Random Enforcement and Hypocrisy

[OldMadBrit]

Looking at numerous recent and past threads, there is growing objection to the seemingly random enforcement of traffic and vehicle laws.

At the same time, we all see and hear of some LEO's demonstrating massive hypocrisy in how they are seen to drive on the highway.

I am absolutely not defending squidly behavior. Squids need squishing before Sportbiking is lost to us all (just like some of us lost all access to single track mountain bike trails). In the same tone, I expect to get busted if I am caught riding like a d__k and have been thrilled to proceed with nothing more than a "talk" more than once.

However, and this is my point, given that we understand that squidly behavior within the Sportbike community is going to bite us. Would it not be a good idea if the LEO community figured out that their behavior on the road sets the tone for how they are perceived as well?

My observations, in no particular order:

1). occasional LEO's demonstrating no regard for the law (or more importantly what the “Average Joe” believes to be the law) by driving in Bus Lanes, speeding up the "slow lane", tailgating, speeding up & slowing down and generally driving like a d__k - without any visible sign of being in pursuit (i.e. no lights or other indication of being in legitimate pursuit); :hand

2). LEO's on record stating that some of the vehicle codes and traffic laws are silly; :applause

3). Random enforcement of 2) above; :wow

4). Enforcement of 2) above against the "target of the month"; :(

5). Mindless enforcement of 2) above at the end of a financial period - for what are obviously revenue reasons; :x

6). Occasional outbreaks of "discretion" which although very welcome - do confuse the whole picture. :applause :applause

I'm looking for some serious comments here from bikers and LEO's (yes really).

Steve

[cydobomb]

Hypocrisy from LEO's?:wtf Say it aint so!!!:laughing

The quality of man as a whole is on a downward spiral- cops aren't exempt, and may be augering in faster than the masses. Intelligent, discreet, uncorrupted and vigilant coppers are the exception. Avoid all police like the plague. How? Keep yer nose clean!:nerd :p :twofinger

[dog_butter]

most definately i agree that human race has seen better days in terms of character .

[Mike T]

*sigh*...i had a friend who was nearly taken out by a speeding CHP when he was driving in his cage. also, ive seen my share of LEOs breaking the law...the one i always remember was the traffic light was about to turn red and what does he do? turn on his lights,speeds up, drive passed the TL, turns off his lights, and drive normally...and also i think that no LEOs dont know how to signal...then those oh-so-speeding LEOs....*sigh*......

still..i would like to say that theyre like us and if one messes up, we cant blame them all.....BUT....they were suppose to be the public "look up to" person...sucks if kids were lookin up to LEOs and see them breaking the same laws they were suppose to reinforce....

[Velox]

Originally posted by Mike T
*sigh*...i had a friend who was nearly taken out by a speeding CHP when he was driving in his cage. also, ive seen my share of LEOs breaking the law...the one i always remember was the traffic light was about to turn red and what does he do? turn on his lights,speeds up, drive passed the TL, turns off his lights, and drive normally...and also i think that no LEOs dont know how to signal...then those oh-so-speeding LEOs....*sigh*......

still..i would like to say that theyre like us and if one messes up, we cant blame them all.....BUT....they were suppose to be the public "look up to" person...sucks if kids were lookin up to LEOs and see them breaking the same laws they were suppose to reinforce....

Several years ago I WAS taken out by a speeding LEO in Illinois. He was a county cop heading toward the scene of another accident. He was going well over the speed limit, with lights only (no siren), in the wrong lane of a two-lane road, coming over a hill. I was making a left just over the crest of the hill with a minivan behind me blocking my rear view.

I started to make my turn, and when the LEO saw me start to turn, he fliped his siren on. I figured, since the siren went on when I started my turn, that he was going to pull me over (still didn't actually see him at this point). Next thing I know, I get T-boned in the driver side door by the LEO. Witnesses report that the LEO was accellerating right before the collision to try and cut me off.

Both of our vehicles ended up in the parking lot on the corner, and luckily, noone was standing at that usually busy corner. Also luckily, neither of us was injured. The LEO ended up getting a ticket for "Failure to use due care."


It's all too easy to foget, that LEOs are just people, like you and me. They have their bad days, and their good days. There are good guys, and there are the jerks. I imagine that even the best LEO deals with enough jerks who automatically label them the "corrupt cop" steriotype that it starts to rub off on them. With all the LEO bashing, eventually it's going to get to 'em.


Another point, for the OP, is that a lot of the points come back to #2, and that is really out of the LEO's hands. They don't make the law, they are only charged with enforcing it. The solution wouldn't be for LEOs to just ignore the fact that it's a law, but to lobby that the law get repealled, or revised to something that can be, and makes sense to be, consistently enforced.

[rsrider]

Good cops and bad cops. I know that my personal experience with them seems to vary from year to year. Some years they're like a plague of locusts, and others they're not even on the radar. This year, umm last year, I've driven by them at excessive speeds and they just look at me and yawn. I'm hoping that response continues into the future.

Do I think they are revenue collectors? Yes I do.
Do I think they take advantage of their status to circumvent normal traffic laws? Yes i do, but I would do the same in certain situations.

I was reading about how unions sometimes start following their contracts to the letter when they want management to get their shite together. When they do, work slows to a crawl as there are so many proceedures to follow that it just becomes stupid. Are there laws that border on retardation? Yes there are. But if the cops decided that they were going to enforce the entire vehicle code all the time, traffic would grind to a halt. They have to make decisions about what laws they need to enforce every day for any different situation, just like we have to make those same types of decisions about our job. And if one day the cop is pissed off, just hope that someone else gets his attention before you do.

I try to keep all my paper work straight, ride with the proper gear, don't give any attitude, and do everything I can to make the cop relaxed when I get pulled over. If he decides to show discretion towards letting me ride off with a warning, then so be it. If he writes me up, I accept it, cause I did after all break the law. Do I like it? Hell no, but them's the breaks.

[Junkie]

My impression has been that CHP are interested in writing you up no matter where you are, whereas more local LEOs are more willing to not write you as long as you are doing whatever you are doing in a relatively safe way and most importantly doing it out of town. In other words, if CHP catches you doing 85 on the freeway, they don't care what else is happening - ie you're getting a ticket even if it's the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night. If a local is the one who catches you, he is going to base ticket vs not more on the situation.

I ALWAYS slow down when I get to towns. I've been pulled over by local LEOs and been given warnings for doing stupid shit on backroads, but been let off with a warning because I explained to them that while yes, I was doing stupid shit that I shouldn't, I was doing it somewhere that wasn't disturbing many other people and was only going to hurt me if something happened. Now, they obviously told me to go do it somewhere else if I have to do it anyway, but they seemed to be fairly understanding that I was doing it in a smart way. Down here in SLO, you can get away with doing a LOT on backroads as long as you don't run into any CHP.

Of course, it's still always funny when you're riding along behind a group of a few cars on a county road at 75-80 and then slow down by 15mph when you get to the state highway.

edit: in other words, I think a certain amount of officer discretion is a good thing. I like that the local cops can decide to not give tickets when they find you going well over the speed limit if they think you were doing so in a safe way. I don't know of any CHP who do that though.

[Meter Man]

My brother was going to a party before he headed out to his senate page appointment in DC.

A local copper ran a stop sign and hit him at about 60mph without lights or sirens.

Luckily no injuries to my brother and the city paid us for the car.


The reason the cop was speeding ? A drunk was kicking a keno machine at Golden Nugget Casino.

What happened to the copper 2 months later? He was arrested for trying to defraud pharmacies of pain pills.

[}Dragon{]

Originally posted by rsrider
Do I think they are revenue collectors? Yes I do.


Do you know where the term Sheriff comes from? :laughing

The Shire Reeve was the revenue collector for the King.

In traffic enforcement, the revenue that is generated is actually very small for the individual agency. The state and the county get most of the money.

[motorman4life]

In CA, there are approx. 1000 citizens per peace officer and no more than 1/3 of the officers are on duty at a given time. That means there are at least 3000 citizens per 1 on-duty officer throughout the state. This includes CHP, county sheriff's deputies, city officers and even special agents from the FBI, DEA, DOJ, ATF, DHS down to the regional task forces (NTF, VTTF, etc..), anti-crime, anti-gang and sworn LEO park rangers. 3000 to 1. While some are assigned to plainclothes and other specialized duties and investigations, by and large, a majority of those officers are tasked with responding to calls for service. Aside from handling those calls, writing reports, conducting any necessary follow-up and providing cover or assistance to their fellow officers, they are also expected (in most areas) to fill their "dead time" with proactive enforcement. This is where it may seem random.

As for the growing objection to the seemingly random enforcement of traffic and vehicle laws, all I can say is, we cannot be everywhere all of the time and every person can't be handled with the exact approach because each situation, each citizen and each officer are different.

Each officer has their own pet-peeves or concerns that may influence where they dedicate their time or what approach they take to their duties, above and beyond the routine report taking and contacting complainants to deal with whatever problems they have noted. On top of that, they have the priorities they are given by their administration in addition to those priorities dictated to agencies by OTS and other funding agencies that give grants for things like seatbelt enforcement and crosswalk compliance. When an officer gets a free moment or happens to on-view a blatant violation, s/he is expected to take action... some action, any action, if they are not actively involved in a higher priority call. Just because you don't know what other priorities they have or there is no apparent "emergency" does not mean they don't have higher priorities at hand. Once I was en route to a cold rape call, the victim was at the hospital. There was no emergency. I on-viewed a fender bender and called it in to dispatch to send an officer. Being that I was going the other direction and stuck in a patrol car, in traffic, I was not in position to advise the involved parties, so I continued to the hospital. In retrospect, I could have possibly used the PA to tell them officers were on their way. When the traffic officers arrived, one of the involved parties was upset because I had "blown them off" and "obviously" I was not going to an emergency because I wasn't chasing anyone and did not have my lights and siren on. Could the rape victim have waited? Yes. But, it was clear there were no injuries in the fender bender and it was obvious to me that as a patrolman, I was needed at the hospital more than the crash scene.

FWIW, over the years, while on motors and patrol, I have commonly focused my "free-time" efforts on things like handicapped zone violations, red light runners, unlawfully tinted windows, speeding vehicles in school zones when students are present, juveniles soliciting adults to purchase alcohol for them. In my capacity, I am not expected to be targeting weapons of mass destruction, military weapons trafficking, active or inactive terrorist cells or producing meth labs. I am trained to recognize and take appropriate action of I see evidence of these things, but between documenting crashes or handling routine or emergency calls for service, I am expected to write tickets and my bosses are fine with the fact that I write more handicapped tickets than the rest of my agency combined... in spite of the fact that I have not found any weapons of mass destruction or terrorist cells. It is not about the $$$, it is about getting compliance.

As for those LEO's you believe to be demonstrating massive hypocrisy in how they are seen to drive on the highway, all I can say is; if you don't know what they are responding to, then it is short sighted to assume it is for no reason. I have responded to silent hold up alarms with no lights or siren. I have had people call up and complain about my driving, only to discover I had just captured 3 armed gunmen after 4 shots were fired in the local bank. There are frequently reasons officers drive aggressively to some calls without lights and siren. A pursuit is not the only time they may need to get somewhere quickly. As for those officers that regularly drive without regard to the law or safety, because they can... eventually, it will catch up with them. By and large, they are in the very smallest minority. This may not seem to be the case, but again, you don't know what is going on at any given time.

As for LEO's on record stating that some of the vehicle codes and traffic laws are silly. Please remember, we don't make the laws. I don't agree with all of the laws and neither do the judges. I have seen tickets thrown out by judges for the same reason I have seen officers either turn a blind eye or simply give a verbal warning for the same violation. There are laws that are so poorly written that they are not enforceable. There are also laws on the books that have been ruled unconstitutional. We, as officers, cannot do much about fixing the laws on the books. We just have to set our priorities, use the time, manpower and resources available to us and take it from there.

As for the "target of the month." These are priorities set by the state or the community (city council and community groups putting pressure on local police admin) to increase enforcement and gain compliance. Often these come down as mandates or there is additional funding attached for special equipment or overtime to add officers on the streets to focus on whatever the "pet" priority is at a given time. Examples are the "Avoid" DUI campaign during the holidays, the seatbelt crackdowns held in conjunction with a nation-wide $1 billion+ ad campaign, crosswalk, school zone and school bus right of way enforcement programs held at the beginning of the school year. All of these programs are designed and intended to reduce accidents, injuries, fatalities and change behaviors for the better. Whether you agree with them or not, they do save lives.

As for the "mindless enforcement of traffic laws at the end of a financial period - for what are obviously revenue reasons." This is one I hear all the time. I don't know any cops that care about "the end of the month" or any other period. It is really not important.

My boss and I have an agreement... they don't tell me how many tickets to write as long as I write every violation I see. Do I stop every car I see with no front plate? No. Do I stop every car I see with a skateboarder behind it being dragged by a rope? Yes. Do I stop every seatbelt violation I see? No, except during the seatbelt campaign. Do I stop every person I see driving the wrong way down a 1-way street? Yes.

There is another thread in the LEO Forum right now regarding increased police presence on the SF Bay Bridge. To what do you attribute the increased enforcement? If it were January 31st, I'm certain you think your point would be proven. Well, it's January 17th, so as far as I'm concerned, that proves your theory wrong. We (cops) don't care if it is the end of the month, the end of a quarter or the end of the year. If we see a violation, we are expected to take appropriate action, regardless of the calendar.

If you feel the occasional outbreaks of "discretion" (which you see as very welcome), confuse the whole picture, then maybe you should tell the next officer that stops you that. I'm sure they can easily convert a verbal warning into a ticket... to avoid any confusion. :teeth

As I stated, each officer has their priorities. I know cops that average over 200 tickets a month and cops that have written less than 10 tickets in a 15+ year career. Each has their own approach and depending on their particular assignment, they have different expectations put upon them.

[StuntrHuntr]

+1

Originally posted by motorman4life
My boss and I have an agreement... they don't tell me how many tickets to write as long as I write every violation I see.
:laughing Spoken like a true motor officer.

Major mojo to MM4L for a well written response.

[Meter Man]

Yes, but do you guys really sing like on that show COP Rock?

[czarb]

Well written response-- too bad human cloning is illegal else MM4L would be the T-1000 out on the road right now (only a good one)~ :)

[Lucky]

Yes, very eloquent. Solid!

[duffman650]

+100 MM4L that says it all


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike T
[...the one i always remember was the traffic light was about to turn red and what does he do? turn on his lights,speeds up, drive passed the TL, turns off his lights, and drive normally...

when I work graves this is comon pratice for me when I am following a DUI driver and miss a light. I will flip my lights on and clear the intersetion. I wont leave my lights on and alert the DUI driver I am there until I have got all the driving observations I need. Just an example. . . .

[SpeedyCorky]

+ mojo to MM4L


great info and good to hear a LEOs solid opinion on the subject
:thumbup

[silverbelt]

If there is a bunch of phone calls complaining about speeding near retirement communities (example), who is it that makes the decision to put a few motocops doing strictly traffic enforcement on that stretch of road during commute hours?.

Can that person who makes that decision specify a certain amount of tickets to be written?

In general, I am asking how the police dept traffic division makes decisions on which areas to target for special enforcement. Just curious.

[silversvs]

Originally posted by silverbelt
If there is a bunch of phone calls complaining about speeding near retirement communities (example), who is it that makes the decision to put a few motocops doing strictly traffic enforcement on that stretch of road during commute hours?.

Can that person who makes that decision specify a certain amount of tickets to be written?

In general, I am asking how the police dept traffic division makes decisions on which areas to target for special enforcement. Just curious.

The squeaky wheel does get greased. When I get calls into my office complaining about speeders, redlight runners, etc etc, I will assign a motor to go out and see what we can do. We put out a list of traffic enforcement requests to patrol so that they can assist us as their time permits.

Depending on the nature of the complaint, we can throw a radar trailer out, look at engineering issues, provide extra enforcement, or in many cases we just take the time to educate the complaining party. Many people who call to complain say that cars are doing 50 MPH in a posted 25 zone. We meet with them, walk outside and observe passing traffic. We ask how fast they think the cars are moving. Then we use a radar to show them that the cars they think are doing 50 are actually only going 30. Its an eye opener for many complainers.

[motorman4life]

Same here.

Traffic complaints may come in through admin or the front office and they are usually directed to the Patrol Lieutenant or Traffic Sergeant. They'll send a motor out to check it out and see what will fix the problem, or if there is a problem at all. Similarly, we can do concentrated enforcement or add the location to the beat list to have patrol monitor the location while they are parked doing reports. There is rarely any mandate to write tickets... just fix the problem. Of course, if I see violations, I am expected to take action, whether that is a verbal or written warning or a citation.

Last year, I was sent out to the Senior Center due to a complaint of cars not yielding to peds in the marked crosswalk and making R on red when peds were trying to cross over from their lot across the street. I went out and all I saw were numerous peds crossing against the red. I contacted the R/P (reporting party) and advised them I had confirmed there was certainly a problem and I would spend at least an hour there, maybe more. On a lark, I asked her if she would prefer warnings or tickets be given. She said, without reservation, that she wanted tickets to be written and I assured her I would be writing tickets for whatever violations I saw. She seemed pleased and I gave her my voicemail and encourged her to call me again if she wanted me back out to write more tickets. She assured me she would be calling again.

