Good cop #2

**Lou Girardin** · 23rd July 2004, 18:50

Radar Detectors aren't infallible, you still need to be alert for Sneaky Plod. The old saying is 'first in line gets the fine'.
And Spud, why do the Police use their discretion far more for some offences than for others. When did you last issue a ticket for, say, failing to indicate. It's at least as common as speeding, but I'll bet that it's way down in the number of tickets issued by any Officer.

**bikerboy** · 23rd July 2004, 19:37

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

........When did you last issue a ticket for, say, failing to indicate. It's at least as common as speeding, but I'll bet that it's way down in the number of tickets issued by any Officer.

As there isn't a machine to do it for them, they have to be awake.

**scumdog** · 23rd July 2004, 20:03

Originally Posted by k14

The jammers are only for the laser gun thingys. You can't get a jammer for normal radar.

But in my few thousand kms with my radar, probably around 2500kms, I have never come across a cop that uses the instant on option for the radar. If they did use them they probably would be a bit more effective, but unless the cop has a specific agenda to zap people with radars, then it probably isn't worth using instant on, just leave it on continuously.

All the ones I have nailed at 140+ were depending on their radar detectors - suckers!! on a good road with not too much traffic and the radar on hold the guy coming the other way is toast!!!!

**spudchucka** · 23rd July 2004, 20:13

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

Radar Detectors aren't infallible, you still need to be alert for Sneaky Plod. The old saying is 'first in line gets the fine'.
And Spud, why do the Police use their discretion far more for some offences than for others. When did you last issue a ticket for, say, failing to indicate. It's at least as common as speeding, but I'll bet that it's way down in the number of tickets issued by any Officer.

I young guy ran a red in front of me a few nights ago. He just biiggy backed through the intersection with other traffic but in reality he had plenty of time to stop, (the light was green on my side and he was only 1/2 way through the intersection). I followed him for a few hundred metres and his driving wasn't that bad and I was about to flag pulling him over, then he switched lanes in front of me without indicating. Pulled him over and we had quite a decent chat about his driving and a few laughs too. He knew he was driving like an ass and admitted running the red on purpose. He got a ticket for the red light and was grateful, knowing that he could have got one for the lane change as well. To me the red light was the more dangerous act, thats why I gave him that ticket. I couldn't see any point in giving him one for the lane change as well.

**spudchucka** · 23rd July 2004, 20:14

Originally Posted by bikerboy

As there isn't a machine to do it for them, they have to be awake.

Still haven't gotten over it huh!!

**DEATH_INC.** · 23rd July 2004, 21:13

Originally Posted by spudchucka

So it comes down to police discretion and its use should be encouraged in my opinion.

I agree.I mean,what's wrong with doing 120k on say the southern m/way at 6am when there's no traffic around?(example).Why should the cop be required to issue a ticket if he can see it's safe......??

**scumdog** · 23rd July 2004, 21:17

Originally Posted by bikerboy

As there isn't a machine to do it for them, they have to be awake.

Nah, failing to indicate etc is chicken-shit (unles they have caused a danger) so I ignore them,speed and eba etc is more of a problem

**Gixxer 4 ever** · 23rd July 2004, 21:34

Originally Posted by spudchucka

Still haven't gotten over it huh!!

So I see a touch of the human nature in your comments.
I know we need laws and law enforces to keep society going but it works two ways. When you pull people over give some respect and you will get it back. As you did with the red light rider. How ever our local traffic enforces are becoming an absolute pain in the ass with an attitude that could well divide them from the help they may need one day. They need training in people skills. Not so much the tickets that have bugged me but the way they do their job. Just be nice not smart.
Oh by the way I like to read your posts they are good. This is not an attack on you but a comment about the way some of the other offices do their job.

**marty** · 23rd July 2004, 21:53

Originally Posted by spudchucka

The problem is that people want law enforcement on "Their" own terms and don't want to except that anything outside their personal perspective of where the law sits should be acted upon.

Burglars for instance don't think that there is anything wrong with breaking into someones home and flogging the brand new DVD or Playstation. Its their way of life and they think they should be able to help themselves without the law intervening. Paedophiles think it is quite ok to have it off with babies or small children, their perspective of what is lawful is quite different to any other normal person.

