quote:Agreed, they were abusing the badge, unfortunately it is within their scope of authority to do so. They could have told the ticket taker that they were coming in and offered no explanation. What's the door guy going to do, restrain them? They were honest about why they wanted in, which basically means being honest about being a couple of dicks.
See, I thought you were saying that what they did at the computer convention was proper and legal.
Ah, that's why it's necessary for me to clarify my ramblings.
quote:What do you think would have happened if ottercreek had called the precinct and complained about the officers? (Assume he had badge numbers and some sort of proof like video evidence.)
If it is a PD and/or city at least the size of Milwaukee, it would warrant a written notification of a complaint from a citizen. That of course, would be added to the 199 others that even the best of officers (attitude-wise) can acculmulate in a 20-year career. It's not the kind of thing that ends a career or holds up a promotion, but some Sargeants, Lieutenants and/or Captains have the ability and willingness to follow it up with a pretty jarring verbal reprimand.
Video is a different animal. If it plays on the 5:00 news, it reflects on the PD and the city as a whole. That could mean that the Police Chief might get a call from the Mayor, who would then call the Deputy Inspector, who would then call the precinct Captain, who would then. . . As you can see, what we have here is a s**t sandwich. All for a hugginsmootch from Carmen Elecktra.
- P
Posts: 1856 | From: Milwaukee, WI | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Roadie: And, by the way,ParaDiddle, why do you think "it is within the scope of their authority" to abuse their badges? It may be within their capability, as most citizens are afraid to challenge the officers, but why do you say it is within their authority? AFAIK, officers are not given authority to abuse, but your precinct must have way different rules than any other that I've heard of.
ETA: proper snopester reference
Roadie, If there is a common theme to what I have posted so far, it is that there are things officers can (posesses legal authority to) do and things they should (tempered by administrative regulation) do. On that scene, yes an officer can order his/her way into a ticketed public event. The door personnel have no authority to stop the officer from doing so. You (specifically), as a member of the officer's administrative control, have the authority to reprimand the officer (after the fact) for breaches of established practices.
The issue being discussed is when, where and by whom an officer's actions are remediated.
- P
Posts: 1856 | From: Milwaukee, WI | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LadyAnnora: I've been pulled over my fair share (it's hard not to speed in North Dakota!) and every single time the cop has been polite and professional.
I just want to comment on this.
No, it's not hard "not to speed" anywhere. The speed limit is such for safety reasons. It's set. You read the sign, set your cruise.
I've never been pulled over for speeding. Not in my car, and not in the semi I was driving.
The way I see it is that there's no reason to speed. (With few exceptions-medical emergencies and such.) To speed because you can? Just stupid. With your knowledge of the law enforcement feild (which you so staunchly defend) you should know better.
Morrigan
Let me give you a little bit of context and make sure I understand you before I take exception. North Dakota is extemely desolate and flat and has certain parts where the speed limit suddenly drops because you are passing through the city limits of a ghost town (where absolutely no one exists, no buildings, nothing...a town existed there 20 years ago and no one has ever bothered to change the speed limits cause no one is there to do it.) As such, it sets it up to unintentionally (vs intentionally with disregard to the law) be driving above the speed limit. The cops are pretty understanding, but having very little else to do will pull you over. I stated in my post that I did not want to announce to the whole world that I had gotten a ticket for doing something wrong. Now I can see where not being familar with the landscape might have made my statement about it being hard not to speed seem flippant, but are you really accusing me (reading my complete post carefully) of
a) claiming there is a reason to speed b) speeding because I can c) being stupid d) contradicting a previously stated position
Cause that's what you did, and I just want to make sure it's what you ment before I respond to it.
-------------------- Where are my pants and why am I wearing this helmet? Posts: 27 | From: Ogden, UT | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Roadie: And, by the way,ParaDiddle, why do you think "it is within the scope of their authority" to abuse their badges? It may be within their capability, as most citizens are afraid to challenge the officers, but why do you say it is within their authority? AFAIK, officers are not given authority to abuse, but your precinct must have way different rules than any other that I've heard of.
ETA: proper snopester reference
Roadie, If there is a common theme to what I have posted so far, it is that there are things officers can (posesses legal authority to) do and things they should (tempered by administrative regulation) do. On that scene, yes an officer can order his/her way into a ticketed public event. The door personnel have no authority to stop the officer from doing so. You (specifically), as a member of the officer's administrative control, have the authority to reprimand the officer (after the fact) for breaches of established practices.
The issue being discussed is when, where and by whom an officer's actions are remediated.
- P
PD, I hope you are not taking this personally. I'm enjoying this conversation with you, and am just trying to get clarification of your statements, as well as clarify my own. I'm not trying to be argumentative.
So, if the private citizen denies entry to the officer, the officer has two recourses. They can arrest the citizen for interfering with police business and thus will have to cough up, at some point, the business reason. Or they can walk away, which I think is the more likely scenario if they have no official reason for wanting to enter the venue. Which goes to my statement that most citizens are afraid to challenge the officers, and I think if more people did the "bad apples" would be less likely to abuse their authority.
BTW, when I say "deny entry", I don't mean physically, because that in itself opens a whole 'nother can of worms. But I would suggest that if the citizen has denied entry, and the officer is still insistent on being let in without disclosing the official reason, I would let that officer know that I will be on the phone to the administrator finding out why.
-------------------- "The little local company I buy from has CHEAP shipping and I have met their goats." (snapdragonfly)
"And that's one lost erection I'll never get back! You hear me Dan! I'm owed an erection!" (I'mNotDedalus) Posts: 2658 | From: California | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ParaDiddle: If it is a PD and/or city at least the size of Milwaukee, it would warrant a written notification of a complaint from a citizen. That of course, would be added to the 199 others at even the best of officers (attitude-wise) can acculmulate in a 20-year career. It's not the kind of thing that ends a career or holds up a promotion, but some Sargeants, Lieutenants and/or Captains have the ability and willingness to follow it up with a pretty jarring verbal reprimand.
