RatTruck440
Well-known member
The cops are used to bilk us out of our coin to help finance their respective Governments. Fair is fair if you ask me.
http://www.speedtrap.org/
http://www.speedtrap.org/
Local speed traps website
- Thread starter RatTruck440
- Start date
Help Support Rat Rods Rule:
FlatbedAndy
Well-known member
Try to drive no more than 5-7 over limit I bought a GPS that shows my speed and the speed limit, otherwise dint know what the limit was.
Torch
Extremely dangerous with a torch!!!
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,627
Knock on wood I haven't had a ticket in years and I have no working speedometer in my truck.
I just do a little slower than everyone else or the same speed just fast enough to blend in not enough to stand out.
When i get pulled over and the officer asked if I know how fast I was going I say "not exactly just a little slower than everyone else".
they might ask why and i tell them straight out
"the speedo broke and I don't have it fixed yet so i just stay out of trouble, why push it,,, 10 mph over the speed limit gains you 10 minutes on a 1 hour trip...is that worth getting a ticket over? no just drive slow and get there the same time."
They like that... My having a cdl might also gain me some cred as a professional driver and carries the implication i'm not going to just pay the ticket without trying to get out of it. I'll take a faulty equipment ticket over a moving violation any day.
One reason for asking you if you knew how fast you were going is to get a confession. another reason is if you were speeding excessively and admitted to knowing it, that makes it willful and reckless.
The officers primary purpose is to check you out or warrants and make sure you have a license insurance and registration and are not on a wanted list or transporting drugs.... then it's to bring you into compliance and make the road safer, even if the officer does have ticket quotas to meet.
If it's a close call who's right, you or the officer it is a step of good faith to send in the fine to the court without making a plea but instead asking the prosecutor or the court to hear your side of the story out of court before the trial and review the charge against you and consider dropping it.
Now when most people try to get out of a ticket the court assumes they are trying to avoid the penalty.
If you pay the fine and ask for review of the charge there is a chance that if you did not admit guilt to the officer and did not make evidence against yourself that your word being against his...the fine will be accepted by the court and the charge might be dropped.
Your still innocent until proven guilty or until you admit guilt.
The court has an interest in clearing the docket and avoiding trials. The court is going to know if you are a repeat offender.
The side of the road is no place to argue your case
Anytime you can settle a case before it goes to trial and becomes public record it is in your best interest.
I just do a little slower than everyone else or the same speed just fast enough to blend in not enough to stand out.
When i get pulled over and the officer asked if I know how fast I was going I say "not exactly just a little slower than everyone else".
they might ask why and i tell them straight out
"the speedo broke and I don't have it fixed yet so i just stay out of trouble, why push it,,, 10 mph over the speed limit gains you 10 minutes on a 1 hour trip...is that worth getting a ticket over? no just drive slow and get there the same time."
They like that... My having a cdl might also gain me some cred as a professional driver and carries the implication i'm not going to just pay the ticket without trying to get out of it. I'll take a faulty equipment ticket over a moving violation any day.
One reason for asking you if you knew how fast you were going is to get a confession. another reason is if you were speeding excessively and admitted to knowing it, that makes it willful and reckless.
The officers primary purpose is to check you out or warrants and make sure you have a license insurance and registration and are not on a wanted list or transporting drugs.... then it's to bring you into compliance and make the road safer, even if the officer does have ticket quotas to meet.
If it's a close call who's right, you or the officer it is a step of good faith to send in the fine to the court without making a plea but instead asking the prosecutor or the court to hear your side of the story out of court before the trial and review the charge against you and consider dropping it.
Now when most people try to get out of a ticket the court assumes they are trying to avoid the penalty.
If you pay the fine and ask for review of the charge there is a chance that if you did not admit guilt to the officer and did not make evidence against yourself that your word being against his...the fine will be accepted by the court and the charge might be dropped.
Your still innocent until proven guilty or until you admit guilt.
The court has an interest in clearing the docket and avoiding trials. The court is going to know if you are a repeat offender.
The side of the road is no place to argue your case
Anytime you can settle a case before it goes to trial and becomes public record it is in your best interest.
Crossfire
Well-known member
Speed traps
Here in Florida we have a small town that was listed in the national AAA magazine as a place to avoid. This city has billboards on each end of town stating they will stop you. If you ever travel hwy 301 in Fla. you will see their cops always have cars pulled over day or night.
Here in Florida we have a small town that was listed in the national AAA magazine as a place to avoid. This city has billboards on each end of town stating they will stop you. If you ever travel hwy 301 in Fla. you will see their cops always have cars pulled over day or night.
Dont know if its still like this but..
30 years ago, I used to travel allot in my 49 Plymouth, and the worst speedtraps, contrary to the steriotypical small southern town is Illinois. Those dudes were tricky as hell along interstate 57 from South Chicago all the way southern Ill.
30 years ago, I used to travel allot in my 49 Plymouth, and the worst speedtraps, contrary to the steriotypical small southern town is Illinois. Those dudes were tricky as hell along interstate 57 from South Chicago all the way southern Ill.
Contrary to popular belief there are no "quotas" for law enforcement. All of the revenue goes into the states general fund which pays for everything the state pays for. Believe me there is enough other stuff going on that will generate a ton of paperwork that we would rather be doing than giving out citations. On an aveage shift (10 hours) I would be pulling over an average of 15 cars a night. I will usually only give out 1 - 2 citations and the rest are written or verbal warnings. We are, as stated above, interested in 2 things, 1; by pulling you over we are stopping the infraction and hope to remind you to not do it again usually without a citation, and 2; looking for the more prominent crimes ie: drugs, DWI, warrants and wants etc. Be polite, no arguments, put us at ease by always having your hands visable, and you will most likely get away with a warning. happy hot rodding!
John T. Hodgen
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2010
- Messages
- 81
Hwy 19 thru Summersville, Wv. It says 50 mph, you better be doing 50. Or less.
Torch
Extremely dangerous with a torch!!!
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,627
Not to offend
Sorry. I didn't mean quotas as in go out and write so many pay us tickets for this and that.
I meant it as in records keeping and such. I'm not a police officer myself and I don't know the correct vernacular. My cousins are and while they are not required to write so many tickets they are expected to keep up a good record of might I call them public contacts?
I do know that as a trucker while not required to give out so many tickets the commercial enforcement and some of the bears out there are required to perform a minimum number of inspections and credential audits.
One of the policies I take umbrage with is when your rolling along doing what your supposed to be doing and you get pulled over for a random dot inspection... but not at the scale house..on the side of the road where it's dangerous.
one day I was rolling through Ind. on I-64. According to the word on the CB between the 20 mile marker and the Illinois state line there were about 5-6 or more local, county, and state bears shooting lazer and pulling over trucks and doing shoulder inspections.
The speed limit was 65mph.
I came through doing 63.
One Indiana State trooper in an unmarked approached from behind and planted his cruiser at my trailer tires for several miles.
He was wandering a little and getting very close to my rig and crossing the line. I didn't know if he was busy or trying to shake me into wandering, I just kept it steady and straight perfectly between the lines.
I slowed to 55mph for several miles and he slowed.
I sped back up to 62 and he did too.
After a couple miles at 62 he hit his lights and pulled me over at the 3 mm.
All in all he had dogged me (without lights on) for about 10 miles prior to pulling me over
I got my logbook and license out and powered my windows down
Instead of him coming up tot he truck he called me to exit the drivers side and approach the rear of the vehicle.
When I started to walk back he was getting out of his cruiser and drawing his gun.
He told me to freeze and approached with the gun aimed about 1' to the left of my torso. he detained me and frisked me in the traffic lane of I-64 before ordering me to return to my seat and doing and inspection (with his gun still drawn but in the opposite hand and pointed down and away)
He accused me of speeding and asked me why I didn't pull over right away. It takes almost a mile to stop a semi at 60mph and I had a load of liquid feed supplement in 55 gallon drums on pallets in the trailer. dynamiting the brakes would be very expensive.
I don't know what caused his bad day but I do know that I almost got shot and almost got ran over because someone wanted to simply check my papers.
Another one was in Illinois.
I was going 57 between Mt Vernon and St Louis.
The officer had 68 mph locked in on his radar.
the speed limit there was 55 for trucks and 65 or cars. Cars were going 70.
The officer wanted to do a level III
He couldn't find anything to write me a ticket for and he wrote me a warning ticket for going 68 in a 55.
I didn't say anything because I didn't want him to write me a real ticket even if the warning was bogus
Sorry. I didn't mean quotas as in go out and write so many pay us tickets for this and that.
I meant it as in records keeping and such. I'm not a police officer myself and I don't know the correct vernacular. My cousins are and while they are not required to write so many tickets they are expected to keep up a good record of might I call them public contacts?
I do know that as a trucker while not required to give out so many tickets the commercial enforcement and some of the bears out there are required to perform a minimum number of inspections and credential audits.
One of the policies I take umbrage with is when your rolling along doing what your supposed to be doing and you get pulled over for a random dot inspection... but not at the scale house..on the side of the road where it's dangerous.
one day I was rolling through Ind. on I-64. According to the word on the CB between the 20 mile marker and the Illinois state line there were about 5-6 or more local, county, and state bears shooting lazer and pulling over trucks and doing shoulder inspections.
The speed limit was 65mph.
I came through doing 63.
One Indiana State trooper in an unmarked approached from behind and planted his cruiser at my trailer tires for several miles.
He was wandering a little and getting very close to my rig and crossing the line. I didn't know if he was busy or trying to shake me into wandering, I just kept it steady and straight perfectly between the lines.
I slowed to 55mph for several miles and he slowed.
I sped back up to 62 and he did too.
After a couple miles at 62 he hit his lights and pulled me over at the 3 mm.
All in all he had dogged me (without lights on) for about 10 miles prior to pulling me over
I got my logbook and license out and powered my windows down
Instead of him coming up tot he truck he called me to exit the drivers side and approach the rear of the vehicle.
When I started to walk back he was getting out of his cruiser and drawing his gun.
He told me to freeze and approached with the gun aimed about 1' to the left of my torso. he detained me and frisked me in the traffic lane of I-64 before ordering me to return to my seat and doing and inspection (with his gun still drawn but in the opposite hand and pointed down and away)
He accused me of speeding and asked me why I didn't pull over right away. It takes almost a mile to stop a semi at 60mph and I had a load of liquid feed supplement in 55 gallon drums on pallets in the trailer. dynamiting the brakes would be very expensive.
I don't know what caused his bad day but I do know that I almost got shot and almost got ran over because someone wanted to simply check my papers.
Another one was in Illinois.
I was going 57 between Mt Vernon and St Louis.
The officer had 68 mph locked in on his radar.
the speed limit there was 55 for trucks and 65 or cars. Cars were going 70.
The officer wanted to do a level III
He couldn't find anything to write me a ticket for and he wrote me a warning ticket for going 68 in a 55.
I didn't say anything because I didn't want him to write me a real ticket even if the warning was bogus
Torch
Extremely dangerous with a torch!!!
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,627
Why it happens
In these 2 examples I give, I was pulled over for a level III inspection.
A level 1 inspection is a full equipment inspection.
A level III inspection checks your license, registration, insurance, bills of lading, logbook, medical card etc. It is a document inspection.
You are by law required to turn over these documents and testify against yourself.
If the officer finds any flaw in the documentation there is no legal defense to the charge as you have testified against yourself and admitted guilt when providing the officer with the documents.
No way out, your papers better be perfect. if you make a clerical mistake it is classified as a falsification and you do not get to correct it.
One driver I knew who did not have the hazmat endorsement on his license was arrested and fined $2,000 for illegally hauling hazardous materials because he was a really dumb simpleton and placarded his load as dangerous when it was not hazmat.
The court decided that since he had placarded the load as hazardous he was testifying that it was... even though it factually and by the BOL was not... and "for the purposes of the charge against him" the judge ruled that "the load of dirty laundry shall be considered hazardous materials subject to haz-mat regulation" and gave him 60 days and a $2,000 fine.
In these 2 examples I give, I was pulled over for a level III inspection.
A level 1 inspection is a full equipment inspection.
A level III inspection checks your license, registration, insurance, bills of lading, logbook, medical card etc. It is a document inspection.
You are by law required to turn over these documents and testify against yourself.
If the officer finds any flaw in the documentation there is no legal defense to the charge as you have testified against yourself and admitted guilt when providing the officer with the documents.
No way out, your papers better be perfect. if you make a clerical mistake it is classified as a falsification and you do not get to correct it.
One driver I knew who did not have the hazmat endorsement on his license was arrested and fined $2,000 for illegally hauling hazardous materials because he was a really dumb simpleton and placarded his load as dangerous when it was not hazmat.
The court decided that since he had placarded the load as hazardous he was testifying that it was... even though it factually and by the BOL was not... and "for the purposes of the charge against him" the judge ruled that "the load of dirty laundry shall be considered hazardous materials subject to haz-mat regulation" and gave him 60 days and a $2,000 fine.
Torch
Extremely dangerous with a torch!!!
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,627
law encroachment and reasons for pulling you over
There are (in my opinion corrupt) administrative trends in law enforcement that relate to policy changes at the legislative level and also involve influence from activist groups and activist administration.
I have the highest respect for the officers on duty doing the best that they can, caught in the middle between the bad guys and the bad laws.
DOT officers need no excuse to pull over a CMV and they do not give an reason. they simply pull you over and ask for your papers.
If you ask them why they pulled you over you will not get an answer you will be ordered to comply with the inspection and after a search they will charge you or issue you a statement of compliance and release you.
The color of authority for unwarranted searches comes from your willingly accepting license to drive a CMV subject to these peculiar circumstances and regulations.
The next step is applying these practices to all motorists.
Law Encroachment effects minority classifications of the public first and are generally accepted by the majority as they become commonplace.
"If your not doing anything wrong than you have nothing to fear from us having a peek".
The problem with that is the scope of what is classified as "wrong" is progressive. As society learns to adhere to stricter standards, new and stricter standards must be invented so the legislators can act like they "are doing something about that issue".
If you accept the argument that very serious consequences and very strict enforcement are required as a deterrent in a world where it is difficult to not just solve every crime but even know that a crime has been committed...
You would have to accept the conclusion that as technology and knowledge increase, Law Enforcements ability to identify offenses and get convictions increases.
And as law enforcement becomes more able, the burden of that enforcement on the public should diminish.
