I agree that wearing should be a law, but the way the police enforce it, like the way they enforce all traffic laws, is an obvious method of collecting revenue.  If they are sincere about, there should be a system where they issue warnings.  If a ticket is warrented, then fine.  But loose the attitude and show some respect, please.

I know this issue has been brought up and debated to death, but look around and watch how the police conduct themselves in public, especially on the street.  I’m always witnessing them breaking traffic laws.  They speed, make turns constantly without signaling, not coming to a full stop.  All of this in broad daylight.  I cringe when I think what they do when they know the public isn’t watching—like the time I came up on a cop sleeping in his squad car one night.  He was on private property (my landlords) and I caught that prick red-handed.  God, I wish I had a camera.

Here in Salt Lake City the have “no cruising” ordinances for down town.  One night I’m driving home and they have these sneering jack booted motorcycle thugs stopping traffic at checkpoints looking to bust teenagers who are out cruising.  For fuck sakes, this is Salt Lake City and these miserable little assholes have nothing better than to harass Mormons who also have nothing better to do.  I live downtown.  Traffic congestion is not a problem here, at all.  There has to be a better way to educate the public sans the harassment and ticket books.  That’s another issue.  When a cop pulls you over, you’re gonna get a ticket these days.  There’s no such thing as a friendly reminder.  It used to be, not so long ago, that an officer would make a stop and see if the driver has a reason and story, and determine if a ticket is warranted.  
Today’s police are mean spirited little men who want to issue tickets.  Like that pig that was driving at exactly the 65mph, the speed limit, in the passing lane on the freeway.  It was like the dickhead was daring people to pass by on the right. As a matter of fact, that’s exactly what he was doing.   If you did, that meant you’re speeding, and the shit head would pull you over and write you up.  I watched him do it and it was as pathetic as the cop I busted sleeping on the job.  There has to be a way to get back at bad cops like this.  But it has to be legal.  When a citizen witnesses a cop crossing the line, we should be able to nail them for it.  And it should stick.

God I wish there was more justice in this world.  There has to be a way we can stand up to the law and make a change.

Quoted: Oly---you forgot the millions that the feds pay the state because you are writing tickets for the laws that the feds blackmailed them into passing.....

Yeah, Click it or Ticket is a federal program, and they feds will pay to put officers on the street to do traffic enforcement.

Quoted: Quoted: Ahh yes, but what if they dont die? What about when they wind up on disability and your insurance company is paying them unemployment ergo driving up insurance rates. Therefore, old people should be prohibited from bathing because they fall & break their hips in their tubs and end up with either your insurance or (tax-funded)Medicare paying the doctor bills. Skydiving should be prohibited for the same reasons as driving w/o a seatbelt. Ditto rugby, skin diving, tree climbing, and diving into water.

YES!  Ban all those things!!!  They are too dangerous and people might hurt themselves.  I also think it reasonable to ban public shooting ranges unless a government-licensed Range Officer is on hand to ensure safe firearm handling!

-Nick Viejo.

its just frau Granholm's  way of saying thank you for electing me you stupid schmuks.
Heres more for you DAC....

A warning to all Michigan Residents

Subject: Surprise for Michigan residents Just to WARN everyone....I got
caught by the $10.00 tag renewal on 3 vehicles.  I went into the DMV on the
14th of Oct, after that Friday payday of 10/10/03 to renew my tags.

So this is a heads up.....you no longer have the "month" of your tags
(registration) expiration to renew....they must be renewed on or before the
FIRST DAY of the MONTH they expire. (It's on the list below)

The Clerk handed me a little Xerox slip of paper that told me since I
didn't renew the tags on or before the 1st of Oct....I was being charged
$10.00 per tag late fees.

My comment was - this is really sneaky - The State should warn the people
the first year, then apply the fine the next year. I had no knowledge of
this fine, before I walked into the DMV.  I had gotten a request from the
State to renew my tags by mail, and there was nothing in that letter that
implied there would be a fine.          Didn't work, I got fined $30.00.

http://www.motorists.com/pressreleases/michiganfines.html

New Fees Target Michigan Drivers

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 30, 2003

New Fees Target Michigan Drivers

On October 1, new fees, fines and surcharges aimed at generating more
revenue, at the expense of Michigan motorists, goes into effect. Most
drivers don't realize the full extent of the penalties coming their way.

Public Act 165 has instituted new "Driver Responsibility Fees" which
amounts to raised fines and surcharges on traffic tickets. If you have
seven points on your drivers license, you will be paying $100 each year for
two years. And, you will be paying an additional $50 per point for every
point above seven. If you're stopped and you can't present proof of
insurance, you must pay a $300 fine, even if you later prove you do have
insurance.

If you receive an Operating Under the Influence of Liquor (OUIL), not only
do you have to pay your fine, a new $40 surtax, and license reinstatement
fee, but you will also be getting a $1,000 bill each year for the next two
years (courtesy of Governor Granholm and Senator Gilbert).

This additional money will go to local governments and police, county
sheriffs, the State Police, the state General Fund and local fire
departments. This sets a dangerous precedent, as the agencies that issue
tickets will directly profit from them. "Guaranteeing police a share of
motorist fines will lead to further fine increases down the road," says
Eric Skrum of the National Motorists Association. "It creates a vested
interest effect: more police revenue equals more patrols, which equals more
tickets, which equals more revenue. The state legislature and city
governments are sure to put pressure on police agencies to issue more
tickets."

There will be serious unintended consequences. More tickets will make more
motorists subject to the points tax. As more drivers face annual fees of
several hundred dollars to keep their licenses, the poorest will respond by
not paying the fees. "The legislature rammed this through without
investigating the impacts," says Skrum. The points tax was borrowed from
New Jersey, but NMA reports that "In New Jersey, they call this program
'Debtor's Prison.' Poor drivers try driving without a license, incur an
even larger surcharge when they get caught, and go so far in debt to the
state they can never get a driver's license again. This prevents them from
holding a job, and effectively takes them out of the economy." An increase
in unlicensed, unregistered, and uninsured drivers is the probable outcome.
The state cynically estimates that only a little over half of the points
taxes will ever be paid; the rest will be owed by persons unable to pay and
who will never be able to renew their licenses.

See below for a list of the fee increases and how much money will be
extracted from motorists for state purposes.

Michigan Motorist Tax, Fine, and Fee Increases, 2003

Vehicle Fee Increases - Senate Bill 554, Public Act 152 of 2003

Make trailer plates permanent at roughly the former price of 5 to 7 years'
registration Increase all vehicle registrations by $3, unconstitutionally
award $2.25 to State Police. Add late registration-renewal fee of $10.
Raise vehicle title fees by $3. Raise auto dealer-license fees from $10 to
$75. Raise used-parts dealer-license fees from $100 to $160. Raise CDL fee
from $20 to $25. Raise CDL correction fee from $6 to $18. Raise original
chauffeur's license from $20 to $35. Raise original driver's license from
$12 to $25. Raise license renewal fee from $12 to $18. Add license-renewal
late fee of $7. Raise minor's restricted license from $5 to $25. Raise fees
for duplicate licenses by $6.

Total revenue increase: $70.1 million/year. Dispositions: Michigan State
Police $21.8 million/year Secretary of State $18 million/year Roads and
transit $5.3 million/year General Fund $25 million/year

After shifts of funds between the Secretary of State and the Michigan
Transportation Fund under SB 539, road and transit funds are increased by
approximately $24.9 million/year.

One-time advance from trailer registration fees (conversion to permanent
registrations). Revenue: $108 million in 2004. Disposition: Roads and
transit



Points Tax - Senate Bill 509, Public Act 165 of 2003

Attach tax to driver-license points, $100 for the seventh point and $50
each for additional points. Notes: points remain on license for two years.
Points existing on Sept. 30, 2003 are not taxable. Attach mandatory fines
of $150 to $1,000 for certain traffic violations (not subject to points
tax), payable as surtaxes on driver's-license fees in EACH of TWO years
following conviction.

Official revenue estimate: Approx. $65 to 75 million/year realized on
billings of $124.7 million (shrinkage is due to drivers refusing to pay and
continuing to drive with suspended licenses, based on rates from New
Jersey). Note: House Fiscal Agency estimates and all published media
reports on P.A. 165 contain the same error: the mandatory fines are
described as being imposed once only, and not in each of TWO years, so
these revenue estimates are low.

Disposition: First $65 million/year to the General Fund, additional amounts
for local fire departments in cities having state-owned buildings.

SB 436 & 439, HB 4736 P.A's. 73 & 97 of 2003 - Court-finance Package

Increase conviction surtax from $25 to $40 on approximately 500,000
citations/year. Revenue increase: $7.5 million/year Disposition: Court
operations.



HB 4333, P.A. 34 of 2003 - Handicapped Parking Spaces

Raise fine for violation of handicapped parking spaces from $50 to $150.

TOTAL MOTORIST TAX INCREASE: $147.6 million/year AMOUNTS FOR ROADS AND
TRANSIT: $132.9 million in Fiscal 2004 Approximately $24.9 million/year
after 2004

Sealt belt syndrome. Ever hear of it? Beware the lap belt!

Quoted: I agree that wearing should be a law, but the way the police enforce it, like the way they enforce all traffic laws, is an obvious method of collecting revenue.  If they are sincere about, there should be a system where they issue warnings.  If a ticket is warrented, then fine.  But loose the attitude and show some respect, please. I know this issue has been brought up and debated to death, but look around and watch how the police conduct themselves in public, especially on the street.  I’m always witnessing them breaking traffic laws.  They speed, make turns constantly without signaling, not coming to a full stop.  All of this in broad daylight.  I cringe when I think what they do when they know the public isn’t watching—like the time I came up on a cop sleeping in his squad car one night.  He was on private property (my landlords) and I caught that prick red-handed.  God, I wish I had a camera. Here in Salt Lake City the have “no cruising” ordinances for down town.  One night I’m driving home and they have these sneering jack booted motorcycle thugs stopping traffic at checkpoints looking to bust teenagers who are out cruising.  For fuck sakes, this is Salt Lake City and these miserable little assholes have nothing better than to harass Mormons who also have nothing better to do.  I live downtown.  Traffic congestion is not a problem here, at all.  There has to be a better way to educate the public sans the harassment and ticket books.  That’s another issue.  When a cop pulls you over, you’re gonna get a ticket these days.  There’s no such thing as a friendly reminder.  It used to be, not so long ago, that an officer would make a stop and see if the driver has a reason and story, and determine if a ticket is warranted.   Today’s police are mean spirited little men who want to issue tickets.  Like that pig that was driving at exactly the 65mph, the speed limit, in the passing lane on the freeway.  It was like the dickhead was daring people to pass by on the right. As a matter of fact, that’s exactly what he was doing.   If you did, that meant you’re speeding, and the shit head would pull you over and write you up.  I watched him do it and it was as pathetic as the cop I busted sleeping on the job.  There has to be a way to get back at bad cops like this.  But it has to be legal.  When a citizen witnesses a cop crossing the line, we should be able to nail them for it.  And it should stick. God I wish there was more justice in this world.  There has to be a way we can stand up to the law and make a change.

