Posted: 3/16/2012 12:54:34 PM EDT
|
Looks like the ticket thread got nuked.
Anyway, looks like the OP contacted the media: http://www.kptv.com/story/17172237/one-officer-one-violation-hundreds-of-ticketed-drivers |
|
Quoted: So Ofc Dalton does his job and people who are bad drivers cry about it. Why is this a story? Oh, he writes lots of them? Maybe people should learn to drive! Just don't say that to the OP of the old thread...  They really need to make a drivers license MUCH harder and more expensive to obtain in the US. Would really cut down on a lot of the BS. And as for this whole turning into the wrong lane thing, I have had quite a few problems with people doing this. It isn't just a revenue issue, it can certainly cause accidents. The morons out there get too used to turning left and going straight for the right lane instead of going into the left lane like they are supposed to. Not only does this interfere with a potential opposing traffic making a right turn into the same lane, but when you have a location where there are TWO left turn lanes, the idiots in the left most lane STILL go for the right lane. One example specifically where I have had MANY close calls, both in a semi truck and on my motorcycle, is in NW Portland at the end of the Fremont bridge, right at the intersection of Yeon and Nicolai. Then the assholes honk their horn and flip ME off for being in my own fucking lane - FUCK YOU. Too many idiot drivers out there not paying attention to where and what the fuck they are doing. So really, the actions of the OP of the original thread who seems to think that being ticketed for breaking the laws governing driving on a public right of way is unconstitutional, is actually the root of the cause of probably 40% of the road rage cases out there. |
|
Quoted:
Looks like the ticket thread got nuked. Anyway, looks like the OP contacted the media: http://www.kptv.com/story/17172237/one-officer-one-violation-hundreds-of-ticketed-drivers I just saw this on kptv.com and came here to give the OP of the other thread (the offender) crap for calling the media. Couldn't find the other thread but found this one. As far as I am concerned this was an extremely lowbrow move on the part of the "offender" . The cop was doing his job and the offender broke the law and admitted it. This is what is wrong with America now. The "offender" might as well finish it off by suing Beaverton PD for discrimination.  
Edit: I went and looked at all the other local news sites and didn't see any info, I wonder how many other news channels the offender called that passed on this non story before KPTV picked it up. Also fixed OP's link. |
I had the last entry on the original thread a couple of days ago commenting that the OP should grow up, go to court, accept whatever the outcome was, and quit whining. If that post caused the entire thread to be nuked I apologize (I didn't think it was that bad ). The OP appears to be more than a little OCD about his ticket. I'm with you guys - it had to be him to go to the media with this.
My motto has always been if you don't want the ticket don't break the law. |
|
Quoted:
I had the last entry on the original thread a couple of days ago commenting that the OP should grow up, go to court, accept whatever the outcome was, and quit whining. If that post caused the entire thread to be nuked I apologize (I didn't think it was that bad ). The OP appears to be more than a little OCD about his ticket. I'm with you guys - it had to be him to go to the media with this.
My motto has always been if you don't want the ticket don't break the law. Who else would it be? KPTV has all the same information that the offender listed in the other thread. He gave it to them in a nice neat little package. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So Ofc Dalton does his job and people who are bad drivers cry about it. Why is this a story? Oh, he writes lots of them? Maybe people should learn to drive! Just don't say that to the OP of the old thread...
They really need to make a drivers license MUCH harder and more expensive to obtain in the US. Would really cut down on a lot of the BS. And as for this whole turning into the wrong lane thing, I have had quite a few problems with people doing this. It isn't just a revenue issue, it can certainly cause accidents. The morons out there get too used to turning left and going straight for the right lane instead of going into the left lane like they are supposed to. Not only does this interfere with a potential opposing traffic making a right turn into the same lane, but when you have a location where there are TWO left turn lanes, the idiots in the left most lane STILL go for the right lane. One example specifically where I have had MANY close calls, both in a semi truck and on my motorcycle, is in NW Portland at the end of the Fremont bridge, right at the intersection of Yeon and Nicolai. Then the assholes honk their horn and flip ME off for being in my own fucking lane - FUCK YOU. Too many idiot drivers out there not paying attention to where and what the fuck they are doing. So really, the actions of the OP of the original thread who seems to think that being ticketed for breaking the laws governing driving on a public right of way is unconstitutional, is actually the root of the cause of probably 40% of the road rage cases out there. Double lefts? Sure, I can see that being an issue. They are usually designed where there is plenty of room to allow two large vehicles to turn at the same time. Single left, and people with a red light wanting to turn right? Fuck 'em. I waited my turn to use a much smaller time span to make my left turn. The through traffic light (and occasionally, a green right arrow) will be on a higher percent of the time. His original beef was that it was too outrageous of a ticket price for such a small infraction. The super cops made it out like he deserved any price issued on the ticket, because his infraction was the same thing as raping children. A few of the nice officers did chime in with their few cents, agreeing that the fine was hefty, but if it wasn't for those guys with their choice words about any offender, this wouldn't have gone this far. Ticket prices in Oregon are insanely priced. My friend was involved in a four car pileup recently, and the ticket was $435. The grandma who originally slammed on her brakes for no reason received no ticket, but everybody who hit somebody else in the rear was issued a fine. Should have been ~$60 tickets.... Hell, seat belt tickets are outrageous here too. It's cheaper to fight them. They'll even ticket you when you were wearing your belt the whole time, and make you prove your case, only reducing the charges... It's fucking stupid. On a related note, one of the scooter cops dumped his bike near my place this week, and my roomie's mother was on the scene, rendering aid (professional state funded caregiver). My roomie had this funny stare when she was telling him about it, and asked "What did you do that for?". I agree. Cop shouldn't have ran into a car, and should be ticketed for causing a wreck. |