By the public I mean everyone...with no distinctions made between good guys and bad guys.
What we have instead is ever efficient enforcement and increasingly progressive legislation that is criminalizing more and more of the population than ever before.
America did have a liberal and possibly Christian revolution where we adopted a policy of mercy and reform where we once just "strung em up by the neck"
Who is being considered a "bad guy" is becoming a broader definition and more and more of us become criminalized by progressive regulation, or as I prefer to call it Law Encroachment.
Now that other branches of law enforcement have been given permission to perform DOT inspections you get pulled over a lot more and it is not always as professional as it is with a commercial vehicle specialist.
One of the things that effects an officers performance rating is if he is writing good or bad tickets.
The officer has an interest in not having an abnormal % of defendants being found not-guilty.
I don't mean bad tickets in the sense that they are fabricated or falsified just in the sense that the court can't make them stick.
Since the advent of GPS and computerized trucks it is possible to document your speed at any given time and successfully win a case over a speeding ticket, even if the vehicle had a momentary surge of speed in excess of limits.
More and more truckers and trucking companies are successfully beating these tickets.
What once had been a policy of fishing for speed violations has evolved into abandoning the speeding tickets except for the serious offenders and instead fishing for paperwork violations.
remember... there is no defense against testifying against yourself
A warning ticket cannot be proven wrong because it carries no legal jeopardy and will not be argued in court.
A warning establishes that it has been deemed that you did commit the offense but will not be charged.
You have no defense against a warning ticket.
Warnings carry no direct legal jeopardy
Warnings being without legal jeopardy however are not without commercial jeopardy.
Law enforcement can review your record of warnings when making a determination if you should get another warning or be charged this time.
Insurance companies consider warnings as they affect your personal and your carrier's safety rating established by the DOT.
And the records of warnings are maintained against your license and against your carrier's authority.
Currently these conditions only apply to commercial drivers but I predict will eventually effect everyone. what's fair for one is fair for all.
There are (in my opinion corrupt) administrative trends in law enforcement that relate to policy changes at the legislative level and also involve influence from activist groups and activist administration.
I have the highest respect for the officers on duty doing the best that they can, caught in the middle between the bad guys and the bad laws.
DOT officers need no excuse to pull over a CMV and they do not give an reason. they simply pull you over and ask for your papers.
If you ask them why they pulled you over you will not get an answer you will be ordered to comply with the inspection and after a search they will charge you or issue you a statement of compliance and release you.
The color of authority for unwarranted searches comes from your willingly accepting license to drive a CMV subject to these peculiar circumstances and regulations.
The next step is applying these practices to all motorists.
Law Encroachment effects minority classifications of the public first and are generally accepted by the majority as they become commonplace.
"If your not doing anything wrong than you have nothing to fear from us having a peek".
The problem with that is the scope of what is classified as "wrong" is progressive. As society learns to adhere to stricter standards, new and stricter standards must be invented so the legislators can act like they "are doing something about that issue".
If you accept the argument that very serious consequences and very strict enforcement are required as a deterrent in a world where it is difficult to not just solve every crime but even know that a crime has been committed...
You would have to accept the conclusion that as technology and knowledge increase, Law Enforcements ability to identify offenses and get convictions increases.
And as law enforcement becomes more able, the burden of that enforcement on the public should diminish.
By the public I mean everyone...with no distinctions made between good guys and bad guys.
What we have instead is ever efficient enforcement and increasingly progressive legislation that is criminalizing more and more of the population than ever before.
America did have a liberal and possibly Christian revolution where we adopted a policy of mercy and reform where we once just "strung em up by the neck"
Who is being considered a "bad guy" is becoming a broader definition and more and more of us become criminalized by progressive regulation, or as I prefer to call it Law Encroachment.
Now that other branches of law enforcement have been given permission to perform DOT inspections you get pulled over a lot more and it is not always as professional as it is with a commercial vehicle specialist.
One of the things that effects an officers performance rating is if he is writing good or bad tickets.
The officer has an interest in not having an abnormal % of defendants being found not-guilty.
I don't mean bad tickets in the sense that they are fabricated or falsified just in the sense that the court can't make them stick.
Since the advent of GPS and computerized trucks it is possible to document your speed at any given time and successfully win a case over a speeding ticket, even if the vehicle had a momentary surge of speed in excess of limits.
More and more truckers and trucking companies are successfully beating these tickets.
What once had been a policy of fishing for speed violations has evolved into abandoning the speeding tickets except for the serious offenders and instead fishing for paperwork violations.
remember... there is no defense against testifying against yourself
A warning ticket cannot be proven wrong because it carries no legal jeopardy and will not be argued in court.
A warning establishes that it has been deemed that you did commit the offense but will not be charged.
You have no defense against a warning ticket.
Warnings carry no direct legal jeopardy
Warnings being without legal jeopardy however are not without commercial jeopardy.
Law enforcement can review your record of warnings when making a determination if you should get another warning or be charged this time.
Insurance companies consider warnings as they affect your personal and your carrier's safety rating established by the DOT.
And the records of warnings are maintained against your license and against your carrier's authority.
Currently these conditions only apply to commercial drivers but I predict will eventually effect everyone. what's fair for one is fair for all.
Torch
Extremely dangerous with a torch!!!
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,627
Warnings and data collection- legislators
When legislators prepare to write a bill (when they aren't rubber stamping them) they require a lot of information.
They need to identify trends to justify the legislation.
One of the ways of identifying trends is through data collection by law enforcement and regulators.
This data is shaped by many forces, the primary forces for this argument are:
1) The procedures implementing the data's collection.
2) How the data is presented.
Collection:
Once upon a time a fact of law was established by due process. There would need to be documentation, a witness, an accusation, a defense, a determination of guilt or innocence by a jury and a judicial ruling to establish a legal fact. essentially facts were proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Today... Anyone who is in authority may in certain but broadening circumstances "DEEM" any statement as fact. the requirement for proof has been thrown out, It is true because they have or a peer has said it is true.
In many cases proof is not thrown out by the authorities but by the those subject to that authority...unknowingly (subject used loosely-we in America are citizens, not subjects).
Although the accused is deemed to be innocent until proven guilty...
Once you make a statement about yourself it is deemed to be true until proven false.
When you get in an accident officers are required to ask certain questions...
Were you wearing a seatbelt? were you smoking or drinking, listening to the radio, using a hand held or communications device, reading a map, etc.
You might not have been distracted, None of these activities may have contributed to the accident or have caused you to be distracted. The officer might tell you answering these questions will in no way be used against you and are simply a survey.
The officer is permitted to lie, and answering these questions can be used against you.
If you admit to engaging in any of the activities it will be DEEMED that you were distracted on the basis that these activities have a history of distracting some drivers without proof that the activity to which you admitted had in fact caused you to become distracted or otherwise engaged you away from your responsibilities in operating the vehicle or identifying hazards.
If you said no and the police decide to pull your cell phone records and find your phone was connected to a call or text... you now have committed a Martha Stewart. Lying to an officer (who can lawfully lie to you) is a major crime.
Your statement answering those questions can lead to a charge against you, can lead to a determination of negligence in a civil suit, and creates a record of a trend.
Someone is collecting and spinning that data...
Presentment:
lets say legislators or administration regulators want to advance the law.
Some people who can't talk and chew gum are getting in and causing some bad accidents and people are dying.
I'm not criticizing the necessity I'm highlighting the fraudulent method.
They try to pass a law and it gets shot down...
They instruct law enforcement from the top down to collect certain data.
law enforcement then collects a record of 5 million preventable fatality accidents...
And a record of 15 million unpreventable fatality accidents...
It is combined with...
A record of 20 million cell phone calls involving one of the drivers during those fatality accidents...
The circumstantial evidence becomes a statistic of fact establishing 20 million cell phone calls have caused 20 million fatal accidents and killed untold millions....without a shred of proof.
"We need to do something about that...now will you pass this law"
They have been trying to require truckers to have black boxes or EOBR electric on board recorders in the trucks like the airline industry is required to have. The police want the power to tap into these tattletales.
The attempt has been called out as a violation of privacy and an unwarranted search. The bills attempting to push this on the truckers have failed and have been called by legislators unconstitutional.
The legislators promoting this regulation, the regulators writing the laws for the legislators to pass and the officers enforcing the laws are in cahoots to get it passed.
the excuse used to justify the need is that drivers are falsifying their logbooks or blatantly operating illegally so it is necessary to put a tattle tale in the truck the drivers can't cheat.
Soon as the attempts to get these bills passed failed there was a surge in the statistic of logbook violations. Law enforcement began a full court press to write as many logbook tickets as they could find. Including the abuse of the warning ticket loophole. Officers began writing frivolous warning tickets in cases the logbook was actually filled out perfectly.
The objective is to build the statistic by any means necessary to justify the desired legislation.
Some of the trucking industry has made the concession that they would like the black boxes to be mandatory if it eliminated the requirement for the driver to keep a separate log because they would also prove compliance, not just prove non compliance.
But the legislators, regulators, and law enforcement do not want the black boxes and electronic log to replace the driver's log...they want to be able to compare it against the driver's log.
The purpose of this and other new regulation is not just safety and enforcement it is revenue generation.
I'm not saying the purpose for putting the warriors on the beat is to collect revenue. I'm just pointing out how the situation is taken advantage of by government to enrich and expand government.
When legislators prepare to write a bill (when they aren't rubber stamping them) they require a lot of information.
They need to identify trends to justify the legislation.
One of the ways of identifying trends is through data collection by law enforcement and regulators.
This data is shaped by many forces, the primary forces for this argument are:
1) The procedures implementing the data's collection.
2) How the data is presented.
Collection:
Once upon a time a fact of law was established by due process. There would need to be documentation, a witness, an accusation, a defense, a determination of guilt or innocence by a jury and a judicial ruling to establish a legal fact. essentially facts were proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Today... Anyone who is in authority may in certain but broadening circumstances "DEEM" any statement as fact. the requirement for proof has been thrown out, It is true because they have or a peer has said it is true.
In many cases proof is not thrown out by the authorities but by the those subject to that authority...unknowingly (subject used loosely-we in America are citizens, not subjects).
Although the accused is deemed to be innocent until proven guilty...
Once you make a statement about yourself it is deemed to be true until proven false.
When you get in an accident officers are required to ask certain questions...
Were you wearing a seatbelt? were you smoking or drinking, listening to the radio, using a hand held or communications device, reading a map, etc.
You might not have been distracted, None of these activities may have contributed to the accident or have caused you to be distracted. The officer might tell you answering these questions will in no way be used against you and are simply a survey.
The officer is permitted to lie, and answering these questions can be used against you.
If you admit to engaging in any of the activities it will be DEEMED that you were distracted on the basis that these activities have a history of distracting some drivers without proof that the activity to which you admitted had in fact caused you to become distracted or otherwise engaged you away from your responsibilities in operating the vehicle or identifying hazards.
If you said no and the police decide to pull your cell phone records and find your phone was connected to a call or text... you now have committed a Martha Stewart. Lying to an officer (who can lawfully lie to you) is a major crime.
Your statement answering those questions can lead to a charge against you, can lead to a determination of negligence in a civil suit, and creates a record of a trend.
Someone is collecting and spinning that data...
Presentment:
lets say legislators or administration regulators want to advance the law.
Some people who can't talk and chew gum are getting in and causing some bad accidents and people are dying.
I'm not criticizing the necessity I'm highlighting the fraudulent method.
They try to pass a law and it gets shot down...
They instruct law enforcement from the top down to collect certain data.
law enforcement then collects a record of 5 million preventable fatality accidents...
And a record of 15 million unpreventable fatality accidents...
It is combined with...
A record of 20 million cell phone calls involving one of the drivers during those fatality accidents...
The circumstantial evidence becomes a statistic of fact establishing 20 million cell phone calls have caused 20 million fatal accidents and killed untold millions....without a shred of proof.
"We need to do something about that...now will you pass this law"
They have been trying to require truckers to have black boxes or EOBR electric on board recorders in the trucks like the airline industry is required to have. The police want the power to tap into these tattletales.
The attempt has been called out as a violation of privacy and an unwarranted search. The bills attempting to push this on the truckers have failed and have been called by legislators unconstitutional.
The legislators promoting this regulation, the regulators writing the laws for the legislators to pass and the officers enforcing the laws are in cahoots to get it passed.
the excuse used to justify the need is that drivers are falsifying their logbooks or blatantly operating illegally so it is necessary to put a tattle tale in the truck the drivers can't cheat.
Soon as the attempts to get these bills passed failed there was a surge in the statistic of logbook violations. Law enforcement began a full court press to write as many logbook tickets as they could find. Including the abuse of the warning ticket loophole. Officers began writing frivolous warning tickets in cases the logbook was actually filled out perfectly.
The objective is to build the statistic by any means necessary to justify the desired legislation.
Some of the trucking industry has made the concession that they would like the black boxes to be mandatory if it eliminated the requirement for the driver to keep a separate log because they would also prove compliance, not just prove non compliance.
But the legislators, regulators, and law enforcement do not want the black boxes and electronic log to replace the driver's log...they want to be able to compare it against the driver's log.
The purpose of this and other new regulation is not just safety and enforcement it is revenue generation.
I'm not saying the purpose for putting the warriors on the beat is to collect revenue. I'm just pointing out how the situation is taken advantage of by government to enrich and expand government.
This has always been my experiance.
I generally have always had pleasant pullovers with cops. But, like you mentioned, I have always been respectful and put the officer at ease that I was no threat. In fact, one a few years ago, was very gracious to me because I had a concealed hand gun in the car. When he came to the window, I kept both hands on my steering wheel and calmly informed him that I had a concealed weapon permit and there was one in the car. I told him where it was, and kept my hands on the wheel. He expressed thanks for letting him know that several times, and checked my drivers and my concealed weapon license. He let me go with a warning.
Being pulled over 20-30 times over the past 34 or so years, only gotten an actual ticket maybe 4 times. Most cops are actually scared to pull over cars (no disrespect to you) so putting their fears at ease, and a little respect for what they do does get ya a long way.
I generally have always had pleasant pullovers with cops. But, like you mentioned, I have always been respectful and put the officer at ease that I was no threat. In fact, one a few years ago, was very gracious to me because I had a concealed hand gun in the car. When he came to the window, I kept both hands on my steering wheel and calmly informed him that I had a concealed weapon permit and there was one in the car. I told him where it was, and kept my hands on the wheel. He expressed thanks for letting him know that several times, and checked my drivers and my concealed weapon license. He let me go with a warning.
