A BS Ticket Resolved

[rohan]

I can't disagree with one thing you wrote TBR.  My only thing would be is John's state and the issuing state had reciprocity agreement that would be the only reason I'ld fithgt it if they did.

[Catman]

Well, I've been hit by mirrors twice.  On one occasion a gas pump assembly came off a truck and missed my head by a couple inches.  Lucky.

[J86]

Well, I've been hit by mirrors twice.  On one occasion a gas pump assembly came off a truck and missed my head by a couple inches.  Lucky.

What do you do in that situation?  Thank your lucky stars and continue what you were doing, or hop in the cruiser and beat the guy to a bloody pulp? 

[Catman]

What do you do in that situation?  Thank your lucky stars and continue what you were doing, or hop in the cruiser and beat the guy to a bloody pulp? 

I was on details at the time.  Was a long time ago. The truck one we made come back.  Can't remember what the deal was but it was just an accident.  The ones with the mirrors weren't bad just got grazed.

[TurboDan]

I always move over for anyone - cop, robber, tow truck driver, drunk guy, dude chasing escaped chickens - because you never know.

In these parts, our fine state troopers use the borderline-suicidal strategy of parking diagonally, halfway in the right lane, during traffic stops to attempt to get the traffic to move over. Another boneheaded move by a boneheaded organization run by a bunch of boneheads.  I can see the use of this tactic on local roads, but on a highway with a 65mph limit where traffic regularly moves 80-85? I'd hate to see the shitshow that would ensue if someone wasn't paying attention and rammed into the back of one of those CVs sticking out in the middle of traffic.

All in all, I think this is a good law. But like too many laws, it seems like it was being used in this case in a technical sense to make a traffic stop rather than to actually correct someone who made an obviously-dangerous move on the highway. Plus, if the guy really did mouth off while cracking a shitty grin, that's especially contemptuous, given the fact that he's essentially making a mockery of the law that's there to protect his ass.

[Tave]

As someone who's done a lot of survey work for our highway department, I appreciate laws like this. I came within an inch of death one year when some douchebag brushed me @ 80 mph while I was running level loops.

That said, I think they can be taken too far. When the Wyoming law first came out, it required you to move to the left and reduce your speed by half (I don't know if it's still like that). All our interstate limits are 75 mph, so this law requires you to swerve into the other lane, slam on the brakes, and take the car down to 37.5 mph. Now granted, our roads have a lot less traffic (except I-80), so there is more room for error, but that big of a speed discrepancy--between the person slowing down and the drivers approaching from behind--cannot be safe.

[dazzleman]

As someone who's done a lot of survey work for our highway department, I appreciate laws like this. I came within an inch of death one year when some douchebag brushed me @ 80 mph while I was running level loops.

That said, I think they can be taken too far. When the Wyoming law first came out, it required you to move to the left and reduce your speed by half (I don't know if it's still like that). All our interstate limits are 75 mph, so this law requires you to swerve into the other lane, slam on the brakes, and take the car down to 37.5 mph. Now granted, our roads have a lot less traffic (except I-80), so there is more room for error, but that big of a speed discrepancy--between the person slowing down and the drivers approaching from behind--cannot be safe.

This is what I meant when I said that sometimes these laws do more harm than good.  If they go too far, they can create another hazard to substitute for the one they're trying to ameliorate.

So many people out there are morons with no regard for the safety of others.  I don't need a law to tell me not to go whizzing by within inches of somebody at the side of the road at 80 mph.  Anybody who does that should face severe, severe penalties.

[Byteme]

I also think John kind of got screwed on this one (though given the situation I probably would have went ahead and moved over myself), but I think I'd probably just pay-up since he's out of state.

Yeah, I got screwed, no doubt in my mind.  And as I said I was in the act of starting the process of changing lanes when the officer turned off his lights, at that point I was probably something like 100 feet from his car.  Also remember he was already back in his car.  So at that point it becomes a question of which is safer; changing lanes on a stretch of state highway in teh city in moderate traffic at 4:30 on a weekday afternoon, or legally going by a car parked on the shoulder of the highway. 