I was there for about 90 minutes and in that time, I wrote 1 car for R on red when unsafe (and it was a senior citizen that had just left the senior center) and I wrote 11 peds (all seniors) for crossing against the red ped signal. We never got another complaint from the Senior Center and she never called for me to come back and write more tickets! :teeth

[Dove]

Originally posted by motorman4life
Same here.

Traffic complaints may come in through admin or the front office and they are usually directed to the Patrol Lieutenant or Traffic Sergeant. They'll send a motor out to check it out and see what will fix the problem, or if there is a problem at all. Similarly, we can do concentrated enforcement or add the location to the beat list to have patrol monitor the location while they are parked doing reports. There is rarely any mandate to write tickets... just fix the problem. Of course, if I see violations, I am expected to take action, whether that is a verbal or written warning or a citation.

Last year, I was sent out to the Senior Center due to a complaint of cars not yielding to peds in the marked crosswalk and making R on red when peds were trying to cross over from their lot across the street. I went out and all I saw were numerous peds crossing against the red. I contacted the R/P (reporting party) and advised them I had confirmed there was certainly a problem and I would spend at least an hour there, maybe more. On a lark, I asked her if she would prefer warnings or tickets be given. She said, without reservation, that she wanted tickets to be written and I assured her I would be writing tickets for whatever violations I saw. She seemed pleased and I gave her my voicemail and encourged her to call me again if she wanted me back out to write more tickets. She assured me she would be calling again.

I was there for about 90 minutes and in that time, I wrote 1 car for R on red when unsafe (and it was a senior citizen that had just left the senior center) and I wrote 11 peds (all seniors) for crossing against the red ped signal. We never got another complaint from the Senior Center and she never called for me to come back and write more tickets! :teeth

Mojo'd :thumbup

[}Dragon{]

Originally posted by motorman4life
I was there for about 90 minutes and in that time, I wrote 1 car for R on red when unsafe (and it was a senior citizen that had just left the senior center) and I wrote 11 peds (all seniors) for crossing against the red ped signal. We never got another complaint from the Senior Center and she never called for me to come back and write more tickets! :teeth

:applause

[SpeedyCorky]

Originally posted by motorman4life
Last year, I was sent out to the Senior Center due to a complaint of cars not yielding to peds in the marked crosswalk and making R on red when peds were trying to cross over from their lot across the street. I went out and all I saw were numerous peds crossing against the red. I contacted the R/P (reporting party) and advised them I had confirmed there was certainly a problem and I would spend at least an hour there, maybe more. On a lark, I asked her if she would prefer warnings or tickets be given. She said, without reservation, that she wanted tickets to be written and I assured her I would be writing tickets for whatever violations I saw. She seemed pleased and I gave her my voicemail and encourged her to call me again if she wanted me back out to write more tickets. She assured me she would be calling again.

I was there for about 90 minutes and in that time, I wrote 1 car for R on red when unsafe (and it was a senior citizen that had just left the senior center) and I wrote 11 peds (all seniors) for crossing against the red ped signal. We never got another complaint from the Senior Center and she never called for me to come back and write more tickets! :teeth


:laughing SOOOO POWN3D !!!!$#*(^$FTW!!!

http://www.bayarearidersforum.com/forums/images/threads/000/190/619/2929455-owl_lol.jpg

[saizai]

Originally posted by motorman4life
[B]In CA, there are approx. 1000 citizens per peace officer and no more than 1/3 of the officers are on duty at a given time. That means there are at least 3000 citizens per 1 on-duty officer throughout the state. This includes CHP, county sheriff's deputies, city officers and even special agents from the FBI, DEA, DOJ, ATF, DHS down to the regional task forces (NTF, VTTF, etc..), anti-crime, anti-gang and sworn LEO park rangers. 3000 to 1.

Interesting stat (per your usual), but IMO misleading.

The stat you would want to make the point you are making is, what is the average number of people being supervised by an individual cop?

E.g. for traffic enforcement cops, this is (# of people on the road within their beat)/(# cops on that beat).

I suspect it's somewhat less than 3k:1, and that it varies very widely depending on the particular job.

only to discover I had just captured 3 armed gunmen after 4 shots were fired in the local bank

Good for you. :applause

How'd you manage it without getting shot? 3:1 is bad odds...

We, as officers, cannot do much about fixing the laws on the books.

Does your union lobby to make that happen?

If not, why not?

My boss and I have an agreement... they don't tell me how many tickets to write as long as I write every violation I see. Do I stop every car I see with no front plate? No. Do I stop every car I see with a skateboarder behind it being dragged by a rope? Yes. Do I stop every seatbelt violation I see? No, except during the seatbelt campaign. Do I stop every person I see driving the wrong way down a 1-way street? Yes.

Didn't you just contradict yourself by saying that you agreed to write every violation you see, but you don't?



Overall though, :applause as always for the thoughtful response.

[Cosmo]

Didn't you just contradict yourself by saying that you agreed to write every violation you see, but you don't?
I do believe that was his intention. Ever tell your boss what he wanted to hear? ;)

[saizai]

Originally posted by Cosmo
I do believe that was his intention. Ever tell your boss what he wanted to hear? ;)

I have had the fortune of having bosses who liked the truth. And I absolutely abhor such behavior.

So, no actually. :teeth

[RolnCode3]

Originally posted by saizai
E.g. for traffic enforcement cops, this is (# of people on the road within their beat)/(# cops on that beat).

I suspect it's somewhat less than 3k:1, and that it varies very widely depending on the particular job.

But motors are still peace officers, just on directed patrol. And patrol does traffic enforcement. If you try too hard, you'll wind up getting nowhere...just stuck on semantics.

