Cops Speeding in Non-Emergency Situations

[TurboDan]

For lower pay part, I don't know if I would agree since I don't know any teachers, fireman, EMS that would be making 6 figures.

In New Jersey, average police salary is $91K, without OT. With average OT factored in it's about $108K. This is common even for newer guys. In my town you make $95K after 6 years on. Not a bad gig at all. NJ has the country's highest-paid police. I realize in some other areas the pendulum swings far the other way and they are horribly underpaid.

[TurboDan]

Immediate relatives such as the wife?  I think the answer should be glaringly obvious.

As for the others; who says they do? 

I have never heard of cousins or uncles getting a pass, children often do not either. 

I think you have very bad information.

You've never been to New Jersey. 

The union gives out cards that are colored depending on what "level" the card represents. There are gold "family cards" that are metal with the relative and officer's names both engraved, then "friend" cards that are laminated with the person's name (and the name of the officer who gave it to him/her) printed on it and then general cardboard cards. The "holy grail" is the "courtesy shield" which is literally a replica of a police agency's shield that is suction-cupped on the windshield of a relative or friend's car to get you a pass on whatever violation you may commit. About 1/4 of the cars I see driving in NJ have one of these things stuck to their windshield. All will get you out of a ticket. All cause "average Joe" New Jersey residents to be so anti-police it's crazy, but what do you expect? We have a sizable, and growing, class of drivers shielded from tickets. And yes, I've heard many cops from other states rightly look upon this situation as tacit corruption and a black eye to LE, but there isn't much we citizens can do. You can't STOP people (police unions) from printing up cards with names of them, right? Freedom of speech.

If you ever want to read more, go to the NJLawman.com forums and read about it. You'll see officers lambasting cops in states that don't give their relatives passes on tickets with their gold cards.

[TurboDan]

Wow...

Why am I trying to get a fancy degree? 

These days you WILL NOT get a police job (at least around here) without a bachelors. So many people have MAs these days that they really prefer to hire people with grad degrees, really.

[bing_oh]

In New Jersey, average police salary is $91K, without OT. With average OT factored in it's about $108K. This is common even for newer guys. In my town you make $95K after 6 years on. Not a bad gig at all. NJ has the country's highest-paid police. I realize in some other areas the pendulum swings far the other way and they are horribly underpaid.

That's definitely the exception to the rule. In Ohio, breaking $50k in most small to medium sized departments is doing good. If you work hard and suck up alot of OT, you might be able to break $60k. The south tends to be slightly lower in pay, but generally makes up for it in slightly lower cost of living. The extreme pay scales seem to be the higher-end areas of the coasts...California on the West Coast and anywhere from DC north on the East Coast.

[dazzleman]

You've never been to New Jersey. 

The union gives out cards that are colored depending on what "level" the card represents. There are gold "family cards" that are metal with the relative and officer's names both engraved, then "friend" cards that are laminated with the person's name (and the name of the officer who gave it to him/her) printed on it and then general cardboard cards. The "holy grail" is the "courtesy shield" which is literally a replica of a police agency's shield that is suction-cupped on the windshield of a relative or friend's car to get you a pass on whatever violation you may commit. About 1/4 of the cars I see driving in NJ have one of these things stuck to their windshield. All will get you out of a ticket. All cause "average Joe" New Jersey residents to be so anti-police it's crazy, but what do you expect? We have a sizable, and growing, class of drivers shielded from tickets. And yes, I've heard many cops from other states rightly look upon this situation as tacit corruption and a black eye to LE, but there isn't much we citizens can do. You can't STOP people (police unions) from printing up cards with names of them, right? Freedom of speech.

If you ever want to read more, go to the NJLawman.com forums and read about it. You'll see officers lambasting cops in states that don't give their relatives passes on tickets with their gold cards.

From what I understand, in New York, if a cop tickets a person with one of those 'get out of jail free' cards, he'll get a lot of crap for it.

There's a guy I work with who drives like a maniac.  Zero respect for the rules of the road.  He's been ticketed many times in the past, but now he has one of those cards from a friend of his.  He got pulled over recently and really deserved a ticket for safety reasons, but the cop let him off.  He told him that it was totally wrong that he wasn't getting a ticket, but that if he gave him one, he would catch a lot of crap.

It's that dirty corruption that makes the New York metro area such a special place.

[bing_oh]

These days you WILL NOT get a police job (at least around here) without a bachelors. So many people have MAs these days that they really prefer to hire people with grad degrees, really.

That's the pinnacle of stupidity. You don't need a graduate degree as a LEO. Realistically, you don't need a bachelor's degree. An associates degree will serve a normal street cop up to an entry-level supervisor very well (and much of that is probably still wasted). Maybe an advanced degree in admin or business if you're looking at a higher administrative position.

[TurboDan]

From what I understand, in New York, if a cop tickets a person with one of those 'get out of jail free' cards, he'll get a lot of crap for it.

It's customary in New Jersey that, if an officer does not honor the card, he'll be getting a call at his department by the cop who initially handed out the card, demanding an answer as to why it was not honored. It is also somewhat customary that the union rep of the officer who didn't honor the card will also be called so as to denigrate the "rouge" officer a bit and put him in his place.

[TurboDan]

That's the pinnacle of stupidity. You don't need a graduate degree as a LEO. Realistically, you don't need a bachelor's degree. An associates degree will serve a normal street cop up to an entry-level supervisor very well (and much of that is probably still wasted). Maybe an advanced degree in admin or business if you're looking at a higher administrative position.

I agree it's pretty stupid. The best candidate should get the job, degree or not. Around here it seems to be a supply/demand kind of deal. The shear number of people with degrees (and these days... grad degrees) makes a lot of departments want to get "the best" and use it as something of a way to weed through the applications. And as with most organizations, as a department gets staffed with people who have degrees and grad degrees, they're going to be looking for similar types of people to hire.

And to become an upper level supervisor, you BETTER have a grad degree! Some chiefs around here even have law degrees. I know one chief who retired from the PD and became the town attorney. I can think of another chief who retired and became the town administrator. It's very, very political.

[TBR]

How perverse must hound's logic be if he thinks it's a double standard to be against a double standard?

Mentioning that you have a relative who's a LEO, or that you're a LEO yourself, is not the same thing as apologizing/rationalizing/justifying/etc. Rather it's trying to get a different set of rules applied due to who you know. It's a double standard. It's cronyism.

It is not a perk. Tickets are and should be discretionary, but the violator's profession, much less the profession of a relative/friend, is not relevant. Making the decision based solely on who the individual is or who they know is a dereliction of duty.  A few years ago, back home the wife of the owner of all the local McDonalds was pulled over and tried to get out of a ticket based on the fact that her husband's restaurants provided free meals to officers. Obviously this is inappropriate (and caused a big stink when it failed and the husband complained to the Sheriff's office), but how is it any different from when a LEO flashes his badge when he's pulled over? In the past I have heard it justified as being like having an expense account or a company car, but that is not analogous at all. It is more like an auditor letting an accounting manipulation go because the CEO is a good friend. That's not discretion; it's bias.

[bing_oh]

How perverse must hound's logic be if he thinks it's a double standard to be against a double standard?

Mentioning that you have a relative who's a LEO, or that you're a LEO yourself, is not the same thing as apologizing/rationalizing/justifying/etc. Rather it's trying to get a different set of rules applied due to who you know. It's a double standard. It's cronyism.

It is not a perk. Tickets are and should be discretionary, but the violator's profession, much less the profession of a relative/friend, is not relevant. Making the decision based solely on who the individual is or who they know is a dereliction of duty.  A few years ago, back home the wife of the owner of all the local McDonalds was pulled over and tried to get out of a ticket based on the fact that her husband's restaurants provided free meals to officers. Obviously this is inappropriate (and caused a big stink when it failed and the husband complained to the Sheriff's office), but how is it any different from when a LEO flashes his badge when he's pulled over? In the past I have heard it justified as being like having an expense account or a company car, but that is not analogous at all. It is more like an auditor letting an accounting manipulation go because the CEO is a good friend. That's not discretion; it's bias.