This is part of the problem. If anyone other than an LEO got into this computer show without paying, they could be arrested for trespassing and might be fined or required to pay restitution. At the least, I would hope that security or the local police would evict them from the show.
But when a PO abuses the badge and does the same thing, essentially nothing happens. No fine is paid, no penalty is suffered, and I seriously doubt the security is going to throw out a cop.
Civilian -> crime -> faces penalty Officer -> same crime + abuse of authority -> faces no penalty
See where people might begin to see that police are above the law?
This kind of contradicts your post:
quote:If the officer commits a breech of authority, he/she anwers to administration.
They may face have to listen to the chief lecture them (and are they even listening), but if that is all they face (and your post seems to indicate that's usually all the penalty they face), they aren't exactly under threat to behave themselves.
quote:Video is a different animal. If it plays on the 5:00 news, it reflects on the PD and the city as a whole. That could mean that the Police Chief might get a call from the Mayor, who would then call the Deputy Inspector, who would then call the precinct Captain, who would then. . . As you can see, what we have here is a s**t sandwich. All for hugginsmootch from Carmen Elecktra.
- P
So basically a complaint from a civilian doesn't cause any action from the fellow cops unless enough pressure is brough to bear from the media or the civilain authorities. Sounds like the cops really don't care about policing themselves and only take action to get the civilians off their back.
-------------------- IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Roadie: PD, I hope you are not taking this personally. I'm enjoying this conversation with you, and am just trying to get clarification of your statements, as well as clarify my own. I'm not trying to be argumentative.
Personally? Hell no. I'm enjoying the exchange as well.
quote:So, if the private citizen denies entry to the officer, the officer has two recourses. They can arrest the citizen for interfering with police business and thus will have to cough up, at some point, the business reason. Or they can walk away, which I think is the more likely scenario if they have no official reason for wanting to enter the venue. Which goes to my statement that most citizens are afraid to challenge the officers, and I think if more people did the "bad apples" would be less likely to abuse their authority.
Yup.
quote:Originally posted by GenYus: See where people might begin to see that police are above the law?
Yup
quote:This kind of contradicts your post:
quote:If the officer commits a breech of authority, he/she anwers to administration.
They may face have to listen to the chief lecture them (and are they even listening), but if that is all they face (and your post seems to indicate that's usually all the penalty they face), they aren't exactly under threat to behave themselves.
I don't really think it contradicts it. When I say "administration" I mean the entire complaint process that may be processed through several layers of the command structure over the course of weeks, if not months.
quote:Sounds like the cops really don't care about policing themselves and only take action to get the civilians off their back.
Yup.
- P
Posts: 1856 | From: Milwaukee, WI | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LadyAnnora: No one ever talks about the time they got pulled over and the cop was really decent about it.
Then you haven't been lurking here as much as I'd thought. If you had, you might have run across the other two threads that ottercreek refers to in the OP, and found that there were many stories related to good interactions with law enforcement. I think you are being overly defensive here, and are getting to the point where you are on the offensive using generalizations that are frowned on here.
Acutally, I remember one of the first threads that I read was the one where ottercreek was ranting about the cops! And moreover, I remember not bothering to take the time to register to respond because whatever I would have said was already being said better than I could have said it by other posters. Not that it isn't the case anymore, I just don't have anything to get my brain firing at work this week!
But you are 100% right that my statement was overgeneralizing. People lose credibility with me when the say something always or never occurs and then I went and did it myself. Just to clairify, I was thinking more of a general social phenomenon (the tendancy for people to focus and rehash a negative incident and gloss over positive ones) than this message board never does etc. I should have been clearer. I've stuck with this site precisely because multiple perspectives are usually articulated very well.
I am going to take exception at one thing though. I am (was) an extremely dedicated and committed snopes lurker, and I don't let anyone, ANYONE tell me I'm not!
-------------------- Where are my pants and why am I wearing this helmet? Posts: 27 | From: Ogden, UT | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Morrigan:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by LadyAnnora: I've been pulled over my fair share (it's hard not to speed in North Dakota!) and every single time the cop has been polite and professional. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I just want to comment on this.
No, it's not hard "not to speed" anywhere. The speed limit is such for safety reasons. It's set. You read the sign, set your cruise.
I've never been pulled over for speeding. Not in my car, and not in the semi I was driving.
The way I see it is that there's no reason to speed. (With few exceptions-medical emergencies and such.) To speed because you can? Just stupid. With your knowledge of the law enforcement feild (which you so staunchly defend) you should know better.
Let me give you a little bit of context and make sure I understand you before I take exception. North Dakota is extemely desolate and flat and has certain parts where the speed limit suddenly drops because you are passing through the city limits of a ghost town (where absolutely no one exists, no buildings, nothing...a town existed there 20 years ago and no one has ever bothered to change the speed limits cause no one is there to do it.) As such, it sets it up to unintentionally (vs intentionally with disregard to the law) be driving above the speed limit. The cops are pretty understanding, but having very little else to do will pull you over. I stated in my post that I did not want to announce to the whole world that I had gotten a ticket for doing something wrong. Now I can see where not being familar with the landscape might have made my statement about it being hard not to speed seem flippant, but are you really accusing me (reading my complete post carefully) of
a) claiming there is a reason to speed b) speeding because I can c) being stupid d) contradicting a previously stated position
Cause that's what you did, and I just want to make sure it's what you ment before I respond to it.
I've been trying to stay out of this one, but I just have to ask - are the speed changes signposted?
-------------------- So many people are hung up on achievements. What did you do today? What are you planning? Sometimes, just getting through the day is an achievement in itself. Posts: 256 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
[/QUOTE]I've been trying to stay out of this one, but I just have to ask - are the speed changes signposted? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Yes, they are. But again, ND is very flat and desolate, and unless it's deer hunting season, (which cause the deer to run all over the roads) it's easy to get lulled into a false sense of security and let your attention wander a little bit. I'm not exaggerating when I say you can easily drive for a half hour without seeing another vehicle. So it's easier to fall into hypnotic driving and miss things like a small sign dropping the speed limit. Now in no way am I saying this justifies speeding, and as I said a before, I'm in the wrong so I take my ticket from the nice officer and go on my way. I don't think that speeding because you didn't notice a sign indicating a drop in the limit equates to a reckless attitude equivilant to I'll speed if I want to and nobody better say anything. Not arguing that it should affect whether you get a ticket or not, but I recognize a difference.
And just more ND wierdness that might shed some light...the last time I got a speeding ticket at home, it was $1 per mile over the speed limit. So if any of you are asking why people don't throw a fit and force the county to take down the signs dropping the limit so this doesn't happen...we always mean to right when we get our whopping $11 ticket, but then eh. Every once it a while someone gets a little heated and it's changed.
-------------------- Where are my pants and why am I wearing this helmet? Posts: 27 | From: Ogden, UT | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LadyAnnora: just want to comment on this.
No, it's not hard "not to speed" anywhere. The speed limit is such for safety reasons. It's set. You read the sign, set your cruise.
I've never been pulled over for speeding. Not in my car, and not in the semi I was driving.
The way I see it is that there's no reason to speed. (With few exceptions-medical emergencies and such.) To speed because you can? Just stupid. With your knowledge of the law enforcement feild (which you so staunchly defend) you should know better.
Morrigan
Let me give you a little bit of context and make sure I understand you before I take exception. North Dakota is extemely desolate and flat and has certain parts where the speed limit suddenly drops because you are passing through the city limits of a ghost town (where absolutely no one exists, no buildings, nothing...a town existed there 20 years ago and no one has ever bothered to change the speed limits cause no one is there to do it.) As such, it sets it up to unintentionally (vs intentionally with disregard to the law) be driving above the speed limit. The cops are pretty understanding, but having very little else to do will pull you over. I stated in my post that I did not want to announce to the whole world that I had gotten a ticket for doing something wrong. Now I can see where not being familar with the landscape might have made my statement about it being hard not to speed seem flippant, but are you really accusing me (reading my complete post carefully) of
a) claiming there is a reason to speed b) speeding because I can c) being stupid d) contradicting a previously stated position
Cause that's what you did, and I just want to make sure it's what you ment before I respond to it. [/QB][/QUOTE]
I've driven through many states.
I never accused you of being stupid or speeding because you can. It was a generalized statement-and one I've made in other threads.
The way I see it is as long as there're signs stating the speed limit, there is no reason to speed. Being lulled into a "false sense of security" is a bunch of bull. You pay attention while you drive (at least to the signs) or don't drive.
Be a responsible driver or don't drive. Speeding is a sign of not being a responsible enough to drive.
If there is a speed limit change "for no reason" as you claim (because there was a town there 20 years ago), then lobby to get it changed. The sign is there. Read the sign. It's not that hard.
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Morrigan: The way I see it is as long as there're signs stating the speed limit, there is no reason to speed. Being lulled into a "false sense of security" is a bunch of bull. You pay attention while you drive (at least to the signs) or don't drive.
Be a responsible driver or don't drive. Speeding is a sign of not being a responsible enough to drive.
If there is a speed limit change "for no reason" as you claim (because there was a town there 20 years ago), then lobby to get it changed. The sign is there. Read the sign. It's not that hard.
Aren't there cases when this isn't entirely true though? If I'm driving up I-95 and the speed limit is 55, but all the cars around me are doing about 70-80, then wouldn't I be more likely to cause an accident because of my sudden disruption of the speed of traffic? In this case, wouldn't it be more responsible to speed rather than take the high moral ground by observing the posted signs? It's not like this is an uncommon situation.
Posts: 345 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Morrigan: The way I see it is as long as there're signs stating the speed limit, there is no reason to speed. Being lulled into a "false sense of security" is a bunch of bull. You pay attention while you drive (at least to the signs) or don't drive.
Be a responsible driver or don't drive. Speeding is a sign of not being a responsible enough to drive.
If there is a speed limit change "for no reason" as you claim (because there was a town there 20 years ago), then lobby to get it changed. The sign is there. Read the sign. It's not that hard.
Aren't there cases when this isn't entirely true though? If I'm driving up I-95 and the speed limit is 55, but all the cars around me are doing about 70-80, then wouldn't I be more likely to cause an accident because of my sudden disruption of the speed of traffic? In this case, wouldn't it be more responsible to speed rather than take the high moral ground by observing the posted signs? It's not like this is an uncommon situation.
I still drive the speed limit-but I'm just that way. I hate to break the laws.
I can see where you're coming from, though. I just don't like it-I don't see why someone needs to speed in the first place.
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The way I see it is as long as there're signs stating the speed limit, there is no reason to speed. Being lulled into a "false sense of security" is a bunch of bull. You pay attention while you drive (at least to the signs) or don't drive.
Be a responsible driver or don't drive. Speeding is a sign of not being a responsible enough to drive. [/QB]
#1) I never claimed that the circumstances made it okay to speed, I admitted from the gate that I was in the wrong. I clairified and explained the situation to you to demonstrate what I believe is a distinction between the attitudes of "I made an honest mistake, recognize my mistake and accept the punishment" and "I was intentionally and knowingly breaking the law and don't think I should be punished." I make no claims that the separation in attitudes should have influence on the punishment metted out.
#2) In my opinion you have a dangerously judgemental attitude, especially for someone who wants to go into law enforcement. "Speeding = irresponsible driver = you should never drive at all. Do you plan to apply this logic in the real world? What would you think of a law that suspends people's driving privileges for speeding? Seriously think before you post.
#3) So, because you drive, your saying that you have never once, made even the smallest mistake while driving. At all times and in all circumstances, 100% of your attention is on the road and your surroundings. You never drive with the radio on, or passengers in your car? You don't drive with tempurature control on either, because being distracted = irresponsible driver = you shouldn't drive at all. Your logic, not mine. I don't see any reason to have to pretend I'm perfect in order to support my opinion. You seem to.
-------------------- Where are my pants and why am I wearing this helmet? Posts: 27 | From: Ogden, UT | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: But again, ND is very flat and desolate, and unless it's deer hunting season, (which cause the deer to run all over the roads) it's easy to get lulled into a false sense of security and let your attention wander a little bit. I'm not exaggerating when I say you can easily drive for a half hour without seeing another vehicle. So it's easier to fall into hypnotic driving and miss things like a small sign dropping the speed limit
I drive along roads like that on a regular basis. Not to sound like I'm trying to one-up you here, but on the last half of the trip to my parents place, I may see two cars in 90 minutes. In the last 45 minutes of the trip it's so rare to see another car at all, that not only could I count the number of time it's happened on one hand, it's something that I'll my parents as soon as I arrive. ("How was the trip?" "Not bad. Get this - I actually saw a car between here and here!") Yet I've never been lulled into that false sense of security and cannot recall looking at my speedo to suddenly realise I've been speeding. I'm sorry, but I'm joing Morrigan in calling 'bull.'
quote:Aren't there cases when this isn't entirely true though? If I'm driving up I-95 and the speed limit is 55, but all the cars around me are doing about 70-80, then wouldn't I be more likely to cause an accident because of my sudden disruption of the speed of traffic? In this case, wouldn't it be more responsible to speed rather than take the high moral ground by observing the posted signs? It's not like this is an uncommon situation.
There's something that bothers me about this statement, but I can't quite put my finger on what.
-------------------- So many people are hung up on achievements. What did you do today? What are you planning? Sometimes, just getting through the day is an achievement in itself. Posts: 256 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The way I see it is as long as there're signs stating the speed limit, there is no reason to speed. Being lulled into a "false sense of security" is a bunch of bull. You pay attention while you drive (at least to the signs) or don't drive.
Be a responsible driver or don't drive. Speeding is a sign of not being a responsible enough to drive.
#1) I never claimed that the circumstances made it okay to speed, I admitted from the gate that I was in the wrong. I clairified and explained the situation to you to demonstrate what I believe is a distinction between the attitudes of "I made an honest mistake, recognize my mistake and accept the punishment" and "I was intentionally and knowingly breaking the law and don't think I should be punished." I make no claims that the separation in attitudes should have influence on the punishment metted out.
#2) In my opinion you have a dangerously judgemental attitude, especially for someone who wants to go into law enforcement. "Speeding = irresponsible driver = you should never drive at all. Do you plan to apply this logic in the real world? What would you think of a law that suspends people's driving privileges for speeding? Seriously think before you post.
#3) So, because you drive, your saying that you have never once, made even the smallest mistake while driving. At all times and in all circumstances, 100% of your attention is on the road and your surroundings. You never drive with the radio on, or passengers in your car? You don't drive with tempurature control on either, because being distracted = irresponsible driver = you shouldn't drive at all. Your logic, not mine. I don't see any reason to have to pretend I'm perfect in order to support my opinion. You seem to. [/QB]
Responsible driver means not speeding. If you're so distracted that you don't notice a speed limit sign, then that's a problem.
2. No, I don't plan to apply that logic. That's my opinion and my opinion doesn't matter when it comes to enforcing laws. I don't let my opinions cloud my judgement to that degree. A law that suspends licenses for speeding? Only in extreme cases.
I did think before I posted. I just didn't type out the four-page paper I have written on the subject and my opinions on the subject. I just didn't elaborate as it seems I should have.
3. I know I'm not perfect. I've posted here about it. I make mistakes when driving. I speed five over, as I've said before, on different threads. Distraction is something different than just driving with the radio on or passengers in the car. Distraction (to me) is something that fully takes your attention away from the job at hand. Talking on a cell phone, going into the daze (in which you don't notice signs.) That's distraction. People here have seen me post about my mistakes. I never claimed to be perfect.
What I did claim is that I don't speed (enough to warrent a ticket.) I never have. I've never had a reason to. I've never been "lulled into a false sense of security."
Anything else about my opinions that you want to pick apart? Because I can elaborate all day/night on these things.
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I too have a very lonely drive right before I reach my parents house, but I never ever have problems with speeding there because I am familar with the area an know where the speed reductions are. I don't follow the logic that because I have on a handful of occasions missed a sign dropping the speed that is in the middle of nowhere that I am somehow so irresponsible that I should give up my driving privileges. I wouldn't apply that logic. Again, it's about making a distinction between an honest error and an intentional violation of the law. Do you knowingly and intentionally drive "just five over the limit" because in my book that is far worse than not being so vigilant that you unintentionally miss a speed limit sign. If you have the education in Criminal Justice that you claim, than you should have been exposed to the data that shows how the seriousness of accidents increases exponetially with every mile an hour that you increase your speed. Not having a problem with intentionally going five miles over the speed limit seems a far worse infraction that not noticing a small sign in the middle of nowhere.
-------------------- Where are my pants and why am I wearing this helmet? Posts: 27 | From: Ogden, UT | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: A law that suspends licenses for speeding? Only in extreme cases.
Just out of curiousity sake, what does it take it take to lose your licence? I've been getting the impression for a while now that the US road laws aren't as strict as the Australian ones.
-------------------- So many people are hung up on achievements. What did you do today? What are you planning? Sometimes, just getting through the day is an achievement in itself. Posts: 256 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ChickyBee: There's something that bothers me about this statement, but I can't quite put my finger on what.
