[axe rive]

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	We spoke about this earlier in the thread, technically its not wrong to drive 44 in a 35 zone. Its understood that 35 mph has a 10mph buffer on the top and bottom end. Otherwise, driving 5 mph would be legal in a 35 mph zone which its not. The government has to ensure a smooth flow of traffic (to prevent slow traffic) and one in which traffic can go quicker sometimes without breaking the law.

Everybody get ready to hate me, because I used to be a cop. To put this idea quoted above to rest, five states in the U.S. currently have absolute speed laws, meaning even one mph over is illegal without exception. The other states all have relative speed laws, meaning the legality of the speed is either left to the discretion of the officer or there is a pre-defined range of acceptability provided by the state. If you are curious, the five with absolute speed laws are Illinois, Ohio, North Carolina, Hawaii, and ...I'll have to get back to you on the fifth one.

Having been on the other side of the debate from a lot of you who have posted already, I can absolutely say that, yes, the majority of cops are assholes on a power trip. Most state-department audits and internal affairs reviews show 60% of state and local law enforcement are likely abusing the authority granted by the state rather than upholding the public interest; unfortunately it's damn difficult to kick out the dishonest ones.

That being said, the majority of cops most of you interact with are likely the bad ones. There are two types of cops, the ones who will pull you over for doing 2mph over so they can bully you for awhile and feel big, and the ones who just watch you drive by as you double the speed limit because they realize the road is empty, your'e likely late for work, and by pulling you over they will miss the call that's about to come through about a burglary in progress. It is unfortunate, but the public gets stuck seeing the bad cops because the bad ones never get promoted out of traffic, and that is where 90% of public contact happens. I do have to say, though, that if you broke the law and got caught, don't argue that the cop is an ass for arresting you or writing you a ticket. He's probably an ass, but at least acknowledge that you did something wrong to get his attention.

[DanteFalling]

I was fine with cops until a married one twenty years my senior where I worked (university) tried to cheat on his wife with me while engaging in behavior "not becoming an officer," especially not an on duty one. I have found in my experience as a liaison that many police members have issues and join the force because they couldn't get into the FBI or the CIA. I tested the creepy guy's "affection." He let me hold a loaded firearm on campus. This is illegal.

No, I never engaged in sex with him, but I was in a horrible sexual harassment work issue because my boss found out that he was leaving me love letters at my desk, and she pressed charges.

Obviously, it would be insipid of me to assume all officers are so. However, it does make sense, when alone with a person who is calling on your social contract in order to arrest you, etc to not forget your "real-life" situation just because of a social construct.


Know your rights.

[curiousgeorge01]

Originally Posted by axe rive To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Everybody get ready to hate me, because I used to be a cop. To put this idea quoted above to rest, five states in the U.S. currently have absolute speed laws, meaning even one mph over is illegal without exception. The other states all have relative speed laws, meaning the legality of the speed is either left to the discretion of the officer or there is a pre-defined range of acceptability provided by the state. If you are curious, the five with absolute speed laws are Illinois, Ohio, North Carolina, Hawaii, and ...I'll have to get back to you on the fifth one. Having been on the other side of the debate from a lot of you who have posted already, I can absolutely say that, yes, the majority of cops are assholes on a power trip. Most state-department audits and internal affairs reviews show 60% of state and local law enforcement are likely abusing the authority granted by the state rather than upholding the public interest; unfortunately it's damn difficult to kick out the dishonest ones. That being said, the majority of cops most of you interact with are likely the bad ones. There are two types of cops, the ones who will pull you over for doing 2mph over so they can bully you for awhile and feel big, and the ones who just watch you drive by as you double the speed limit because they realize the road is empty, your'e likely late for work, and by pulling you over they will miss the call that's about to come through about a burglary in progress. It is unfortunate, but the public gets stuck seeing the bad cops because the bad ones never get promoted out of traffic, and that is where 90% of public contact happens. I do have to say, though, that if you broke the law and got caught, don't argue that the cop is an ass for arresting you or writing you a ticket. He's probably an ass, but at least acknowledge that you did something wrong to get his attention.

That's informative, thanks. Here's another one, did you guys have ticket quotas?





curiousgeorge01 added to this post, 30 minutes and 30 seconds later...

Originally Posted by Lycurgus To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Oh yes, obviously! To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Do you have anything other than (possibly false, likely inaccurate) anecdotal evidence, like, say, empirical evidence? Memorandums, police guidebooks, etc? Once again, actual evidence versus anecdotal evidence? Police officers aren't concerned with the budget of the state. But if I might offer an alternative to your theory, while not changing any of the facts. X number of cars on the road, Y number of officers, Z is the average number of tickets given out per officer, per shift. A is the average number of tickets an individual gets. The equation would be as follows: x/(y*z)=a If, as you say, in a recession, the number of the cars on the road goes down, a will increase. So, it will seem as if the cops are giving out more tickets, but in reality they're giving out the same amount of tickets as before. As to quotas, no, they don't exist. In fact, most states explicitly prohibit fixed numbers/"goals" for tickets. On the other hand, the fact remains that if there are 10 officers on shift, and 8 of the officers come back having written 4 tickets a day on average, one comes back having written 6, and one comes back having written a ticket every other shift... yeah, someone is going to end up getting disciplined for not doing their job. That's not ticket quotas, that's slacking the hell off.

Unfortunately, you only can rely on anecdotal evidence for something like this. If you know you might get caught committing something prohibited, you sure as hell aren't going to write it in the rule book. What you do is highly suggest something (writing tickets and meeting your quota in this case) and then deny it when you get sued (saying the cop misunderstood). This happens in the banking and mortgage industry all the time.


I understand that cops aren't concerned with the budget of the state, however, if its highly suggested they do it to keep their jobs, they will do it!

Your theory is fine, except that when a recession hits, people get more BS tickets because there are less cars to write them for. For example, my car getting towed even though it was in the correct parking zone. What incentive do you have to tow my car, its not like he knows me. The only thing I can think of is that it has to do something with his job. Granted that this is deductive reasoning, but combined with the anecdotal evidence of my cop friends I'm pretty sure I'm correct!

[Lycurgus]

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Unfortunately, you only can rely on anecdotal evidence for something like this.

No, it's not. It's the only evidence you can rely on. There's a difference.

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	What you do is highly suggest something (writing tickets and meeting your quota in this case) and then deny it when you get sued (saying the cop misunderstood).

And yet, you have no evidence for this, whatsoever.

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I understand that cops aren't concerned with the budget of the state, however, if its highly suggested they do it to keep their jobs, they will do it!

But, you don't have evidence that it is "highly suggested."

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Your theory is fine, except that when a recession hits, people get more BS tickets because there are less cars to write them for.

You haven't shown that more people do get BS tickets. However, I offered an explanation within the confines of reality for this phenomena and you outright refused to admit it has merit.

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	For example, my car getting towed even though it was in the correct parking zone.

Which I'm willing to concede happened, without evidence, however even cops make mistakes. They are human. He could've written down the wrong address.

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	What incentive do you have to tow my car, its not like he knows me. The only thing I can think of is that it has to do something with his job. Granted that this is deductive reasoning, but combined with the anecdotal evidence of my cop friends I'm pretty sure I'm correct!

Yes, you're definitely correct, damn the evidence and ignore reality. You're right! And that's all there is to it!

[curiousgeorge01]

Originally Posted by Lycurgus To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

No, it's not. It's the only evidence you can rely on. There's a difference. And yet, you have no evidence for this, whatsoever. But, you don't have evidence that it is "highly suggested." You haven't shown that more people do get BS tickets. However, I offered an explanation within the confines of reality for this phenomena and you outright refused to admit it has merit. Which I'm willing to concede happened, without evidence, however even cops make mistakes. They are human. He could've written down the wrong address. Yes, you're definitely correct, damn the evidence and ignore reality. You're right! And that's all there is to it!

I did take a look at your formula, while its well thought out I think it supports my argument more than detracts from it. Your theory suggest that they have to hand out the same amount of tickets to meet an average number of tickets. If there are less cars, and the amount of tickets are the same, you're right that they're not handing out more overall, but they are handing out more over less people which indicates there is in fact a quota (because the absolute number of tickets stayed the same). If there are less cars and no quotas, there should be an overall less amount of ticketing because there are less cars to ticket.

You're right, I don't have evidence that it is highly suggested, I'm just offering a method that I am familiar with because I work in banking. I know that they don't write it specifically, but they highly suggest it and then fire you if you don't meet it. I'm just offering an alternative way of looking at it.

And yes the cop could've made a mistake on the address, but is it coincidence that the sign on the block he made the mistake on says 'no standing' which is what he claims I violated? There was no such sign on my block.

I didn't mean I think I was right in that absolute way, I just feel like the evidence points in my direction.

[Liason]

I'm still in the happy teenage years of my life, so much of what I do is publically illegal. Perhaps it is knee jerk reaction? However, I detest cops, they assume I am a genuinely good citizen and become easy to manipulate. Despised, but useful for me.

[boldbidder]

	Originally Posted by Prunesquallor To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Why is it that everyone who hates the police follows that statement with "omg, I was, like, breaking the law, and would you believe it, they arrested me??!?! Those jerks!!" I don't get it.

There are plenty of times in life where I've been fucked with by cops and have not been breaking the law. If you haven't experienced this count yourself lucky, doesn't mean that it doesn't happen though. You've probably never been the victim of a violent crime (sorry if you have poor analogy in that case), but no one would argue that because no one has ever assailed me personally that such things don't occur.

[Lycurgus]

Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I did take a look at your formula, while its well thought out I think it supports my argument more than detracts from it. Your theory suggest that they have to hand out the same amount of tickets to meet an average number of tickets. If there are less cars, and the amount of tickets are the same, you're right that they're not handing out more overall, but they are handing out more over less people which indicates there is in fact a quota (because the absolute number of tickets stayed the same). If there are less cars and no quotas, there should be an overall less amount of ticketing because there are less cars to ticket.

No it doesn't.

There aren't enough cops to monitor every single person, and ticket every single person, for violating the law/speeding. If there are 100,000 cars, and 500 cops, if the number of cars drops to 80,000, each of the 500 cops is still going to write the same number of tickets, there will just be fewer people breaking the law and not getting tickets.

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	And yes the cop could've made a mistake on the address, but is it coincidence that the sign on the block he made the mistake on says 'no standing' which is what he claims I violated? There was no such sign on my block.

Is the area predominately no parking/no standing?

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I didn't mean I think I was right in that absolute way, I just feel like the evidence points in my direction.

That's the thing though, you formed an opinion and looked for evidence to point in your direction.

I look at the evidence, and form my opinion around it, and I just don't see it supporting your case.

[curiousgeorge01]

Originally Posted by Lycurgus To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

No it doesn't. There aren't enough cops to monitor every single person, and ticket every single person, for violating the law/speeding. If there are 100,000 cars, and 500 cops, if the number of cars drops to 80,000, each of the 500 cops is still going to write the same number of tickets, there will just be fewer people breaking the law and not getting tickets. Is the area predominately no parking/no standing? That's the thing though, you formed an opinion and looked for evidence to point in your direction. I look at the evidence, and form my opinion around it, and I just don't see it supporting your case.

Ok, that's another way of looking at it. But I'm thinking if there are less cars, and the same amount of cops, they still need the same amount of revenue to pay for the cops, which means they have incentive to ticket those people even if they didn't commit anything. Also, people who get ticketed become more wary of tickets, so cops will have more pressure to find reasons to ticket, which leads to bogus reasoning.

The street I was on was allowed parking. The street behind me there's a middle section that says 'no standing.' So I was on the street that was allowed, with no sign that says 'no standing.' He wrote that I was in the middle of the street behind me and he quoted the sign also.

I do take into account anecdotal evidence as evidence if someone has worked in the field long enough. If they can explain it to me rationally, then a buy it as a valid piece of evidence.

Given the above and the fact that more people are experiencing ticketing (in my circle of friends) I am leaning more towards that they're erroneously handing them out.

[JoeyDude]

Lycurgus, check out this police officer trying to pull over an ambulance:
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Lycurgus]

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Ok, that's another way of looking at it. But I'm thinking if there are less cars, and the same amount of cops, they still need the same amount of revenue to pay for the cops, which means they have incentive to ticket those people even if they didn't commit anything.

Cops don't get payed out of ticket revenues, ticket revenues go into the budget for the roadways, typically. And you keep positing that cops pay for themselves by way of tickets, they don't. Cops don't write nearly enough tickets to cover their cost of employment.

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Also, people who get ticketed become more wary of tickets, so cops will have more pressure to find reasons to ticket, which leads to bogus reasoning.

I find that this isn't true, generally. People who get one ticket, tend to get multiples, where as those who get no tickets don't get any, or get one or two over their entire lifetime.

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The street I was on was allowed parking. The street behind me there's a middle section that says 'no standing.' So I was on the street that was allowed, with no sign that says 'no standing.' He wrote that I was in the middle of the street behind me and he quoted the sign also.

Those signs often apply to more than one block, and "no standing" is a standard term used.

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Given the above and the fact that more people are experiencing ticketing (in my circle of friends) I am leaning more towards that they're erroneously handing them out.

I'm going to stand by my previous mathematical posit.





Lycurgus added to this post, 1 minutes and 30 seconds later...

	Originally Posted by JoeyDude To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Lycurgus, check out this police officer trying to pull over an ambulance: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Yeah, I've seen stuff like that.

There was a case of an NFL player getting held while his mother-in-law was dying in a hospital, which he was parked in front of.

[Prunesquallor]

Originally Posted by boldbidder To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

There are plenty of times in life where I've been fucked with by cops and have not been breaking the law. If you haven't experienced this count yourself lucky, doesn't mean that it doesn't happen though. You've probably never been the victim of a violent crime (sorry if you have poor analogy in that case), but no one would argue that because no one has ever assailed me personally that such things don't occur.

There are assholes in every profession, obviously. Never denied that. And some cops to make mistakes. Like in every profession.

I was saying that most people I've heard demonise the profession as a whole tend to have stories about breaking laws and a wee bit of an entitlement complex. Clearly one or two bad experiences with cops, which obviously a special snowflake who needn't follow rules shouldn't have to experience, means the entire profession is evil and corrupt. Obviously.

[curiousgeorge01]

Originally Posted by Lycurgus To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Cops don't get payed out of ticket revenues, ticket revenues go into the budget for the roadways, typically. And you keep positing that cops pay for themselves by way of tickets, they don't. Cops don't write nearly enough tickets to cover their cost of employment. I find that this isn't true, generally. People who get one ticket, tend to get multiples, where as those who get no tickets don't get any, or get one or two over their entire lifetime. Those signs often apply to more than one block, and "no standing" is a standard term used. I'm going to stand by my previous mathematical posit.

Yes I know, but that's part of the revenue stream and overall the city can't give up any types of revenue during a recession. I'm just not discounting that in some way it helps subsidize their salaries.

I took pictures of the site the next day, I'm positive I'm in the right. In NYC every block has a different code.

Well I guess we'll just have to leave it to a vote then!

[Brion]

Some unasked for rules of thumb...

1. Cops are NOT your friend.. They have an agenda, they have a job... So many of my clients screw themselves over by calling the cops. Life or death situations maybe call a cop.. nothing else

2. For the love of god, if you do get pulled over by a cop. Keep your mouth shut.. Hell, ive even violated this rule after one week on the job as a public defender, I got pulled over for not having an inspection sticker.. The cop asked me why and I said it was cheaper to pay the ticket than get the car fixed... When he came back to give me the ticket it also had attached that statement.

3. If a cop has to ASK you permission to do something... ie search your car ect... generally you can say no...(If they have the right, probable cause they will do so anyway) They can order you out of the car though for protection purposes and prob even a brief not invasive pat down.

4. Take care of small problems before they become big ones... A fav true story is my $1000 One thousand dollar seatbelt ticket... dont even get me started on the "law" of seatbelt use which only harms me... but anyway, my second year of law school going into my third i get pulled over in a beat up pick up truck and I get a ticket for not having a seatbelt... it was $35... i say ok, and go about my buisness... about 3 weeks after that i trade in that vehicle for another one and throw the ticket away... In november of that year around thanksgiving I get a notice from the DMV that If I do not pay that ticket by December 26th day after xmas my license would be suspended... Well as a 3l i wanted to get home after finals so I left town, Buffalo, and went home for christmas... Anyway, I come back January 2nd to Buffalo, visit campus, to check email and do a u turn out of a deserted parking lot, public safety (another euphamism0 stopped me and asked for drivers license.. I gave it to him, he ran it... Then came back and arrested me, put me in handcuffs and in the back the police car, booked me at the jail, and I had to stay there 2 hours while I paid my $250 bail... what I didnt know then driving with a suspended license is a misdmeanor... anyway, everything got settled by a traffic infraction but the ticket, my license, and the atty cost me about $1000... After I became Licensed I represented any student for free in Amherst NY because I loathe the police there...