Officers use countless little criteria when deciding whether or not to issue a citation for a traffic violation. It's no more bias giving an off-duty officer a warning for a violation that I would give to an average motorist than it is to give Joe Blow Citizen a warning because it's a nice spring day and I just happen to be in a good mood. When it comes to traffic violations, discretion is an accepted practice within the American justice system. Citizens can't expect discretionary enforcement for themselves but say it's not allowed with off-duty LEO's because it's a form of bias or corruption. It's either corruption when applied to everybody or it's not corruption.

Now, personally, I don't like the discretion displayed primarily in the northeastern US (PBA cards, courtesy shields, etc). Fortunately, it's not a common practice in my area (I believe I've encountered it once, and it was a non-issue with me as it was a minor equipment violation for which I'd pretty much always give a warning if the person is sober).

[TBR]

Officers use countless little criteria when deciding whether or not to issue a citation for a traffic violation. It's no more bias giving an off-duty officer a warning for a violation that I would give to an average motorist than it is to give Joe Blow Citizen a warning because it's a nice spring day and I just happen to be in a good mood. When it comes to traffic violations, discretion is an accepted practice within the American justice system. Citizens can't expect discretionary enforcement for themselves but say it's not allowed with off-duty LEO's because it's a form of bias or corruption. It's either corruption when applied to everybody or it's not corruption.

Now, personally, I don't like the discretion displayed primarily in the northeastern US (PBA cards, courtesy shields, etc). Fortunately, it's not a common practice in my area (I believe I've encountered it once, and it was a non-issue with me as it was a minor equipment violation for which I'd pretty much always give a warning if the person is sober).

I don't think you read my post very carefully. There's a difference between discretion and bias. To continue my example, if an auditor objectively evaluates a borderline accounting decision and decides it is not material then that's discretion. Without the objective evaluation it's just bias. I have no issue with LEOs and their family not automatically receiving tickets. That's not what I am suggesting. What I am suggesting is that the profession of someone who is pulled over should not be a factor in the decision whether or not to ticket him/her. It should not matter if you work with him/her; if he/she provides you with free food; if he/she is related to you, etc. Who the person is should not be relevant, but that clearly is not the case. There's plainly a double standard at play when LEOs feel that they can break the law when off duty with no repercussions.

[bing_oh]

I don't think you read my post very carefully. There's a difference between discretion and bias. To continue my example, if an auditor objectively evaluates a borderline accounting decision and decides it is not material then that's discretion. Without the objective evaluation it's just bias. I have no issue with LEOs and their family not automatically receiving tickets. That's not what I am suggesting. What I am suggesting is that the profession of someone who is pulled over should not be a factor in the decision whether or not to ticket him/her. It should not matter if you work with him/her; if he/she provides you with free food; if he/she is related to you, etc. Who the person is should not be relevant, but that clearly is not the case. There's plainly a double standard at play when LEOs feel that they can break the law when off duty with no repercussions.

Your assumption is that LEO's would have to act like robots, basing their enforcement on just a specific set of criteria and ignoring any and all personal bias. It's not gonna happen. If your best friend is a LEO and he pulls you over for speeding, do you honestly expect him to base his decision whether or not to write you a ticket solely on the criteria of the violation and not at least partially on your friendship? I suppose in a perfect world that might be the way it works, but it's just not true (and it's not true in anything...relationships effect everything we do in life, not just discretion by LEO's).

I'll openly admit that I have a personal bias for LEO's on traffic stops. I also have a personal bias for firefighters, doctors, nurses, active duty military, and my mother. I also have a personal bias for people who are polite, apologetic, and admit their violation. That's not to say that any of the above would get an automatic pass (except for mom)...the violation DOES have an effect on the final outcome...but they're more likely to get a warning.

[hounddog]

How perverse must hound's logic be if he thinks it's a double standard to be against a double standard?

Perverse? 