Two things for me:
1. If they all drove off a bridge, would you?
2. What are their following distances like? It's my general experience that speeding doesn't always come with an increase in following distance. Indeed, sometimes speeding and tailgating go hand in hand (observation, not personal experience ).
Number 2 bothers me more than number 1. The "I'll cause an crash by going slower than everyone else" argument to me is like the "Spend less time in intersections and reduce your chances of getting hit - so speed through them" one.
-------------------- "We don't keep a certified whale-vomit expert on staff." - Larry Penny, Director, Natural Resources Department, Town of East Hampton Posts: 377 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LadyAnnora: If you have the education in Criminal Justice that you claim, than you should have been exposed to the data that shows how the seriousness of accidents increases exponetially with every mile an hour that you increase your speed.
If I have that education? *laughs* I have an AAS and BS in Criminal Justice! One from a community college and one from SVSU. There is no "if" to that statement. I have it. I earned it.
Yes, I have been exposed to it. I drive five over. I get passed by....most drivers, actually. There are very few people that drive the speed limit. Me going five over is me trying to drive up with the rest of Michigan. I never claimed to be perfect. I know I have my faults-and going five over is one of them. And, I do have a problem with it. Lately, my speed has been going 2 miles per hour over. My choice. I'm trying to slow myself down.
I do have a problem with missing speed-limit signs. I always imagine that one kid running out in the road.
Morrigan
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: A law that suspends licenses for speeding? Only in extreme cases.
Just out of curiousity sake, what does it take it take to lose your licence? I've been getting the impression for a while now that the US road laws aren't as strict as the Australian ones.
In Michigan, several.
Too many points (from various types of tickets, such as speeding, manslaughter and others.) Too high of a BAC (blood alcohol content) can get you suspended driving privleges. Many felonies can get you a suspended or revoked license.
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by NZUL: Number 2 bothers me more than number 1. The "I'll cause an crash by going slower than everyone else" argument to me is like the "Spend less time in intersections and reduce your chances of getting hit - so speed through them" one.
I'm not saying that it would cause a crash, only that it's more likely. I'm saying that if there is light traffic and most cars are going over the speed limit, then it is reasonable to go at the same pace, particularly since everyone else is looking at traffic to be a certain speed.
If most cars on a given stretch are going 15 over the speed limit, then it is most safe to maintain a the speed of traffic rather than trying to break it up. Likewise, if most cars on a given stretch are going at the speed limit, it would be just as dangerous to suddenly decide that you want to go 15 faster than the rest.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I really don't understand the comparison between speeding through intersections and trying to keep with the speed of traffic on a major highway.
ETA: Generally, the only time that traffic goes noticeably faster than the speed limit is when it's not particularly dense, so yes, it usually does mean that there is a greater distance between cars.
Posts: 345 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
My one-and-only speeding ticket: I was on a very hilly stretch of road, doing 40 in a 30. I've always felt that particular road should have a higher speed limit. There's no houses nearby, just trees on both sides, and at the time (this was back in high school) there was very little traffic. It's hard for me to maintain a constant 30 when my engine is straining to get up a hill and bobsledding down the next one.
But even so, I accept that the speeding was my fault, I was completely wrong, and I bear no ill will towards the officer for giving me a ticket. I was just learning to drive, and prone to mistakes. And, my mind was wandering.
But here's the part where the officer was a jerk: As he's handing me the ticket, he says, "I also got you for not wearing a seat belt."
I immediately felt for the belt, found it was still on, and answered, "But I am wearing my seat belt."
To which he replied, "Not when I first pulled you over." I didn't say anything else; I really didn't want to press the issue. The 'seatbelt warning' box on the ticket didn't actually add anything to the cost of the ticket (this was about a year before they started getting harsh on that). But even to this day, when I think back on it, his accusation REALLY PISSES ME OFF.
About four years before I started driving, my father was in a car wreck. His was one of those unusual wrecks where the driver's side completely caved in, pushing him into the passenger seat. He wasn't wearing his seatbelt, but if he had been, it would have killed him. But ironically enough, that wreck got our entire family to start wearing seatbelts. Maybe we suddenly realized we were mortal, or maybe we just figured that such a "seatbelt-would've-killed-you" accident was the kind of thing that only happens once.
Regardless, within six months, we wore our seatbelts religiously. By the time I started driving, I felt naked if I didn't have my seatbelt on. I would panic if I couldn't find the belt as soon as I sat down. So by the time of my ticket, there's simply no way I could have been driving without it.
But it goes so far beyond that. By saying what he said, the officer was calling me a liar. I can't STAND people who do that. It's about the rudest thing he could have done. I'd have been less offended if he'd shot out my tires.
Okay, surely it just looked to him like I wasn't wearing the belt. It was a dark night, the seatbelt was grey, my jacket was black, etc. But if it's so hard to see it anyway, why assume I'm not wearing it? He obviously didn't see an empty seatbelt dangling next to my head, because there couldn't have been one to see. What possible advantage could he have had to accuse me of this?
I know, I know... let it go.
My second experience with a cop: I witnessed my best friend get into a fender bender, after another driver ran a red light and hit him. The officer on the scene immediately took the other driver's side, and it was obvious why: we were just teenagers. Among other things, he flat-out told me that since I was a friend, I wouldn't be allowed to testify in court. Well, my friend's family took it to court, and called me as a witness, and my testimony won them the case.
So I guess my bias against cops goes back a little farther than that college town I mentioned. I don't think I ever had a chance.
