather spend time in jail for speeding? How about 1 day for each
# mile an hour over the limit, doesn't sound very reasonable to me, but it
# might end speeding as we know it! Or how about speed 3 times and lose your
# license.

If speeding is a dangerous as you claim, why does this sound
unreasonable to you?

# If you don't beleive that's the reason, let me ask you: When you're late
# and you want to speed, but change your mind and don't, is it because you
# thought you might get injured doing it, or because you thought it might
# cost you $100

Considering that I don't believe that speeding is inheriently dangerous
my answer is obvious - because it might cost me $100.  You see, I'm not
stupid enough to think that just because Bob Rae says driving 120 in a
100 zone is very dangerous it is dangerous.   Especially considering
that Bob Rae's government is running up a massive deficet and his
solution to this "danger" just happens to generate a lot of money.

But I guess I'm just cynical.   Or perhaps you are naive?

# > Exactly!  Off duty cops speed more than anyone.  Also many police officers
# > cause accidents while running through red lights to buy doughnuts (
# > well, it is true that cops often cause massive amounts of damage in dubious
# > high speed chases .. and break the traffic laws that we have to obey --
# > running red lights, making illegal turns, etc,  -- for no good reason.)
# > They certainly don't lead by example.
#
# When cops get in accidents responding to calls it is *usually* because of
# some idiot that wasn't paying attention, and didn't see the strobes, or
# hear the siren because their radio was to loud.

You didn't address the issue of police officers driving poorly.  I've yet
to see a police car signal a lane change on the 401 or 400!  I've seen
numerous police cars turning without signaling and all sorts of other
safety violations without any reason at all.   Most police officers
speed off duty,  they have a get out of ticket free card.

# As far as "dubious high speed chases" go, if criminals thought police
# wouldn't chase them, they wouldn't bother stopping for them at all.

Yes.  The police *have* to chase,  you never know who is behind the
wheel of a car that rabbits.   Participating in a high speed chase
should result in an automatic prison sentence and loss of license
for the driver.

# Most police departments have strict policies *now* on when you can involve
# yourself in chases (it's not like t.v.). Most departments today will not
# allow you to continue a chase when it is a minor offense that you tried
# stopping them for in the first place. And most supervisors will order you
# to discontinue a chase, if the public is in to great a danger because of
# it.  

I only agree with the "public danger" part.  A large number of wanted
criminals are caught when stopped for routine traffic offences!

# And also contrary to popular belief: Police are not immune to the
# consequences of their actions in situations where they cause accidents. If
# you do not use reasonable judgement in such situations and injure someone,
# or damage their property, you are *personally* liable (meaning your
# savings, your house, you are the one in debt for the rest of your life
# from the lawsuit, not the city you work for) Where I live, an ambulance
# driver recently got out of jail, after being sent there for a couple
# years, because of an accident he caused on duty. 

The police *are* largely immune to the consequences of their actions.
How many of the police officers that have had accidental discharges that
killed suspects or fellow officers are still on duty?   Why is the turnover
at police departments so low for such a high risk, high stress job?
Especially amongst new hires?

# 12 years ago I left the sheriffs dept I worked for,
# because of injuries I sustained trying to catch up w/a speeder, when
# another vehicle 10 feet in front of me couldn't hear my siren, pulled into
# my lane and caused me to run over a muffler at 75 mph that was deposited
# onto the berm by somebodies piece of junk, that shouldn't have even been
# on the road.

Your views on speeding/photo radar are very different from all the other
police officers and former police officers that I know.

Rob.
--
Robert A. Osborne   ...!uunet.ca!isgtec!robert or robert@isgtec.com


Follow-Ups: