Cops not playing fair

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by salvageV6
Who said anything about a court of law?

I don't plan on suing anyone.

Just my opinion. That and $500 will get you out of a speeding ticket.

Cops that have to hide to catch motor vehicle infractions just plain suck. Oh that's another opinion.

Revenue raisers that's about all they are.

If they cared about saving lives they would go after all those that don't signal and run red lights, or drive in 3 lanes at one time while putting on makeup or shaving and reading the newspaper while driving, or jawing on the cell phone or......

You can catch plenty of speeders all day and night with a plainly marked car.

"Entrapment" is a legal term and has nothing to do with "suing" anyone. A lawsuit is a civil action, whereas "entrapment" is used in a criminal complaint.

Contrary to your opinion about what cops "should" be doing, ride with one for a while and you'd find they do all you mention along with stuff you object to. Just drive a patrol car for 8 hrs and you'll find everyone drives just like they did in driver's Ed. Hiding is necessary to catch those who are dangerous when the police AREN'T around. See the BIG picture yet?

I apologize for the sarcasm, had a bad day at work today....

 

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by GNVAIR
I personally am totally against unmarks or using vehicles marked for other usages for law enforcement. How the hell are we supposed to know its really a cop and not some lunatic trying to rob or hurt someone?

This is a great comment which I must address with regard to the laws in the state I work.

Here, if a police officer is driving an unmarked or semi-marked unit for regular or traffic patrol he/she MUST be in full uniform. When I watch COPS on FOX I see guys driving marked units with jeans and a flannel shirt, that would be totally illegal here. There's too many nuts out there trying to impersonate the real thing that we've established rules on enforcement. If we were to have undercover guys in their completely unmarked cars (blue lights and all) tail someone they want stopped they MUST call for a fully marked car to initiate the stop so the suspect knows it's the real police stopping them. This is very reasonable and necessary for safety.

Goading someone into a street race with a pimped out Camaro and a hidden cop inside is over the edge in my book.

 

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by GNVAIR
This is the same b.s. as the towns that say there is no such thing as quotas. Another crock. I have friends who are cops and the proper terminology is "standard of performance".
It means that if you are a cop (atleast here in towns in New Jersey) and you dont write a certain amount of tickets, you could be fired for not performing your job.

I challenge you to do this. You're a police supervisor in a up-scale suburb with a low amount of crime. Your area has several fairly busy thoroughfairs. You generally have 6-7 patrol cars on duty each shift and each officer comes back with 2 tickets per month. Do you honestly think they're doing what they're being paid for or simply finding places to hide and do absolutely nothing their entire shift? Obviously they aren't doing jack which is cheating the taxpayers (you) out of a good police department. They're allowing people to do what they like on the road....now that's getting what you pay for huh.

If they hide and wait for someone to run a red light they're in the wrong according to some in this thread. Hiding isn't "fair".

If they're in the open and ticket someone for running a red light they're doing something wrong according to your argument because they shouldn't be "made" to do their job.

If they're in the open and ticket a speeder they're a jerk since speeding doesn't endanger anyone because the cars are engineered better today.

If they leave everyone alone and hang at a local eatery they're criticized for not doing jack **** but sitting at donut shops on the tax dole.

Are we getting the picture here yet? You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't and you can be sued no matter what you do.

Here's the most simplest of solutions. Don't go 15+ over the speed limit otherwise you're sticking out like a sore thumb. Don't have your windows tinted if it isn't allowed....you'll get a ticket from me every time. If you get stopped and you ARE guilty blame the guilty party and not the cop.

You play, you pay. End of story. I've been on the paying end enough to know myself....

 

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by Vendor Defendor
on the level of entrapment, i heard this somewhere that if an undercover cop comes up to you, and asks you for something illegal, like if you can find him drugs or something... and you ask him 3 times if he is a cop and he denies it 3 times that he cant bust you any more.. can anyone shed light on this?

-neil

Neil,
Entrapment is "the solicitation on the behalf of law enforcement on another individual whom normally would not engange in such unlawful behavior".

Example: I'm a cop and ask you to steal a car. You say no and I insist you can get away with it and encourage you to do it. You steal said car and I bust you for car theft. That's entrapment.

Example II: What's called a "John Sting". Female cop walking around the street "posing" as a prostitute. SHE's approached and conversation ensues. A deal for sex in exchange for $ is struck = NO entrapment. If you're not shopping for a prostitute (criminal behavior) you wouldn't engage in an exchange of $ for sex anyway.

Example #1 there is encouragement of criminal behavior on someone who refused, example #2 does not. #2 simply offers bait just like fising. If you're not a hungry fish you won't bite.

As far as the 3 "no's" I know of no case or state law that deals with that.

 

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by TurboTer
He violated the Fourth Amendment by searching your car. He ought to be fired, then hung for treason against his government.

TurboTer,
Don't jump to conclusions until you've studied case law and entrepertations of the 4th Amendment before spouting off hanging anyone for treason. You're totally out of line.

You don't know if he gave "consent to search", if they had "probable cause" or even if you're familiar with the "motor vehicle exception" to the right to search a car? If not, study up before spouting off such drivel 'cuz you really don't know what you're talking about.

I challenge any law-enforcement armchair quarterback to ride with a cop on a regular basis to see the other side before solidifying any hard-core attitude. If anyone's in the lower Michigan area I'll let you ride with me every day if you want.

Thank God it's Friday....

 

[TurboTer]

Originally posted by whitehot84
If you are not breaking the law it doesn't matter what they are driving. Why is it that people think if there is not a cop around they can do anything they want?

There is no excuse to break the law. My point is Big Brother shouldn't be watching people who haven't commited any crimes.

 

[TurboTer]

Originally posted by salvageV6
Hey I never said ban cellphones while driving, nor even putting on makeup and shaving or reading.

What I mean and meant was that when these idiots happen to be swerving around and in the wrong lanes pull them over for "Failure to Drive Right".

My bad, sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[TurboTer]

Re: Re: Re: Come back to the center a bit Ter..

Originally posted by gn85
Ter... If this is honestly a suffering burden to you then perhaps you shouldn't be driving a TR or any car for that matter. Yes, there are some of us co-ordinated enough to drive a car and do other activities. That doesn't make it right for the masses. Because most drivers have enough difficulty with handling the car alone. You don't care if it saves lives if people aren't reading books, putting on make-up or talking on the cell phone???? It is your right and the right of others to be careless and foolish? Ter, I have no idea how long you've been driving a car, but I can almost gaurantee (god forbid) that one of these people not paying attention will inflict some sort of harm or inconvenience to you. When that day comes, please repeat what you just said.

Lastly, you are TOTALLY opposed to taking away someones car for drunk driving?? My former room-mate used to have a blow-to-start device on his car because he got a DWI that went through three different counties and required some brave state trooper to spin him out in a ditch. Nobody was hurt that night... How many nights like that have to happen before somebody says enough is enough.. that person should NOT have a car.

As to the original conversation about police as taxi's... yes, it's pretty damn sneaky and I'm sure we all hate it when we get caught, but I'm sure we'd be just as happy when the day comes that taxi-cop catches some scum trying to steal your TR.

I've been driving for several years now (I'm 30). Please don't "gaurantee" anything. Nothing would change my views. The same people told me "I bet you'd support gun-control if your girlfriend was shot by the LIRR gunman!" No, I wouldn't. It is a burder on my life. I love using my celly, and I love driving. I get tons of calls when I'm driving. Why should I have to suffer just because some clown can't walk and chew gum at the same time?

As for dunk driving, I strongly oppose it, but taking personal property (unless it is something illegal, like a grenade, kiddy porn, etc.) is VERY Communistic. I'm all for heavy tickets (not points though, as I oppose the failed American-only point system), or even jailing the driver. But I just don't like the idea of taking someone's car one bit.

 

[TurboTer]

Originally posted by WakkoSS
My response to this highly intelligent quote...


Ya'll that are anti police and want to cut the balls off police rights can also click the above link. I'm tired of people that don't know what the hell they are talking about telling US how to do OUR job and getting mad when they get caught BREAKING the law. It's as stupid as "Oh, I forgot to turn my nitrous bottle on....won't race uphill..."

If you don't like how the American justice system is? I heard there's cheap real estate in Canada, Mexico and Iraq.

Neil, there's no law like that. Law enforcement is legally allowed to lie to conduct an investigation. And that's a SUPREME COURT RULING folks...take it up with them if you don't like it.


Why am I so pissed today? Find my other post in the Lounge. When YOUR job deals with what it says, then you can talk like a dumbass and I'll be ok with it.

I know all about your job, and I would take a pay cut and trade it for my job without thinking twice. I am not anti-police, but I am definatly for taking a lot of your "rights" away (but I'm for givinmg you a raise). If I don't like the laws in the US, I should leave? Sorry, that is my line to Anti-American liberals. That line should never be said to a conservative. No other country is better, but that's not saying much. I'm for an America the way our Founding Fathers wanted it to be, not the way it is now with the eroding of the 2nd, 4th, and 10th Ammendments.

 

[TurboTer]

Originally posted by ULYCYC
TurboTer,, Lets take all of the unmarked police cars and plainclothes detectives out of Staten Island. Lets go further and remove traffic lights, stop signs and even school crossing guards. It's bad to want protection from others. The cops should also drive 4 cyl "K" cars so they can't catch anybody. All of the above are byproducts of the "big brother" explosion

Now you're just getting stupid. Trafic lights are so one side doesn't have to wait forever to go when lined up against a busy street. Undercover cops and searching and listening devices are to terrorize and spy on American citizens.

 

[TurboTer]

Originally posted by TT/A1233
TurboTer,
Don't jump to conclusions until you've studied case law and entrepertations of the 4th Amendment before spouting off hanging anyone for treason. You're totally out of line.

You don't know if he gave "consent to search", if they had "probable cause" or even if you're familiar with the "motor vehicle exception" to the right to search a car? If not, study up before spouting off such drivel 'cuz you really don't know what you're talking about.

Obviously they didn't have "probably cause", because this guy was innocent. I don't give a rat's rear end about the illegal
"motor vehicle exception" law. There is NO exception. NEVER. The 4th Amendment is in the US Constitution. It is above ANY local, state, or even federal law. If the US Supreme Court knew anything about the Constitution, they would strike the moter vehicle exception law down as un-Constitutional, because clearly it is. If he gave the cop consent to search, it doesn't change much. What are you gonna tell a cop, no? He'll only get a search warrant, be more pissed, and do it anyway.I know I wouldn't ever tell a cop he couldn't search my car. True, I have nothing to hide in my car, but it isn't the point.

 

[RealFastV6]

I think me and TurboTer share pretty similar views, I dont really feel like getting into the debate here though.

"Those who are willing to trade civil liberties for temporary security, deserve neither"

 

[gn85]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Come back to the center a bit Ter..

Originally posted by TurboTer
I've been driving for several years now (I'm 30). Please don't "gaurantee" anything. Nothing would change my views. The same people told me "I bet you'd support gun-control if your girlfriend was shot by the LIRR gunman!" No, I wouldn't. It is a burder on my life. I love using my celly, and I love driving. I get tons of calls when I'm driving. Why should I have to suffer just because some clown can't walk and chew gum at the same time?

As for dunk driving, I strongly oppose it, but taking personal property (unless it is something illegal, like a grenade, kiddy porn, etc.) is VERY Communistic. I'm all for heavy tickets (not points though, as I oppose the failed American-only point system), or even jailing the driver. But I just don't like the idea of taking someone's car one bit.

Well, this is probably the last I'll reply to this and I'm halfway kicking myself for replying now. As you said, I shouldn't "guarantee" anything. People are entitled to their opinions and being closed off enough to not changing them, no matter what the cost.

I just have to say that your views seem very cold-war era based and don't seem to move very much from that. Things that the gov't does tend to be "comministic". I think many Americans would agree as well, that there are things that the gov't and law enforcement should be kept on a leash for. But when I hear the good news at night that some law enforcement has made a major drugbust or that they manage to save someones life or property, I tend to be a little thankful that there are police out there who are willing to put the immense dedication and tenacity that is required to try and keep the public safe. So, enjoy your taxi's. If ya catch me speeding, then I'll SURE have a good story to share on tb.com. But I guess I've learned an aweful lot about what I wish we could have and why we have what we do. Especially when it comes to driving and that's why I'm so wound up over the "celly" issue. Over here, I love driving on roads with no speed limits. It's absolutely a blast even when your car only has 52HP. But, I just don't think that could happen in the US. As much as I would love it, as well as the Interstates are built, I don't think it's a possibility. Will I continue to speed in the US, yes. Will I get more tickets in the future.. hopefully not. Will I attempt to drive the speeds that I do here just because I've lived here, I love driving and shouldn't be penalized for others lack of driving?? No... because I know that the law is there for a reason.