-------------------- I believe I'm growing skeptical of cynicism. MyspaceNWNBoard Posts: 917 | From: Nashville TN | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In 2002 I moved away from my hometown to go to college. When I came back to visit over spring break, I wound up getting a speeding ticket on a stretch of highway that I'd driven dozens of times before. That stretch of road started out at 45 mph, then moved up to 55mph for several miles, then lowered back to 45 mph. I hadn't been paying attention to my location when I was pulled over and cited for going 52 in a 45 on that road. I thought I'd passed the point where the speed limit changed to 55 mph because I'd lived there for many years and had driven the road dozens of times. But the officer was in a bad mood so I just apologized, accepted the ticket, and didn't argue.
Later when I came home and grumbled to my parents, they informed me that in the months that I'd been away, the city had lowered the speed limit on the entire road from 55 to 45! I was pissed. So I'd been speeding without knowing it. It hadn't occurred to me to look at the speed limit signs, because, well, I just never assumed the speed on a highway would have changed.
I know it's supposed to be each driver's responsibility to be aware of the speed limit, but how many of us who drive over the same roads daily would notice if the limit was suddenly lowered and we got a surprise ticket when we were driving under [what we thought was] the limit?
-------------------- "There is no constitutional right to sleep with endangered reptiles." -- Carl Hiaasen Won't somebody please think of the adults! Posts: 8254 | From: Florida | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cervus: In 2002 I moved away from my hometown to go to college. When I came back to visit over spring break, I wound up getting a speeding ticket on a stretch of highway that I'd driven dozens of times before. That stretch of road started out at 45 mph, then moved up to 55mph for several miles, then lowered back to 45 mph. I hadn't been paying attention to my location when I was pulled over and cited for going 52 in a 45 on that road. I thought I'd passed the point where the speed limit changed to 55 mph because I'd lived there for many years and had driven the road dozens of times. But the officer was in a bad mood so I just apologized, accepted the ticket, and didn't argue.
Later when I came home and grumbled to my parents, they informed me that in the months that I'd been away, the city had lowered the speed limit on the entire road from 55 to 45! I was pissed. So I'd been speeding without knowing it. It hadn't occurred to me to look at the speed limit signs, because, well, I just never assumed the speed on a highway would have changed.
I know it's supposed to be each driver's responsibility to be aware of the speed limit, but how many of us who drive over the same roads daily would notice if the limit was suddenly lowered and we got a surprise ticket when we were driving under [what we thought was] the limit?
I used to live in a town southeast of Nashville whose speed traps were so notorious they earned them a spot on 60 Minutes. There was a stretch of road that was 45 (2 lanes, plus a turning lane). It was then widened to four lanes plus turning lane, and the speed limit was bumped up to 55 on a portion of it without any fanfare at all.
Several months after the speed limit was raised, I then moved to Nashville, but my father still lived in that town. One day while on my way to visit him, I noticed that the speed limit had gone back down to 45. And I was not particularly surprised, figuring the town had a budget shortfall.
And, just for irrelevancy's sake, I haven't had a traffic ticket in over 10 years. I have never had a negative encounter with a police officer; I know many officers, and I have a great deal of respect for them. Their jobs are incredibly difficult.
Their jobs are not so difficult, however, to prevent them from using their turn signals under regular driving conditions.
-------------------- "When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ParaDiddle: Roadie, If there is a common theme to what I have posted so far, it is that there are things officers can (posesses legal authority to) do and things they should (tempered by administrative regulation) do. On that scene, yes an officer can order his/her way into a ticketed public event. The door personnel have no authority to stop the officer from doing so. You (specifically), as a member of the officer's administrative control, have the authority to reprimand the officer (after the fact) for breaches of established practices.
The issue being discussed is when, where and by whom an officer's actions are remediated.
- P
Paradiddle, my point is that the police officers do not possess the legal authority to enter a private venue without paying if they do not have a law enforcement reason. And specifically, using their badges, or positions, to gain entry (or any other thing of value) for their personal benefit, is in fact a felony:
Wis. Stat. 946.12 (emphasis mine):
quote:
Misconduct in public office. Any public officer or public employee who does any of the following is guilty of a Class I felony:
(1) Intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the officer's or employee's office or employment within the time or in the manner required by law; or
(2) In the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee, does an act which the officer or employee knows is in excess of the officer's or employee's lawful authority or which the officer or employee knows the officer or employee is forbidden by law to do in the officer's or employee's official capacity; or
(3) Whether by act of commission or omission, in the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee exercises a discretionary power in a manner inconsistent with the duties of the officer's or employee's office or employment or the rights of others and with intent to obtain a dishonest advantage for the officer or employee or another; or
(4) In the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee, makes an entry in an account or record book or return, certificate, report or statement which in a material respect the officer or employee intentionally falsifies; or
(5) Under color of the officer's or employee's office or employment, intentionally solicits or accepts for the performance of any service or duty anything of value which the officer or employee knows is greater or less than is fixed by law.
I know that gaining admission to a trade show or concert or what not may not seem like such a big deal, but I noticed in the annotations that someone was prosecuted under this provision for a $25 offense. IF the officer had a legitimate reason, he might be able to gain entry (I think only if he got permission, or was in hot pursuit could he go in without paying). If he has any other reason for being there, he needs to pay. Using his position to get out of it is misconduct, and it is a felony. Moreover, an officer's authority comes with performing official duties. The officer does not have legal authority to act outside of his official duties.
The same goes for "inspecting" the sprinkler system at a concert venue during a concert that you want to see. Using one's public office/position for personal gain is official misconduct, it's unethical, and it ought to get the person anything from a reprimand to a prison sentence.
posted
I'll try to answer a few questions from my experience.