What I didn't mention in the original post was that this was the highway in the city limits, there are businesses and cross streets, the speed limit was 45 and traffic was moderate so this wasn't a situation where one can confidantly change lanes with a quick glance in the mirror to see if the other lane is clear.  Also I don't think that I mentioned that I had also slowed and was probably doing between 35 and 40 when I passed the officer's car.  I'll go to court because I'm not guilty and I'll be in the area anyway.  It's a matter of principle for me.  The only way I'll not go is if I call them, explain the situation and they dismiss it or tell me to mail them the minimum fine.  But, again, because I'm out of state I expect they will sock it to me.  And I will have a witness with me; my wife.


As for moving over myself.  Yes, I generally do it, especially when warranted.  If this were simply about safety it would be a law to move over for anybody on the shoulder, not just cops.  Civilians out of gas or changing a flat on the shoulder are probably more likely to be unaware of their danger on the shoulder of the road than a trained officer and are therefore probably more at risk.  Certainly they are more likely to do something stupid like step out on the roadway without looking.   And yes, when possible I move over for those civilians as well. 

[Byteme]

I always move over for anyone - cop, robber, tow truck driver, drunk guy, dude chasing escaped chickens - because you never know.

In these parts, our fine state troopers use the borderline-suicidal strategy of parking diagonally, halfway in the right lane, during traffic stops to attempt to get the traffic to move over. Another boneheaded move by a boneheaded organization run by a bunch of boneheads.   I can see the use of this tactic on local roads, but on a highway with a 65mph limit where traffic regularly moves 80-85? I'd hate to see the shitshow that would ensue if someone wasn't paying attention and rammed into the back of one of those CVs sticking out in the middle of traffic.

All in all, I think this is a good law. But like too many laws, it seems like it was being used in this case in a technical sense to make a traffic stop rather than to actually correct someone who made an obviously-dangerous move on the highway. Plus, if the guy really did mouth off while cracking a shitty grin, that's especially contemptuous, given the fact that he's essentially making a mockery of the law that's there to protect his ass.

I had Texas plates, He was an Arkansas cop, I was out of state and in his mind likely not to fight the ticket or ever show up in Russellville again.  Probably nuff said right there.

It's especially annoying for two reasons; 1. I didn't deserve the ticket and he knew it and wrote it anyway.  2.  I was very polite to him, I always am if stopped. There is no value in mouthing off to anybody who is armed and can drag you to jail or otherwise make your life miserable.  Sirs, smiles and polite speech cost nothing.

[Raza]

http://www.odmp.org/officer/15352-police-officer-gary-neil-priess

http://www.odmp.org/officer/15387-trooper-rick-lee-johnson


Their families may  beg t o differ.  It's a great law -and one we set up to enforce specifically about once a month along different parts of the county.  Park a police car along the side of the road with the lights on and a few chase cars sitting in front of it.  Folks who don't abide by the "move over law" get misdemeanor tickets.  If the people get mouthy or nasty they get a ride to jail and get to bail out there.  The law is there to protect road-side workers wether they be police or construction workers or firemen or wrecker drivers.  In Ofc. Priess incident the truck driver was playing "Hat Off" a game truck drivers would play for points to see if they could knock off the officers hat.  I can honestly and absolutely say that I have nearly been hit a number of times by people getting to close.  It's not a game it's officer's lives at risk.
You should get a copy of the state law before you decide it's unwarranted- you should have moved over out of nothing more than courtesy but that's my opinion nothing else.   If someone can post the law from that state then one of us can layman-ize it for you if you want.


(an d for those of you tha like to grade my posts- I'm drinking tonight)

Yeah, it's a great law...that's enforced once a month when it doesn't even matter because you're setting up a false situation anyway. 