Okay, okay.  The police are here so everybody just calm down.
I am a cop and most of the people here know it.
We are not perfect in spite of your expectations.  However, I totally agree with your stance on traffic violations.  I have always held that traffic tickets are nothing but stealing from the public.  Period. We speed when we're in a hurry, so do most of you. I speak for myself when I say that I only turn on lights and siren or run a red light when I have a genuine police emergency. Not to get to a donut shop or a blowjob. In a few cases, a ticket may be warranted in a high accident area or an elementary school area when little ones are present at the time. They have their place as a stopping charge to get drunk drivers off the road. Otherwise, they represent theft, pure and simple.  People get in a hurry, it's human nature.  Governments know this and they use it to fill their coffers.  They establish ordinanaces to justify this theft.  Then, when someone gets a ticket for speeding, they just say, "Well, you we're speeding, you deserve it."  Bullshit.  There are a lot of different types of cops. There are the district officers that take the runs, quell the disturbances, settle the domestics, etc. There are administrative officers, detectives, and public information officers. All kinds depending on the size of the city. Then there are traffic cops. They are cops just like the rest of us.  They went through the same academy, have the same authority and work for the same chief. The big difference is that traffic enforcement is all they do.  Some of them are quite overzealous. They say, "No, we don't have a quota, we can write as many tickets as we want". Cute. I've seen them myself running lights, speeding, making illegal U-turns, etc. I really wouldn't care except they write people for things that they do themselves. In my opinion, and my opinion only, I would say that they are the worst public relations problem that we have. If the government really wanted you to stop speeding, they could easily do it. Confiscation of vehicles, huge fines, etc. would get it done.  All the politicians would be out of office in the next election and they know it.  They gauge the fines on what they think the traffic will bear.  They know people are going to speed and they count on it to draw revenue. If you see a cop violating the law, report it. You have a right to do it. No one is going to kick your door in at 3AM no matter what some may say. I will stand up and answer any complaint a citizen may have against me without them having any fear of retribution. And I will take a drug test any time with no notice because the public has a right to expect it.  By the way, seat belt laws are primarily in place because of insurance company lobbying. Whether you agree with the law or not is your business, but seat belts are a good idea. The next time you see a cop sleeping in his car why don't you wake him up. Maybe he's working three jobs and can't stay awake. Maybe he'd like a cup of coffee and a friendly greeting. At the least he'll know you saw him and maybe he'll make a better effort to get some sleep before he starts his shift.  Thank you. [rant off]

Quoted: When a cop pulls you over, you’re gonna get a ticket these days.  There’s no such thing as a friendly reminder.  It used to be, not so long ago, that an officer would make a stop and see if the driver has a reason and story, and determine if a ticket is warranted.

Depends on where you live, I guess.  More often than not, we say "slow it down and have a nice day" here.  We generally save tickets for the more extreme drivers or those that are just asking for it (literally).  I'm serious - one guy was about to get a friendly warning until he went off and ended his rant with "write me a ticket".  When asked for his insurance, he said "I don't have my ins card in my truck, write me for that, too!".  So, we did.  (he was doing a lot worse than speeding)
Also, unlike rn45's dept - we don't have "traffic cops"  - we're assigned a zone and are expected to take calls and enforce traffic laws in that zone - maybe that's why we're not as big on writing tickets.
CR

Hello ren45,

Thanks for your reply.  It's good to see an officer who thinks like a civilian and means it to.  As for waking that cop up.  I wanted to so bad, but for one thing it was at the end of long gravel drive on the edge of town.  It was very dark, and my cabin, which looks like a garage, was/is the only buidling around there.  The only way for me to wake him up would be to wrap on his window.  I didn't have car then or I might have turned on my head lights.  But approaching his car seems quite dangerous.  

I wanted to call him in, but, again, he would have known were Iived then, and could have been a sitting duck.  Some might find a cop getting some payback a little unlikely.  Not me.

If you see a "check point charlie" and there is a driveway or parking lot use it to make a u-turn. If they want to play "check point charlie" they can thin out the blockade coming after me. As long as I'm not making a u-turn in the road what can they do, I simply decided to go somewhere else.

OLY and shotar, thank you for your reasoned responses. Being "on the inside," I know you are privy to information some of us are not.

I still, however, tend to disagree with how you both downplay the revenue-aspect of ticket writing, for reasons I stated in my previous post. You cite all the costs involved as being "over and above" your usual job. Not that I would know precisely how you do your job, but it seems that regardless of what your duties included for the hours that you work, you are getting paid the same amount. This includes whether you are behind a desk, in your cruiser, standing on the side of the road, or sitting in a courtroom. The same goes for the rest of the criminal justice system.

I get a kick out of it when some news outlet reports that "such-and-such" case cost the county $1 million to prosecute. WTH? Those prosecutors would be working on some case for that time anyway. It's not like they were added to the payroll for that one case and then were let go.

Anybody see where I'm coming from?

