Sharp as a Marble - To Protect and Serve and while we're at it, a little shakedown doesn't hurt

<< Gunnie dreams | Home | Casting call for Monster Hunter International >>

To Protect and Serve and while we're at it, a little shakedown doesn't hurt

Views

JayG had a little run in with the po-po this morning where he barked his tires and was promptly ticketed. Someone in Gunblogger Conspiracy posted this disgusting link for something very similar.

I work as a reserve police officer in a small town north of Boston. It's one of those towns where reserve's get to patrol as well as do details. The question I had is with regards to an incident that occurred the other day. I was stopped at a traffic light on patrol in a marked unit when the vehicle two cars in front of me proceeded to spin their tires for about 6 or 7 seconds, in turn they left some rubber on the pavement and put on a bit of a smoke show. Upon pulling them over I cited them the $50 for Harsh and Objectinable Noise. I was wondering if there was anything else I could cite one for in the future with regards to that. Any suggestions? Thank you.

Go read it. It's a bunch of power hungry mini-tyrants we call 'police officers' who are online, trying to figure out more ways to take money out of people's pockets. It has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with what amounts to nothing more than mafia style tactics.

The whole 'tickets as revenue' scam is something we need to seriously start taking a look at. Quotas force cops to ticket people for no good reason. Yes, there are traffic laws that should be obeyed for the safety of all, but barking your tire isn't something that's going to kill a busload of paraplegic cancer patients.

Anger and rage – it's not just for breakfast any more.

posted @ 6/7/2010 9:52:44 AM

Comments

Will says:

on 6/7/2010 11:18:20 AM

Well if the governments would stop spending money on crap that either doesn't work or we don't need and spent that money on police, firefighters and the like we might not have such a problem with this. Was at a restaurant locally here in STL that's owned by a bunch of city firefighters. The guy in charge was walking around and talking to everyone. He was telling us that the local board of alderamans wanted to cut the budget to the fire department because the budget came up short and none of the aldermans would have the normal amounts of money that they usually get every year for pet projects. And people wonder why the state controls the police department for St. Louis city.

Jake says:

on 6/7/2010 11:58:25 AM

We almost lost the State EMS training budget a few months ago, and we're probably going to have to fight to keep it next year, too.

Every EMS provider is required to undergo a certain number of hours of specific classes to remain certified, and volunteer agencies, especially in rural areas, rely very heavily on state sponsored training. Losing this budget would have crippled rural EMS in most of the state.

While this was being proposed, the state was re-opening highway rest areas that had been closed a few months earlier because of budget issues. The difference? Rest areas are immediately visible to the average voter - police, fire, and EMS budgets (especially training budgets, and most especially on the state level) are not. Then the MSM buries those budget cuts on some little corner of the Miscellaneous section, while the rest area closures make the front page.

You can tell the difference between a politician and a statesman by how they handle these issues. A statesman will prioritize based on what is actually necessary and beneficial, and willingly risk his reelection because that's what is needed. A politician will prioritize based on what makes the front page and motivates the voters, and will never risk his chances at getting reelected.

Jake says:

on 6/7/2010 11:59:07 AM

Oops, forgot to subscribe to the post.

Weer'd Beard says:

on 6/7/2010 12:31:23 PM

Gun Control Dorks say we need more Gun laws, and state-funded "buy backs"

Meanwhile our police forces spend most of their time writing tickets for traffic infractions.

Tony says:

on 6/7/2010 2:43:09 PM

To play the devils advocate, on a local web forum for hobby motorists, there has been a long discussion on the matter of burn-outs and their dangers. Now, of course, I wasn't there and I didn't see what exactly happened, but there are situations in which doing burn-outs is not safe. Vehicles can slide sideways, throw rocks from the ground... And of course, if some jackass loses control of their vehicle (it can and AFAIK has happened before - hey, not everybody has any clue about what the hell they are doing), things can seriously take a turn for the worse.

I did not read through the entire discussion linked, nor do I know in what kind of conditions the burn-out happened, just saying that there are situations in which a burn-out is not something one should do.

John Hardin says:

on 6/7/2010 2:50:16 PM

... there are situations in which doing burn-outs is not safe.