Can you imagine if murders were enforced this same way?  You'd set up tables on the streets with potential victims and weapons and wait for people to walk by and commit a murder.  "Sorry fella, but you picked the wrong day to commit a murder in this town!"

[Tave]

I agree with Raza. I don't think that's a good way to enforce the law.

First, the danger to the officer is almost illusory, as he isn't going to exit the patrol vehicle. In and of itself, this wouldn't be so bad, because we can assume that some of those ticketed will adjust their behavior in the future.

However, the resources devoted to that method of enforcement could just as easily be spent sending additional cruisers to shadow construction workers, highway workers, and other patrol vehicles. Then you could both alter the driving habits of those ticketed and punish those responsible for creating a more tangible danger.

I know I would have appreciated a patrolman shadowing me when I surveyed new off/on-ramps for I-90 last summer. Perhaps the highway patrol was too busy conducting operations like the one Rohan described.

To be fair to the Wyo patrol, they sent a cruiser by periodically to check on us, and they encouraged us to take down plate numbers and report unsafe drivers. We did, but it's hard to do that when you're on foot and trying to work. A patrolman could have actually pulled them over and issued citations. I realize they have neither the time nor the manpower to issue an officer for every highway crew, and I appreciate the job they do. I just think that since their resources are limited, that's all the more reason to spend them wisely. If some guy that Rohan ticketed in Michigan drove through Wyoming and slowed down when he saw me because of that prior ticket, then my heartfelt thanks goes out to the Michigan police.


Something I have noticed over the years working on the highway. When you have a cruiser next to you, people become a LOT more responsible. I know that since our LEOs have seen all types of crazy behavior go on in their presence, they might not believe me, but trust me: it's like night and day. Especially when you're like us and you don't have a full cone system set up, people pay you absolutely no respect. And often we have to survey points in the middle of the roads.

[Byteme]

I know I would have appreciated a patrolman shadowing me when I surveyed new off/on-ramps for I-90 last summer. Perhaps the highway patrol was too busy conducting operations like the one Rohan described.


Something I have noticed over the years working on the highway. When you have a cruiser next to you, people become a LOT more responsible. I know that since our LEOs have seen all types of crazy behavior go on in their presence, they might not believe me, but trust me: it's like night and day. Especially when you're like us and you don't have a full cone system set up, people pay you absolutely no respect. And often we have to survey points in the middle of the roads.

Q:  Why did the surveyor cross the road?


A:  To try to stay alive.   


I know it's not funny in real life but that lame joke just popped in my head.

[GoCougs]

Okay, that's a good point about an LEO wrastlin' with a perp and getting drawn/thrown into the roadway. Still, my hunch is that is not what is happening - it's the drunk, drowsy, distracted, reckless, et al., driver that moves out of the lane.

[Catman]

Okay, that's a good point about an LEO wrastlin' with a perp and getting drawn/thrown into the roadway. Still, my hunch is that is not what is happening - it's the drunk, drowsy, distracted, reckless, et al., driver that moves out of the lane.

Certainly the vast majority.

[The Phantom]

I agree with Raza. I don't think that's a good way to enforce the law.

First, the danger to the officer is almost illusory, as he isn't going to exit the patrol vehicle. In and of itself, this wouldn't be so bad, because we can assume that some of those ticketed will adjust their behavior in the future.

However, the resources devoted to that method of enforcement could just as easily be spent sending additional cruisers to shadow construction workers, highway workers, and other patrol vehicles. Then you could both alter the driving habits of those ticketed and punish those responsible for creating a more tangible danger.

I know I would have appreciated a patrolman shadowing me when I surveyed new off/on-ramps for I-90 last summer. Perhaps the highway patrol was too busy conducting operations like the one Rohan described.