|
Quoted:
Double lefts? Sure, I can see that being an issue. They are usually designed where there is plenty of room to allow two large vehicles to turn at the same time. Single left, and people with a red light wanting to turn right? Fuck 'em. I waited my turn to use a much smaller time span to make my left turn. The through traffic light (and occasionally, a green right arrow) will be on a higher percent of the time. His original beef was that it was too outrageous of a ticket price for such a small infraction. The super cops made it out like he deserved any price issued on the ticket, because his infraction was the same thing as raping children. A few of the nice officers did chime in with their few cents, agreeing that the fine was hefty, but if it wasn't for those guys with their choice words about any offender, this wouldn't have gone this far. Ticket prices in Oregon are insanely priced. My friend was involved in a four car pileup recently, and the ticket was $435. The grandma who originally slammed on her brakes for no reason received no ticket, but everybody who hit somebody else in the rear was issued a fine. Should have been ~$60 tickets.... Hell, seat belt tickets are outrageous here too. It's cheaper to fight them. They'll even ticket you when you were wearing your belt the whole time, and make you prove your case, only reducing the charges... It's fucking stupid. On a related note, one of the scooter cops dumped his bike near my place this week, and my roomie's mother was on the scene, rendering aid (professional state funded caregiver). My roomie had this funny stare when she was telling him about it, and asked "What did you do that for?". I agree. Cop shouldn't have ran into a car, and should be ticketed for causing a wreck. I'll chime in on this one, think of intersections like SW 229/SW TV Hwy, non protected turn lanes, green lights, no arrows, one car turning right onto EB TV Hwy from NB 229 and other turning left onto EB TV Hwy...if both turn into their proper lanes no issues, and traffic flows smoothly, if not then they crash As for yer roomies mother rendering aid, good on her, and she has all of our thanks....as for him "dumping" his bike, he was running code three lights and sirens to an emergency call when a car turned in front of him and he struck it. But it's nice to know you think so little of police officers that you wouldnt attempt to assist if you saw one in distress 
|
|
A few things gentlemen...
Original thread was deleted as per the request of the OP. As long as this one stays mellow then no issues. Just please dont turn it into a bash thread or I will have no choice but to lock it. That said, I agree, dont want a ticket, follow the law. Dont like the law, vote to change it. Dont blame a LEO for doing his job. This, IMHO, is no different then a DUI saturation or construction zone saturation. When there is a problem identified you up the patrols until the people start to comply with the rules. Very simple. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So Ofc Dalton does his job and people who are bad drivers cry about it. Why is this a story? Oh, he writes lots of them? Maybe people should learn to drive! Just don't say that to the OP of the old thread...
They really need to make a drivers license MUCH harder and more expensive to obtain in the US. Would really cut down on a lot of the BS. And as for this whole turning into the wrong lane thing, I have had quite a few problems with people doing this. It isn't just a revenue issue, it can certainly cause accidents. The morons out there get too used to turning left and going straight for the right lane instead of going into the left lane like they are supposed to. Not only does this interfere with a potential opposing traffic making a right turn into the same lane, but when you have a location where there are TWO left turn lanes, the idiots in the left most lane STILL go for the right lane. One example specifically where I have had MANY close calls, both in a semi truck and on my motorcycle, is in NW Portland at the end of the Fremont bridge, right at the intersection of Yeon and Nicolai. Then the assholes honk their horn and flip ME off for being in my own fucking lane - FUCK YOU. Too many idiot drivers out there not paying attention to where and what the fuck they are doing. So really, the actions of the OP of the original thread who seems to think that being ticketed for breaking the laws governing driving on a public right of way is unconstitutional, is actually the root of the cause of probably 40% of the road rage cases out there. Just a note: I grew up in California and I'm pretty sure if you were turning left on a non protected green light the guy coming at you turning right had full right of way. He could take any lane. My family was pretty freaked out when we moved here and we are making a RIGHT ON A GREEN and the oncoming people are hauling ass around the intersection making lefts in FRONT OF US! I finally looked in the oregon DMV driver book and it does say that if turning into a road with 2 lanes you can turn left next to the guy turning right. I'm a truck driver and this would really fuck up a big rig, because he needs 3.5 lanes to make a turn. That meens he'd need the lane he's in, both lanes of the street he's turning into plus the bike lanes. So just to make a right I guess you yield to oncoming left-turners? Seems wacky to me. Another weird thing I'd NEVER seen before moving here, when you turn RIGHT into an onramp, it has a YIELD sign. WTF? You tiurn right, then YIELD to people who were coming at you turning left?  It just seems stupid.
