Pulled over by the 5 0 thread

[Nick M3]

Originally Posted by ff

I would disagree with that. For law enforcement, it's about quotas/generating revenue. Alan just happened to be the most convenient target for this particular cop, at that moment.

That became crystal clear to me one time back in my 20's when I was last in a line of 3 cars going 12 MPH over the limit on a highway. Oncoming cop slammed on his brakes, turned around, and pursued. Pulled me (the caboose) over and issued a ticket, without any concern about the guy in front leading the pack. Or the guy behind him.

Depends on the day, depends on the cop. Because so much of law enforcement is subjective/discretionary, there’s no rule that you can apply to any one interaction.

Lots of different interactions, of course, do add up and you’ll generally see disparate impacts.

[FC]

Originally Posted by wdc330i

That said, it does sound like Alan was singled out for having the expensive-looking fast car. The officer was not applying the law fairly...

I can't disagree with that. My last ticket, all those years ago, was clearly biased due to my new, red, sporty-looking BMW. I was going only a couple of mph faster than a huge semi.

Originally Posted by wdc330i

Using the card to evade a ticket or whatever strikes me as similar to using someone else's handicap placard (although one is legal and sanctioned and the other illegal, they seem equivalent in effect to me).

Related rant: As someone who had a legitimate handicap tag for a few months following an awful ankle injury, it is enraging to find no handicapped spots because they are all taken by seemingly able-bodied people. I had surgery a week ago to have the hardware removed and didn't want apply and get a tag for about a week of use. Not having one I parked in a regular spot and went to get lunch with my crutches as I walk past two people getting out of handicapped spots while having no issues.

It is so abused, it is ridiculous. I know several people who acknowledge not having any issues, but happened to know a Dr. who got them one. It really bothers me.

[rumatt]

Originally Posted by FC

I can't disagree with that. My last ticket, all those years ago, was clearly biased due to my new, red, sporty-looking BMW. I was going only a couple of mph faster than a huge semi.

If you were going faster, even only a little, how was it bias from the red color?

I know several people who acknowledge not having any issues, but happened to know a Dr. who got them one. It really bothers me.

I guess it shouldn't surprise me that people do this. But jesus christ.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by rumatt

That cop did sound like a dick though.

He wasn’t really a dick, he was definitely strange and animated.

Originally Posted by Nick M3

No. The whole point of taking the card away is to say to their fellow officer that they should really reconsider letting their friend or family member trade on their reputation for favors from other cops.

And, of course, it is absolutely insane that the whole PBA card practice is allowed.

What your saying is part of it as well but it is not the full reason, you should hear the stories I been told. These guys rank on each other and give each other a lot of shit behind closed doors. Almost like high school in the locker room sort of crap.

[ff]

Originally Posted by Alan

These guys rank on each other and give each other a lot of shit behind closed doors. Almost like high school in the locker room sort of crap.

So, essentially, people that are predisposed to become cops never really mature beyond what you'd expect from an massively paranoid, angry, middle school bully.

[JST]

Originally Posted by clyde

I want to agree more than I actually do. In my absolutely best self, I probably do. In my "I live in the real world" self, I'd probably say, "use it if you're okay with it, but you should feel really bad about it and do some kind of meaningful act of kindness to make up for it."

Part of what factors into that is that minor traffic infractions often lead to overly punitive actions. That part of the system is fucked up, too.

Originally Posted by rumatt

Damn dude. That's a broad statement.

Aren't 90% of court cases impacted, at least in some form, by attorneys "trading in favors"?

And are people really expected to reject a "not guilty" finding because it was for immoral reasons? Like, a having a buddy in the DA's office? Or an all-white jury? Or...

Be the change you want to see.

We can talk about marginal cases, and differential access to power, and differential access to money, and the impact money has the on the justice system, and lobbying more generally...there are legitimately hard cases that are tough to figure out.

This isn't one of them.

This case is about the easiest case that I can imagine. There's apparently an informal process for signaling a relationship with a police officer that is so well-established that it has its own mores and rules. My guess is that you won't see any of that written down anywhere. Schlubs who aren't related to cops won't know about it, let along be able to use it.

That's fucked up and you absolutely should not be a part of it. Come on, guys. This isn't that difficult. If you get pulled over for speeding (or breaking HOV rules), pay the fucking fine.

[FC]

Originally Posted by rumatt

If you were going faster, even only a little, how was it bias from the red color?

p=m*v and other governing physics.

Me doing 82mph is a helluva lot safer than a loaded semi doing 80mph. If safety is what they care about, that semi should have been pulled over doing 70mph before I should have been pulled over doing 82mph.

[FC]

Originally Posted by JST

That's fucked up and you absolutely should not be a part of it. Come on, guys. This isn't that difficult. If you get pulled over for speeding (or breaking HOV rules), pay the fucking fine.

Yup. I've never argued a ticket.

[clyde]

Originally Posted by JST

Be the change you want to see.

Nothing wrong with anyone taking that track for themselves.

If you get pulled over for speeding (or breaking HOV rules), pay the fucking fine.

No.

First, that statement suggests admitting to being a violator whether or not you did it. Where's the line between that and "arrested for murder? Climb into the chair, strap in, and say goodbye"?

Second, if you did it, accepting state punishment for violating arbitrary rules without defense or protest is wrong.

Third, accepting a third-party's financial punishment for violating arbitrary rules when the third-party has a profit motive without defense or protest is asinine.

Fourth, if you have a legal avenue available to you that may protect you from punishments grossly disproportionate to the offense, being the change you want to see shouldn't be turning into a lamb on its way to slaughter.

[rumatt]

Originally Posted by FC

Me doing 82mph is a helluva lot safer than a loaded semi doing 80mph. If safety is what they care about, that semi should have been pulled over doing 70mph before I should have been pulled over doing 82mph.

A cop choosing not to incorporate vehicle weight into his speeding-badness-algorithm (for a law that doesn't mention vehicle weight) is a far cry from proof of discrimination against sporty red cars.

Originally Posted by JST

Be the change you want to see.

In what universe would a lawyer not recommend his client leverage a *perfectly legal* means to evade prosecution?

"I could get you off right now based on a technicality, but I think that law is wrong so let's go to trial and hope for the best".

If your kid got busted for cocaine possession and your best friend was the cop (or DA) would you not talk to them and ask them to show leniency?

You're pulling a string here that would unravel the entire legal system.