[axe rive]

	Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	That's informative, thanks. Here's another one, did you guys have ticket quotas?

Yes and no. There aren't official quotas because that is illegal, but in reality senior officers and command staff will make life hell for patrol officers who don't write enough traffic citations. It is a simple matter of department revenue. No, writing tickets does not cover salaries or state road repairs or anything of that nature. However, when a sheriff or chief has to report to his/her district representative on the number of incidents in which his/her officers were involved to "protect the general public" a larger number means more money from state and federal sources to continue doing the work. Traffic citations offer the fastest way of raising that overall number while having the least residual costs.

The problem is that some officers actually enjoy this crap and go above and beyond what is necessary. I had a recommended rate of 3 citations per shift, and believe me that is easy to land without bothering people who are late for work. Running red lights, swerving while drinking coffee and almost knocking someone off the road, speeding around a school bus while there are kids in the street. These are things I saw every day and had no problem writing up, but speeding was never an issue for me. Neither was seeing someone slow to a reasonably slow speed to check the intersection at a four-way stop without actually stopping. The sign isn't there to see how many people stop, it's there to make people check the interection. Other officers were all about bullying, though, and would come in after their shift and have twenty tickets in hand, then go out and do it again the next day. It makes the department look good on paper, but those guys are never going to get advanced to that narc or detective spot they want because they can't figure out what being human is.

In summary, yes there are unofficial quotas, but they are generally so low that it won't impact the decision of the officer on whether or not to give you the ticket.

[curiousgeorge01]

Originally Posted by axe rive To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The problem is that some officers actually enjoy this crap and go above and beyond what is necessary. I had a recommended rate of 3 citations per shift, and believe me that is easy to land without bothering people who are late for work. Running red lights, swerving while drinking coffee and almost knocking someone off the road, speeding around a school bus while there are kids in the street. These are things I saw every day and had no problem writing up, but speeding was never an issue for me. Neither was seeing someone slow to a reasonably slow speed to check the intersection at a four-way stop without actually stopping. The sign isn't there to see how many people stop, it's there to make people check the interection. Other officers were all about bullying, though, and would come in after their shift and have twenty tickets in hand, then go out and do it again the next day. It makes the department look good on paper, but those guys are never going to get advanced to that narc or detective spot they want because they can't figure out what being human is. In summary, yes there are unofficial quotas, but they are generally so low that it won't impact the decision of the officer on whether or not to give you the ticket.

Then the cop who gave me my ticket and towed my car must've just wanted to be an ass. He took my car that was legally parked and claimed I was somewhere else.

[Arthur]

I have a bit of a distaste for cops. I used to refer to them as "pigs," but now I am rather neutral towards cops in general. I can respect those who are at least nice or relatively lax about their job, but I cannot respect those who feel they are above the law because they have power or those who feel it is their duty to rigidly enforce the law (no matter how stupid some laws may be) down to every little detail. Additionally, I don't think victimless crimes (like drug possession or prostitution, for example) warrant arrest, but that's a different matter.

[dogwoodlover]

	Originally Posted by Lycurgus To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	There are no such things as "cop quotas," if you can find an accurate, reasonable cite to the contrary I'd be interested in seeing it. But you can't, because not only do most departments not have them, but I've never heard of a single department that does.

I have personally known three different police officers who worked for the state of California, and all of three of them, when I asked, stated in unambiguous terms that they do have quotas. Obviously, that's not going to be on the books. Does that mean it does not exist? Obviously not. You, being a man of reason, should clearly be able to tell the difference between what people say and what they actually do.

Also, my aunt used to work for the county, and she has mentioned more than once that revenue from tickets are part of the yearly budget. That's about as close as you can get to having legislatively defined quotas. Let's trace this line: city officials depend and rely on certain amounts of money being present for all their precious little projects. City officials, in the face of not having their expected cash flow, will go to the police chief and say: "Why have your officers been writing less tickets this year?" The correct answer is not "there is less crime," despite, of course, their being "tough on crime." The chief then speaks to sergeants, lieutenants, etc. and says: "Why have your men been writing less tickets? are they just slacking off eating donuts all day?" There seems to be an obvious line of cause and effect here, to which the outcome seems quite clearly predetermined.