|
|
Quoted:
A few things gentlemen... Original thread was deleted as per the request of the OP. As long as this one stays mellow then no issues. Just please dont turn it into a bash thread or I will have no choice but to lock it. That said, I agree, dont want a ticket, follow the law. Dont like the law, vote to change it. Dont blame a LEO for doing his job. This, IMHO, is no different then a DUI saturation or construction zone saturation. When there is a problem identified you up the patrols until the people start to comply with the rules. Very simple. I agree with you, but this is usually a concerted effort by all the units, not a pet peeve of just one... |
|
Quoted: Ticket prices in Oregon are insanely priced. My friend was involved in a four car pileup recently, and the ticket was $435. The grandma who originally slammed on her brakes for no reason received no ticket, but everybody who hit somebody else in the rear was issued a fine. Should have been ~$60 tickets.... That's nothing compared to the tickets in CA... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ticket prices in Oregon are insanely priced. My friend was involved in a four car pileup recently, and the ticket was $435. The grandma who originally slammed on her brakes for no reason received no ticket, but everybody who hit somebody else in the rear was issued a fine. Should have been ~$60 tickets.... That's nothing compared to the tickets in CA... Yup. Its just another way for a backasswards struggling state govt to bring in revenue... |
|
I think it is funny that the OP starts a thread wherein he admits guilt, then complains about the penalty. After he doesn't get the sympathy he is looking for in the thread he started, he asks that the thread be delete. Then, some unknown person takes it to the press (there is only one really valid "suspect" in going to the press, but I'm open to other suggestions) for more commentary.
I just wish the distance between where I live and the court's location didn't preclude me from going to court. It would certainly be interesting to watch what happens when officer Dalton produces the OP's posting containing an admission of guilt. I think watching such an occasion would make for some pretty entertaining court room theatrics. |
|
As for the fairly well agreed on complaint that Oregon's traffic fines are too high, that would be a matter for voters to take to their public representatives for modification. If the people elected to office don't do what the voters want, then vote 'em out of office.
On the other hand, if the majority of people who vote like the system of traffic fines the way it is, then I guess the rest of us just have to either live with it, or drive in a way that doesn't result in our getting a citation. |
|
I think some people just have too much time on their hands and don't wanna take responsibility for their actions. I don't write tickets cause I LIKE to, I write them because some people and their driving habits make them deserve a pinch. We all need brought back in line from time to time, yep, even me. When I was still a supervisor with another agency, I got stopped by CHP for speeding and pinched. No badgeing, no police ID, no excuse. I let my attention to my speed lax and got pinched. Paid my ticket and haven't had a stop since in my POV because the pinch I got woke me up and made me more aware.
This goof just took it personal and decided to come unhinged and make a project out of the officer for some type of revenge. So, good for you buddy, you got your 15 minutes of fame and got to pound your chest a little. Ultimately I'm betting the ticket did its job and you'll be more careful making your turns from now on.
|
|
Quoted:
I think some people just have too much time on their hands and don't wanna take responsibility for their actions. I don't write tickets cause I LIKE to, I write them because some people and their driving habits make them deserve a pinch. We all need brought back in line from time to time, yep, even me. When I was still a supervisor with another agency, I got stopped by CHP for speeding and pinched. No badgeing, no police ID, no excuse. I let my attention to my speed lax and got pinched. Paid my ticket and haven't had a stop since in my POV because the pinch I got woke me up and made me more aware. This goof just took it personal and decided to come unhinged and make a project out of the officer for some type of revenge. So, good for you buddy, you got your 15 minutes of fame and got to pound your chest a little. Ultimately I'm betting the ticket did its job and you'll be more careful making your turns from now on.Best thing is the public will have forgotten the news article a day or less after they heard it....The OP of that thread will remember his improper turn for years if not life. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
A few things gentlemen... Original thread was deleted as per the request of the OP. As long as this one stays mellow then no issues. Just please dont turn it into a bash thread or I will have no choice but to lock it. That said, I agree, dont want a ticket, follow the law. Dont like the law, vote to change it. Dont blame a LEO for doing his job. This, IMHO, is no different then a DUI saturation or construction zone saturation. When there is a problem identified you up the patrols until the people start to comply with the rules. Very simple. I agree with you, but this is usually a concerted effort by all the units, not a pet peeve of just one... Agreed......to your agreed. 
I have family and many friends that are LE and know that there are guys that chase tail lights and those that dont. Those that chase em do little else. I was on a ride along with a friend and he pointed out they have one officer that writes a shit ton of traffic tickets but rarely interacts with people beyond that. My friend on the other hand talks to everyone and does more community style policing. As a result his arrest record is much higher.He does way more good then then the officer writing mass tickets. Two different kinds of police work producing two different types of results. |
|
So who ever called got a ticket for not knowing how to drive in a safe manor and when peepee got thwacked by a cop doing his job protecting other motorists and peds alike they snivel to the news?