Being pulled over 20-30 times over the past 34 or so years, only gotten an actual ticket maybe 4 times. Most cops are actually scared to pull over cars (no disrespect to you) so putting their fears at ease, and a little respect for what they do does get ya a long way.
Contrary to popular belief there are no "quotas" for law enforcement. All of the revenue goes into the states general fund which pays for everything the state pays for. Believe me there is enough other stuff going on that will generate a ton of paperwork that we would rather be doing than giving out citations. On an aveage shift (10 hours) I would be pulling over an average of 15 cars a night. I will usually only give out 1 - 2 citations and the rest are written or verbal warnings. We are, as stated above, interested in 2 things, 1; by pulling you over we are stopping the infraction and hope to remind you to not do it again usually without a citation, and 2; looking for the more prominent crimes ie: drugs, DWI, warrants and wants etc. Be polite, no arguments, put us at ease by always having your hands visable, and you will most likely get away with a warning. happy hot rodding!
cantwell.colton
Rat Rod Philosopher
i got pulled over once in college doing 78 in a 55 -- its one of those spots where the speed limit changes from 65 to 55 for no real reason -- anyways - i knew i was doing it -- i was going to be late for a final -- the officer asked me if i knew i was speeding and i said yessir i have a final and i didnt want to be late -- he looked at me and chuckled and said -- well looks like youre going to be late -- he didnt give me a ticket and i was late -- but what he said made sense -- if youre running late and speeding - and get pulled over you ARE going to be late lol -- havent gone over the speed limit (on purpose) since then.
Well put tudor. It isn't that we are scared to pull a car over but that we don't know who is in the car. Until we determine that you are not that 1% nutcase out to get everyone we take every stop as a serious one. Sucks for john Q public but insures that I go home at the end of the day to my wife and kids. Case in point, pulled a car over, newer model, headlight out. Well dressed couple mid 30's, happy, smiling with no nervousness showing at all. Run their wants and warrants. 4 extriditable felony warrants out of 2 different western states on the male driver (we are on the east coast). I didn't have any indicators that they were damngerous people. Needless to say it turned into a full felony stop/arrest from there. So we, at least in my town, are not out to hassle. just do as tudor here said and all will be good.[cl
Yeah, "Scared" was really the wrong word, maybe "apprehensive" "On alert" or "cautious" would have been better.. But, like ya said, ya never know when walking up to a car of unknown. I have a couple close friends that are cops, and they do have some stories to tell for sure.. Some scary, and some pretty damn funny...
speaking of funny, as a civilian I had an officer pull a gun on me over a set of pliers. I had an s10, cap on the back, at dusk, pulled over for speeding. He comes up and I tell him that the reg is in the glove box. he say get it. as I swing the glove box open he suddenly backs off, gun drawn, freeze etc. I do as I'm told. He asks if I have a gun in the box. I say no, all that is in there is a square nosed set of pliers. after double checking he apologizes and we both kind of laugh because after I loked from his view point they did look like the end of a gun due to the "blued" look to them. I got off with a warning. [cl
I ran into him 6 months later at a wedding. He says his dept hadn't let him off the hook about the story. Every time he goes out they say " got your vest on? might be some pliers out there!"
I ran into him 6 months later at a wedding. He says his dept hadn't let him off the hook about the story. Every time he goes out they say " got your vest on? might be some pliers out there!"
I've beat tickets..
On countless occasions, I have beat a ticket with subtle, dorky humor. I have always been sort of a jokester anyway and I found humor not aimed at the cop, but aimed more at myself many times lightens the mood of an otherwise tense situation.
One such times was when I was younger, I was in the Aero Club to gain a single engine privates pilots cert. I was pulled over one day going about 20+ over the posted limit. The cop that came to the window was and older cop and thinking he would get the sarcastic drop on me asked me, "Why are you flying down this road like that? Let me see your pilot's license...", so, you guessed it, I casually reached for my wallet, thumbing through it, and removed my pilots cert card and handed it to the officer. He looked at it, and I can tell by his face, that all that was on his mind is "how the hell am I gonna come away from this without egg on my face...". He looked it over good, then looked up and said "thank you very much son. Now, if I could also see your driver's license, we can wrap this up for ya.. .". He handed it back to me shaking his head slightly as if to say "well, I did ask for it..". I then offered him my driver's licence never missing a beat. he looked it over, then handed me it back with a "ya got me grin" and said, "Gonna let ya slide today... Be safe... " and that was it.. I think the subtle humor saved me on that one..
