Police Quotas

[Anprionsa]

http://news.yahoo.com/video/police-o...151454247.html

We already all knew this. But will this gain any traction? The guy says taxation through fines. Just another tax then.

[Rukentuts]

http://news.yahoo.com/video/police-o...151454247.html

We already all knew this. But will this gain any traction? The guy says taxation through fines. Just another tax then.

Except it's a "tax" you don't qualify for if you obey the law.

[Roose]

Even more disturbing are the arrest quotas and the stop and frisks.

As for Alabama, they must ticket or they have no funds. Many places are like this. People refuse to pay taxes and police must bring in money or they have none. They focus mostly on out of state tags, but it does affect everyone.

[Anprionsa]

Except it's a "tax" you don't qualify for if you obey the law.

We already know police try to flub arrests and fines. You don't always "break" the law.

[Rukentuts]

We already know police try to flub arrests and fines. You don't always "break" the law.

Then challenge it in court. The state loses money when you take up court's time to get a ticket thrown out.

[Deleted]

Then challenge it in court. The state loses money when you take up court's time to get a ticket thrown out.

Don't you do too ?

[Rukentuts]

Don't you do too ?

When you're not busy working (i.e. contributing to the economy) and beating a bad ticket that's a double-whammy to the state.

Of course, depending on salary you might still get paid.

[Deleted]

http://news.yahoo.com/video/police-o...151454247.html

We already all knew this. But will this gain any traction? The guy says taxation through fines. Just another tax then.

People don't vote for politicians that want to raise taxes, so they have to hide them in ticket quotas and other such things.

Yes, it's a gigantic waste of tax payer money, but peoples ignorancy is here to stay.

[Kantalope]

Then challenge it in court. The state loses money when you take up court's time to get a ticket thrown out.

So do you when you have to take time off of work, travel expenses to the courthouse (parking is not usually free unless you're on jury duty), and the paying of court costs.

[Rukentuts]

So do you when you have to take time off of work, travel expenses to the courthouse (parking is not usually free unless you're on jury duty), and the paying of court costs.

You don't pay court costs when you are defending yourself criminally. You only pay the lawyer.

Which, for a speeding ticket, you really don't use.

In addition, you could seek restitution from the state. People just don't because it's a fucking hassle and most tickets are legit. Which brings me back to my point of actually following the law.

Got pulled over for not signalling a lane change? Yes, that's cheap, but it's a law for a reason (safety).

[Masark]

Except it's a "tax" you don't qualify for if you obey the law.

Except that's impossible.

Combine "drive the speed limit" with "don't drive slower than the speed of traffic (and traffic is moving at 20 above the limit)".

Unless you just simply forget about driving, you're breaking one of the laws.

[TirielWoW]

http://news.yahoo.com/video/police-o...151454247.html

We already all knew this. But will this gain any traction? The guy says taxation through fines. Just another tax then.

This has gone on for years. I'm somewhat surprised people are...well..surprised...that it happens. o_O

[Rukentuts]

Except that's impossible.

Combine "drive the speed limit" with "don't drive slower than the speed of traffic (and traffic is moving at 20 above the limit)".

Unless you just simply forget about driving, you're breaking one of the laws.

I didn't know the latter was a law.

Because I know there is a law in MN where if you speed you lose your right of way, and therefore I don't think the latter applies.

And Interstates have a posted minimum (40) I believe.

[TirielWoW]

I didn't know the latter was a law.

Because I know there is a law in MN where if you speed you lose your right of way, and therefore I don't think the latter applies.

And Interstates have a posted minimum (40) I believe.

They get you for impeding the flow of traffic. If you don't drive the same speed as the rest of the traffic, you can actually cause accidents.

[Rukentuts]

They get you for impeding the flow of traffic. If you don't drive the same speed as the rest of the traffic, you can actually cause accidents.

In Minnesota they do not (unless you're going under a posted minimum, and perhaps don't have hazards on) but I cannot speak for other states.

[Deleted]

They get you for impeding the flow of traffic. If you don't drive the same speed as the rest of the traffic, you can actually cause accidents.

I'm sure the law will have something like "normal speed" or such.

[Masark]

I didn't know the latter was a law.

Because I know there is a law in MN where if you speed you lose your right of way, and therefore I don't think the latter applies.

And Interstates have a posted minimum (40) I believe.

169.15 IMPEDING TRAFFIC; INTERSECTION GRIDLOCK.

Subdivision 1. Impeding traffic; slow speed.

No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law or except when the vehicle is temporarily unable to maintain a greater speed due to a combination of the weight of the vehicle and the grade of the highway.

The bolded bit is frequently absent in other states' versions.

[Rukentuts]

The bolded bit is frequently absent in other states' versions.

The bolded bit is there for school zones and work zones.

But from what you cited I really don't see a bullshittable clause that police could pull me over for doing 45mph in a 55pmh zone, even if the bolded was absent.

Ex. Say I got a fuckload of wood hanging out of my trunk for redoing my deck. If they pull me over for 40 in a 55 I could just argue it was "necessary for safe operation" i.e. my wood not busting all over the road.

[Kalyyn]

I don't know about whatever hellhole of a state you're in, but here in Indiana, most of the highway patrols set their radars to 75 (our speed limit is 60), and they still get their quotas made in under 2 hours of their shift. Once that is done, they will only pull you over if you are endangering the lives of others, because they run an extremely high risk of being run over every time they step out of their car.

Source: Indiana State Trooper

[Ethes]

The bolded bit is there for school zones and work zones.

But from what you cited I really don't see a bullshittable clause that police could pull me over for doing 45mph in a 55pmh zone, even if the bolded was absent.

Ex. Say I got a fuckload of wood hanging out of my trunk for redoing my deck. If they pull me over for 40 in a 55 I could just argue it was "necessary for safe operation" i.e. my wood not busting all over the road.

I think that clause was added to make sure that you can't decide to create traffic jams and waste everybody's time. You can't be pulled over or fined when driving the speed limit or slightly under the speed limit for this. If that does happen, you should fight it imo