Defense for LEO tailgating?

[bing_oh]

I usually give them a tap from behind just so they know who is boss.

Actually, I've discovered that push bumpers can take an impact between 20-25 mph. You've gotta "tap" with authority, damnit!

[TurboDan]

I usually give them a tap from behind just so they know who is boss.

Yeah. Buddy!

[Rupert]

I can tell when Dan has been drinking, because all of his posts suddenly contain some iteration of, "yeah, buddy".

[rohan]

Really?  That sucks.  I mean, I know it's extra, but I thought it would be like mine; I get vision and dental for like $5 a month combined.

Our county just gutted our general employee (deputies and corrections) during the last contract negotiations in August.  Dropped dental completely- allows for up to $200 per employee with $200 more for entire family per year for optical.  General health coverage pay in for everyone is now the same:  $250 per month plus $50 per family member- $8k out of pocket and then insurance kicks in at 75% coverage.  Plus all non-life threatening treatments must be "pre-authorized."  So much for that "Cadillac Coverage" everyone claims public servants have.  At least the deputies receive no raises this year and 1.9% next and 2.9% in the last year of this new contract- removed education and retention incentives- removed uniform allowances/dry cleaning services and removed all OT/extra pay for K9 handlers.    I have a hard time believing we'll be able to retain many of our top performers at this point over the next year or 2.  I mean I can understand the county position because our individual insurance coverage costs about $16,200 per employee per year in the last quote we got but this seems a bit extreme.   New "coverage" will cost the county about $13k per employee. 

[TurboDan]

I can tell when Dan has been drinking, because all of his posts suddenly contain some iteration of, "yeah, buddy".

Hahaha. Yeah last night was a rough one.

[Rupert]

yeah buddy

[dazzleman]

yeah buddy

I like the "yeah buddy" type drunks.  They're a lot of fun. 

[Byteme]

Our county just gutted our general employee (deputies and corrections) during the last contract negotiations in August.  Dropped dental completely- allows for up to $200 per employee with $200 more for entire family per year for optical.  General health coverage pay in for everyone is now the same:  $250 per month plus $50 per family member- $8k out of pocket and then insurance kicks in at 75% coverage.  Plus all non-life threatening treatments must be "pre-authorized."  So much for that "Cadillac Coverage" everyone claims public servants have.  At least the deputies receive no raises this year and 1.9% next and 2.9% in the last year of this new contract- removed education and retention incentives- removed uniform allowances/dry cleaning services and removed all OT/extra pay for K9 handlers.    I have a hard time believing we'll be able to retain many of our top performers at this point over the next year or 2.  I mean I can understand the county position because our individual insurance coverage costs about $16,200 per employee per year in the last quote we got but this seems a bit extreme.   New "coverage" will cost the county about $13k per employee. 

But you still get the protection money and funds from shakedowns, right?


Just kidding

[rohan]

But you still get the protection money and funds from shakedowns, right?

Well duuuh!  We also get 10% of any tickets we write and $2.50 per arrest we make.    Doesn't help the insurance issues though. 

[Byteme]

Well duuuh!  We also get 10% of any tickets we write and $2.50 per arrest we make.    Doesn't help the insurance issues though. 

Good to see a sense of humor. 

[bing_oh]

Well duuuh!  We also get 10% of any tickets we write and $2.50 per arrest we make.    Doesn't help the insurance issues though.

You guys need to renegotiate that in your contract. We get 15% and our pay scale depends on the level of offense...I bought my new house on money for felony arrests!

[sparkplug]

You guys need to renegotiate that in your contract. We get 15% and our pay scale depends on the level of offense...I bought my new house on money for felony arrests!

must be union....

[TurboDan]

You guys need to renegotiate that in your contract. We get 15% and our pay scale depends on the level of offense...I bought my new house on money for felony arrests!

Ha, there actually was a local police chief around here back in the day who held contests over who could make the highest number of arrests during a warrant sweep. Quite the character. He's long retired now, but he taught at my college and I took a couple of his classes. Lots of good stories.

[bing_oh]

Ha, there actually was a local police chief around here back in the day who held contests over who could make the highest number of arrests during a warrant sweep. Quite the character. He's long retired now, but he taught at my college and I took a couple of his classes. Lots of good stories.

Reminds me of a time when one of my former departments had two new officers in field training at the same time, one with me, the other with another field training officer. Each year, we had a "picnic" (read "drunkfest"). So, the sgt. made it a competition who could get the most GOOD arrests (cheap pinches were verbotten!) during the course of the picnic. It was a good motivator for the two young guys, who were learning by doing, and encouraged things like contact with people (which is frequently a sticking point for new, inexperienced officers) and observation skills. There wasn't any "reward" beyond bragging rights, but it did motivate.

