This weekend our traffic enforcement

[Eye of the Tiger]

The cell phone thing IS illegal in an increasing number of states and that is enforced on a fairly regular basis. Once again, thats something that people KNOW they were doing. You start writing for some vaguye thing like "improper merging" or even "tailgating" in which no accident took place, and you're going to be seeing a lot more trials because thats a matter of perception.

I'm talking about ticketing dangerous drivers, I don't care about the logistics of the courts.

[James Young]

Once again, thats something that people KNOW they were doing. You start writing for some vaguye thing like "improper merging" or even "tailgating" in which no accident took place, and you're going to be seeing a lot more trials because thats a matter of perception. 

Improper merging and tailgating are neither vague nor matters of perception since I suspect that you?ll find that they are more closely correlated to crash causes than ?speeding,? which by its very nature is arbitrary.  If those cited actions lead to more trials then that?s a good thing. 

Just because enforcement of them is more difficult does not make it less desirable since it would have the effect of teaching drivers what they don?t know[/b, i.e., certain expectations and the skills to attain them.  Citing speeding, on the other hand, teaches drivers only that much traffic enforcement is done to collect money.

[Soup DeVille]

The point is, most people KNOW they were speeding. Regardless of whatever ewxcuse they give at the side of the road, they KNOW they were caught. So they mail in the ticket. No trial. Charge them with "improper lane use" or "improper merging" and everyones going to think they were shafted and they'll fight it.? Way too much hassle to go to trial because some guy disputes how he merged with the flow of traffic. Given how some roads are built, its going to be highly subjective to boot. For something that ISN'T a big concern for most people. How many complaints do you think agencies get that some driver didn't merge quickly enough to suit someone behind them?

Complaints don't injure people or cause accidents, bad driving does. People complain just to complain sometimes, but its not the job of someone charged with increasing the safety of the public to satiate obsessive whininess.

For the rest of your argument: basically what you're saying is is that ignorance of the law is an excuse? What goes to trial or not is not your concern anyways is it? Again: the safety of the driving public is supposedly the reason your out there in the first place isn't it?

Or is it simply to issue the easy, rarely contested, revenue enhancing ticket?

[Soup DeVille]

The cell phone thing IS illegal in an increasing number of states and that is enforced on a fairly regular basis. Once again, thats something that people KNOW they were doing. You start writing for some vaguye thing like "improper merging" or even "tailgating" in which no accident took place, and you're going to be seeing a lot more trials because thats a matter of perception.

Again, there is nothing vague about either of those rules: they are clear cut and obvious. The only thing that makes them "vague" is that most people only have a vague idea what those rules are: and it can be argued that that's because its almost never ticketed for.

[TBR]

People complain about speeding because that is the only traffic violation they can really expect police to enforce. Start actually righting tickets for following to close, merging unsafely, and unsafe lane change and people will start to bring up problem areas in town hall type meetings.

This is from somebody who got pulled over for following to close (dumbass in the left lane hit the brakes as soon as he saw a cop (a negative side effect of police on traffic duty almost entirely focusing on speeding), which put him at 45 in a 55, pacing a truck in the right lane)

[the nameless one]

Again, there is nothing vague about either of those rules: they are clear cut and obvious. The only thing that makes them "vague" is that most people only have a vague idea what those rules are: and it can be argued that that's because its almost never ticketed for.

"Tailgating" is a generic term with no real true definition. What constitutes tailgating will vary from one person to the next. Who you think might deserve ticketing may not be who James thinks deserves ticketing. As for trials, I'm simply pointing out that because its so vague, you're going to see more trials because the people ticketed will feel that they are innocent of the charge, bogging the courts down.

Theres the myth of the "revenue-enhacing ticket" brought up again. You guys can't get over the fact that in much of the country, tickets are overall a loss, and certainly don't go to the local municipality or the agency issuing the ticket.

[rohan]

"3 or 3 1/2 times normal pay" doesn't sound too shabby to me.

For the record- these guys were on OT on my regular shifts.  I didn't get anything other than the 3 times for  holiday pay.   They got standard OT- AND holiday pay which is about 3 1/2 times pay per contract because they were assigned to the duty not volunteer.

[rohan]

Rohan is an officer with the Michigan State Police- which is one of the most professional departments in the nation, and in all my years of living here I have never seen a State trooper engage in some of the more flagrant revenue-grabbing schemes that I have seen other departments in the area do.

No I'm not.  I'm with a larger more urban/suburban Sheriff department.  But thanks for thinkin I could be one of them- even if they are just blue bellies.     Our department only received money for 180 hours of added traffic enformcent  the rest came out of county coffers.  And according to our Chief Deputy (3rd guy in the department) at our meeting this morning it cost us more than $5000 to run that but he felt that the added patrols helped with traffic crashes this weekend- he hasn't gotten that data yet but he thingks it helped.

