Posted: 11/27/2007 4:53:28 AM EDT
|
Convinces me that it is just a revenue (read tax) generator. BY JESSE JONES / KING 5 News Troopers encouraged to write tickets Related Content Blog: Ticket troubles? SEATTLE – Washington State Patrol encourages its troopers to issue a specific amount of traffic citations, but the policy has caused some conflict. This is a hot-button issue for anyone who has gotten a ticket and for many troopers in the state patrol. Two years ago, the chief of the agency told troopers to write more tickets and give fewer warnings. Is that a quota? Some troopers say it is. It's the blinding flash of blue and red lights in your rearview mirror that makes your heart. You've just received one of the hundreds of thousands of tickets the Washington State Patrol gives out every year. State troopers wrote 50,000 more tickets in 2006 than they did the year before. Assistant Chief Brian Ursino says they were asked to be less tolerant with motorists. "We know as a matter of factual basis that giving somebody a traffic infraction alters their behavior for a longer period of time than if you give them a verbal warning, so we did ask our troopers to be a little less tolerant," he said. And they obeyed. Ursino, who runs field operations, says it's the right thing to do. "This is about reducing collisions, preventing injuries and preventing fatality collisions," he said. But along with the ticket mandate came what was called "minimum performance standards." According to an internal memo, a sergeant in Bellevue told officers he supervised: "No matter how many cars you stop, the goal... is 80 percent enforcement" (tickets)." KING Washington State Patrol troopers wrote 50,000 more tickets in 2006 than they did the year before. Some officers were asked to "average 25 violators per shift." In Seattle, troopers were assigned goals for citing speeders, seatbelt and HOV violators, and aggressive drivers. "Before they could take leave or a holiday credit or a day off, they are asked: 'What do your statistics look like? How many cars you got for a month?' That ain't right," said Tommie Pillow, state trooper and union president. He says these goals are simply a quota which takes away the officers' discretion. "If you told the average person my expectation is 100 cars, well what is that?" he said. "It's an expectation, it's a goal, it's a quota, what's the difference?" Ursino said: "There isn't any quotas but there is accountability. I'm accountable to the chief, the chief is accountable to the governor and we are all accountable to the people." The state patrol says it hasn't disciplined anyone who did not meet expectations, but those who exceed them have been rewarded. A memo issued in March shows those troopers who pull over at least 1,200 drivers and cite more than 55 percent of them earn commendations, plaques or coins. "There are some agencies out there that say WSP stands for Washington Stat Patrol," Pillow said. As far as the claim that writing more tickets makes the roads safer, in 2004, 43 percent of drivers who were stopped were ticketed. In 2005, 47 percent were cited. And after expectations were raised in 2006, that number grew to 63 percent. But according to the state Department of Transportation, the fatal accident rate statewide is almost 10 percent higher than it was in 2004. Pillow maintains that catching speeders should only be part of the job. JESSE JONES: "You don't want those troopers out there to be ticket machines?" PILLOW: "No." JESSE JONES: "Do you think this is happening now?" PILLOW: "Yes." Both sides agree all the tickets written are justifiable. But since KING 5 started the investigation, we have learned that union leaders and Chief John Batiste have met to discuss this topic. It's clearly an issue that is not going to go away anytime soon. With all these tickets comes a lot more money. Does the state patrol benefit directly? Yes and no. The state patrol keeps only 5 percent of the ticket revenue, 57 percent goes to the local jurisdiction where the ticket was given, the rest is sent to the Public Safety Education Account that funds a number of safety, educational and recreational program. Linky |
57 percent goes to the local jurisdiction for what? More police/tax collection enforcement? The state patrol keeps only 5 percent of the ticket revenue, so that means they need to write a lot more to make a little bit more money. While I was trucking I would get pulled over, or in, every f**king month, for five years. After awhile I felt like a crook on the run, and those years on the road, all the truckers I talked to said, screw safety, its all about money for them. And quite a few cops would just write you a ticket just because they felt the need. Not because you did something wrong. They ticket out of state drivers a lot more than local, because they figure you will not be coming back to fight it. It sucks to live in a police state, so tread lightly. |
This only works if you have complete unfettered faith that the system is only there for its intended purpose - code enforcement. However, institutions are inherently static and act out of that paramount human characteristic, self-preservation. This undeniable instinct is amplified when their power to enforce is directly tied to generating revenue directly (or indirectly) for themselves. It's simple to say that LE probably only nabs 10% of daily offenders and that any increase in enforcement is therefore easily justified, but knowing each of the historical precedents set by LE caught pilfering the public pocket to line the PD's coffers (eg, seizures), its equally difficult to under-estimate the human trait of greed. |
|
If they want to do somehting about safety why not go after the ones that are going 50 in the left lane (something about the law saying keep right except to pass). Especially when the road is clear. When they had those stupid singsong commercials about speeding a few months ago, I was tempted to start filming every cop I could see speeding and sending it in to whatever department. I thought about that again today as I saw a WSP car tailgating someone at like 80. It's not like you are trying to sneak up on a house in the middle of the damn freeway. Or you could set up radar on I5 near 38th and on 38th near the Starbucks. Lots of speeders there. Especially near shift change... |
It always kills me when people post about cops "speeding". Do you have any idea where they are going or what they are doing? Of course you don't. Do you also know that it is WRITTEN POLICY for many departments to allow their officers to exceed the speed limit when responding to certain types of calls? And no, it does not require lights and sirens to exceed the speed limit. And I see cops tailgating from time to time, but it's almost always so that they can accurately read a license plate. Let me ask you this.... when you call in that your spouse or child has been assaulted, that your car has just been stolen, or that someone just set fire to your house... Would you like me to drive the speed limit on my way there? 
|
But I saw a documentary about da Po Pos!  
|
That doesn't seem entirely true as far as the RCW is concerned...
|
So you're saying that if an officer is responding to a call going 10-15mph over the limit, they should have red/blue lights flashing? That's a bit silly... Have you ever gone on a ride-a-long where lights and/or sirens were used? People are MORONS. When they see the lights, they freak out. Some do nothing at all, others dynamite their brakes right in front of you, others merge to the left instead of the right, and any number of other asinine moves. If officers used their overheads every time they went 15mph over the limit, it would take even longer to get to calls and there would be more accidents from idiots who don't know how to properly yield to emergency vehicles. |
Uh, I'm not saying anything - I'm merely reading the RCW.
I have, but then again I also drive a Firetruck from time to time.
Beats me - you're probably right - I'm just regurgitating the statutes which seem to say speeding without some lighting or "when necessary"-noise is verboten. But then again, they're just words and if LE sees fit to interpret them in such a way that benefits them, how is that new? |
This again falls into to the catagoy of blaming the messenger. I don't blame the enforcers for the policy of the .gov I blame .gov for using just like a tax. I got a ticket about a year and a half ago. The WSP were very professional but I am sure she would have been happier doing something more productive. Like improving traffic flow, getting the 55 mph driver out of the left lane, or stopping an aggressive driver. BUT WA.gov had her maning (sorry about that) a speed trap. BTW it was the northbound hill at Nisqually. Everybody goes 70 down that hill. |
| what pisses me off is when I see cops coming to a red light, turning on their lights and siren, going through and turning them off after clearing the intersection only to end up heading to a donut emergency... I see it all the time. A couple times I followed them and sure enough they did it several more times and stopped at Starbucks for some coffee… |
Im sure every time a cop is speeding he is going to a call....  Ive personally MANY instances of police breaking traffic laws for no reason other than they can. |
Funny, seems to me you can't read.  I'll even paraphrase it, so it's easier to understand.Law says LE gets to use 2b, 2c, and 2d only when using visual signals, with two exceptions. ONE being that police vehicles may possibly not have a forward facing red light, and TWO, authorized vehicles must (RCW says shall, as in shall issue...) use audible signals when "civilians" need warned. Part 3 in not when necessary, 3b is when necessary. But when 3b is not necessary, part three still applies, get it? So yes, the RCW says that if "emergency personnel" are using 2b, 2c, or 2d that they must use lights, except if they are using sounds. |
Actually, I can read. Why don't you read RCW 46.37.190 while you're at it? Furthermore, the original RCW quote neglected to include the following:
That renders the entire RCW not applicable to my original statement. I was never referring to pursuits or priority emergency response calls. |
|
A short list of crimes involved in the traffic stop. 1. Red lights indicating a emergency, there in no emergency, infraction does not meet the test. 2. Stops the motion of the traveler, which in law is an arrest, when a heart stops it is called cardiac arrest. 3. Violates individual right to privacy 4th amendment 4. Forces individual to witness against themselves. 5th amendment 5. Force a signature under threat duress and coercion (felony) 6. causes harm without due process. technically the list can go on and on but in general traffic enforcement is very unlawful. |
|
Since entire FIRST section of the RCW was left out when posted, it puts a whole different spin on things. The RCW you are quoting refers to Police, EMS, and Fire responding to PRIORITY calls or engaging in PURSUITS. Neither one of those has any relevance to my point. If you want to be condescending towards me, at least educate yourself first. |
Actually I did read the other RCW before I posted. BUT since we're not talking about private carrier buses among other things, I left it out. My intent was not to be condescending (hence the ducking icon, signalling that I had a sense of humor even though I was about to be attacked), rather my intent was to have you form the defense of speeding in terms of the written law. In other words, please show me the exact law that allows LEOs to flout the laws that proletariats are subject to, both when responding to emergencys and when not responding to emergencys. Mordecai helped out with the emergency law, but it says lights or sirens/horn. Can you provide a non-emergency or non-lights/sirens/horn law or policy authorizing speeding that would APPEAR to other motorists as being for no reason? Frankly, I would love to see that there is a written standard for when to flout the law beyond simple officer discretion, which is inherently RIPE with the possibility of abuse. ETA: spelling |
And it's been that way for over a year.. We covered in on this forum when some people jumped up claiming that failure to sign was now a felony. Even then this applies
Which is a requirement that signing a ticket did not meet. |
|