1) Activating lights to get through an intersection deal.--First there are many calls where getting to them quickly but stealthy is needed. An example would be an alarm at a bank. If there is a bank robber inside, police need to respond fast and be set up quickly to manage the scene correctly. However it is best if the robber not know police are there. We would rather get the robber outside unaware and deal with him then tip him off we are there while he is inside the bank and turn it into a hostage situation. It is more effective to these goals to quickly turn my lights on and zip through an intersection then go lights and sirens blazing. This is just a single example of this type of call. Secondly- There may be a reason that doesn't require lights and sirens, but I need to get to quickly. If I hit a red light and it is the only thing slowing me down from me getting to that location then I might do this as well. An example would be an officer checking out with 2 people behind a closed business in an area with high number of burglaries. If he is a few blocks away, and I'm stuck at a light, and know that the road ahead is clear and the red light is my only obstacle, I might get through the intersection so I can back that officer up quickly in case he really is out with dangerous persons.
Of course there are bad cops who abuse this ability such as those who flip em on to get through to subway quicker. Those officers I would hope get caught and recieve the appropriate penalty from their department.
2)- Parking in a metered spot- We don't have metered spots here but I can tell you that the city ordinaces governing parking give police vehicles (and other emergency vehicles)expections when for an offical capacity. Going to court is an offical capacity. I try to use my best judgement regarding this priveledge. I don't park in handicap spots unless it is an emergency call and there is nothing else available, I try to find normal spots before parking against a curb or a red zone etc. but the law here is clearly written to give us the authority to do so.
3) Going into the computer show- I really need to know more about this to say definately what the deal is. Because he said the officer "showed" him his badge it tends to lead me to believe he was not in uniform with it dangling on his chest. They said was that they needed to talk to the vendor, and it may have been non-uniformed officers or detectives talking to the vendor for offical business. If they were just shopping and used their badges to get free admission, then that is clearly an abuse of their power. I know around here that would not go over well and would lead to serious displinary actions, and depending on the officer's tract record could lead to termination.
In a similar vein myself and other officers will often go to public events as part of our patrol including ticketed events. We usually just walk through the area and talk to people who stop us and talk to us. We find that showing a police presence helps keep the peace and decreases the likelyhood of us having to return. Most event officals are all to happy to have us do this as they also don't wish there to be any problems. I suppose if push came to shove and they didn't want us to enter then we probably wouldn't unless we had be summoned there by somebody inside to respond to something.
4) Turn signals- I readily admit I am terrible at using them both on and off duty. For that reason I have never written a failure to use turn signal ticket. There really is no excuse as to why I don't use them all the time, sorry AngelRdr. But at least I can be honest and say I don't use them often enough and 99% of the time there really isn't a valid reason I dont. I'm human too.
5) Rude cops- I have been accused of being rude many times. Occasionaly I have been rude and again there is not valid exuse for it, I am simply human and I'm sure all of us have been unnessisarily rude at some time or another. However often it is a lack of politeness that gets interpreted as rude. An example for you. I was on a call for shots fired in a public park, after park hours. More than one person had called and said they heard shots in this park. I was alone and walked into the park for a foot path. As I turned the corner a man was walking quickly in my direction. When I came into his view his immediate action was to put his hands into his jacket pockets. I responded with " POLICE STOP! LET ME SEE YOUR HANDS NOW!" He complied and we continued our interaction but he told me that I didn't have to be so rude about it. I wasn't trying to be rude, I wasn't trying to belittle him, I was just trying to make sure I made it home to my family. This however was not intended to be a friendly request, something to be considered before being complied with, this was pretty much a command based on what knowledge I had at the time. I did not want there to be any doubt on his part about what he should do and if it was something that he may or may not choose to comply with. SO if it had been you, you may have considered me rude that night, and if so that is fine, you are welcome to your opinion, but because I don't do something in a polite manner doesn't mean I'm trying to be rude.
6) Why I wanted to become a cop. The typical answer applies to me. I like helping people. I like that in the worst moment of somebody's life I can make it better. I like that when someone is terrified of something I can face it for them. I think of calls I have gone to and know why I do this job. I went to a call with 2 boys and a girl all siblings living in an absolute sh*thole, starving, abused, dirty and watching their mother and father get high and fight. The parents went to jail, and the kids went to a better home. I helped those kids. Their parents wern't on their side so who else would have helped them if I hadn't. Eventually they probably would have gotten help, but I knew that night that they were going to sleep in beds with a full stomach and without worrying that dad was going to come in and start taking out his frustrations on them. Something none of them had gotten in a long time. That is why I chose to become a cop.
It's an exciting job, I like the adrenaline, I would by lying if I said I didn't like getting to turn on my lights and siren and go somewhere to help someone. People run, people fight, and you have to deal with it, but it's a rewarding feeling when you bring a chaotic scene into control. When you end up with a bad guy in custody and nobody hurt.
I did NOT become a cop so I could write a lot of tickets. I did NOT become a cop so I could boss people around.
I don't have a family tree with a lot of cops in in. I know of only one other relative that is a cop.
But I do know I love my job, and I thik it would be hard to find a more rewarding one.
-------------------- I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf. -- On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs by LTC. Dave Grossman, USA (Ret) Posts: 675 | From: Arizona | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LadyAnnora: Several of you state that you're a bit biased against cops because of experiences that you've had. It frustrates you that cops behave in a terse manner. Well, this probably won't suprise you, but it takes a rookie cop all of about 2 months to get pretty biased against the public too.
Fury1958 mentioned retail. Retail work makes you hate the general public, yet despite wanting to shoot the face off so many people, I always managed to remain polite. So when pulling over someone who is doing the responsible thing of being the designated driver for their friends, who is perfectly polite and who has committed no crime, why accuse them of drunk driving, get stroppy when they can't remember where they were five days previously (not at the club where there had been an incident, hence why police were pulling people over) and generally act like a NFBSK?
It's late at night, the job of pulling people over must suck, but that incident reinforces some people's bias against police.
I'll bet that I've just been unlucky. Also, the officer who arrested me was very nice. It'll likely take one positive experience to reverse this belief. I'll let you know if/when it happens.