Throw man card in trash along with license and grow the hell up. |
|
Quoted:
As for the fairly well agreed on complaint that Oregon's traffic fines are too high, that would be a matter for voters to take to their public representatives for modification. If the people elected to office don't do what the voters want, then vote 'em out of office. On the other hand, if the majority of people who vote like the system of traffic fines the way it is, then I guess the rest of us just have to either live with it, or drive in a way that doesn't result in our getting a citation. Are you suggesting that we, the people, voted for increased ticket prices? I inspect every inch of my ballots, which I have been receiving in Oregon for almost 4 years now, and I have never seen anything on it hinting at increased ticket prices, yet I do recall the seat belt tickets going up in price $5. That is a 6% increase from it's old price, if my mental math is serving me well. SMPRider; My roomie's mother was also a witness to the scooter accident. The officer passed everybody on the right, approaching what was a red light for him, and the traffic turning left from Kinnaman could not see him. Rather than veering right, around the back of the car already in the intersection, he veered left, into the direction the car was headed. Lights and siren or not, those are only a request for the right of way, not a guarantee that traffic will be stopped, especially on that semi-blind corner, which leads down hill, around a slight curve, and has a bad angle. As far as me not helping... I've never seen the motorcycle officers serve and protect. They are just nitpicky, bitter guys who are angry that they have to ride a motorcycle in the rain all year round. They have never been friendly to me (where as sedan officers have once in a while), and take violations very personally. While kindly stating my opinion of seat belt laws from a constitutional level, one scooter cop even said "I don't give a fuck what the constitution says". Not really the kind of person that I would help, for sure. |
|
As a side note, the base fines for violations (aka ticket prices), went down on 1/1/12. I was surprised, as they have steadily been going up. Base fine on a D violation (the lowest) is now $110. C is $160, B is $260 and A is $435. You can see a breakdown, based on ORS, here: http://www.pocketpress.com/Samples/ORBail.pdf
In general, I think the fines are still too high, with some exceptions. Driving Uninsured is currently a B violation ($260), plus a license suspension if found guilty. It should at least be an A violation, if not a crime (misdemeanor). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
As for the fairly well agreed on complaint that Oregon's traffic fines are too high, that would be a matter for voters to take to their public representatives for modification. If the people elected to office don't do what the voters want, then vote 'em out of office. On the other hand, if the majority of people who vote like the system of traffic fines the way it is, then I guess the rest of us just have to either live with it, or drive in a way that doesn't result in our getting a citation. Are you suggesting that we, the people, voted for increased ticket prices? I inspect every inch of my ballots, which I have been receiving in Oregon for almost 4 years now, and I have never seen anything on it hinting at increased ticket prices, yet I do recall the seat belt tickets going up in price $5. That is a 6% increase from it's old price, if my mental math is serving me well. SMPRider; My roomie's mother was also a witness to the scooter accident. The officer passed everybody on the right, approaching what was a red light for him, and the traffic turning left from Kinnaman could not see him. Rather than veering right, around the back of the car already in the intersection, he veered left, into the direction the car was headed. Lights and siren or not, those are only a request for the right of way, not a guarantee that traffic will be stopped, especially on that semi-blind corner, which leads down hill, around a slight curve, and has a bad angle. As far as me not helping... I've never seen the motorcycle officers serve and protect. They are just nitpicky, bitter guys who are angry that they have to ride a motorcycle in the rain all year round. They have never been friendly to me (where as sedan officers have once in a while), and take violations very personally. While kindly stating my opinion of seat belt laws from a constitutional level, one scooter cop even said "I don't give a fuck what the constitution says". Not really the kind of person that I would help, for sure. I would love to hear your opinion of seatbelts from a constitutional level. Considering driving on a public roadway is a privelege and not a right, which is why you are required to have a license and obey traffic laws. I don't think motorcycle cops are bitter because they have to ride in the rain, since it's a special assignment that they chose to get. More likely, they are adamant about enforcing traffic laws because that's their primary responsibility. Despite your negative view of all motorcycle cops, the one that got injured is a nice guy and if you had stopped to assist, you may have found that out for yourself. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
As for the fairly well agreed on complaint that Oregon's traffic fines are too high, that would be a matter for voters to take to their public representatives for modification. If the people elected to office don't do what the voters want, then vote 'em out of office. On the other hand, if the majority of people who vote like the system of traffic fines the way it is, then I guess the rest of us just have to either live with it, or drive in a way that doesn't result in our getting a citation. BEGIN QUOTE: Are you suggesting that we, the people, voted for increased ticket prices? I inspect every inch of my ballots, which I have been receiving in Oregon for almost 4 years now, and I have never seen anything on it hinting at increased ticket prices, yet I do recall the seat belt tickets going up in price $5. That is a 6% increase from it's old price, if my mental math is serving me well. END QUOTE Of course you didn't get to vote for traffic fines...you know that because you looked at your ballot. But you DID have the chance to vote for the people who DO set the fines. That was what I said in the first paragraph of my posting. Re-read the first paragraph in my posting, you will see that I said "If the PEOPLE ELECTED TO OFFICE", "not the fines you voted to impose on yourself". There is a very large, and significant difference on the two. In either case, changing either one requires a majority of the voters. If enough voters don't agree about the fines being excessive or unreasonable, the minority will simply have to live with the results of the election, or move somewhere that has fines they agree with. If you don't like what the people elected to office are doing, get rid of them. And that includes the people who impose fines that the majority of voters consider unfair, or excessive. |
|
Let me tell you guys, working traffic all day is a pain in the butt. Nobody every did anything you stopped them for and they ALL lie.