[Champ]

Good luck proving those, it'll be one persons word against the other without video and everyone will be taking their tickets to court.

Can a LEO not sit at the top of an on ramp and clock people that are merging?  That's easy to prove - this guy was going 40 by the time he hit traffic, thus impeading it's flow and merging unsafely.

Isn't inattentive driving the #1 cause of accidents?  Why not take a stab at that, then worry about the secondary things later.

[James Young]

Isn't inattentive driving the #1 cause of accidents?? Why not take a stab at that, then worry about the secondary things later. 

Exactly!  What a concept!  We go after the important things -- as determined by scientific method -- in the effort to actually have our actions make a difference.  Nameless One seems to believe that because drivers have different defintions of "tailgating" or "proper merging," then we should not pursue those.  He would rather that we chase after the easy but ultimately counterproductive stuff such as speeding.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Exactly!  What a concept!  We go after the important things -- as determined by scientific method -- in the effort to actually have our actions make a difference.  Nameless One seems to believe that because drivers have different defintions of "tailgating" or "proper merging," then we should not pursue those.  He would rather that we chase after the easy but ultimately counterproductive stuff such as speeding.

I have a different definition of "speeding" than all the ridiculous signs posted along the side of the road, therefore I don't think I should be pursed. 

[the nameless one]

Isn't inattentive driving the #1 cause of accidents??

No.

I have a different definition of "speeding" than all the ridiculous signs posted along the side of the road

And that would be? i would say exceeding the sign by the side of the road is a clearcut definition.

[Soup DeVille]

No I'm not.? I'm with a larger more urban/suburban Sheriff department.? But thanks for thinkin I could be one of them- even if they are just blue bellies.? ?? Our department only received money for 180 hours of added traffic enformcent? the rest came out of county coffers.? And according to our Chief Deputy (3rd guy in the department) at our meeting this morning it cost us more than $5000 to run that but he felt that the added patrols helped with traffic crashes this weekend- he hasn't gotten that data yet but he thingks it helped.

My mistake.

[Eye of the Tiger]

And that would be? i would say exceeding the sign by the side of the road is a clearcut definition.

No shit! I can read the signs, but my definition is different. 
Speedlimits never change, but ideal speeds vary constantly with conditions; weather, traffic, type of vehicle, driver's condition, etc. Now shut up, troll.

[the nameless one]

No shit! I can read the signs, but my definition is different.?
Speedlimits never change, but ideal speeds vary constantly with conditions; weather, traffic, type of vehicle, driver's condition, etc. Now shut up, troll.

Troll? Hardly. Yes, maximum speed you should be driving at any given time may change, but the conditions you describe require that you REDUCE your speed from what is posted on the sign. Exceeding the number on the sign would be speeding; driving too fast for conditions is just that.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Troll? Hardly. Yes, maximum speed you should be driving at any given time may change, but the conditions you describe require that you REDUCE your speed from what is posted on the sign. Exceeding the number on the sign would be speeding; driving too fast for conditions is just that.

Ok. I'm going to go ride my bike 120mph down the interstate now. If I die, you are not a troll. If I come back, you are a troll. Let's see what happens...

[the nameless one]

So anyone who disagrees with you is a troll eh? Go ahead and ride your motorcycle down the road at 120 MPH. Sooner or later your rash behavior will get you killed, ticketed, suspended, revoked, etc. Hopefully no one dioes because of your conduct.

[Eye of the Tiger]

I only went 105mph because I didn't think 120mph was safe today, but you're still a troll.

[the nameless one]

Like I said, you only think that because I disagree with you. Good luck with the speeding. You'll miss your license when its gone.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Like I said, you only think that because I disagree with you. Good luck with the speeding. You'll miss your license when its gone.

You're a troll because the only thing you do is argue about how perfect our traffic laws and enforcement is.

[the nameless one]

That makes me a troll? Hardly. Someone needs to be a counterpoint to the "speed til we wreck" crowd here.
What topic shall we discuss? The weather? Sports? This is the driving and the law section of the board, what do you expect to be discussed here if not traffic enforcement?

[Soup DeVille]

Like I said, you only think that because I disagree with you. Good luck with the speeding. You'll miss your license when its gone.

Maybe he says that because you tend to take whatever reasoning you can to support your position, even if its directly contradictory to not only the facts, but in many cases to your own previous arguments?

[the nameless one]

Maybe he says that because you tend to take whatever reasoning you can to support your position, even if its directly contradictory to not only the facts, but in many cases to your own previous arguments?

Facts? Like James' "facts"?  take the "fact" that was presented above about distracted driving being the #1 cause of accidents...righhtttt..You guys just don't like hearing that speeding, something you guys love to do, can be hazardous. You hate any enforcement that inhibits your ability to speed to your hearts content.

