The Cops and Radar detectors

[turbojimmy]

Originally posted by aperrego
ERRR

Look at this link I am sure it will have maybe not the bad tires...

NHTSA DOC



BTW: Congrats on your new addition(s)

Thanks!

I'm not saying the details aren't compiled or somehow ignored. Saying "not considered" was incorrect and not really my intention. I realize that there is excruciating detail behind the statistics. It's that the blanket "speed kills" statements are the result of a glossing over of all of the factors behind the fatalities and are a representation of the least granular level of the data - like the drug use analogy.

It would take me the rest of my life to go through that report, but the numbers you presented were a summary of that data, right? If you pull out the drunks, the egregious speeds, the inclement weather, etc. what are you left with? That's my only point. I'd like to think that my travelling at 70 MPH in a 55 along with the rest of the traffic poses less of a danger than travelling at 40 MPH in a 25 MPH school zone.

Jim

 

[aperrego]

Originally posted by turbojimmy
Thanks!

I'm not saying the details aren't compiled or somehow ignored. Saying "not considered" was incorrect and not really my intention. I realize that there is excruciating detail behind the statistics. It's that the blanket "speed kills" statements are the result of a glossing over of all of the factors behind the fatalities and are a representation of the least granular level of the data - like the drug use analogy.

It would take me the rest of my life to go through that report, but the numbers you presented were a summary of that data, right? If you pull out the drunks, the egregious speeds, the inclement weather, etc. what are you left with? That's my only point. I'd like to think that my travelling at 70 MPH in a 55 along with the rest of the traffic poses less of a danger than travelling at 40 MPH in a 25 MPH school zone.

Jim

I hear ya... I agree.. My feel is that the car does not drive itself.. It's always the operator... Poor judgement, inexperience, and/or substance.. Which the later of the 2 point right back to the driver and thier decisions or actions.

 

[Blown&Injected]

Also, about the drug tests.

It is possible to shoot up some heroin or snort coke in the bathroom at work and test negative next week, but get high in Amsterdam and test positive weeks later.

It is really a drug screen that looks for the presence of metabolites, not the actual presence of the stuff that makes one high - thc.

 

[rev. 3:11]

My 2 cents: as a patrolman I have had my share of traffic duty. It was not the speed that would normally get my attention, but the REALLY BAD DRIVING! An idiot driving wreckless at 30mph in a 40 mph zone is a much greater hazard than a trained driver going 50. My pet peeves are: tailgating; failure to use turn signals; slow drivers in the left lane (impeeding the flow of traffic by self appointed "civilian traffic enforcers") left turn from the right lane an vice versa; people doing things other than driving while behind the wheel (the worst case I had was a woman breast-feeding a baby while driving her minivan! Talk about shallow end of the gene-pool!) I probably have given as many warnings as citations to drivers who speed - sometimes a warning works better than a citation. It really all comes down to attitude. There is a point that a driver earns a citation. After I run the tags and license I know if the driver has a problem with driving, etc. If they have racked up a lot of tickets then so be it, they have had their warning. anyway, I could go on, but I'm hogging... just my 0.02

 

[Blown&Injected]

Bless you rev.

 

[aperrego]

I probably have given as many warnings as citations to drivers who speed - sometimes a warning works better than a citation. It really all comes down to attitude.

Can I get an AMEN!

 

[Vector]

A few weeks ago someone on his board posted a bumpersticker:
Ban Low Performance Drivers
Not High Performance Cars!
That says it all.

 

[Blown&Injected]

good one!

 

[ncgreg231]

Originally posted by aperrego
As far as the yellow light principle, I just dunno.. Have not noticed them. Me personally if I get a picture and citation in the mail for "running" a red light with a traffic cam then that pic better have a CLEAR AND CONCISE picture of the Driver, Tag, Vehicle and the Position of the vehicle and the light Color at the time of the position in alignment with the State Statutes regarding that violation.