I am genuinely not trying to pick on you, I simply wish to point out how LEO mentality being different from "the common folk" sets the stage for mistrust/misunderstanding. It always kills me when people post about cops "speeding". Do you have any idea where they are going or what they are doing? Of course you don't. All the more reason people need reassured that LEOs aren't abusing their authority. ...And I see cops tailgating from time to time, but it's almost always so that they can accurately read a license plate. So the possibility that an LEO MIGHT catch a criminal justifies an action that would otherwise be illegal? I will be the first to admit that sometimes LEOs/military/covert ops/etc. maybe should be given leeway to bend the law in order to catch known criminals, but I would never consent to "authority figures" bending the law BEFORE THEY EVEN KNOW IF THE SUBJECT IS A CRIMINAL. ...Would you like me to drive the speed limit on my way there? Personally, YES! Speeding to my house won't suddenly make my car appear out of nowhere, an LEOs presense at my house won't instantly douse all the flames at my house, and it won't change the assault that has already happened before I called 911. If the speed limit is really a safety issue as LEOs keep telling us, then they are risking their own safety as well as everyone they pass by speeding! And an LEO has no idea when they begin to respond, exactly who or how many people that may be along the path. So they are gambling with an unknown number of lives for the arguable benefit of a handful. That's not a risk I'd like my public servants to take when it can be avoided by simply keeping the foot out of the pedal! Am I aware that speed limits are intentionally set below speeds that the average joe considers safe, sure...but I wanted to point out the duplicitous mindset that says it's only a law that "civilians" must obey. Noone should be above the law. People are MORONS. When they see the lights, they freak out. Some do nothing at all, others dynamite their brakes right in front of you, others merge to the left instead of the right, and any number of other asinine moves. If officers used their overheads every time they went 15mph over the limit, it would take even longer to get to calls and there would be more accidents from idiots who don't know how to properly yield to emergency vehicles. Here is another example of the split mentality that changes the rules to suit however is fitting. If lights are a hazard or an impedance to an LEOs job, why do we even install them? Is it obvious yet why it is that some "civilians" have the idea that abuse is quite possible when the mentality displayed by "elite non-civilians" constantly changes to their advantage? |
Fortunately, there is no written standard that I am aware of. Fact of the matter is.... If we take to long to respond, people complain. But if we speed, people complain. If we shoot, people complain. But if we don't shoot, people complain. No matter what you do in this line of work, there's somebody waiting around the corner to bitch and moan about it. That said, I wouldn't trade it for anything. 
|
How were you able to follow police officers through an intersection where they had to use their emergency lights and sirens to get through? Since you see this "all the time", you must have some trick or a knack for not getting caught following speeding police cars. Basically, your statements do not pass my sniff test. Have you ever heard of a canceled call? Might be a perfectly reasonable explanation for shutting down the big hurry and getting in to line at the starbucks. |
Yeah, sure.... that's why you see so many threads about "I hate plumbers!" and "F'ing bank tellers!" and "Jack booted carpenters!" You can't honestly say that law enforcement officers endure the same level of BS as any other trade. If you believe that, Elton John wants his glasses back.... |
|
To maintain the peace, force should only be used as a responce to violence, but instead of looking the other way on someone not wearing a seatbelt they have elaborate traps of officers posing as pan handlers at off ramps in order to find additional things to harass people with. They even have amphasis patrols for seat belts as well as a State Patrol detachment for tinted windows that are too dark. It is no wonder at all why the people are angry. |
I don't disagree with one bit of that. But "they" does not represent all. Just like HCI would like to lump all gun owners into one ignorant hick, wife-beating, child molesting, life endangering mold.... Do you fit that mold? I assume not... and give you the benefit of the doubt as such. |
Let me guess, you're a cop?  (hopefully one who has a sense of humor) |
I'm a stand-up comedian. However, I occasionally moonlight as a jack-booted, baby-stomping, constitution raping thug... At least that's what some folks around here would have you believe.
|
Naw - Everybody loves FIREFIGHTERS!!! 
|
Soory about hat, I should have been more specific. Disregard, you already gave a good answer to another poster. Second, yes, I have seen where some have been speeding to. The Starbucks so they could get there before they closed. That one is pretty common. Places like coffee shops, Subway, the bank. All stuff I've seen. Yes, I've been bored and curious enough to actually follow where they went. The trooper I saw yesterday tailgated for several miles before traffic cleared enough to pass on the right. Didn't seem that important of a call if he could sit on someones ass for that long. So then why not film every one that does it? If it was legit, then nobody gets into trouble, but if they are just trying to get someplace before it closes then fuck them. Stolen car? Like my buddy that got carjacked at gunpoint and waited for three hours for a cop to show? |
|
Since I started this whole mess I am requesting it be locked. I did not intend it to turn into a cop bashing/cop responding mess. I thought it was interesting that they were doing it, the WSP I am sure did not ask to do it. They were told to do it by the powers that be. I blame the powers that be for using them like a revenue generator. I bet they like it less than I do. |