[saizai]

Originally posted by RolnCode3
But motors are still peace officers, just on directed patrol. And patrol does traffic enforcement. If you try too hard, you'll wind up getting nowhere...just stuck on semantics.

:laughing Point.

[motorman4life]

3000/1 would be ALL citizens divided by ALL Peace Officers on duty at a given time. In a town of 40k, you may have 35-40 police officers on the payroll. Of those, you may have as few as 4 patrol officers on duty in the dead of night and maybe 9-10 patrol officers on duty on a weekday or a busy Friday night. That would be 10,000/1 at the low end and maybe 4000/1 at the high end. But that is only the patrol cops that are paid by that town. Then you have to factor in their Detectives, the local Sheriff's Office, CHP, Park Police, Postal Police, BART Police, Feds and other LEOs that are authorized to take enforcement action within that town, as needed. Of course it would vary by region and time of day, but 3000/1 is the average I have seen used numerous times over the past 5-6 years for CA communities.

As for the bank robbers,
1) They turned tail and ran when we arrived.
2) Initially, there were 5 of us and 3 of them. I wasn't alone.
3) One of them gave up almost immediately.
4) The other two ditched their guns and hid (one in their car and the other in a backyard woodpile).
5) By the time we captured the last one, we had over 50 officers involved including 2 K-9s and a helicopter.
6) We called the FBI. When we told them we had 3 in custody, they couldn't get there fast enough!

I handcuffed the first and second ones while another officer covered me. The 3rd one was found by a Sheriff's K-9 a few hours later. And of course, the FBI showed up and took all of the credit.

As for my union working to lobby to get the laws fixed. Hell! My union is lucky to get our contract signed before it expires! I'm a Teamster. Don't even get me started. The Teamster organization sucks. :mad

No, I didn't just contradict myself by saying that I had agreed to write every violation you see. Cosmo got it right. My boss tells me he won't dictate how many tickets I write, as long as he is confident I am the ruthless asshole I am paid to be. So long as I have a reputation that I'd write my Mother, he's happy. In reality, I just need to "produce" enough to account for my time and take care of the squeaky wheels. I do that and he stays off my back. :angel

[saizai]

Originally posted by motorman4life
I handcuffed the first and second ones while another officer covered me. The 3rd one was found by a Sheriff's K-9 a few hours later. And of course, the FBI showed up and took all of the credit.

Yay feds! :cool :p

Out of curiosity, how many days of the year do you have something that interesting happen?

As for my union working to lobby to get the laws fixed. Hell! My union is lucky to get our contract signed before it expires! I'm a Teamster. Don't even get me started. The Teamster organization sucks. :mad

IMHO then... you have an ethical obligation to make them start doing so. Or to start/join an organization that does have the balls / ability.

So long as I have a reputation that I'd write my Mother, he's happy. In reality, I just need to "produce" enough to account for my time and take care of the squeaky wheels. I do that and he stays off my back. :angel

:laughing Understood.

But... is your boss supportive of your using your own discretion appropriately?

If you have to lie to him to get the room to use it, it sounds like the answer is 'no', which I would expect to be an uncomfortable situation for you in the long term...

[silverbelt]

Thanks for the responses guys :)

[OldMadBrit]

Wow MM4L - great response and obviously from the heart. I totally get that LEO's have a tough job to do and that the average Joe has no clue.

My last point was supposed to be light hearted - of course I am hugely grateful when I benefit from a let off.

I guess my key point is the damage done to public perception when a LEO (and yes a minority):

1) weaves up the "slow" lane at 70+ with lights off (I5, H101, H24, H80 etc).

2) pulls the bloody silly tailgating/tailbating ploy - especially at night (I5, H101, H80).

3) Or IMHO the most dangerous of all - and fully deserving of the dickhead of the month award - was having a cruiser pull along side me at 11:00pm and shine a light in my face through the side window (505).

On the month-end revenue point, I should have made it clear that I was referring to local LEO's - but puuuuleese - where I live in the East Bay you can set your calender by the local LEO activity in the last week of a financial period.

[silversvs]

Originally posted by motorman4life
6) We called the FBI. When we told them we had 3 in custody, they couldn't get there fast enough!

Tis the only way to get them to show up!

[motorman4life]

Originally posted by saizai
Out of curiosity, how many days of the year do you have something that interesting happen?
Once in a blue moon. It's not like it can be clocked or projected out like the sock market or oil futures.. I've had busy days followed by busier days. Multiple homicides, chaos, catastrophy. You never know what's gonna happen next. That is part of the fun! It can be a boring Sunday morning and some nut job can snap and become a one-man wrecking crew, whether it is a homicidal driver, a spree killer or just Gandpa off his meds, trying to burn down the house! Naked people running down the street, stabbings, hold-ups, crashes, pursuits, break-ins. They are all challenges, chaos needing to be contained, puzzles that need to be solved, real people dealing with tough decisions, loss, addiction, anxiety, grief.. reality. Many times it makes me appreciate my sanctuary (home and family).

Originally posted by saizai
IMHO then... you have an ethical obligation to make them start doing so. Or to start/join an organization that does have the balls / ability.If I had wanted to go into politics, I'd have become a page instead of going into the Army.. when I was 18, I had the ass for it! ;)

Seriously, I do my part. I served 7 years in the Army, I now serve my community and lay my ass on the line for people that are ungrateful 99% of the time. I get my pay check and go home. I enjoy my free time, tell my war stories and look forward to retirement. I really don't see where I have any more an obligation to "fix" the legislative fuck ups than any other citizen.