[r0tor]

Insinuating that there are "bad" arrests?

[bing_oh]

Insinuating that there are "bad" arrests?

Of course there's such a thing as a bad arrest. Cops are human. They make mistakes. There are also bad apples (though significantly fewer than some people would like to believe). I've never implied otherwise, let alone actually said so.

[Raza]

Of course there's such a thing as a bad arrest. Cops are human. They make mistakes. There are also bad apples (though significantly fewer than some people would like to believe). I've never implied otherwise, let alone actually said so.

They're all bad apples.  It's only a few that are rotten to the core, though.   

[bing_oh]

They're all bad apples.  It's only a few that are rotten to the core, though.   

Not my fault you don't like apples, Raza (and, as an extention, you also don't like mother's apple pie...YOU DAMN DIRTY COMMUNIST HEATHEN!!! ). Besides, I'm just as aspect of your personality made manifest, remember? So, which part of yourself do you hate? Hmmm...

[TBR]

I'm not going to dig through this entire thread again so i don't know if someone has asked since I last read it, but, to the board LEO's, if you bait someone into spending or whatever because you think something else might be going on do you let them off if you find that you were mistaken?

[bing_oh]

I'm not going to dig through this entire thread again so i don't know if someone has asked since I last read it, but, to the board LEO's, if you bait someone into spending or whatever because you think something else might be going on do you let them off if you find that you were mistaken?

How do you bait someone into speeding?

[rohan]

How do you bait someone into speeding?

Spending, he said. 

[Rich]

A buy 1 get 1 free sale?

[TBR]

How do you bait someone into speeding?

Is that not one of the justifications I saw for a LEO tailgating?

[GoCougs]

Is that not one of the justifications I saw for a LEO tailgating?

Oops.

[NomisR]

A buy 1 get 1 free sale?

free donut with a purchase of coffee

[bing_oh]

Is that not one of the justifications I saw for a LEO tailgating?

Not one that I gave...not even one of the smartass less-than serious ones.

In response to your original question, the answer is much like many answers in LE...it depends on the circumstances.

[Tave]

Not one that I gave...not even one of the smartass less-than serious ones.

Pretty sure it was.

There's nothing "cynical" about it...there are various tactics used to "encourage" a violation, usually as a pretext for a stop and contact. Drunks in particular respond to certain driving habits of the vehicles around them. Also, it's not unusual for me to get a bit closer to a vehicle to look for various things like the license plate expiration sticker.

Realize than an officer needs reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle. I can't stop a vehicle just because I think it's "suspicious," for example...I still need that violation. Driving behind someone for a period of time, maybe a little closer than usual, will frequently make them nervous enough to commit at least a small violation if I think they're up to no good and want a closer look.

He was on his way to a call that needed a rapid, but not emergency, response.
He was on his way to lunch and his girlfriend was gonna give him a zipper fuck.
He needed to take a major dump and you wouldn't get out of his frickin' way.
He was trying to make you paranoid enough to commit a violation because he thought you were a dirtbag.
His department has budget cuts and he was drafting to improve fuel economy.
He was bored and just felt like screwing with you.

[bing_oh]

Pretty sure it was.

I didn't say speeding, I said a violation.

[Tave]

I didn't say speeding, I said a violation.

Is speeding not a traffic violation? And is it not a predictable response to tailgating?

Regardless, "encouraging" people to commit potentially dangerous violations by committing a potentially dangerous violation yourself seems like an all-around shitty way to go about enforcing traffic safety. I get how it might lead to a successful fishing expedition, but it's the kind of underhanded, disingenuous tactic that causes people to lose respect for law enforcement in the first place.

[bing_oh]

Is speeding not a traffic violation? And is it not a predictable response to tailgating?

Speeding is a violation, but not all violations are speeding. Your logic is unsound. It's also not a predictable response for the normal driver when the vehicle behind them is a marked police car.

Regardless, "encouraging" people to commit potentially dangerous violations by committing a potentially dangerous violation yourself seems like an all-around shitty way to go about enforcing traffic safety. I get how it might lead to a successful fishing expedition, but it's the kind of underhanded, disingenuous tactic that causes people to lose respect for law enforcement in the first place.

Most "encouraged" violations are minor. Minor lane violations, no turn signal, etc. You make it sound like it's encouraging people to do donuts in the middle of a crowded school playground. In short, you're being overly dramatic about a LE tactic that few people understand or even recognize is being used, but that tends to get very good results in catching some of the most dangerous violators like DUI's.