Another one, it was around 3am. I was on graveyard shift in my shop (I was an aircraft electrician in the Air Force). I stopped by a 7/11 just outside the gate to pick up a snack. Upon leaving, I ran the red light at that intersection, because there was no other cars or signs of life around. Came to the next light, and also rolled through it for the same reason (remember it was 3am on a weekday). I see the lights behind me and get pulled over. The cop said, "I pulled you over, because you just rolled through that red light". I replied "Yes, sir, I realized that too late. I just stopped to get a snack and was reaching in the potato chip bag and didn't notice the light changing.." The cop replied, "fair enough, but while we are on the subject, you also ran the one at the previous intersection too...." I was caught.. All I could say, "It's a big bag of chips?"... He laughed, and believe it or not, let me off on a warning..
On countless occasions, I have beat a ticket with subtle, dorky humor. I have always been sort of a jokester anyway and I found humor not aimed at the cop, but aimed more at myself many times lightens the mood of an otherwise tense situation.
One such times was when I was younger, I was in the Aero Club to gain a single engine privates pilots cert. I was pulled over one day going about 20+ over the posted limit. The cop that came to the window was and older cop and thinking he would get the sarcastic drop on me asked me, "Why are you flying down this road like that? Let me see your pilot's license...", so, you guessed it, I casually reached for my wallet, thumbing through it, and removed my pilots cert card and handed it to the officer. He looked at it, and I can tell by his face, that all that was on his mind is "how the hell am I gonna come away from this without egg on my face...". He looked it over good, then looked up and said "thank you very much son. Now, if I could also see your driver's license, we can wrap this up for ya.. .". He handed it back to me shaking his head slightly as if to say "well, I did ask for it..". I then offered him my driver's licence never missing a beat. he looked it over, then handed me it back with a "ya got me grin" and said, "Gonna let ya slide today... Be safe... " and that was it.. I think the subtle humor saved me on that one..
Another one, it was around 3am. I was on graveyard shift in my shop (I was an aircraft electrician in the Air Force). I stopped by a 7/11 just outside the gate to pick up a snack. Upon leaving, I ran the red light at that intersection, because there was no other cars or signs of life around. Came to the next light, and also rolled through it for the same reason (remember it was 3am on a weekday). I see the lights behind me and get pulled over. The cop said, "I pulled you over, because you just rolled through that red light". I replied "Yes, sir, I realized that too late. I just stopped to get a snack and was reaching in the potato chip bag and didn't notice the light changing.." The cop replied, "fair enough, but while we are on the subject, you also ran the one at the previous intersection too...." I was caught.. All I could say, "It's a big bag of chips?"... He laughed, and believe it or not, let me off on a warning..
Torch
Extremely dangerous with a torch!!!
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,627
Good stories... I have no idea why the one trooper that pulled me over was so worked up but at least he knew how to handle a weapon... he had that thing out and ready but not exactly right at me. He prolly could have put me down in about 1/100th of a second though if he decided he needed to.
I was slightly more relieved when I saw he wasn't pointing it right at me
I was more worried about a daydreaming driver running me over.
I'll say it again..I have no disrespect for the officers even though I disagree with the way the system does things.
I have occasional nightmares of epic fail... the kind like when you were a kid and falling...or drowning... only now it's your an adult in some situation and peoples lives and property are depending on you and in the nightmare you try everything to no avail and it ends quite bad...
I've seen some bad stuff and been there when people have died (not from me)
I think I have a little post traumatic stress...PTS not PTSD it ain't a disorder the fear and stress that keeps you sharp in danger doesn't get forgotten and dissipate as fast as the memories of what brought on that stress.
That's just a normal fact.
When your in the S&%t you don't notice and later when everything is quiet it doesn't make any sense why you feel that way.
I think it's just a taste of what the soldiers and bears go through in their jobs...I don't relish it, my hats off.
I was slightly more relieved when I saw he wasn't pointing it right at me
I was more worried about a daydreaming driver running me over.
I'll say it again..I have no disrespect for the officers even though I disagree with the way the system does things.
I have occasional nightmares of epic fail... the kind like when you were a kid and falling...or drowning... only now it's your an adult in some situation and peoples lives and property are depending on you and in the nightmare you try everything to no avail and it ends quite bad...
I've seen some bad stuff and been there when people have died (not from me)
I think I have a little post traumatic stress...PTS not PTSD it ain't a disorder the fear and stress that keeps you sharp in danger doesn't get forgotten and dissipate as fast as the memories of what brought on that stress.
That's just a normal fact.
When your in the S&%t you don't notice and later when everything is quiet it doesn't make any sense why you feel that way.
I think it's just a taste of what the soldiers and bears go through in their jobs...I don't relish it, my hats off.
gassersgarage
The California Kid
Funny, I worked a commercial enforcement car for awhile. I hate doing traffic, but it was a self scheduling car so I could have weekends off. I actually let more people go than I cited, but still wrote 1500 cites in 6 months. These were reserved for people that lied, gave me an excuse or hard time. Most of the people were pleasant to deal with.