Were you being sarcastic? Even your story sounds like you didn't try to make things go smoothly, and if I was the cop I'd have thought you were lying. A simple "Okay officer, it wont happen again, I promise. I'll put them out in my ash tray from now on," would have been sufficient, and probably would've gotten you out of the ticket. Unless the cop asks for an explanation, don't open your mouth. He doesn't care why you did it, unless it's important/relevant to the situation at hand -- like a dying passenger -- only that you did it.

The first words out of his mouth were: "WHY DID YOU DROP THE CIGARETTE?"

He approached me with no intention of letting me off. Otherwise, he may have started off with something a little more friendly like "Hi."

When I apologized all over myself, to the point of massive suppression of my own ego, he said: "There's no telling how many times you've done that, how many cigarette butts on my freeway have been from you." That, if I am not mistaken, is not the kind of tone one takes when they are "feeling generous."

And lastly, why are you defending him with groundless speculations? Seeing as how I was there, looking him in the face and listening to him speak, I think I'm pretty qualified to say what he would have and would not have done, or at the very least more qualified than you.

[Lycurgus]

Originally Posted by dogwoodlover To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I have personally known three different police officers who worked for the state of California, and all of three of them, when I asked, stated in unambiguous terms that they do have quotas. Obviously, that's not going to be on the books. Does that mean it does not exist? Obviously not. You, being a man of reason, should clearly be able to tell the difference between what people say and what they actually do.

	Originally Posted by Lycurgus To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Do you have anything other than (possibly false, likely inaccurate) anecdotal evidence, like, say, empirical evidence? Memorandums, police guidebooks, etc?

Originally Posted by dogwoodlover To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Also, my aunt used to work for the county, and she has mentioned more than once that revenue from tickets are part of the yearly budget. That's about as close as you can get to having legislatively defined quotas. Let's trace this line: city officials depend and rely on certain amounts of money being present for all their precious little projects. City officials, in the face of not having their expected cash flow, will go to the police chief and say: "Why have your officers been writing less tickets this year?" The correct answer is not "there is less crime," despite, of course, their being "tough on crime." The chief then speaks to sergeants, lieutenants, etc. and says: "Why have your men been writing less tickets? are they just slacking off eating donuts all day?" There seems to be an obvious line of cause and effect here, to which the outcome seems quite clearly predetermined.

You and I disagree on that effect, however that's probably because I've been inside of police stations more often than you have -- I used to goof around at one all the time. You'd be amazed the kind of stuff cops will chat with you about if you're there long enough.

	Originally Posted by dogwoodlover To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The first words out of his mouth were: "WHY DID YOU DROP THE CIGARETTE?" He approached me with no intention of letting me off. Otherwise, he may have started off with something a little more friendly like "Hi."

I disagree. I've known cops who greeted me, or the other person in the car quite aggressively and still let them off with a warning. It's your responses, not his initial statements, that determine whether or not you get a ticket the majority of the time.

	Originally Posted by dogwoodlover To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	When I apologized all over myself, to the point of massive suppression of my own ego, he said: "There's no telling how many times you've done that, how many cigarette butts on my freeway have been from you." That, if I am not mistaken, is not the kind of tone one takes when they are "feeling generous."

	Originally Posted by dogwoodlover To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	And lastly, why are you defending him with groundless speculations?

Were you being sarcastic?

I wasn't defending him, I was asking a question.

	Originally Posted by dogwoodlover To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Seeing as how I was there, looking him in the face and listening to him speak, I think I'm pretty qualified to say what he would have and would not have done, or at the very least more qualified than you.

I very much doubt that. You and I are likely equally qualified to speak to what he would or would not have done, simply because neither of us where actually there for those events.

I was putting forth a scenario which was possible, if not likely, given my knowledge of officers and my experience with them.

[PunkinA]

I used to despise police. I did not need policing. I experienced a lot of speeding tickets. So bad one year that the lady at the County Clerk's office recognized me. I suffered some suspensions too, as well as an arrest for driving with a suspended license when I didn't know it was suspended. Those cops were a burden on me. I had no need for their authority.

I grew older and a couple things happened. One, I learned to slow down. I don't speed very often, which reduced my encounters with the Police incredibly. Second, it was explained to me how to approach police.

