Got a Speeding Ticket Today :(

I believe I have made a distinction between traffic police and REAL police. Traffic police are just tax enforcers.

 

And you are quite simply, a troll.

Traffic police are not tax enforcers, they are the thin line that keeps reckless a-holes from killing innocent people on the streets, and the ones who clean up the mess when one of those a-holes causes a wreck.

They do a lot more than simply write tickets and collect revenue.

As to your other issue, 20% fine for speeding? Did you know the law when you went zooming down the highway? Sure you did. So, you were playing Russian roulette with the police, and you lost. Don't want to pay a big fine, then don't speed. If you want to speed, then don't ***** about a huge fine, simple as that.

In a game where you know the rules, and get beat by them, there's no room for whining. I've gotten three tickets in my driving life, almost 37 years, and I've paid the fines, taken the points and moved on. If I'm tooling down the highway at twice the legal limit, I should expect to get a hefty fine, maybe lose my license, and have a hell of a lot of explaining to do.

 

I disagree. If someone working for McDonalds for 400 Euro a month gets caught speeding with his 20 year old VW Golf and pays 80€, it's 20% of his monthly income and he will think twice about doing it again. If some stock broker earning 400 Euro an hour gets caught speeding with his Ferrari, it may be the same money he spent for lunch with his friends and won't really hurt him. It would be highway robbery if the speed trap is, don't know, on a 5 lane Autobahn on a sunday morning with no car there. But then it's robbery, too, with the current fixed-amount system


and btw, your reference to communism - isn't the aim of communism to make everyone and everything the same? So if the McDonalds guy and the stock broker both have to pay the same fine without regard of their financial strenght, we might as well call it communism

 

And why is that? Because he doesn't share your opinion?

 

Well actually, no, but your post may qualify if I apply the Wiki standard.


An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who intentionally posts controversial or contrary messages in an on-line community such as an on-line discussion forum or group with the intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.

Seems to me that Russian M whatever constantly posts here looking to cause an argumentative response with completely contrary statements. Or with broad generalities that incite.

You don't think a statement like, "I believe I have made a distinction between traffic police and REAL police." is meant to inflame in a situation where he's having an internet discussion with a traffic officer, or two, included in the posting? Do you think he posted that as anything other than a troll-like comment? And he's all over here with them, on a very consistent basis. Yes,I consider him a troll. No, I don't agree with him that traffic officers are not "real" police.

Do you think his statement has merit? Do you think traffic officers are out there simply to generate revenue, and are in some way inferior to other types of law enforcement officers?

Dave M.

 

Yes.

Yes. In the same way I distinguish between a Navy Seaman and a Navy Seal, you don't make any distinction between the two? He wasn't making a moral distinction but one of training and purpose.

 

Apples and oranges. I don't beleive he was making that distinction at all.

In Pennsylvania I believe there is no distinction in the training or purpose of one over the other. If you asked me is there a difference between a SWAT officer and a Traffic officer, I would say yes, I think that is a more equal comparison to Seal/Seaman. However at the local level our SWAT guys are everyday patrol officers with additional training.

Traffic enforcement is a part of all the everyday officer's duties, both state and local, that I've ever been exposed to. The guys who write speeding tickets on a Monday in my town may just be chasing a bad guy on Tuesday, directing traffic on a Wednesday or investigating a prowler report on a Thursday. They all get the same training. So do the state police, who in our urban areas are primarily the highway patrol, but in the more rural areas handle all sorts of law enforcement.

Maybe it's different where you come from, I can't comment on that. But I do object to all the cop bashing that goes on here, mostly because they enforce laws that we tend to break, and then annoy us with their tickets.

 

Dave;

For the most part traffic officers are tax collectors. If indeed their purpose was to ensure safety, we wouldn't see so many of them on the Interstates, where the fatality rate is so low. Take a look at these figures: http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus/1037_fatal_motor_vehicle_accidents_national_summary.html

You'll note that secondary roads account for approximately 3 times the fatal accidents (at least for the time period in which they are reported), yet as we all know, the vast majority of traffic cops are on the interstate. Could it be that with artifically low speed limits (roads were designed for .4 G at 80 mph) that most people are speeding, and the pickings are easier? I suspect so.

I haven't had a ticket in quite a while, over 7 years since the last one, but like everyone else, I don't obey the speed limits. I travel at a speed that I believe is safe and comfortable. The interesting thing about that is that my attitude is exactly what just about everyone else does also. However, given that I don't want to support insurance carriers, and buy new toys for the CHP, I leveled the playing field. Not going to say exactly what I've done, but it works, and I'm not expecting to be ticketed any time soon.

Art

 

For you law enforcment officer haters out there (and judging from this thread you know who you are), ABC News had a piece tonight on the high number killed in the line of duty this year:

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/LawAndJusticeLinks/story?id=3914709&page=1

Some quotes:

What concerns police most is that they are encountering on routine patrols violent criminals who shoot to kill -- often without provocation. Despite the increasing risks to their lives, many officers say they remain committed to their jobs. "It's my way to serve the community and that's why I got into it in the first place."

You should check it out before you continue to shovel the drivel.

 

Yes, people change to fit the roles society assigns to them (whether or not they undertook those roles voluntarily to begin with). This has been perfectly well established with the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE), and its successors.

Cops may be genuinely nice guys at the outset, but with the constant exposure to the dregs of society, they might well begin to treat everyone as a criminal. I don't know why there are cops or police-sympathisers here who keep insisting on denying the inevitable. To the LEOs : you're human too, and fallible, accept that you are just as much a slave to psychology and circumstance, stop getting so defensive and we can move on. Yes, there are disrespectful buggers out there who will insist on calling you dirty names, but be willing to consider the likelihood that average cop-behavior may just be capricious and bad enough to warrant the mistrust of the man-on-the-street. If the SPE is anything to go by, it is likely that the average/majority (not a small minority as has constantly been assumed) of LEOs may have had subtle behavioral changes or an altered worldview that makes them act in a bad-mannered, even abusive fashion.

