Airport Police vs Romulus Police

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by azoomm

So, you are for bleach in the pool?

I understand your point, and agree. Though, with so many laws on the books... can we go back to a more simple time when common sense prevailed? Like, when texting in your car wasn't an idea (for example).

I've been corresponding with various officials in Provincial government about this very issue, for some months now, because some representatives are trying to push through a whole shit-load of nanny laws that add needless complexity to our Highway Traffic Act. Where things like texting are involved we already have a law that covers it quite adequately. It's called, "Operation of a vehicle without due care and attention" (what you would refer to as 'careless driving'). Nothing more than enforcement of this law is needed, in order to correct this issue.

Instead they want to pass specific laws that cover the use of electronic devices, like Blackberry and GPS, in cars. What about the people who juggle a cup of coffee, newspaper, and cigarette while driving? Should we also pass a specific law to cover that? No because, as I said, that one law takes all into account.

[Corey]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

I've been corresponding with various officials in Provincial government about this very issue, for some months now, because some representatives are trying to push through a whole shit-load of nanny laws that add needless complexity to our Highway Traffic Act. Where things like texting are involved we already have a law that covers it quite adequately. It's called, "Operation of a vehicle without due care and attention" (what you would refer to as 'careless driving'). Nothing more than enforcement of this law is needed, in order to correct this issue.

Instead they want to pass specific laws that cover the use of electronic devices, like Blackberry and GPS, in cars. What about the people who juggle a cup of coffee, newspaper, and cigarette while driving? Should we also pass a specific law to cover that? No because, as I said, that one law takes all into account.

I wish our state would follow that line of thought, but unfortunately, anything not specifically stated in a law becomes fodder for a legal loophole. The dipshit lawyers and self important assholes use the broad and vague wording of the law to effectively destroy any enforcement that's not specifically listed. It's why a cell phone bill gets pushed through to put a stop to dangerous behavior, and why people will continue to get off of such punishment by exploiting any vague or questionable wording in that specific law.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Corey

I wish our state would follow that line of thought, but unfortunately, anything not specifically stated in a law becomes fodder for a legal loophole. The dipshit lawyers and self important assholes use the broad and vague wording of the law to effectively destroy any enforcement that's not specifically listed. It's why a cell phone bill gets pushed through to put a stop to dangerous behavior, and why people will continue to get off of such punishment by exploiting any vague or questionable wording in that specific law.

In practise the charge "operation without due care and attention" is rarely placed until after a collision has occurred, but the charge is still valid. If it would be placed more often, then people would start to reform their behaviour. Instead we get 'feel good' laws like the recent racing and stunting law, and the currently proposed ones that limit the use of electronic devices, or the nimber of teenagers allowed in a car that is driven by a teen.

As I said in a recent letter to the leader of the opposition party if a law isn't going to be enforced, why bother passing it?

[Rider]

I can tell you that speeding tickets are ALL about money everywhere in Michigan. The speeding ticket I got 2 months ago was $150 for 5mph over the limit(50 in a 45).

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Rider

I can tell you that speeding tickets are ALL about money everywhere in Michigan. The speeding ticket I got 2 months ago was $150 for 5mph over the limit(50 in a 45).

If that's what they are in Michigan then what are they in Ohio, a mileage tax?

[unknownroad]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

My point is... just because there is a possibility of more severe crimes in the area, an officer should ignore someone breaking the law?

If there are crimes against persons and property going unsolved, then police resources should not be spent enforcing arbitrary traffic regulations just because it's more profitable.

[Gas Man]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

I used to live in that general area.........Romulus is a joke, it has nothing going for it. Not surprised by this at all.

You would think with the increased crime and unemployment the bad economy is bringing, cops could find something better to do than sitting on their ass on the side of the road.

Exactly

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

The point is that this sort of enforcement does little or nothing to improve public safety, which is ultimately the primary job of police. It ties up officers who would be better used roaming and ticketing drivers in other areas who go unpunished, while performing acts that are more dangerous than simple speeding. Yes, I've been in the area

Speeding isn't the issue, it is when speeding causes accidents. For example, my local pd in my city does as I'm about to describe. The chief of police assigns locations to step up enforcement due to increased accidents in said location. They do so, to lower accidents which is the real reason for traffic laws anyway. Then once that objective is met, they move on to the next problem location.

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

No, the solution is to get rid of stealth cars and targeted sweeps like speed traps, and make police visible to the public as they once were. You can't catch everyone but if you let them know that they're only likely to be caught breaking the law in a few select locations, they'll feel free to break it everywhere else.

The randomness of enforcement tends to reduce the probability that someone will break the law. The visible presence of officers has an obvious and immediate effect on how people drive. Speed has been shown to have less real effect on traffic collisions than do other bad driving practises, like inattentiveness. As I frequently say up here: Speed doesn't cause collisions, it merely magnifies the results of stupidity.

Exactly, they can curve traffic problem with pure presence. But romulus is sporting all blacked out chargers and such with no emblems, no top lights or anything. And they only patrol during good weather so they don't get wet.

Originally Posted by Rider

I can tell you that speeding tickets are ALL about money everywhere in Michigan. The speeding ticket I got 2 months ago was $150 for 5mph over the limit(50 in a 45).

That is the problem. Its just that some cities like Romulus, Taylor, and a few others off the top of my head are more into the "revenue driven enforcement". Which is the real complaignt.

Originally Posted by unknownroad

If there are crimes against persons and property going unsolved, then police resources should not be spent enforcing arbitrary traffic regulations just because it's more profitable.

That is also a large problem with this.

Trust me I have many family members that are cops. From local to county sheriff. Many of these cities are revenue driven to write tickets. They reward the officers with early retirement.

Further, they are usually writting (on the highway) "energy conservation" tickets aka 5 over on highways. They carry the full 5 over fine but no points, so most won't fight it. But the bottom line is not that they are protecting public safety as I outlined above, they are just hunting money.

[Papa_Complex]

Targeted enforcement in order to curtail an actual problem is one thing. Doing it in order to correct an issue that doesn't exist is either pure revenue generation, or a waste or resources (I tend to think that it's both).

[Avatard]

Originally Posted by Corey

Would a Star Trek joke be too geeky and obvious?

Personally, I think that Romulus is just trying to find another way to ream us.

I'm here all week.

[Papa_Complex]

Just remember that Romulus ultimately killed Remus.