The common thread is that they all have their own perception of lawfulness. Its the same with traffic / speed enforcement, some people perceive 120, 150, 180 to be quite safe speeds to travel at and don't believe they should be punished for that behaviour. Yet of course they want the burglars and paedophiles locked up for good, (and rightly so). The point is that they want the law enforced on their terms.

It doesn't and cannot work like that. The law is the law and should be enforced impartially and without fear or favour. The reality is slightly different however and practicality dictates that police should use discrection for minor offences. Is speeding a minor offence, in some cases yes, in many case no.

So it comes down to police discretion and its use should be encouraged in my opinion. However it is not for every person caught speeding to be the sole judge of whether discretion is appropriate in their case, naturally they will have a bias towards discretion being used.

well said dude.

**marty** · 23rd July 2004, 22:00

Originally Posted by DEATH_INC.

I agree.I mean,what's wrong with doing 120k on say the southern m/way at 6am when there's no traffic around?(example).Why should the cop be required to issue a ticket if he can see it's safe......??

nothing's wrong with it. that's why you never see a HP car at 6am on the southern. i should know - i've been blasting up it every day this week.....

.

k14

The jammers are only for the laser gun thingys. You can't get a jammer for normal radar.

But in my few thousand kms with my radar, probably around 2500kms, I have never come across a cop that uses the instant on option for the radar. If they did use them they probably would be a bit more effective, but unless the cop has a specific agenda to zap people with radars, then it probably isn't worth using instant on, just leave it on continuously.

as for instant on - any HP cop worth their salt will use instant on, and use it wisely, mainly to catch the 'sophisticated' speeders (as leo calls them) who use high-end radar detectors. scrupulous use of the stalker can produce excellent results - leaving it on only catches the idiots and tourists (as scumdog will attest....). there are many other factors why even a valentine or escort won't pick up a carefully used radar/laser. the good operators know what they are, and use those factors to their advantage. on the way from from dorkland tonite, i noticed the HP cars leaving their radars running. this is a good ploy when it is busy, as it keeps the high-end speeders guessing, and when it is busy it is hard to u-turn and pursue anyway, so the HP guys tend to be more 9T8H than 9TSH....

**Kickaha** · 23rd July 2004, 22:17

Originally Posted by Two Smoker

I dont completely agree with this.... if i get a ticket for doing 111kmh or 112kmh, he is an arsehole, if i got done for 115+kmh then fair enough i was speeding and deserve it........ Thats why i and MR hardly ever speed on main highways, we just do stupid (but not dangerous) stuff instead hehehe.....

So if we have a 100km speed limit why is 115+ speeding and 111km not?
reality is anything over 100km you can be ticketed for whether it is dangerous or not isn't the issue.

Originally Posted by DEATH INC

I agree.I mean,what's wrong with doing 120k on say the southern m/way at 6am when there's no traffic around?(example).Why should the cop be required to issue a ticket if he can see it's safe......??

See above,you know the rules if you chose to break them,then be prepared to suffer the consequences of your actions,safety is a question of perspective you may consider yourself safe,if he doesn't who is right?

**marty** · 23rd July 2004, 22:36

dangerous driving is a different offence to speeding, this is reflected in the penalties. why is poking your tongue out no offence, but poking your dick out offensive behaviour?

**scumdog** · 23rd July 2004, 23:50

Originally Posted by Kickaha

So if we have a 100km speed limit why is 115+ speeding and 111km not?
reality is anything over 100km you can be ticketed for whether it is dangerous or not isn't the issue.

See above,you know the rules if you chose to break them,then be prepared to suffer the consequences of your actions,safety is a question of perspective you may consider yourself safe,if he doesn't who is right?

Hey, if it would keep everybody happy we would give anybody doing 101kph a ticket, that way there would be no quibbles about "discretion" etc, you would all be happy with that eh? eh?

**Kickaha** · 24th July 2004, 07:33

Originally Posted by scumdog

Hey, if it would keep everybody happy we would give anybody doing 101kph a ticket, that way there would be no quibbles about "discretion" etc, you would all be happy with that eh? eh?

Everyone would just find something else to snivel about