To be fair to the Wyo patrol, they sent a cruiser by periodically to check on us, and they encouraged us to take down plate numbers and report unsafe drivers. We did, but it's hard to do that when you're on foot and trying to work. A patrolman could have actually pulled them over and issued citations. I realize they have neither the time nor the manpower to issue an officer for every highway crew, and I appreciate the job they do. I just think that since their resources are limited, that's all the more reason to spend them wisely. If some guy that Rohan ticketed in Michigan drove through Wyoming and slowed down when he saw me because of that prior ticket, then my heartfelt thanks goes out to the Michigan police.


Something I have noticed over the years working on the highway. When you have a cruiser next to you, people become a LOT more responsible. I know that since our LEOs have seen all types of crazy behavior go on in their presence, they might not believe me, but trust me: it's like night and day. Especially when you're like us and you don't have a full cone system set up, people pay you absolutely no respect. And often we have to survey points in the middle of the roads.

I've driven across Wyoming on 80, and if I remember correctly, that was one of the more desolate Interstate highways I've been on.  It was really fun hitting 80 MPH in the Grand Am without worrying about getting pulled over.

Actually, I-80 in Nevada is probably more desolate.  That's where I hit my first flying bird and saw my first real life tumbleweed back in 1999.

[Tave]

I've driven across Wyoming on 80, and if I remember correctly, that was one of the more desolate Interstate highways I've been on.  It was really fun hitting 80 MPH in the Grand Am without worrying about getting pulled over.

It must have been awhile ago. The speed limit has been 75 mph for a decade, so you needn't worry about going 80 no matter how many patrolmen are on the prowl.

I-80 gets a ton of semi traffic. I've been on it when it's pretty empty, but I've also been on it when it's packed to the gills.

[rohan]

Yeah, it's a great law...that's enforced once a month when it doesn't even matter because you're setting up a false situation anyway. 

Yes Raza- we ONLY enforce the law when we do wolfpack enforcement once a month.   

Can you imagine if murders were enforced this same way?  You'd set up tables on the streets with potential victims and weapons and wait for people to walk by and commit a murder.  "Sorry fella, but you picked the wrong day to commit a murder in this town!"

Well- that's just about the dumbest argument you could've chosen and I'm not even going to bother to explain it beyond that to you

[BENZ BOY15]

I don't think the cellphone law has had that much of an impact. People just put it on speaker and hold it up to their face Hell, even the Governor's wife was spotted heading down Sunset yacking away.

Which is what I do, actually. That or I just talk on the phone regularly if I'm in a non-patrolled area.

[The Phantom]

It must have been awhile ago. The speed limit has been 75 mph for a decade, so you needn't worry about going 80 no matter how many patrolmen are on the prowl.

I-80 gets a ton of semi traffic. I've been on it when it's pretty empty, but I've also been on it when it's packed to the gills.

Yeah, it was in 1999.  All the states from Nebraska through Nevada had 75 MPH limits.  Then I hit the big descent into California's San Joaquin Valley, and the limit wasn't any higher than 65.

I love it out west, though.  I love the vast openness of it all.

[Raza]

Yes Raza- we ONLY enforce the law when we do wolfpack enforcement once a month.   
Well- that's just about the dumbest argument you could've chosen and I'm not even going to bother to explain it beyond that to you

 

[rohan]

Another brilliant response Raza.

[Raza]

Another brilliant response Raza.

 

[rohan]

You make me sad for you Raza.

[J86]

cmon kids lets play nice...

[rohan]

He started it.

[Catman]

 

[rohan]

(  pssssst  I was joking)

[Raza]

You make me sad for you Raza.

 

[Minpin]

I don't see why people still post in the Driving and the Law forum. It ALWAYS ends up in coppers vs. everyone else, and it goes nowhere. The debate isn't even engaging or intellectual. Still LOL worthy though, I guess.

[The Phantom]

I don't see why people still post in the Driving and the Law forum. It ALWAYS ends up in coppers vs. everyone else, and it goes nowhere. The debate isn't even engaging or intellectual. Still LOL worthy though, I guess.