Every single person is convinced they didn't do anything wrong, they all want to argue with you, and they won't concede a point. I was a reserve for a number of years and I was always amazed at how civil most of the traffic guys were with all the abuse they took. While that doesn't excuse unprofessionalism I doubt that very many of us on this board could live up to the standard we expect from these people. While there isn't any excuse for rudeness how about we cut them a little slack? |
|
Many people fail to remember that the traffic officers are there because someone who doles out our tax dollars thought it would be a good idea. If the need or desire for these officers wasn't there, they wouldn't be working traffic.
This goes back to the same thing I said about "unfair, or unreasonable" traffic fines being set by the legislature. If the people we put in the position to do the "public's work" aren't doing what the majority of people want them to do, they need to be removed from those positions. It is ultimately up to us, "the public" to decide what we want public servants to do, and how we want them to do it. If those in public positions aren't doing what the majority wants, then we should insist on change, or their removal from those positions. I want traffic officers to enforce the traffic laws, the same way I want the people who fix pot holes to fix pot holes, and firefighters to fight fires. I don't want any of those people telling us that they just don't feel like doing their job..it is what they were hired to do. Rant over. |
|
Quoted:
I would love to hear your opinion of seatbelts from a constitutional level. Considering driving on a public roadway is a privelege and not a right, which is why you are required to have a license and obey traffic laws. I don't think motorcycle cops are bitter because they have to ride in the rain, since it's a special assignment that they chose to get. More likely, they are adamant about enforcing traffic laws because that's their primary responsibility. Despite your negative view of all motorcycle cops, the one that got injured is a nice guy and if you had stopped to assist, you may have found that out for yourself. I can answer that one pretty easily. Because you don't just ticket those with a license. You will also ticket passengers who never obtained one. If somebody never signed your agreement, how can they be in violation of that agreement? Seat belt laws themselves, depending on which state (and their particular laws), violate 4th, 5th, 9th and the 14th amendments. Quoted:
Re-read the first paragraph in my posting, you will see that I said "If the PEOPLE ELECTED TO OFFICE", "not the fines you voted to impose on yourself". There is a very large, and significant difference on the two. In either case, changing either one requires a majority of the voters. If enough voters don't agree about the fines being excessive or unreasonable, the minority will simply have to live with the results of the election, or move somewhere that has fines they agree with. If you don't like what the people elected to office are doing, get rid of them. And that includes the people who impose fines that the majority of voters consider unfair, or excessive. You make it sound like it is easy to get rid of unwanted elected officials. Remember the Clinton impeachment? He still served his whole second term before the process was over. Unless you have enough coke to plant in their office desk, you can't just wish them away. Again, I vote every time I get a ballot in the mail, and the people I want aren't in office. Honestly, I hate how Oregon is ran, and I long for the days when Michigan can thrive.... So I can move back. Quoted:
Many people fail to remember that the traffic officers are there because someone who doles out our tax dollars thought it would be a good idea. If the need or desire for these officers wasn't there, they wouldn't be working traffic. This goes back to the same thing I said about "unfair, or unreasonable" traffic fines being set by the legislature. If the people we put in the position to do the "public's work" aren't doing what the majority of people want them to do, they need to be removed from those positions. It is ultimately up to us, "the public" to decide what we want public servants to do, and how we want them to do it. If those in public positions aren't doing what the majority wants, then we should insist on change, or their removal from those positions. I want traffic officers to enforce the traffic laws, the same way I want the people who fix pot holes to fix pot holes, and firefighters to fight fires. I don't want any of those people telling us that they just don't feel like doing their job..it is what they were hired to do. Rant over. Since we are paying for police protection, I would rather have every officer be of capacity that can take care of serious matters. I don't see the motorcycle guys being the ones responding to domestic assaults, rapes, burglaries, robberies, muggings, etc, etc. I've not once seen a motorcycle officer on my block. Bang for buck, I'd rather have officers who can actually do some good in the community by reducing crime, and doing traffic when they are idle. The other thing, I never see officers pulling people over for impeding traffic. People doing 20-25 in a 45, stopping at every side street, etc. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would love to hear your opinion of seatbelts from a constitutional level. Considering driving on a public roadway is a privelege and not a right, which is why you are required to have a license and obey traffic laws. I don't think motorcycle cops are bitter because they have to ride in the rain, since it's a special assignment that they chose to get. More likely, they are adamant about enforcing traffic laws because that's their primary responsibility. Despite your negative view of all motorcycle cops, the one that got injured is a nice guy and if you had stopped to assist, you may have found that out for yourself. I can answer that one pretty easily. Because you don't just ticket those with a license. You will also ticket passengers who never obtained one. If somebody never signed your agreement, how can they be in violation of that agreement? Seat belt laws themselves, depending on which state (and their particular laws), violate 4th, 5th, 9th and the 14th amendments. Quoted:
Re-read the first paragraph in my posting, you will see that I said "If the PEOPLE ELECTED TO OFFICE", "not the fines you voted to impose on yourself". There is a very large, and significant difference on the two. In either case, changing either one requires a majority of the voters. If enough voters don't agree about the fines being excessive or unreasonable, the minority will simply have to live with the results of the election, or move somewhere that has fines they agree with. If you don't like what the people elected to office are doing, get rid of them. And that includes the people who impose fines that the majority of voters consider unfair, or excessive. You make it sound like it is easy to get rid of unwanted elected officials. Remember the Clinton impeachment? He still served his whole second term before the process was over. Unless you have enough coke to plant in their office desk, you can't just wish them away. Again, I vote every time I get a ballot in the mail, and the people I want aren't in office. Honestly, I hate how Oregon is ran, and I long for the days when Michigan can thrive.... So I can move back. Quoted:
Many people fail to remember that the traffic officers are there because someone who doles out our tax dollars thought it would be a good idea. If the need or desire for these officers wasn't there, they wouldn't be working traffic. This goes back to the same thing I said about "unfair, or unreasonable" traffic fines being set by the legislature. If the people we put in the position to do the "public's work" aren't doing what the majority of people want them to do, they need to be removed from those positions. It is ultimately up to us, "the public" to decide what we want public servants to do, and how we want them to do it. If those in public positions aren't doing what the majority wants, then we should insist on change, or their removal from those positions. I want traffic officers to enforce the traffic laws, the same way I want the people who fix pot holes to fix pot holes, and firefighters to fight fires. I don't want any of those people telling us that they just don't feel like doing their job..it is what they were hired to do. Rant over. Since we are paying for police protection, I would rather have every officer be of capacity that can take care of serious matters. I don't see the motorcycle guys being the ones responding to domestic assaults, rapes, burglaries, robberies, muggings, etc, etc. I've not once seen a motorcycle officer on my block. Bang for buck, I'd rather have officers who can actually do some good in the community by reducing crime, and doing traffic when they are idle. The other thing, I never see officers pulling people over for impeding traffic. People doing 20-25 in a 45, stopping at every side street, etc. I doubt in our life time , Michigan will ever thrive again. Last time I was home, Detroit was almost a ghost town. Also, I know Traffic guys that have been on calls with me, just because you don't see every call, don't mean it don't happen. Don't paint them all with the same broad brush. This is the same mentality that everyone who owns a semi auto rifle is a terrorist waiting to happen. We should all know that is complete BFS! Traffic guys find lots of crimes. I know of more than a few cases they pulled someone over for little stuff and found MAJOR crimes. Everything from DUII, Meth, Kidnappings ect.. . I don't write chippy pinches, unless the violator really needs it. Normally they talk themselves in to it. I personally would never want to be a Motor Officer, it must suck to be in the rain all the time. I get to get back in to the car, turn on the heater, warm up and maybe even dry out a little. Being in the rain sucks, the other night I had water come out of the top of my boots and my radio started to short out. Motorolas maybe water resistant, but when a pod of Orcas goes swimming by, it maybe raining a little hard Did I cry about it? Heck no, the POS needed to go to jail in big way and the best part, he was as wet as I was. Some of the best advice I ever got from my FTO, remember they are people too. It goes both ways. In between my last Dept and the one I am at now, I got pulled over. I deserved a cite, I was in the wrong. The Trooper gave me a warning, he didn't know I use to be a cop. He just cut me some slack and I learned my lesson. My come as a big shock, the city doesn't get to keep all or even most of the money from the cite. The Officer doesn't get paid per cite. So when you are talking on your cell, not wearing your seat belt , no insurance and you blow through a Red light and T bone a family in a mini van and the Officer has to step in blood and glass and sees the trapped 4 year old girl that use to look like his own kid, maybe you can yell at the Officer for writing the cite. Yes, I watched one of my friends get cussed at for being the bad guy and writing the lady up. |
|
Modly-I get what yer saying about having more officers protecting the people, but honestly motor vehicle crashes account for a significantly higher amount of injuries and death than violent crimes. Although some may see motor cops as ticket writing robots, the truth is their job is to protect motorists from those that break the law and endanger, and raise insurance rates, for everyone. The truth of the matter is, if cops only gave warnings, then people would never follow the rules, but for the 5-10 minute inconvenience. People sometimes need to be hit where it hurts (The wallet) to correct their behavior.