It can also permanently damage the roadway if it's been freshly tarred and graveled. There are a couple of spots on a road near my house where some arsehole did precisely that.

Robb Allen says:

on 6/7/2010 3:08:20 PM

Don't mistake my anger at the ~~mafia thugs~~ police as saying they didn't have the right to ticket the guy for the burnout.

What pisses me off is that they are trying to find EVERYTHING they can to nail people for rather than do just what's needed to protect and serve.

M Gallo says:

on 6/7/2010 3:16:38 PM

The safety of a burnout is inversely proportional to the velocity and mass of the vehicle performing it. That is to say, inertia means that a static burnout is not more dangerous than normal operation of a vehicle at neighborhood speeds.

Now, road damage is certainly possible, and of course if the car begins to gain traction then the danger very quickly surpasses that of normal driving. Being as though I drive a traction-limited vehicle as my daily driver, however, I'm not willing to say that squealing one's tires should ever be a ticketable offense.

DirtCrashr says:

on 6/7/2010 5:06:34 PM

What a bunch of limp-dick pricks. My truck will do that on occasion when there's nothing in the back, with little input from me. Since the downturn in the economy The California Highway Patrol has made a big show of its road-presence and ticketing activity, no doubt they want to insure the liquidity of their guaranteed union pensions when they go to retire early with twice the income - Google "chief's disease."

Tony says:

on 6/7/2010 5:46:34 PM

Robb, I do see your point, I really do. On the other hand, at least with the original poster, I can picture a cop thinking that "A $50 fine seems a little weak, appears ineffective in discouraging burnouts, and just what the hell kind of a citation is "Harsh and Objectionable Noise" anyway?!? Come on, there has to be something meant more for this situation in the books." I dunno, maybe I am being too understanding today (kinda weird, as I'm usually the asshole-who-bits-peoples-heads-off type :P ), but I can see how the question could be just non-optimally phrased. Wouldn't be the first time people get ticked off on the Internet over the way some statement or question was phrased (hell, I've more or less officially banned from one or two web forums because my English was a little off that day myself).

M Gallo, normal operation of vehicles at neighborhood speeds rarely launch rocks at pedestrians behind the vehicle. And you did point out the biggest danger quite well - when the car suddenly gets traction is when fuck-ups can really occur.

DirtCrashr, your truck will just occasionally sit there burning rubber for six to seven seconds without excessive throttle from you?!? Whoa. Don't know what you drive but I want one. :)

Both of you guys, it's not like the cited offense was slightly chirping tires. That's one thing. But think about it. One one thousand, two one thousand, three one thousand, four one thousand, five one thousand, six one thousand. That's a deliberate burnout. If it took place in a busy downtown area, that's a cit-able offense in my opinion. (Of course, if it happened in the middle of a totally empty stretch of road that cop seriously needs to get a real job. :P )

straightarrow says:

on 6/7/2010 8:32:42 PM

The issue is not whether the guy deserved a ticket, but the avidity of the limp-dicked cop to find other reasons to pile on citations. What part of that is so hard to understand?

This cop revealed himself as not a public servant but as an ego masturbator.

Sarah says:

on 6/9/2010 3:12:44 AM

Yeah, straightarrow, it's the part about the public servant going out of his way to find more fines to heap on the citizen that bothers me. Is writing a ticket for the actual offense not good enough anymore? Apparently not to some cops.

Law enforcement has my respect in general and by default but that group, like every other, has bad apples that belong in the compost pile.

Roadkill says:

on 6/10/2010 8:51:13 AM

I'm sorry, I sure as hell don't want to give up 50 bucks for any reason other than spending on what I want. Fining someone is all fine and dandy, but what they later talk about is trying to force a felony charge through. If it stuck, someone would be branded a felon, and lose rights for a very minor infraction. Even if it did not stick, as some cops point out later, it would both tie up the legal system and cost money. They kept talking about putting on extra charges to get extra overtime pay and to pad their records for later benefits.

Comments have been closed on this topic.

Comments

Archives

Categories

Comments

Archives

Categories

Second Amendment

Sharpest Marbles

Blogroll

Funny, as in Ha-ha

Good Reads

Extended Blogroll

Industry Links