Quoted: Quoted: I agree that wearing should be a law, but the way the police enforce it, like the way they enforce all traffic laws, is an obvious method of collecting revenue.  If they are sincere about, there should be a system where they issue warnings.  If a ticket is warrented, then fine.  But loose the attitude and show some respect, please. I know this issue has been brought up and debated to death, but look around and watch how the police conduct themselves in public, especially on the street.  I’m always witnessing them breaking traffic laws.  They speed, make turns constantly without signaling, not coming to a full stop.  All of this in broad daylight.  I cringe when I think what they do when they know the public isn’t watching—like the time I came up on a cop sleeping in his squad car one night.  He was on private property (my landlords) and I caught that prick red-handed.  God, I wish I had a camera. Here in Salt Lake City the have “no cruising” ordinances for down town.  One night I’m driving home and they have these sneering jack booted motorcycle thugs stopping traffic at checkpoints looking to bust teenagers who are out cruising.  For fuck sakes, this is Salt Lake City and these miserable little assholes have nothing better than to harass Mormons who also have nothing better to do.  I live downtown.  Traffic congestion is not a problem here, at all.  There has to be a better way to educate the public sans the harassment and ticket books.  That’s another issue.  When a cop pulls you over, you’re gonna get a ticket these days.  There’s no such thing as a friendly reminder.  It used to be, not so long ago, that an officer would make a stop and see if the driver has a reason and story, and determine if a ticket is warranted.   Today’s police are mean spirited little men who want to issue tickets.  Like that pig that was driving at exactly the 65mph, the speed limit, in the passing lane on the freeway.  It was like the dickhead was daring people to pass by on the right. As a matter of fact, that’s exactly what he was doing.   If you did, that meant you’re speeding, and the shit head would pull you over and write you up.  I watched him do it and it was as pathetic as the cop I busted sleeping on the job.  There has to be a way to get back at bad cops like this.  But it has to be legal.  When a citizen witnesses a cop crossing the line, we should be able to nail them for it.  And it should stick. God I wish there was more justice in this world.  There has to be a way we can stand up to the law and make a change. Okay, okay.  The police are here so everybody just calm down. I am a cop and most of the people here know it. We are not perfect in spite of your expectations.  However, I totally agree with your stance on traffic violations.  I have always held that traffic tickets are nothing but stealing from the public.  Period. We speed when we're in a hurry, so do most of you. I speak for myself when I say that I only turn on lights and siren or run a red light when I have a genuine police emergency. Not to get to a donut shop or a blowjob. In a few cases, a ticket may be warranted in a high accident area or an elementary school area when little ones are present at the time. They have their place as a stopping charge to get drunk drivers off the road. Otherwise, they represent theft, pure and simple.  People get in a hurry, it's human nature.  Governments know this and they use it to fill their coffers.  They establish ordinanaces to justify this theft.  Then, when someone gets a ticket for speeding, they just say, "Well, you we're speeding, you deserve it."  Bullshit.  There are a lot of different types of cops. There are the district officers that take the runs, quell the disturbances, settle the domestics, etc. There are administrative officers, detectives, and public information officers. All kinds depending on the size of the city. Then there are traffic cops. They are cops just like the rest of us.  They went through the same academy, have the same authority and work for the same chief. The big difference is that traffic enforcement is all they do.  Some of them are quite overzealous. They say, "No, we don't have a quota, we can write as many tickets as we want". Cute. I've seen them myself running lights, speeding, making illegal U-turns, etc. I really wouldn't care except they write people for things that they do themselves. In my opinion, and my opinion only, I would say that they are the worst public relations problem that we have. If the government really wanted you to stop speeding, they could easily do it. Confiscation of vehicles, huge fines, etc. would get it done.  All the politicians would be out of office in the next election and they know it.  They gauge the fines on what they think the traffic will bear.  They know people are going to speed and they count on it to draw revenue. If you see a cop violating the law, report it. You have a right to do it. No one is going to kick your door in at 3AM no matter what some may say. I will stand up and answer any complaint a citizen may have against me without them having any fear of retribution. And I will take a drug test any time with no notice because the public has a right to expect it.  By the way, seat belt laws are primarily in place because of insurance company lobbying. Whether you agree with the law or not is your business, but seat belts are a good idea. The next time you see a cop sleeping in his car why don't you wake him up. Maybe he's working three jobs and can't stay awake. Maybe he'd like a cup of coffee and a friendly greeting. At the least he'll know you saw him and maybe he'll make a better effort to get some sleep before he starts his shift.  Thank you. [rant off]

Report a cop! yea right. most of cops here get away with everything, I mean everything. coming home one night from night school I get pulled over 45 in a 55 not a problem with the car, pulled over, right; cop walks up, said  his computer showed that the tags were expired, I said no there not, he said  that there might be a glitch in the system; I said I will contact the BMV, he quickly changed his tune said no! not necessary "BUSTED" caught him in a lie so he stuck his face through my window to see if I was drinking(I was not) he had to let me go. another incedent happen when this lady got busted for drugs, so the officer let her go by getting a blowjob, then she tried to turn this said cop in; not a damn thing happen, I can continue until Iam blue. but what I get pissed about I get stopped
doing 60 in a 55MPH, right I get busted then
later I see a cop go buy 75/80+ mph not lights no siren. If a cop gets pulled over all he has to do is flash his badge then let go nothing!
we had a cop here that wrecked his cruzer he was drinking and driving, they coverd his ass buy saying he was undercover. comon; his blood alchohol level was twice the legal limit. if he killed some bystandard he would still get away with it. I call BULLSHIT!

W-G, you are right and wrong at the same time.  WHile they would be doing those things, there are expenses over and above.  Lets not forget, that while somone is out writing tickets, etc, someone else is busy doing everything else, requiring a net increase in manpower and machine power.  That is achieved either by adding extra manpower either through additional hiring, or overtime.  Having written numerous departmental budgets I can tell you that Traffic enforcement is not a profit center for any police agency.  In fact, it is a money loser when one offsets the simple fine type offenses with the costs and overtime and then factoring in the serious offenses which might entail verrrry expensive incarcerations.  Figure we had to pay $50/day to house a prisoner, a six month DUI sentence would cost us $9000 if we cited under city ordinance.  We therefore arrested under State law, and saw exactly none of the fine money except a Pittence that was more than offset by the officer's court overtime.

Quoted: Quoted: This is the silliest argument I see over and over on this site.  Police Officers are not "collecting taxes".  When I was  cop, I didn't care if the city made any money on the tickets I issued.  I didn't get a dime of the money.  Whether I wrote a lot of tickets or a few, I made the same salary. But if you wrote no tickets? I have a friend who is an EXCELLENT police officer who has been passed over twice for not writing enough tickets. Sure no one gets a cut of the tickets, but if you don't write enough of them, at least in departments I know about, you lose out on promotions, transfers, what days you want off, what shift you work etc.

Aimless, I am sure this is true at some departments.  But none that I ever worked at.

On the other hand, a Police Officer is paid to enforce traffic laws.  At least patrol officers are, when not investigating other crimes.

I believe that most shift commanders don't really care about how much "income" for the city an officer produces.  But if he never writes any tickets, the shift commander will eventually ask, "What are you doing out there?"

If a guy isn't asleep, he will see many, many traffic violations each day.  If he never writes any citations, he isn't doing his job.

But his job is enforcing traffic laws by citing violators.  Not making "money" for the city or county.

Quoted: OLY and shotar, thank you for your reasoned responses. Being "on the inside," I know you are privy to information some of us are not. I still, however, tend to disagree with how you both downplay the revenue-aspect of ticket writing, for reasons I stated in my previous post. You cite all the costs involved as being "over and above" your usual job. Not that I would know precisely how you do your job, but it seems that regardless of what your duties included for the hours that you work, you are getting paid the same amount. This includes whether you are behind a desk, in your cruiser, standing on the side of the road, or sitting in a courtroom. The same goes for the rest of the criminal justice system. I get a kick out of it when some news outlet reports that "such-and-such" case cost the county $1 million to prosecute. WTH? Those prosecutors would be working on some case for that time anyway. It's not like they were added to the payroll for that one case and then were let go. Anybody see where I'm coming from?

I use that arguement myself, as far as Court costs, that if that case wasn't there, it's not like everyone would be on a day off w/o pay.

But as far as citations, where I work part timers do a lot of the report transribing and data entry. So if there are no tickets to be processed, or reports to be typed, those people don't come in.

Also, my dept doesn't get any of the money from citations. Any money recieved goes back into the general fund.

Then again I think thsi does follow the Oly-M4 theory of you ge the govt. you demand. We get funded at 100%. So no amount of ticket writing changes our budget. If however you live someplace that funds the PD at say 75%, and they get the monies generated from citations..........Don't get me started if the Courts have a stake in ticket fines. When I lived in Louisiana 50% of a citation went to the PD that issued it and 50% percent went to the Court that heard the citation, or something like that. Seems kinda tempting for the Court to keep track of funding.

Plus in most places the officers that write citations also respond to calls etc. So in cities it is much less likely that officers have a lot of time on their hands between calls for traffic violations.

Of course whne some %&)*&) cuts us off we all would like the cops there to do something about that.................

Also the most frequent complaint, request we recieve is for more traffic enforcement in someone's area. Nobody likes speeders or drunks driving on the street where they live.

My list of citations, the guy flying through stop signs, was because I was in a certain area do to a citizen complaint of guy flyin' through stop signs..........

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is a big difference between "asking for your papers" which implies you dont have a right travel and the government is keeping track of you vs. ticketing people for breaking the law. you don't have the right to travel it's impossible for me to get from here to my parents house without walking on a public road Actually I had that same argument with Kar98... There isnt any law specifically excluding you from traveling in public therefore you can. so it's all 10th amendment. Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. next time you are going down the on ramp onto the interstate, look at the signs "no pedestrians allowed"

just remembered that i snapped this pic back in july

Quoted: Just went to lunch at a place near my office. The intersection is a busy one, near a highway interchange, and retail/commercial district. At the stoplight are 2 police officers on foot, and 3 cruisers on the side of the road; a state trooper, a county sheriff, and a city cop (from a different city). At the intersection is a city cop. And a bunch more cruisers in the area. 2 big signs on side of road..."seat belt enforcement zone". Here in Michigan, they have been advertising this "Click it or Ticket" program on the radio and television quite a bit. $65.00 fine for no seatbelt. In Michigan, the law says you must wear a seatbelt, and yes, not wearing a belt is enough to get you pulled over. They were birddogging cars at the intersection, and then nailing people. I am a big believer in seatbelts, and always wear mine, however, I am offended at this "checkpoint charlie" approach, and feel like I should be giving these guys a seig heil type salute. What's next, they just set up on an intersection and ask - (accent on) "Your Papers Please?" I know, " Its for the Children, and if it makes the streets safer, its all worthwhile.." I think they are just generating revenue because the politicians have no incentive to control budgets, and they are pussies about raising taxes. So - they unleash the JBTs to generate revenue. Please sound off if you think this is BS too...

Coupla years back, a shift Sargent did this with a coupla other cops, not 1/2 block from my house, in Astoria Oregon.

Small town, this was a residential neighborhood.

It lasted 45 minutes...

The PD was deluged with calls, we had a pretty good patriot bunch there, and gave the cops hell.......

We ALL shoot the shit together in the local gun shop. Most of it was good natured ribbing with a message. He knew he screwed up, and PRIVATELY admitted it.

Nobody pushed it, and it hasn't happened again....

It's been my experience, that when citizens don't give the leo's any input, they're just gonna do what they do....

When ya have a problem, call 'em, make an office appointment, and let them know. It has worked for me in every small town I've lived.

'course, that doesn't mean thay's the way it is all over...

Quoted: So, with all that advertising, radio, perhaps some TV, billboards, newspaper, etc.  Everyone pretty much has fair warning that this law is going to be vigorously enforced, right?

"You must obey zee law! You know zee law says you do vat vee zay, now get in zee train car like zee other Juden!"

So, the law, and the police, are always right?

Quoted: In some states, including Fla. seatbelt violations are "secondary" offenses, meaning that you can't be pulled over for that alone, but can be cited for it if pulled over for something else.

WRONG, but you were correct up until about 3-4 years ago.  It's been a primary offense here in FL for quite awhile now.  

OLY-M4Gery, no insult intended, but you couldn't be a stater in WA. You would have to write three citations per hour, minimum, at least according to investigative reporters who looked into an alleged quota system. Citations here are $101 for 5 over or no seat belt, $156 for 15 over, and over $250 for 20 over.

And, if you were the top ticket writer here, thats probably 5 tickets an hour, and probably more than one infraction on each ticket, if you can find something. They will also pull you over if a passenger is not belted.

But, time spent scraping dead idiots off of the road would cut into your day also.

If writing tickets is so costly, I am sure the increase in traffic enforcement since the budget crunch is all coincidence...

If writing tickets doesn't generate revenue,  why do you have to pay money when you get one???

Quoted: OLY-M4Gery, no insult intended, but you couldn't be a stater in WA. You would have to write three citations per hour, minimum, at least according to investigative reporters who looked into an alleged quota system. Citations here are $101 for 5 over or no seat belt, $156 for 15 over, and over $250 for 20 over.

Darn, I'm all busted up. I really don't care how many citations I write. Plus I would much rather write a few citations, DUI, No DL, Suspeneded DL, Revoked DL, then a large number of speeding tickets.

I do traffic, usually though it is when I am going from place to place looking for signs of criminal activity. I very rarely set aside time to do "traffic".

Much rather catch a burglar, or robber than write a whole bunch of tickets.

And, if you were the top ticket writer here, thats probably 5 tickets an hour, and probably more than one infraction on each ticket, if you can find something. They will also pull you over if a passenger is not belted.

We only get 1 charge per citation. Usually when I stop someone it is fir several minor violations, or one really sginifigant one. It wouldn't be hard for me to write 2-3 citations per stop. I don't pile on like that, nor will multiple citations per stop be prosecuted. So it's the major violation as a citation, and verbal for the rest.  

But, time spent scraping dead idiots off of the road would cut into your day also.

My day gets cut into like that here too. It used to be line officers were required to do those techincal crash investigations. Now we use traffic reconstructionists, and CSI. But on "usual" type investigations I still get to play CSI or crash investigator.

Quoted: The original poster was making the point that the local government is trying to make up for lost revenue by setting up checkpoints. .

That argument doesn't work because in most states, the municipality doesn't retain fine money from tickets. There are some rather notorious exceptions, but thats the reality for most places. Money is not a motivating factor for officers writing tickets.

Quoted: You could make a point by completely removing the seatbelts from your car.   How can they ticket you for not using a safety device your car doesn't have?

If your car came equipped from the factory with seatbelts, you would be cited for inadequate seatbelts. Obviously  a pre-seatbelt era vehilce has no seatbelt requirement.

Quoted: Quoted: In some states, including Fla. seatbelt violations are "secondary" offenses, meaning that you can't be pulled over for that alone, but can be cited for it if pulled over for something else. WRONG, but you were correct up until about 3-4 years ago.  It's been a primary offense here in FL for quite awhile now.

WRONG, but you may be right 3-4 years from now. Here's the current Florida Statute:
Section 316.614(8) "Any person who violates the provisions of this section commits a nonmoving violation, punishable as provided in chapter 318. However, except for violations of s. 316.613, enforcement of this section by state or local law enforcement agencies must be accomplished only as a secondary action when a driver of a motor vehicle has been detained for a suspected violation of another section of this chapter, chapter 320, or chapter 322."

You can look it up here: http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0316/ch0316.htm I hope you haven't been paying (or writing) tickets for this as a primary offense.

Quoted: Killing babies is OK - after all, "it's the mother's body" (even though it isn't) and she should be able to do whatever she wants with her own body.  But if we don't wear a seatbelt we get in trouble! ERRGH! How does not wearing a seatbelt hurt anyone else???

Have you seen the statistics on how much tax payer money is spent of medical treatment for morons that can't put on a seatbelt.  I'm tired of paying for other people's stupidity.  Put on your f'in seatbelt or give me my f'in money back.  


Here's a clip from another state's Click it or Ticket campaign.  

Does the failure to use occupant restraints really have a significant financial impact on society? When someone is injured or dies in a traffic crash, society pays many of the costs including emergency services, uninsured medical care, tax supported rehabilitation programs, higher insurance costs, and survivor payments. In fact, 85 percent of all medical costs for crash ictims fall on society, not on the individuals involved. When crash victims are not buckled up, their costs for medical treatment are 50 percent higher than those who wear seatbelts.  Belted crash victims average 60 to 80 percent lower hospital costs than unbelted victims.

Quoted: Have you seen the statistics on how much tax payer money is spent of medical treatment for morons that can't put on a seatbelt.  I'm tired of paying for other people's stupidity.  Put on your f'in seatbelt or give me my f'in money back.

Can I safely assume that you believe that all behavior which might result in a person's becoming a drain on insurance companies or the public health system should be prohibited?

Posted earlier by FLAL1A: Therefore, old people should be prohibited from bathing because they fall & break their hips in their tubs and end up with either your insurance or (tax-funded)Medicare paying the doctor bills. Skydiving should be prohibited for the same reasons as driving w/o a seatbelt. Ditto rugby, skin diving, tree climbing, and diving into water. Yessirree, you got it nailed. Any voluntary behavior that carries a risk of injury beyond that presented by sitting in a Barcalounger should be prohibited because of its potential impact on insurance rates and tax expenditures. Wait! Sitting in the Barcalounger all the time makes you fat and unhealthy and you'll need extra medical attention! But anyway, your theory is sound. All human behavior is subject to governmental regulation and/or prohibition because it may have economic effects on others. So tell me, does your position derive from Lenin, Mussolini, or Pelosi?

So, do you agree? Should the law prohibit everything that might cost "you" (meaning an insurance company or the gov't) money? If not, why not? Where do you draw the line? Is risky behavior in which you engage exempt from legal sanction? I really want to see your answer - to know just what private behavior you thing should be illegal because of the once- or twice-removed effect on your precious wallet.