I pay dues into PORAC (look them up online if you like) and they do their part on my behalf, but they are fighting to keep my pension intact (something the Teamsters don't do), stop laws that would hurt my chances of survival on the streets and work to pass laws and elect politicians that will get tougher on crime or make it easier for us to introduce more truth and less speculation into the courtroom. PORAC actually does quite a lot of good, but they can't do it all either. They are up against the ACLU and 1001 other forces at work against law abiding citizens that just want to be safe, see justice be done and ensure their kids are safe. FWIW, as I see it, just because I see the problems in the system, does not give me any greater a responsibility to try to fix them. I do my part, through PORAC and out on the streets where it impacts lives and families. I can't do it all.

Originally posted by saizai
But... is your boss supportive of your using your own discretion appropriately? If you have to lie to him to get the room to use it, it sounds like the answer is 'no', which I would expect to be an uncomfortable situation for you in the long term... Let me just say that I had a very strange relationship with my boss. He was one of those people that was never satisfied. He felt if you did your job well, you could always do it better. In a paramilitary organization, you don't have the same freedom to speak your mind as you do in a public sector.

At times, he would get upset if he felt I was not using ENOUGH discretion. Other times, he was 180 degrees out from that and became upset that I used too much. I found the easiest way to keep him happy was to make him think I believed he was always right and to deal with the situations as best I could and simply assure him things were getting taken care of to his satisfaction. Once I convinced him he was micromanaging too much, as long as things ran smoothly, he simply had to trust that was the case and did not ask many questions. He was moody and unpredictable and I hated seeing him, I hated hearing his voice and just tried to avoid him altogether. I don't work for him anymore and I couldn't be happier.

Some of my recent comments have been in reference to him, because I still have this dread that lingers from not too long ago when I did work for him. In some ways he was a bit like many of the bosses I have had in my LEO career, but in many ways he was the worst of the bunch. He was (and still is) a consummate hypocrite and backstabber.

Anyhow, I'm glad to be out from under his command now and I (really) wish him only the best in his future pursuits. I think he is a very miserable person and I feel sorry for his family and the people that work under him now.

[saizai]

Originally posted by motorman4life
Seriously, I do my part. I served 7 years in the Army, I now serve my community and lay my ass on the line for people that are ungrateful 99% of the time. I get my pay check and go home. I enjoy my free time, tell my war stories and look forward to retirement. I really don't see where I have any more an obligation to "fix" the legislative fuck ups than any other citizen.

I'm going to suggest that you do.

Why? You're tasked with enforcing those fuck ups. That means that if you think a law is unethical, and you are carrying it out, YOU are behaving unethically as a result. The average citizen doesn't have this; they only have the once-removed responsibility of letting it happen.

So, if you want to have the freedom to behave ethically, you have to act against laws that aren't.

I'd like to suggest also that it is possible to balance civil liberties with safety, and that it doesn't have to be an adversarial situation. But I'll let it go at that, since I don't want to drag this thread into a political debate. ;)

Let me just say that I had a very strange relationship with my boss. He was one of those people that was never satisfied. He felt if you did your job well, you could always do it better. In a paramilitary organization, you don't have the same freedom to speak your mind as you do in a public sector.

Frankly from what you wrote... it seems much more like you had a really bad boss who wasn't fit to do managerial work than that it's an issue of public vs paramilitary governmental. (Unless the latter leads to a dearth of people who *can* do management...)

I have only briefly had to work under people like that, fortunately, and currently have a boss / client who is about as good as one could ask for. And the difference in my productivity & satisfaction with the situation is rather noticeable.

I'll agree that with bosses who set things up so that they effectively DON'T reward honesty and give you no leeway to perform your job as a sentient being... that's a tough situation, and I would try to get out of it as soon as I could, but in the meantime managing the manager probably becomes necessary. Unless they're human enough still to be taught what the impact of their behavior is and try to reform.

Doesn't sound like you think that's the case for him, though. My condolences.

I am also sorry that he has any chance of keeping his job as a manger, but I guess that's government for ya.

[RolnCode3]

You're playing devil's advocate to the n'th degree.

A correlation would be that if a soldier disagrees with a war, he has the responsibility to change foreign policy...until he does, he is acting irresponsibly.

[saizai]

Originally posted by RolnCode3
You're playing devil's advocate to the n'th degree.

A correlation would be that if a soldier disagrees with a war, he has the responsibility to change foreign policy...until he does, he is acting irresponsibly.

Absolutely correct. (And in this case, non-theist though I am, I think I'm playing God's advocate...)

If not, then you get people going along with unethical programs because they were ordered to. In military, that means killing people. Sometimes in police too. Either way, the only difference between a just kill and a murder is in its ethics - NOT in whether it was ordered.

I humbly suggest that if there's a place to be damn sure that you are behaving ethically, that would be it.

I can give a slew of examples where people *don't* act on their own ethics, obey orders, and as a result enable horrible things. Rather than hit Godwin's Law, I'll cite the somewhat less gruesome example of the Milgram experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment).

If that doesn't make you say "this is *wrong*", then I'm afraid we have a pretty major difference in morals.

[Var]

MM4L - note there's a huge difference between laying your ass on the line for people to fight crime, and making traffic stops.. And i don't think anyone complains about LEO's busting robbers, rapists, and murderers. Not one cop has ever done anything for me , but i guess it's better that i haven't needed it.

[silversvs]

Originally posted by Var
MM4L - note there's a huge difference between laying your ass on the line for people to fight crime, and making traffic stops.. And i don't think anyone complains about LEO's busting robbers, rapists, and murderers. Not one cop has ever done anything for me , but i guess it's better that i haven't needed it.

You don't think there is a possibility that because a cop took a suspect off the street and put them in jail then that suspect was not able to victimize you or your family? How about all the drunk drivers who have been arrested off the roadways you travel? You don't think maybe one of them could have crashed into you? How about the officers who have made suggestions for engineering changes on the roadways you drive, or worked to get traffic to drive more carefully on the streets you travel daily? Saying the police have never done anything for you personally is a bit shortsighted in my opinion.