Yes, cops save lives. So do firemen, but I have heard practically zero complaints about abusive firemen. It's all to do with the nominal control over others you've been afforded by your societal role - that *does* change you, just accept it, and try to see things from a non-cop's perspective from time to time.

 

Regular cops also enforce traffic. You are so ignorant of the facts that maybe a second chance is in order. Look into your heart and think about a person with the guts to pull over a car he knows nothing about. Think about a person whose job is to run in the direction of gunfire instead of away from it. Think about a person who is a traffic investigator who has studied enough to do accident reconstruction.(it takes years)

These men and women are heros.

You need to apologize now.

Regards,

Stew

 

Not mine but an old find from 1998. John Romero former ID Software partner getting pulled over after leaving the Texas Motorplex somewhere near Ennis, TX.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Damn! That first sentence got my hopes up that we were going to hear something in this thread that was actually useful, and then with the second sentence, you dash all hopes, ha! (I've been 8 years without a ticket as well Art. But mainly from general vigilance and dumb luck. Sounds like you've taken a more thought out approach of some kind).

 

Reckless a holes are not stopped by cops. The proof is that they are still around. Most stops are of people driving slightly above the limit. Those that street race or do stupid things usually first check to see that no cops are around. I am talking about a cop car hiding in the bushes, pulling over people for 10 over in the middle of nowhere Kansas. I got pulled over once on my bike for being 3 miles over limit (there is no "grace zone" in Switzerland.) I knew there was a police trap, I couldn't control the speed of my bike exactly, since I was in very fluid traffic.

Besides if you read my post properly, I was ticketed for an "offence" that the COP DID NOT SEE. He HEARD it. He claims I accelerated innapropriately.

 

Capitalism wants to eliminate the poor. Communism wants to eliminate the rich.

Rich people paying more does just that.

I don't know how much you make, but what would you feel about... say a 20,000USD ticket?

 

For a "Super Cop" you sure do have thinner skin then a Victorian Dame. The problem is not just that Cops enforce many laws that are patently stupid, the problem is that when left to their own discretion, they tend to always be on a power trip, become some God like authority figure. Why should some meat-head who can barely spell (not meaning you) edumacate on morals and society somebody who has 10 times the education (I am not talking about myself here.)

Many countries have separate traffic/law enforcement agencies, so this is why I make a distinction between different types of cops.

 

So? In Sweden being a cop is safer then being a bouncer, they still ticket the hell out of people. The danger of the job has nothing to do with writing speeding tickets.

 

Wow, I didn't know America was as dangerous as Baghdad. In most civilized countries, being a cop is no more risky then being a bouncer, with probably an even lower chance of getting shot at.

I cop has a legal right to end my life at his discretion. Damn right I hold him to a more stringent standard. If he can't take it, get another job.

A decorated War Hero, if he commits an act of violence on me will go to jail, no matter how many Purple Hearts he has. A cop will almost certainly not since he is sanctioned by the state and his word somehow weighs more then mine.

 

While she was "flying" down the road yesterday (10 miles over the limit), a woman passed over a bridge only to find a cop with a radar gun on the other side lying in wait.

The cop pulled her over, walked up to the car, and with that classic patronizing smirk we all know and love, asked, "What's your hurry?"

To which she replied, "I'm late for work."

"Oh yeah," said the cop, "what do you do?"

"I'm a rectum stretcher," she responded.

The cop stammered, "A what? A rectum stretcher? And just what does a rectum stretcher do?"

"Well," she said, "I start by inserting one finger, then work my way up to two fingers, then three, then four, then with my whole hand in. I work from side to side until I can get both hands in, and then I slowly but surely stretch, until it's about 6 feet wide."

"And just what the hell do you do with a 6 foot *******?" he asked.

"You give him a radar gun and park him behind a bridge..."

 

No way to send you a pm either to get the details?

 

You don't have a clue !
Obviously you are looking at porn and only typing with one hand

Regards,
Stew

 

Nope, but it works. I did my homework on this. Let's leave it at this: what frequency does most of the traffic radar transmit on, and who makes a similar transmitter (since none of the jammers that were tested actually works)? You can go from there.

Art

 

I bought a peice of equiptment a few years ago made by I think Corbra. It picks up the transducer in the trunk of the cruiser. So you get a warning of a police car in the area even if the radar is not on. I heard this peice of equiptment is not produced anymore because it is not legal to use it. I have not ever used mine so I don't even know it works. I was going to look into if it were legal or not for use before I bothered to check it out. Can you send me a pm about what you.....

 

This is public knowledge on the internet and can be found in radio groups online.

For The Peoples Socialist Republic of Kalifornia, the repeater(car to portable radio) operates on frequency 154.905MHz and is always on when they are on duty. No big secret, it's been like that for years with the GE Rangr radios.

 

I used Cobra's "BearTracker" for ten years. It's interesting. It does get false alarms, and it does miss some patrol cars. Better in some states than in others. Typically works when an Officer is equipped with a shoulder-mounted radio that lets him communicate through his squad car's transmitter...which is to say, you'll get the red alarm when a squad car so equipped is stopped and the Officer is outside of his car...and you are inside of about a 3 mile range.

But is the time when an Officer is outside of his squad car really when you *want* to be warned?

Anyway, I had an early version. Big unit. The newer models are tiny. Probably better, too.

I just didn't see the need to continue along those lines.