Quoted: Yes,  this is bs.  I have recieved a ticket for not wearing a seat belt in the past.  It was combined with a traffic violation however.  I know of no one here that has been pulled over solely for not wearing a seat belt. I would be pissed if they were doing that shit myself.  It does seem to be very gestapo like.

my dad was pulled over for my mom not wearing a seatbelt (in the passenger side)...; it does fucking happen.... as an aside, my mother still to this day refuses to wear a seatbelt...

Quoted: Quoted: Have you seen the statistics on how much tax payer money is spent of medical treatment for morons that can't put on a seatbelt.  I'm tired of paying for other people's stupidity.  Put on your f'in seatbelt or give me my f'in money back.   Can I safely assume that you believe that all behavior which might result in a person's becoming a drain on insurance companies or the public health system should be prohibited? Posted earlier by FLAL1A: Therefore, old people should be prohibited from bathing because they fall & break their hips in their tubs and end up with either your insurance or (tax-funded)Medicare paying the doctor bills. Skydiving should be prohibited for the same reasons as driving w/o a seatbelt. Ditto rugby, skin diving, tree climbing, and diving into water. Yessirree, you got it nailed. Any voluntary behavior that carries a risk of injury beyond that presented by sitting in a Barcalounger should be prohibited because of its potential impact on insurance rates and tax expenditures. Wait! Sitting in the Barcalounger all the time makes you fat and unhealthy and you'll need extra medical attention! But anyway, your theory is sound. All human behavior is subject to governmental regulation and/or prohibition because it may have economic effects on others. So tell me, does your position derive from Lenin, Mussolini, or Pelosi? So, do you agree? Should the law prohibit everything that might cost "you" (meaning an insurance company or the gov't) money? If not, why not? Where do you draw the line? Is risky behavior in which you engage exempt from legal sanction? I really want to see your answer - to know just what private behavior you thing should be illegal because of the once- or twice-removed effect on your precious wallet.

No, not all.  You need to look at the cost to benefit ratio of the action.  Is the government violating your rights?  No.  Driving a car is not a right.  Therefore, the government has the ability to regulate how you engage in that privilage.  Since this isn't violating any of your constitutional rights or any of the ammendments to the Bill of Rights, it is far better for the government to attempt to take the financial responsibility for YOUR actions away from the taxpayer.  

It seems so simple to say that since you're not "hurting" anyone by your actions, or that it's "bullshit" that the government should attempt to regulate your actions.  The problem is, that it's not that simple.  Your actions, however small and insignificant as they seem, DO have repercutions beyond you.  That's where I have a problem.  When you cost me money because you can't play by the rules, I have a problem w/ that.  

So, to answer your original question.  I would support the resticion of most behaviors (I try to aviod absolute statements), save for behaviors that are constitutional, if those behaviors are shown to be an unreasonable drain on taxpayers.  The general public should not be held financialy responsible for you in that sense.

My personal belief is that the real reason for seatbelt laws is improvement in plastics.

Now, follow me here... it used to be easy for a cop to pull you over and hassle you over a broken tail light.  Once he had you stopped for a violation (he broke the taillight with his nightstick as he walked up behind your car) he could do anything he wanted, pretty much.  And he had an excuse for stopping you, "Your Honor, I stopped him for a broken tail light and then discovered..."

Nowadays, plastics are a lot tougher, and cops are wimpier, the copchicks had trouble hitting the the now stronger taillight lens hard enough with their PR-24's... so they cooked up the seatbelt thing as a new excuse for stopping you.

Yes, in some states now, a seatbelt violation is a primary reason to ticket you... no other violation need occur.  They sneek this in a few years after they soften you up with the initial seatbelt law, where it is only secondary.  The cops whine and cry that the law is not effective, and they could save more lives if only the seatbelt law was a primary offense.

So, now when it gets to court, "Your Honor, I stopped him for not wearing his seatbelt, and he was acting suspicious... "

Our lawmakers don't give a damn about saving lives... if they did they would make cigarettes completely illegal, treat them and the people that grow tobacco just like heroin and cocaine.  Don't ever believe that "we're doing this for your own good" crap.

Quoted: My personal belief is that the real reason for seatbelt laws is improvement in plastics. Now, follow me here... it used to be easy for a cop to pull you over and hassle you over a broken tail light.  Once he had you stopped for a violation (he broke the taillight with his nightstick as he walked up behind your car) he could do anything he wanted, pretty much.  And he had an excuse for stopping you, "Your Honor, I stopped him for a broken tail light and then discovered..." Nowadays, plastics are a lot tougher, and cops are wimpier, the copchicks had trouble hitting the the now stronger taillight lens hard enough with their PR-24's... so they cooked up the seatbelt thing as a new excuse for stopping you. Yes, in some states now, a seatbelt violation is a primary reason to ticket you... no other violation need occur.  They sneek this in a few years after they soften you up with the initial seatbelt law, where it is only secondary.  The cops whine and cry that the law is not effective, and they could save more lives if only the seatbelt law was a primary offense. So, now when it gets to court, "Your Honor, I stopped him for not wearing his seatbelt, and he was acting suspicious... " Our lawmakers don't give a damn about saving lives... if they did they would make cigarettes completely illegal, treat them and the people that grow tobacco just like heroin and cocaine.  Don't ever believe that "we're doing this for your own good" crap.

You must be joking. You can't seriously believe that.Any of it.

Quoted: Quoted: Personally, I don't think either one should be a law. If someone is dumb enough not to buckle up or wear a helmet then let Darwinism run it's course. Ahh yes, but what if they dont die? What about when they wind up on disability and your insurance company is paying them unemployment ergo driving up insurance rates.