[OldMadBrit]

Originally posted by RolnCode3
..............A correlation would be that if a soldier disagrees with a war, he has the responsibility to change foreign policy...until he does, he is acting irresponsibly.

Absolutely, "but I was ordered to do it" is never a defense. Some version of the DUTY to disobey an order to perform an unethical act, is built into every military rule book. Its the basis on which war criminals are tried.

[Cosmo]

MM4L - note there's a huge difference between laying your ass on the line for people to fight crime, and making traffic stops..
I think that statement requires some explanation on your part. Traffics stops are a key law enforcement tool (the 9/11 hijackers were stopped just days before they're act for instance) and potentially VERY dangerous for all parties involved. From my perspective, a civilian, the traffic stop is not something either party looks forward to.

[silversvs]

Originally posted by Var
MM4L - note there's a huge difference between laying your ass on the line for people to fight crime, and making traffic stops..

I wonder if you ever stop to consider the number of officers killed every year during "routine" traffic stops. Or ever thought about the number of crimes solved and bad guys arrested during "routine" traffic stops.

[Var]

aside from making DUI stops(a legal stop), i still think traffic enforcement is overkill



Originally posted by silversvs
I wonder if you ever stop to consider the number of officers killed every year during "routine" traffic stops.

That's a tragic side effect of the system and i admit my indifference it.

[RolnCode3]

Originally posted by OldMadBrit
Absolutely, "but I was ordered to do it" is never a defense. Some version of the DUTY to disobey an order to perform an unethical act, is built into every military rule book. Its the basis on which war criminals are tried.
But if I disagree with a law, or don't believe in it, guess what:

It doesn't mean I'm right. Opinions are like A-holes...everyone has one.

Laws are based on the collective beliefs of society.

And for those that are bashing us, I submit this:

Every time you abide by a law you disagree with, you are equally culpable.

You have as much duty to change the laws you disagree with as we would have to change it (assuming you are correct and we are guilty of some moral transgression for failing to change the law).

[Var]

it's not a morals issue with most laws , just an monetary and common sense issue. We're not talking about abortion, death penalty, but more about things that we're just used to putting up with. It's not immoral for me to obey the speed limit even though i don't agree with it

[JPM]

Originally posted by Var
aside from making DUI stops(a legal stop), i still think traffic enforcement is overkill


Tell that to all the families left behind of those killed by speeding and reckless driver each year.

[motorman4life]

Originally posted by JPM
Tell that to all the families left behind of those killed by speeding and reckless driver each year.
That is what I was going to say. :applause

I have investigated over 80 fatal collisions and I have seen the tragedy it causes, even with a single vehicle collision. I have had to give at least 50 death notifications and I feel like a fucking victim most of the time... a victim of someone's stupidity. To go to their house and see their family; kids, spouse, parents, whoever... and tell them their loved one, in many cases, the sole breadwinner for the household, died because they were speeding, reckless, drunk, whatever.. it is tough.

I have had to console parents over their dead children and children over their dead parents. It weighs on you. Especially when the cause was something completely avoidable like fogged or frosted windows, misadjusted headlamps, bald tires. Often death and in some cases, major injury could have been avoided by the use of a bicycle helmet, a seatbelt or other protective equipment or gear.

You can call it petty, stupid shit. The fact is, 99% of the decisions you make in life could easily be considered trivial and unimportant... until one of those decisions results in a series of events that lead to a death, yours or someone else’s.

Var, I have written at least 15 failure to signal or unsafe lane change tickets in the past month. Extrapolate that over 21 years... then figure out what percentage of those violatiors might have retained the lesson they learned and now signal more regularly or look out for motorcycles (since they got burned by a motocop) or maybe even listened to me and learned when I showed them how to adjust their mirrors properly (since a majority of car drivers have their mirrors adjusted improperly).

How many lives may have been saved in those years? Maybe yours. ;)

[Var]

Like you said yourself MM4L..cops all have their pet peeves and you happen to share one of mine. I yell at my friends for not signaling, following too closely, and charging yellow lights at intersections. I don't yell at them for doing wheelies, going 150+ down an open stretch of highway, or anything else that puts only themselves at risk..(seatbelts included).

I remember 7-8 years ago when there seemed to be a decent balance of tickets vs warnings, and not once did i ever hear of anyone going to jail for speeding and in my circle of gear-head friends, there were plenty of people getting pulled over at 100+ miles an hour on a monthly basis.

[motorman4life]

Originally posted by Var
Like you said yourself MM4L..cops all have their pet peeves and you happen to share one of mine.
I know you have also said you have no real use for traffic enforcement, but without it, the streets and freeways would become chaos. A place in which motorcyclists would end up being the biggest losers. Face it, we are vulnerable out there and as much as we may feel we have the upper hand due to maneuverability and acceleration, the truth is, when a collision occurs, right or wrong, we lose.

It is called the "lug nut supremacy theory." When a collision occurs, he with the most lug nuts wins and he with the fewest lug nuts loses. Go up against an 18-wheeler, an SUV or a clumsy H2 on your nimble R1 and see who walks away more times than not. You’d be lucky if the 18-wheeler driver even feels the impact.

Keeping everyone reasonably close to the law makes the roadways safer for everyone, especially motorcyclists.

[saizai]

Originally posted by RolnCode3
Every time you abide by a law you disagree with, you are equally culpable.

You have as much duty to change the laws you disagree with as we would have to change it (assuming you are correct and we are guilty of some moral transgression for failing to change the law).

I have to offer a minor quibble: culpability is directly tied to involvement and power to change it.

The public does indeed have a duty to advocate for change of laws to ones that are ethical. We have more responsibility to change CA law than US law than British law than Rwandan law.

But government employees who are actively involved in that law - e.g. cops, legislature, etc - have *more* duty because it is that much more immediate for them.