When you are forced to encounter an officer you are dealing with a person. The type of person who will make law enforcement their job is the type of person who likes order. One element of order is the process of authority. Officers have to deal with people. It is their job. They are trained to read people and make quick adjustments to their projected personality based on observations. What you want is for the officer to react civilly toward you. To do this you must give the officer clues that he wants to act civilly toward you. The officer looks for order. If you demonstrate a deference to authority, the officer will pick up on this.

Tips to surviving a police encounter. As soon as an officer has engaged you, adjust your behavior. Guard your actions and your words. Make eye contact, but don't stare. When the officer is not talking to you look away. This reads in their mind as 'respectful'. Speak in terms of "Yes officer, No officer." This need not be humbling. You are recognizing the situation that your interlocutor is an officer. Do not make quick movements. Do not argue with the officer. Try to give honest answers to the officer's questions. (Assuming your answers do not incriminate you further.) An officer will sense your honesty (they are trained to sense honesty, not truth) and regard this as orderly cooperation. Do not volunteer anything not asked for. Always wait for the officer's prompting. They look for deference to authority, not your desire to please. An officer does not want to feel pleased, he wants to feel respected. Give the officer what he needs, and he will find that he does not need to cite you. He will desire to maintain your respect, and your respect for order.

If you are pulled over for a speeding ticket here is the gambit to play. Coupled with the above behavior you will always get off.

1. Do not volunteer your guilt initially. When he asks if you know why you were pulled over, state, "No, I don't know officer."
2. When he tells you you were speeding, or you blew a stop sign, admit it. Admit you committed a crime. Admit you crucified Jesus Christ if he accuses it. (Unless you have been read miranda rights, by that point you are in a slew of trouble and this gambit will not help. After miranda rights keep your mouth shut!) Do not make up excuses and do not apologize. Saying "I'm sorry" when you are not will show as dishonest. Saying "Yes I did do that." will appear honest.
3. After admitting guilt, but before he has a chance to tell you you are getting a ticket, sigh and ask for the order. "Officer, do you think you can let me off this time?" There are other ways to close the deal, but the gist is that you obligate him into letting you go out of the sheer force of your respect. Do not play on his pity, that makes you weak, or a panhandler. Force him to admit your decency to himself and out of duty, let you go.

Knowing what a police officer wants as a person has helped me deal with police situations better. Having better results in police encounters has led me to have more confidence in the police system. Having more confidence in the system in turn has given positive feedback to individual police encounters.

I could add some stories of how my approach to police has allowed me to get out of some pretty extreme situations, but this post is already very long.

[curiousgeorge01]

	Originally Posted by Lycurgus To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I disagree. I've known cops who greeted me, or the other person in the car quite aggressively and still let them off with a warning. It's your responses, not his initial statements, that determine whether or not you get a ticket the majority of the time.

I don't understand why do you disagree with the fact that parking and speeding tickets are part of a state's revenue. Can you explain?

[lancelot]

Originally Posted by LPM To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

So I got a ticket this morning going 50 in a 35. I just can't handle cops. It almost never goes well. I get pulled over and my heart starts beating and I start hating and I just have to contain myself from doing or saying something stupid. We do the normal exchange, he goes back and writes the ticket, finishes his donut whatever the hell he does that takes 15 minutes, and comes back. As I was leaving I asked him what exactly he clocked me at because at first he says "about 50" and he said he gave me a break on the ticket for 44 in a 35 9 miles over. He said 50. I said "exactly 50?" He said yes. I wanted to say "Liar" soooooooo bad. I had to work so hard to keep it in. But I did. I think the meds (high dose of Celexa) are helping me with these kind of impules. Couple questions. Is it an INTJ thing to hate police as badly as I do? Is it an INTJ thing to do impulsively do or say controversial things that others think through and prudently decide not to?

If I needed to work with law enforcemen for some reason, I would prefer not to work with the police. Ex. Once I found an incindiary device at a cemetary, I turned it in to the cemetary office and suggested they notify the police; later I made the mistake of telling my land lord, she insisted I call the police. When I called, the officer got upset and sounded frustrated as he raised his voice; I felt I was waisting my time dealing with someone so rude and disrespectful.

In my opinion, higher forms of law enforcement are more educated, and professional.