Good to know one can put a dollar value on freedom.

Quoted: I know, " Its for the Children, and if it makes the streets safer, its all worthwhile.."

Actually it's for the insurance companies, and for the traffic cops...

Fact: If you wear your seatbelt you are less likely to be injured in a traffic collision.
Fact: Insurance companies dont like paying out huge personal injury settlements.
Fact: Cops dont like writing injury traffic collision reports.

If you can force people to wear their seatbelts it means less injuries, lower insurance payouts, and less time writing TC reports.

Those cops were probubly o overtime and wont write enought tickets to break even.

Quoted: Oh wait, I get it.  You have to buckle up because if you die, that's a LOT more paperwork for the police .

Yep. If your involved in a fender Bender it's about an hour of paperwrok for me. If you're injured, howeever so slightly, then it's about 10 hours of paperwork for me. 10 Hours that I'm not catching bad guys. The traffic guys write seatbelt tickets so you wont get hurt and so I can use my 40 hours a week to catch badguys.

Quoted: Quoted: I know that it costs more to enforce these laws than is generated for any municipality by enforcement. You cry tax collection, I say public safety enforcement. Shotar, my internet friend, I have heard you (and a couple of others) say this on more than one occasion. I question whether your claim is correct: 1. LEOs have a work schedule that is similiar to most of the rest of us. They get paid hourly. They work between 40-50hrs. per week. That much is true, correct? 2. If said LEOs sat behind a desk for those 40-50hrs. and simply answered phones, they'd get paid for their time just as much as an LEO who pulled traffic duty for those same 40-50hrs., correct? 3. In those 40-50hrs., the desk-bound LEO would've generated $0.00 for the agency/municipality he worked in, correct? 4. Let's say the traffic-duty LEO wrote 20 tickets in those same 40-50hrs. and the revenue totalled $1,500.00 (that was eventually paid). Seems to me, every LEO is getting paid regardless of the duty he is pulling at the time. When they can write tickets and generate revenue through them, that is all a plus. Now, I know you will probably then bring up the fact that I shouldn't forget that "the officer has to go to traffic court for many of those tickets," but let's say he spent an entire week's worth of time at the courthouse, big deal, he was getting paid whether he sat behind a desk, pulled traffic duty, or sat in court all day. .

You are on the right track. But you are forgeting the cost of recruiting, training, and equiping the officer. You are forgetting the administrative costs of building traffic courts, paying traffic commisioners, and the clerks who process the paperwork.  You are forgetting that the officers are mostly going to court on overtime.

My agency has studied the issue. My employer loses about $250.00 on every contested traffic ticket I write. But we have also established that as the number of moving violations increase, the number of injury traffic collisions decrease. So it's worth the finacial drain on the agency becuase it saves lives.

Quoted: My personal belief is that the real reason for seatbelt laws is improvement in plastics. Now, follow me here... it used to be easy for a cop to pull you over and hassle you over a broken tail light.  Once he had you stopped for a violation (he broke the taillight with his nightstick as he walked up behind your car) he could do anything he wanted, pretty much.  And he had an excuse for stopping you, "Your Honor, I stopped him for a broken tail light and then discovered..." Nowadays, plastics are a lot tougher, and cops are wimpier, the copchicks had trouble hitting the the now stronger taillight lens hard enough with their PR-24's... so they cooked up the seatbelt thing as a new excuse for stopping you.

C'mon, that's a training issue. you dont break out the tail lamp with your stick in front of witnesses. You're supposed to follow the bad guy home. Then in the middle of the night you shoot out his tail lamp with a BB pistol, so you have PC to stop the next day....

REVENUE Generation!

R-E-V-E-N-U-E

REH-veh-new.........REVENUE

Say it with me....."REVENUE"

Gotta keep those peasants in line!....and if we can make some $ by pushing them around....ALL THE BETTER!!!!

Quoted: REVENUE Generation! R-E-V-E-N-U-E REH-veh-new.........REVENUE Say it with me....."REVENUE" Gotta keep those peasants in line!....and if we can make some $ by pushing them around....ALL THE BETTER!!!!

Sounds about right to me.

Quoted: If you see a "check point charlie" and there is a driveway or parking lot use it to make a u-turn. If they want to play "check point charlie" they can thin out the blockade coming after me. As long as I'm not making a u-turn in the road what can they do, I simply decided to go somewhere else.

The HP around here usually has a couple of cars ready to nab anybody who tries to avoid checkpoints.

tcsd1236:  Have you no sense of humor?  

Seriously, though... I consider seatbelt laws an abomination to freedom.

What's next?

While we have you stopped, let me see your papers.  Where are you going?  What is your business here?  
etc.

I am tired of it.  I am tired of this and that, "for my own good", or "for the good of society", or "for the children."

Watch, next year, seatbelt violations will be a primary offense... see if that legislation is not introduced where you live.

Quoted: tcsd1236:  Have you no sense of humor?   Seriously, though... I consider seatbelt laws an abomination to freedom. What's next? While we have you stopped, let me see your papers.  Where are you going?  What is your business here?   etc. Watch, next year, seatbelt violations will be a primary offense... see if that legislation is not introduced where you live.

I do. What you posted wasn't even funny.
Seat belt violations are already a primary offense here; we have no distinction in primary and secondary offenses in NYS.

Quoted: Quoted: If you see a "check point charlie" and there is a driveway or parking lot use it to make a u-turn. If they want to play "check point charlie" they can thin out the blockade coming after me. As long as I'm not making a u-turn in the road what can they do, I simply decided to go somewhere else. The HP around here usually has a couple of cars ready to nab anybody who tries to avoid checkpoints.

Well, if your seat belt is on and your u turn is legal, on what charge can they stop you?