If we let you do something unethical, that's a bad thing... but it's worse that you (a conscious person) are doing it.

(This of course applies universally: things that are policies at *my* work, which I help to carry out, are much more my responsibility than yours.)


BTW, just in case you're misinterpreting... I am NOT intending any sort of cop-bashing. And yes, every citizen of a democratic government is responsible to some extent for the actions of that government and its employees. I am simply disagreeing with your statement that you are only as much responsible for your own actions as people who vote for people who make laws that are carried out by people who order you to take those actions.

[Var]

Originally posted by motorman4life
I know you have also said you have no real use for traffic enforcement, but without it, the streets and freeways would become chaos.

I never said that, and i know you're right. But i said it's overkill

Tinted windows
Smog enforcement
Exhaust
Non-DOT approved signals(especially on a bike)
Tinted windscreen on a bike
Excessive acceleration
Speeding on an absolutely open stretch of road
Seatbelts
Helmets
Racing on a deserted road
Simply being present at a street race

and the list goes on


You think I don't know the difference between the above and things that endanger other innocent motorists ?

(note "innocent" - everyone at a street race is a willing participant)

[RolnCode3]

Originally posted by saizai
But government employees who are actively involved in that law - e.g. cops, legislature, etc - have *more* duty because it is that much more immediate for them.

So I want to get this straight.

You are now saying that WE (the government) should decide which laws are best for you, without public input? And we should then, also, go and enforce them on the citizens, again...without their input?

Is that what you really want?

[Var]

You, the government are part of a fucked up system that will never be fixed. So you as a willing participant in said system should deal with whatever criticism that's thrown at you.

Simply put if more LEO's had common sense, everything would be more simple.

[saizai]

Originally posted by RolnCode3
So I want to get this straight.

You are now saying that WE (the government) should decide which laws are best for you, without public input? And we should then, also, go and enforce them on the citizens, again...without their input?

Is that what you really want?

No, no, and no.

I am saying that YOU PERSONALLY - not some quasiperson you are calling "the government" - are a member of two groups.

One is "the public". You are a citizen. You can vote like I can. You have opinions on what are good laws, what are ethical ones.

Another is "armed government employee", aka "cop". You have the power and job obligation to enforce those laws, with lethal force if necessary.

Ergo, you - unlike me - are being required to actually DO THINGS to enforce laws that you are (I would like to hope) as a thinking human opinionated about. Specifically, about the ethics. Sometimes we can agree to disagree with others; sometimes we have to say "no, that's just wrong".

I can, in my life as a nonprofit corporation president, have some situations where we Board members vote on an issue and I get outvoted. I of course try to lead it to a consensus, and am usually successful at that, but sometimes I simply acknowledge that I've been outvoted and we go with the majority. However, that (so far, and hopefully always) isn't a matter of ethicality - we simply disagree on implementation, and I can go along with the group.

But laws are frequently a bit different, because of that little thing about deprivation of life, liberty, happiness, money, etc if you don't obey. That is always unethical unless very strongly justified.

In situations where you - the PERSON - believe that a law is NOT just - rather than merely a disagreement of means or method like I have occasionally w/ my corp - IMHO you are ethically obligated to a) not do anything to carry it out, and b) change it.

I am not, by default, doing anything to carry it out in the first place, because I am not a cop. So that is one less thing that I have a responsibility to change.


I have no idea how you read into what I wrote to come up with the idea that laws should be made and enforced without my input and active consent as a citizen.

I said that YOU are a citizen too, not a robot or a cog, and therefore I say YOU must exercise your influence on the laws if you want to have the ability to, in your work life, act ethically and justly at all times.

If you are willing to act unethically in your work - especially when that unethical behavior hurts others - I request that you resign immediately.

And note, I am leaving the definition of "ethical" to YOUR PERSONAL JUDGMENT. I haven't said anything about what law is just or unjust; I am not making that decision for you, and would not let you make it for me.

Hopefully that is a somewhat more excruciatingly clear admonishment.


Again: I am not intending to bash or insult you or anyone else here, but simply to call you to act in keeping your ethics.

[RolnCode3]

Originally posted by Var
You, the government are part of a fucked up system that will never be fixed. So you as a willing participant in said system should deal with whatever criticism that's thrown at you.

Simply put if more LEO's had common sense, everything would be more simple.
I can deal with criticism. That's how I've gotten thru the time on the job that I have.

This is too much like law school and philosophy classes all rolled up into one. I think I'll just stick to the questions about "What section makes this illegal?" instead of this stuff. Just banging our heads against the wall.

I am secure in my job, and don't have an ethical problem with any of the laws that I enforce.

[kabazauls]

Originally posted by Var

Simply put if more LEO's had common sense, everything would be more simple.

I think they might have some common sense, they just don't know how to apply it when they're on the job. I call it laziness.

[Xenos]

Originally posted by Var
You, the government are part of a fucked up system that will never be fixed. So you as a willing participant in said system should deal with whatever criticism that's thrown at you.

Simply put if more LEO's had common sense, everything would be more simple.

So are you just anti-government or something?

[Var]

i dunno. i don't think so. I just have problems with certain aspects of it

[TheBestName]

I was hanging out at one of the local cafes one night and we have a lot of regular leos that always drop by at around 11pm to get a cup of joe. There is a stop sign pretty much right infront of the shop and every leo I have seen blew that stop sign. There wasn't even an attempt to stop; it was as if it wasn't there. Me and my buddies just laugh about it. The only leo that I ever saw that stopped was a lady. And I have seen leos do the dumbest shit ever...like pace you in your blind spot. I mean...come on...seriously. The road is already dangerous enough...yet you have to stay in my blind spot? Get real...jesus. I know that 98% of leos are good guys...but that 2% really stands out. The guys that I've met at the cafe shops are good guys. They never hassle me about my mods or anything and are fairly open when you talk to them.