[nacht]

Originally Posted by curiousgeorge01 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

From a class I took on law. Many things aren't explicitly stated and that's the way that law is designed. It's purposely open to allow for interpretation and flexibility because things happen all time. And in emergencies, it doesn't apply ie woman is going into labor in a car, someone needs to rush home because his father is dying. I don't know about other states, but in NY, its common for everyone to drive about 10mph or less over the speed limit. You ever wonder why your GPS doesn't say danger until it hits 65mph in a 55mph zone? That's the reason why.

Your grasp of how the law works seems somewhat fuzzy.

Most states I've seen operate on an absolute speed limit (or it is officer's discretion but they can still flag you for going 1 mph over). If you are going 1 mph over, you are breaking the law or the officer can rule that you were breaking the law. In either case the police officers may give you a grace of 10 mph ON HIGHWAYS, but they are by no means required to do so and many areas (e.g., Empire, CO) are known as "speed traps" because they will flag you for going just slightly over. It is officer's discretion as to whether they do this, but if they do flag you for such your defense options are going to be fairly narrow.

Ok from what I've read somewhere else its 10mph, but this is what one of my law books says: Think for example, about one of the laws we most commonly encounter: speed limit. What is the legal speed limit on most interstate highways? Someone who looked only in the law books might think the answer is 65mph, but we know better. If you drive at 65mph on the New Jersey Turnpike, be prepared to have a truck bearing down on you, flashing its lights to get you to pull into the slow lane. The speed limit according to drivers' conduct is considerably higher than 65. And legal officials act the same way. The police give drivers a cushion if 3-5 mph, never giving a speed ticket to someone who is going 66. If they did, the judges would laugh them out of court. As a practical matter, the court doesn't want to waste its time with someone who violated the speed limit by 1 or 2 mph, and as a matter of law, the police radar often isn't accurate enough to draw that fine a line anyway. So what is the law on how fast you can drive? Something different than the books say.

First, judges don't "laugh at them in court"--that depends on jurisdiction (see also, Empire, CO). You might be able to get off on arguing a calibration error, but don't bet on it and it will depend on how you answer the question of "do you know why I pulled you over?" (Hint: "for speeding" is the wrong answer). This is a matter of "what you can get away with" not "what the law reads."

Second, this is clearly meant for highways. Your attempting to extend a courtesy buffer on highways to city streets is absolutely false (try going 25 in a school zone ).

[Jackie]

I get huge anxiety anytime I see a cop car.

One time I blew a stop sign in a car filled with people when it was illegal for me to drive that many people. A cop car was on the other side of the road. He didn't notice. I tend to be very lucky no matter where I am or what I am doing.

I was once accused of something ridiculous and could have been a very serious ordeal. I was nervous like crazy and after 2-3 hours of bickering around they realized I wasn't who they were looking for. I was just quiet and respectful, very honest, I looked them in the eyes and referred to them as officer and sir. It was easy.

Sometimes when I'm driving I just start fantasizing about what will happen when a cop pulls me over. I always imagine them questioning me for stupid things and me giving them the straight honest answers. They end up walking away knowing I didn't do anything.

I don't have any problems with authority figures, probably because whether it is at school or with cops I know how to work them and get what I want. Just don't do anything that could by any stretch of your imagination be wrong.

[curiousgeorge01]

Originally Posted by nacht To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Your grasp of how the law works seems somewhat fuzzy. Most states I've seen operate on an absolute speed limit (or it is officer's discretion but they can still flag you for going 1 mph over). If you are going 1 mph over, you are breaking the law or the officer can rule that you were breaking the law. In either case the police officers may give you a grace of 10 mph ON HIGHWAYS, but they are by no means required to do so and many areas (e.g., Empire, CO) are known as "speed traps" because they will flag you for going just slightly over. It is officer's discretion as to whether they do this, but if they do flag you for such your defense options are going to be fairly narrow. First, judges don't "laugh at them in court"--that depends on jurisdiction (see also, Empire, CO). You might be able to get off on arguing a calibration error, but don't bet on it and it will depend on how you answer the question of "do you know why I pulled you over?" (Hint: "for speeding" is the wrong answer). This is a matter of "what you can get away with" not "what the law reads." Second, this is clearly meant for highways. Your attempting to extend a courtesy buffer on highways to city streets is absolutely false (try going 25 in a school zone ).

You should refer to Axe Rive's comment's above. He was actually a cop so he would know better than I would.

Well I got that quote from a law book, so if you don't believe it, I don't know what else to tell you.

Yes it is clearly meant for highways, I thought that's what everyone was talking about.