What is it with you pups and the melodramatics?

The anti-double standard was not what I was objecting to, but rather, others believing in a double standard for themselves by allowing breaks for citizens but not LEO.

Bing has adequately outlined my feelings and position on this topic.

[TBR]

Your assumption is that LEO's would have to act like robots, basing their enforcement on just a specific set of criteria and ignoring any and all personal bias. It's not gonna happen. If your best friend is a LEO and he pulls you over for speeding, do you honestly expect him to base his decision whether or not to write you a ticket solely on the criteria of the violation and not at least partially on your friendship? I suppose in a perfect world that might be the way it works, but it's just not true (and it's not true in anything...relationships effect everything we do in life, not just discretion by LEO's).

I'll openly admit that I have a personal bias for LEO's on traffic stops. I also have a personal bias for firefighters, doctors, nurses, active duty military, and my mother. I also have a personal bias for people who are polite, apologetic, and admit their violation. That's not to say that any of the above would get an automatic pass (except for mom)...the violation DOES have an effect on the final outcome...but they're more likely to get a warning.

My point is that LEOs should try to minimize this bias, not embrace it by giving it a fancy name ("professional courtesy") or justify it by calling it a perk (as a LEO on this board has done, it's just absurd). It is inappropriate, and LEOs should strive to separate their personal feelings about an individual from their professional obligation.

Again, it's a problem when a LEO feels he can go 20+ over the speed limit in his personal vehicle without repercussions (and this was cross state too, outside of his jurisdiction).

I don't think we're actually in disagreement here.

[Rupert]

So long as cops don't let other cops off when they do actual dangerous things off-duty and get caught, I don't see a problem. Obviously, Jersey has problems.

[James Young]

If these laws have merit and it?s to everybody?s benefit that these laws be obeyed why are not the LEOs held accountable?

LEOs don?t let other LEOs  rob, kidnap, or murder ? so why are traffic laws exempted from this? Could it be that many of these laws are not necessary, constructive, or fair, and the police inherently know this? Is it that many of these laws and their enforcement are more about making a buck for the sponsoring governments than they are about public safety?

Further, please don?t condescend to tell us that choosing to not cite another LEO is mere discretion potentially applicable to any citizen because the reality is that they get away with what the average citizen does not simply because they are LEOs. 

Perhaps the ultimate solution to professional courtesy is to trim back the laws to those that LEOs will enforce against other LEOs and see how that works out.

[TurboDan]

So long as cops don't let other cops off when they do actual dangerous things off-duty and get caught, I don't see a problem. Obviously, Jersey has problems.

We do, and unfortunately it's risen to the level where is has now jumped to dangerous things.

The bottom line is that it's a more of a hassle for an LEO to get a moving violation than most average citizens. There's administrative paperwork involved, etc. I don't think a speeding ticket should set back someone's career, so I understand a justification of not issuing tickets to fellow officers. Plus, the vast majority of us have things in common with other people of the same profession and we understand the ins and outs, and giving a colleague a ticket is just, well, mean (unless the guy is a complete jerk or something).

The issue I have is the "gold card," "courtesy shield" nonsense. Officers choosing not to issue tickets to other officers is fine by me, quite frankly, assuming it isn't DUI or truly intentional reckless driving. When you've extended that courtesy, however, to thousands of other people who are friends, relatives, etc., then I start to have a problem. It's a breath of fresh air hearing this crap doesn't go on to the same extent in other places. We have a very big problem here in New Jersey with this, and the fact that the media has picked up on it big time and it's common knowledge to average citizens brings extreme damage to the police-citizen relationship which is a shame. It also makes a sham out of the law, since you have a group that does not have to follow it.

Now technically, I as a citizen can fill out the same Uniform Title 39 Violation Traffic Summons that any police officer can and issue a "ticket" to anyone I want under NJ law. I've never taken the step to do this, but I certainly wouldn't hesitate in some circumstances. Technically, I could take a photo of the license plate and vehicle of every single car with a "courtesy shield" in the window and issue every one of those drivers a summons for obstructed view since the shield is technically illegal to place suction-cupped to your windshield. Only your registration sticker and EZPass transponder is allowed in NJ.