AFAIK I've never contradicted myself. Feel free to cite an example.

[Soup DeVille]

Facts? Like James' "facts"?? take the "fact" that was presented above about distracted driving being the #1 cause of accidents...righhtttt..You guys just don't like hearing that speeding, something you guys love to do, can be hazardous. You hate any enforcement that inhibits your ability to speed to your hearts content.

AFAIK I've never contradicted myself. Feel free to cite an example.

The fact that tickets can and do increase revenue?

[James Young]

Facts? Like James' "facts"?? take the "fact" that was presented above about distracted driving being the #1 cause of accidents...righhtttt..You guys just don't like hearing that speeding, something you guys love to do, can be hazardous. You hate any enforcement that inhibits your ability to speed to your hearts content.?

Actually, much of the body of those ?facts? is yours.? The data collected by NHTSA is not only voluminous and wide-reaching, it comes in large part from police reports so if those ?facts? are wrong, it?s your fault.? Likewise, the official sites of each of the 50 states are populated by data drawn largely from police reports.

NHTSA has not specifically recognized ?distracted driving? as a cause but has recently begun to examine the phenomenon.? Of course, when the reports and the reporting forms omit that as a cause, contributing factor or a ?xxx-related? issue, then it won?t show up.? In simpler terms:? garbage-in, garbage-out.? Submitted for your consideration:? NHTSA has never recognized suicide as a cuase of crashes, yet we know that it does happen; we just don't know how often.

?Speeding? is not that hazardous, certainly overstated by ?official? statistics everywhere but, in fact, unsupported by your own data.? Not only that, but stopping speeding ? that is, slowing down all traffic ? has a very high cost.? The consequences of speed enforcement are a loss of productivity that runs into the trillions and an increase in the distrust of and belligerence toward law enforcement in general.?

You keep trying to mischaracterize drivers, even enthusiasts such as on these fora, as nothing more than thrill-seeking fools bent on self-destruction.? This is not only factually wrong but downright deceptive in its intent.?

Drivers should be able to decide on their own what speed to drive without the constant harassment and faux-concern for our well-being that are the fa?ade of a money-grubbing campaign to shore up failed institutions.

A pox on your house.

[the nameless one]

The fact that tickets can and do increase revenue?

Posts like yours ignores the reality that for most agencies, they don't get the money from tickets. The revenue is NOT the motivating factor for most agencies. Of course James can point to a handful of exceptions to that. They aren't the norm.

[the nameless one]

?Speeding? is not that hazardous, certainly overstated by ?official? statistics everywhere but, in fact, unsupported by your own data.?

If speeding is not hazardous, why is it a factor in so many accidents. And don't point to your books of stats. Go toa  few accidents and tell me speed wasn't a factor. Oh yeah, right...youw ere an EMT or some such thing in a former life. We will never agree, James.

Not only that, but stopping speeding ? that is, slowing down all traffic ? has a very high cost.? The consequences of speed enforcement are a loss of productivity that runs into the trillions and an increase in the distrust of and belligerence toward law enforcement in general.?

So what.....the alternative for many people is never getting there at all because they are dead vs slowing down. Put a dollar value on those peoples lives, James.

You keep trying to mischaracterize drivers, even enthusiasts such as on these fora, as nothing more than thrill-seeking fools bent on self-destruction.? This is not only factually wrong but downright deceptive in its intent.?

It certainly comes across that thats how they are.

Drivers should be able to decide on their own what speed to drive without the constant harassment and faux-concern for our well-being that are the fa?ade of a money-grubbing campaign to shore up failed institutions.

Plenty of drivers shouldn't be on the road in the first place, many exercise poor judgement, and they negatively impact their communities. As longa s this is the reality, you will have speed enforcement. Want to run full tilt without "harassment"? Go rent some tiem on a closed track and get it out of your system.

A pox on your house.

Yeah yeah, whatever.

[Soup DeVille]

Posts like yours ignores the reality that for most agencies, they don't get the money from tickets. The revenue is NOT the motivating factor for most agencies. Of course James can point to a handful of exceptions to that. They aren't the norm.

And yet I've never seen a properly cited valid rebuttal of those from you ever.

[the nameless one]

And yet I've never seen a properly cited valid rebuttal of those from you ever.

So because I don't post a link to some website you don't believe me? Fine. Your choice. You are wrong though.

[Soup DeVille]

So because I don't post a link to some website you don't believe me? Fine. Your choice. You are wrong though.

A valid cite of any sort would be acceptable yes. I don't agree with all of James' stance, but he does at least bring a decent argument.

All you can bring are tirades worthy of an over-sugared three year old.