As far as yer seatbelt argument for a passenger with no license, I ask one simple question....does that person own the road that the car they are riding in is driving on? I didn't think so....if they are riding in a car, on a public roadway, then by doing so, they have agreed to follow the rules, or simply not ride in a motor vehicle on a public roadway. I get yer rationale though, it's yer body and yer life/safety and you should be free to do with it as u like, but the reality is un belted drivers cost the public more money than those who wear them. Crashes tie up resources and medical care is either covered by insurance, which we all get to help foot the bill with higher premiums, or they flat out can't pay for medical treatment and again we get to foot that bill. Bottom line, there are more with a vested interest than just the numbnut who doesnt wanna click it! |
|
Modly,
I never said it was easy to get rid of politicians, but that is what needs to be done. Lots of things that would be useful aren't easy. If it were easy, it would be done lots more often. In the final analysis, that is what needs to be done. Lots of complaining by me, you, or anyone else still will need to have the eventual change of statute. There are plenty of statute changes that took a long time, but people who wanted them kept on working at it. Medical marijuana is a good example. There are lots of things that I wish police would do, and things I wish they would NOT do. Putting people in jail for some crimes doesn't make lots of sense to me when our public safety dollars are so sparse. If I were king, there are many things I would change, but I'm not king, and I realize that the reality is without legislative change, not much will be done differently. I keep thinking about all the laws that I wish weren't enforced at all, so police could focus on other laws and really get some of the work done that is important to me personally. But again, I don't get to directly set public policy. But indirectly, I can help let government know what I want done by voting and becoming politically active. Any whining I do will only serve to alienate anyone who might otherwise listen to a rational discussion about why change needs to happen. |
| Yes, the legislature reduced the base fines on tickets in Oregon, but penalty assessments and other fines mean your ticket price will vary depending on the city, county, or state agency that writes it up. In Washington County, who has the most expensive ticket prices? Beaverton! There are a lot of minor traffic offenses that result in punitive fines, which I feel is the most unfair aspect of the traffic enforcement system. This feeds the perception that money is the primary motive for traffic tickets with safety merely being incidental. |
|
Quoted:
Yes, the legislature reduced the base fines on tickets in Oregon, but penalty assessments and other fines mean your ticket price will vary depending on the city, county, or state agency that writes it up. In Washington County, who has the most expensive ticket prices? Beaverton! There are a lot of minor traffic offenses that result in punitive fines, which I feel is the most unfair aspect of the traffic enforcement system. This feeds the perception that money is the primary motive for traffic tickets with safety merely being incidental. I may be mistaken, as I work for county so we didn't add extras on before, but I think the new presumptive fine language was to prevent cities from adding on other fees. Everything I've been told is the fines are all now the same regardless of what agency writes the ticket. If someone else has real world experience, since the new law went into effect, please let me know. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes, the legislature reduced the base fines on tickets in Oregon, but penalty assessments and other fines mean your ticket price will vary depending on the city, county, or state agency that writes it up. In Washington County, who has the most expensive ticket prices? Beaverton! There are a lot of minor traffic offenses that result in punitive fines, which I feel is the most unfair aspect of the traffic enforcement system. This feeds the perception that money is the primary motive for traffic tickets with safety merely being incidental. I may be mistaken, as I work for county so we didn't add extras on before, but I think the new presumptive fine language was to prevent cities from adding on other fees. Everything I've been told is the fines are all now the same regardless of what agency writes the ticket. If someone else has real world experience, since the new law went into effect, please let me know. 
That's exactly correct. It's because of all of the varying fees, costs, assessments, and assorted whatnottery that they changed the fine structure. At one time counties, cities, and even individual courts could impose additional fines at the stroke of a pen. That's all gone away.* Now, this doesn't mean that there aren't still variations - the presumptive fine is lower than the former "base fine," and minimums have dropped even further, but that doesn't mean that there won't be differences between the way cities apply minimum fines or other programs (i.e. traffic school). And ORS 153.061(7) is still good law... |
|
In all fairness, most government entities are so hard up for cash that they will do damned near anything they can think of to generate income. I'm one of those who votes against most levies unless it is for fire/police, and even then I think hard about it.
After recently moving from Oregon (I lived there for over 50 years) to Washington, Oregon doesn't seem nearly as bad. It seems like Washington state has their hand out every time I turn around.. Auto licenses are only done for a shorter time so they can get more money for renewal. Personal licenses are the same way... I checked some of the on line places that monitor how much of a tax burden each state has, and I was right...washington state does get lots more even without an income tax. But, I continue to believe that it is up to us, the voters to insist on the changes we want enacted. With traffic fines, licensing fees, and any other issues that the legislature has power over. Tell 'em what we want done, and if they won't do it (at any level of government), then seek to get those in power booted out. Or, simply accept that the majority of people either don't agree with what we want, or are too damned apathetic to do anything or care about anything (as long as the government freebies continue anyhow). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes, the legislature reduced the base fines on tickets in Oregon, but penalty assessments and other fines mean your ticket price will vary depending on the city, county, or state agency that writes it up. In Washington County, who has the most expensive ticket prices? Beaverton! There are a lot of minor traffic offenses that result in punitive fines, which I feel is the most unfair aspect of the traffic enforcement system. This feeds the perception that money is the primary motive for traffic tickets with safety merely being incidental. I may be mistaken, as I work for county so we didn't add extras on before, but I think the new presumptive fine language was to prevent cities from adding on other fees. Everything I've been told is the fines are all now the same regardless of what agency writes the ticket. If someone else has real world experience, since the new law went into effect, please let me know. I got nailed by the OSP yesterday, and researched the presumptive fine structure. You are correct, it has unified the fine structure. The part that concerns me is the presumptive fine is not the maximum fine you can be nailed for. It makes me wonder about those who choose to contest their ticket, will they be fined above the presumptive fine? Are you going to be stiffed by the judge if you plead not guilty and lose? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes, the legislature reduced the base fines on tickets in Oregon, but penalty assessments and other fines mean your ticket price will vary depending on the city, county, or state agency that writes it up. In Washington County, who has the most expensive ticket prices? Beaverton! There are a lot of minor traffic offenses that result in punitive fines, which I feel is the most unfair aspect of the traffic enforcement system. This feeds the perception that money is the primary motive for traffic tickets with safety merely being incidental. I may be mistaken, as I work for county so we didn't add extras on before, but I think the new presumptive fine language was to prevent cities from adding on other fees. Everything I've been told is the fines are all now the same regardless of what agency writes the ticket. If someone else has real world experience, since the new law went into effect, please let me know. I got nailed by the OSP yesterday, and researched the presumptive fine structure. You are correct, it has unified the fine structure. The part that concerns me is the presumptive fine is not the maximum fine you can be nailed for. It makes me wonder about those who choose to contest their ticket, will they be fined above the presumptive fine? Are you going to be stiffed by the judge if you plead not guilty and lose? My guess is it limits how much a judge can reduce the fine. I know our justice court judge is super lenient and reduces fines as much as he can, as long as you have a decent driving record. |
|
Quoted:My guess is it limits how much a judge can reduce the fine. I know our justice court judge is super lenient and reduces fines as much as he can, as long as you have a decent driving record.