I believe that the red light ticket is actually a "civil" lawsuit by the local govt. My mother-in-law got one of those up in Baltimore. It names the owner of the car based on the tag #, but does not cite the driver. They recently installed some of them here in Chapel Hill, I think I've seen a few around Raleigh, too.

Are they revenue generators? I don't know. If people constantly run the red light, then that will be $$$ for the area, but if everyone stopped running red lights, then the local gov't might lose money b/c they paid for the cameras, but then didn't make any money from people running them. I suppose if that happened, the local gov't wouldn't complain either way - they's be talking about how the cameras are a success because nobody runs red lights anymore.

I was wondering if the cameras work after the light has turned red? The one's I've seen have a little strobe that flashes right when the light changes, if anyone goes through, but I wonder if they have a trigger to flash after the light has been red for a little while? Anyone want to go try this for me?

 

[aperrego]

If they really wanted us to slow down, then they should make themselves more visible, set up fake cop cars on the side of the road, and place unmanned radar on the side just to slow down people with detectors

Believe it or not the fake cars don't work and are a potential liability.. There is caselaw and a lawsuit that was filed when a woman was a victim of assualt was being pursued and instead of running to the police dept where she was originally going stopped at one of these fake cars and gave her attacker the opportunity to send her to the hospital. It was the "false sense" of security I think was the premise.

I remeber when FHP was setting up a "fake" car on 275 in Sunrise.. Worked all of about 2 days until people picked up on it. I agree with you that visable patrol is a deterent but from an officers stance there is no reward or "$$$ Benefit" nor quota to write tickets. People get them and they ultimately slow down for a while. Also the fact that people are pulled over on the side of the road with pink slip in hand is a good deterent.


ncgreg - I still would argue any fine or whatever civil or not imposed upon me.. I am responsible for the car when i am driving it, Paying for the loan and keeping insurance on it..

If someone else is driving the car I cannot really be responsible for thier red light antics.. Not that anyone would be driving my car.

 

[rev. 3:11]

Some of you guys don't realize that as cops we usually are assigned special details from the higher ups (your elected officials) and the feds hand out grant $$$ to enforce pet programs. We have about 20 local police departments in the Houston Metro area alone! City, Village, Metro, 9 county depts. (8 Constables plus the Sheriff), DPS... and they all compete for funding (it is typically illegal to use this funding for officer pay or incentives).
Anyway some do-good vote hunter wants us to do a "task-force" for seat-belt violators and we get stck on a busy corner tagging drivers. The Superbowl will have us busting hookers for 2 weeks just for the photo op. Kinda like when "Cops" comes to film and there ain't nothin' excitin' e-nuff; do a reverse sting or do a warrant run
uh-oh gotta go -the donuts are ready

 

[ncgreg231]

Originally posted by aperrego
ncgreg - I still would argue any fine or whatever civil or not imposed upon me.. I am responsible for the car when i am driving it, Paying for the loan and keeping insurance on it..

If someone else is driving the car I cannot really be responsible for thier red light antics.. Not that anyone would be driving my car.

Exactly! I wasn't trying to say that YOU would have to worry about this, only that I believe that this is the way it is handled. Most people wouldn't argue such a fine, although personally if I was the one that got tagged, I wouldn't bother arguing it b/c I don't want to look like a fool in court. If it was someone else driving my car, I would "pass on the savings" to them!

For the ticket, there is a before shot showing the car behind the stop bar, and an after shot while the car is across the stop bar. The red light is also viewable in the pictures.

 

[aperrego]

For the ticket, there is a before shot showing the car behind the stop bar, and an after shot while the car is across the stop bar. The red light is also viewable in the pictures.

I have yet to see the wonders of this technology maybe that is a good thing.. But does it show the driver?

 

[ncgreg231]

In the case of my mother-in-law, no. The camera is positioned to view the traffic light, the stop bar, and the rear of the car, from a high position to show the car's position in relation to the stop bar. All the one's that I've seen in this area appear to operate on a similar principle, but I dunno, haven't been pegged by one either, so I don't know, but I doubt it.