BTW... read my reply to Buick from Hell about taking ones car.

In closing, enjoy your views.. you've got some that are way out there. Just do me a favor... if we should happen to be racing at the same track and get lined up next to each other... please pay attention to racing and not your "celly".

I'm done.

 

[whitehot84]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Come back to the center a bit Ter..

Originally posted by TurboTer


As for dunk driving, I strongly oppose it, but taking personal property (unless it is something illegal, like a grenade, kiddy porn, etc.) is VERY Communistic. I'm all for heavy tickets (not points though, as I oppose the failed American-only point system), or even jailing the driver. But I just don't like the idea of taking someone's car one bit.

I strongly feel that a drunk driver is in fact a GRENADE. He is eventually going to go off and kill innocent people. The answer to not getting your vehicle taken is "don't drive drunk". It's as simple as that. If you know the rules ahead of time what's the problem?

 

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by TurboTer
I don't give a rat's rear end about the illegal
"motor vehicle exception" law. There is NO exception. NEVER. The 4th Amendment is in the US Constitution. It is above ANY local, state, or even federal law. If the US Supreme Court knew anything about the Constitution, they would strike the moter vehicle exception law down as un-Constitutional, because clearly it is.

TurboTer,
Here's Government 101:
Congress passes laws
Courts interpret their constitutionality

The "motor vehicle exception" exists and has been upheld in many rulings by the US Supreme Court no matter how you feel about it. Read below:
http://www.loompanics.com/Articles/motorveh.html

 

[GNVAIR]

Ofcourse those in law enforcement are going to get their panties all in a bunch with this thread. The fact of the matter is that there are those in law enforcement who think they are above the law.
I will give some examples. If you dont believe me, then look them up.
The police force of Rome, Ohio
The New Jersey State Police (look for the Lords or Discipline)
Now you are going to tell me that because these people wear a badge that they can do whatever they want to?

 

[WakkoSS]

Originally posted by GNVAIR
Ofcourse those in law enforcement are going to get their panties all in a bunch with this thread. The fact of the matter is that there are those in law enforcement who think they are above the law.

Now you are going to tell me that because these people wear a badge that they can do whatever they want to?

I don't wear panties. I wear two layers of clothing (one cotton, one polyester..yuck) and a bullet proof vest. Gets kinda warm in 90% humidity and 90 degree weather. But I digress.

You're absolutely right...there are some cops out there that believe they are above the law. They abuse their power and have no business being part of the elite...the "honest cop". Do I work with people that have no business being cops? Yep. Are there cops doing illegal things and getting away with it? Yep. Are all cops dirty? Hell no...as a matter of fact, most I've met are upstanding good guys. Losing my pension is not worth a couple thousand dollars worth of anything.

Good link, TTA, I saved it...and learned from it.

 

[Pat Adkins]

Test & tune? Let's see 45min. drive $25, 2 passes Track sucks (no traction 1350 FT=wrong time) or 2hr drive nice track would have to take a day off no pay. The Track that was 5 min. away was closed by the rich folk that moved close & couldn't handle the noise now the police want to know why there's so much streeet racing.

 

[2 QK 4 U]

My bad, I guess it's different everywhere.
our track is 30 minutes away, 10 bucks. new timing system, and fair traction. not bad i guess.

sorry about your luck man.

 

[blackshoebox]

These threads are funny and ....

always two sided. You have the cop haters and the cops.

My .2$ is.

A. Any cop that complains, about the risk to pay ratio, knew that from the get go and made that choice to become a cop, so to complain about this is point less, if you have someone to blaim, go look in a mirror.
B. Unmarked cars, used in traffic enforcement, are a form entrapment in my opinion, especially when they go out to egg on drag races, etc.
C. For all the cop haters out there, the law is and always will be in the cops favor, there is no point going against it because you will not win. It took me a long time to learn and accept this, as I hate authority figures, including cops, but there are things in life that won't change.

The bottom line, is drive slow, and try to avoid the men in blue suits.