The new "presumptive fines" are lower than the old "base fines" by about 10%. Give or take. And all of the old costs and fees that COULD be assessed "outside" the fine are now rolled into the single payment to the state. The new minimum fines, which are as low as the state will allow a court to go, are about half of what the old minimum fines were in 2011. Again, give or take a bit. |
|
For anyone that's interested, here's the full info on the new presumptive fine schedule:
SOF-12 |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes, the legislature reduced the base fines on tickets in Oregon, but penalty assessments and other fines mean your ticket price will vary depending on the city, county, or state agency that writes it up. In Washington County, who has the most expensive ticket prices? Beaverton! There are a lot of minor traffic offenses that result in punitive fines, which I feel is the most unfair aspect of the traffic enforcement system. This feeds the perception that money is the primary motive for traffic tickets with safety merely being incidental. I may be mistaken, as I work for county so we didn't add extras on before, but I think the new presumptive fine language was to prevent cities from adding on other fees. Everything I've been told is the fines are all now the same regardless of what agency writes the ticket. If someone else has real world experience, since the new law went into effect, please let me know. I got nailed by the OSP yesterday, and researched the presumptive fine structure. You are correct, it has unified the fine structure. The part that concerns me is the presumptive fine is not the maximum fine you can be nailed for. It makes me wonder about those who choose to contest their ticket, will they be fined above the presumptive fine? Are you going to be stiffed by the judge if you plead not guilty and lose? I've been to a lot of traffic hearings and in my experience the judges are very lenient when the defendant has a hearing as long as he/she doesn't blatantly lie in their testimony. The only time I've seen them fine them the full "bail" or increase the presumptive fine is when the defendant makes a claim that is shown to be a lie when I play my DVD on rebuttal. Judges HATE that 
|
|
"jestersdead
I've been to a lot of traffic hearings and in my experience the judges are very lenient when the defendant has a hearing as long as he/she doesn't blatantly lie in their testimony. The only time I've seen them fine them the full "bail" or increase the presumptive fine is when the defendant makes a claim that is shown to be a lie when I play my DVD on rebuttal. Judges HATE that "
The Judge in my old city loved DVDs of the stops. My favorite was a 17 year old gal that could have gotten diversion, 35 in a school zone. She decided to fight it. The first words out of my mouth were "this stop is being recorded." She told me "It's my mom's truck .if I don't go fast up hill, it will stall". I walk in to Muni Court and the gal is there and her mom is giving me the big FU stink eye. She came with pictures two blocks before the school zone, saying this is where the stop took place. I had good notes and played the DVD of the stop. When she said "it's my mom's truck, if I don't go fast up hill it will stall" her mom turned from me to her daughter and said "I don't care what the judge gives you, forget about driving for a long time!" I guess she lied to Mommy also. The Judge reminder her about perjury. On the way out, the mom came up to me and apologized for wasting my time and made her daughter apologize for lying and driving to fast in a school zone. For the next few months , I saw the Mom picking her daughter up from school still. The Mom waved the daughter had the saddest look on her face. There are good parents out there. |
|
I have seen some very entertaining things happen in court rooms. I think that people who have never been in a courtroom would find it most entertaining to sit through a half day of arraignments, motions, probation violation hearings, and so on. Most of the judges (a few exceptions of course) showed not only the required legal knowledge, but an amazing amount of common sense.
Most Judges see through lies and bullshit pretty quickly. |
|
Quoted:
By the way, does anyone know when the OP goes to court for the ticket that started all this? Will we get an update following the OP's court appearance? It would be very interesting to learn what happened at the hearing. He probably already went and lost. That is probably why he ran to Wilamette Week, and anyone that would listen, with the story. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: By the way, does anyone know when the OP goes to court for the ticket that started all this? Will we get an update following the OP's court appearance? It would be very interesting to learn what happened at the hearing. He probably already went and lost. That is probably why he ran to Wilamette Week, and anyone that would listen, with the story. This is my guess. Isn't it usually about 30 days from ticket to payment due around here? Then if you contest it there is another wait, took me about a month and a half after the original date on the ticket before I actually went before a judge(got the ticket July 24th, due Aug 24th, went to court on Oct 7th - and won  ). Original thread indicated ticket was given on 2/14(1st page of old thread was cached on Google, so I saved it as a PDF)Which reminds me... I once got a ticket in California, IIRC it was early August or thereabouts. I pestered those poor guys in the courthouse forever - they write so many tickets along the I-5 corridor in that county, that my ticket wasn't in their computer system(and thus could not get any info on it or pay it) until late January. |