-------------------- Vox populi vox canem Posts: 1985 | From: Reading, England | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erwins: Wis. Stat. 946.12 (emphasis mine):
quote:
Misconduct in public office. Any public officer or public employee who does any of the following is guilty of a Class I felony:
(1) Intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the officer's or employee's office or employment within the time or in the manner required by law; or
(2) In the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee, does an act which the officer or employee knows is in excess of the officer's or employee's lawful authority or which the officer or employee knows the officer or employee is forbidden by law to do in the officer's or employee's official capacity; or
(3) Whether by act of commission or omission, in the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee exercises a discretionary power in a manner inconsistent with the duties of the officer's or employee's office or employment or the rights of others and with intent to obtain a dishonest advantage for the officer or employee or another; or
(4) In the officer's or employee's capacity as such officer or employee, makes an entry in an account or record book or return, certificate, report or statement which in a material respect the officer or employee intentionally falsifies; or
(5) Under color of the officer's or employee's office or employment, intentionally solicits or accepts for the performance of any service or duty anything of value which the officer or employee knows is greater or less than is fixed by law.
erwins
Thanks for that! I'm printing that out and keeping a copy with me. The next time I see a city official "badging" their way into an event, I'll show it and the discussion will be over.
- P
Posts: 1856 | From: Milwaukee, WI | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr: Perhaps before you continue to assume I don't have a "modicum of subject matter knowledge," perhaps you could ask what sort of subject matter knowledge I have.
WHat kind of subject matter knowledge do you have?
-------------------- "Pardon him. Theodotus: he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature."
George Bernard Shaw, Caesar and Cleopatra Posts: 4847 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dark Blue: 3) Going into the computer show- I really need to know more about this to say definately what the deal is. Because he said the officer "showed" him his badge it tends to lead me to believe he was not in uniform with it dangling on his chest.
Reading it again, I'm actually a little suspicious that it could have been someone impersonating an officer to get him and his buddies free admission. Probably in that case it would have been better to call the police and ask.
But the idea of the boss being against the officers being there is weird. If they were real officers, I suppose they were either harrassing the vendor or the boss (bad for business) or else investigating (also bad for business, especially if vendor was breaking the law).
quote:I suppose if push came to shove and they didn't want us to enter then we probably wouldn't unless we had be summoned there by somebody inside to respond to something.
Could you, though? If you wanted to enter a ticketed public event just to show police presence and were refused entry at the gate, do you have authority to go in anyway?
quote:5) Rude cops- I have been accused of being rude many times. Occasionaly I have been rude and again there is not valid exuse for it, I am simply human and I'm sure all of us have been unnessisarily rude at some time or another.
Just last night I was talking to a co-worker on the subject of speeding tickets, and he mentioned his college friends getting caught for speeding and deciding to "just lose the cops."
They found that a high-risk stop is very exciting, and a night in jail, somewhat less so.
Surprisingly, they were let go the next day and never charged.
quote:6) Why I wanted to become a cop.
What's the process for being your next-door neighbor? Do you have an application I can fill out?
My experience with police officers has been very positive. When I'm being wronged, it's very good to have an officer listening to my story. When I'm the one doing wrong, it's good to have an officer who is fair and often forgiving. I wonder if a lot of people who are "against" cops are unconsciously using body language and attitude which makes the officer feel unsafe, which is usually not good for them.
But - in case I give this impression - I don't kowtow to officers either. I would never consent to you seaching my car on general principle. I know it makes your job harder, and I'm sorry, but I'm going to exercise my rights. Looking for a missing child? No problem, I'll consent to a quick search of the trunk, and then end my consent to search. Looking for drugs? ...I don't really feel a pressing need to assist you with that, sorry. If you have PC you don't need my permission anyway.
I can be kind and helpful to officers and protect my civil rights at the same time.
I expect police officers to be professional. I don't always expect them to be polite, though it's nice when they are. If I had an officer treat me unprofessionally, I feel it would be my civic duty to report it. If I was worked up enough to complain on a message board, I'd certainly feel worked up enough to write a letter of complaint.
-------------------- Thinking about New England / missing old Japan Posts: 2603 | From: Virginia | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Morrigan: [QUOTE]No, it's not hard "not to speed" anywhere. The speed limit is such for safety reasons. It's set. You read the sign, set your cruise. The way I see it is that there's no reason to speed. To speed because you can? Just stupid. Morrigan
quote: Be a responsible driver or don't drive. Speeding is a sign of not being a responsible enough to drive.
quote: I still drive the speed limit-but I'm just that way.
quote: I speed five over
quote:What I did claim is that I don't speed (enough to warrent a ticket.) I never have. I've never had a reason to
quote:I drive five over.
quote: Responsible driver means not speeding.
quote: The way I see it is as long as there're signs stating the speed limit, there is no reason to speed.
quote:Me going five over is me trying to drive up with the rest of Michigan
quote: Lately, my speed has been going 2 miles per hour over. My choice.
Morrigan, it just seems to me that when passing judgement on others, it's very black and white, but when examining your own behavior, you allow for a lot of leeway.
-------------------- Where are my pants and why am I wearing this helmet? Posts: 27 | From: Ogden, UT | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've stayed out of the whole computer convention side of the argument because I really don't understand at all what happened. In the department that I was under as an explorer, we had an incident where a business owner called in to complain against an officer because the officer REFUSED to accept a free meal at his establishment. It was against department policy for our cops to accept anything that was offered to them as a "freebie" because of the public perception that they might be "abusing the badge. This business owner felt that if he wanted to give the cops free food in gratitude for what they do and to encourage them to frequent his establishment (and there-by keep away the riff-raff) it was his choice and he didn't appreciate the officers not allowing him to do so. Talk about not being able to win!
-------------------- Where are my pants and why am I wearing this helmet? Posts: 27 | From: Ogden, UT | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
).
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