[dazzleman]

We do, and unfortunately it's risen to the level where is has now jumped to dangerous things.

The bottom line is that it's a more of a hassle for an LEO to get a moving violation than most average citizens. There's administrative paperwork involved, etc. I don't think a speeding ticket should set back someone's career, so I understand a justification of not issuing tickets to fellow officers. Plus, the vast majority of us have things in common with other people of the same profession and we understand the ins and outs, and giving a colleague a ticket is just, well, mean (unless the guy is a complete jerk or something).

The issue I have is the "gold card," "courtesy shield" nonsense. Officers choosing not to issue tickets to other officers is fine by me, quite frankly, assuming it isn't DUI or truly intentional reckless driving. When you've extended that courtesy, however, to thousands of other people who are friends, relatives, etc., then I start to have a problem. It's a breath of fresh air hearing this crap doesn't go on to the same extent in other places. We have a very big problem here in New Jersey with this, and the fact that the media has picked up on it big time and it's common knowledge to average citizens brings extreme damage to the police-citizen relationship which is a shame. It also makes a sham out of the law, since you have a group that does not have to follow it.

Now technically, I as a citizen can fill out the same Uniform Title 39 Violation Traffic Summons that any police officer can and issue a "ticket" to anyone I want under NJ law. I've never taken the step to do this, but I certainly wouldn't hesitate in some circumstances. Technically, I could take a photo of the license plate and vehicle of every single car with a "courtesy shield" in the window and issue every one of those drivers a summons for obstructed view since the shield is technically illegal to place suction-cupped to your windshield. Only your registration sticker and EZPass transponder is allowed in NJ.

It's not for nothing that New Jersey is known as the "Soprano state."  New Jersey is one of the most corrupt states in the country.

[TurboDan]

It's not for nothing that New Jersey is known as the "Soprano state."  New Jersey is one of the most corrupt states in the country.

The superintendent of schools in the town next to mine just got hauled off in cuffs yesterday. Apparently he took between $1 million and $2 million in bribes between 2002 and April 2010. Evidently his $234K/year salary wasn't enough. He put up his oceanfront house for bail.

[dazzleman]

The superintendent of schools in the town next to mine just got hauled off in cuffs yesterday. Apparently he took between $1 million and $2 million in bribes between 2002 and April 2010. Evidently his $234K/year salary wasn't enough. He put up his oceanfront house for bail.

Who was paying him the bribes?

The public needs to start paying closer attention and holding these politicians to account.  I think the artificial wealth of the past couple of decades lulled the public into a casual stupor, and made them less likely to oppose wasteful spending and outright corruption.  This nasty, unending recession could bring about a sea change.  Electing Christie was a good start but a lot more needs to be done.  I'm praying that the legislature in my state gets massacred on election day.

[Vinsanity]

If these laws have merit and it’s to everybody’s benefit that these laws be obeyed why are not the LEOs held accountable?

LEOs don’t let other LEOs  rob, kidnap, or murder — so why are traffic laws exempted from this? Could it be that many of these laws are not necessary, constructive, or fair, and the police inherently know this? Is it that many of these laws and their enforcement are more about making a buck for the sponsoring governments than they are about public safety?

Further, please don’t condescend to tell us that choosing to not cite another LEO is mere discretion potentially applicable to any citizen because the reality is that they get away with what the average citizen does not simply because they are LEOs. 

Perhaps the ultimate solution to professional courtesy is to trim back the laws to those that LEOs will enforce against other LEOs and see how that works out.

The main problem I have is the pretense that laws like the speed limit are for the benefit of public safety. If that were true, then there should be no issue with cops and their friends/family getting speeding tickets like everybody else.

[hounddog]

The main problem I have is the pretense that laws like the speed limit are for the benefit of public safety. If that were true, then there should be no issue with cops and their friends/family getting speeding tickets like everybody else.

In a simplistic, perfect world perhaps.