Police ticket quotas

[yachtie10]

Not really. The 10kph discretion is a Police operational policy, not a government one.

As the piscine gentlewoman has noted, Ministers will not usually openly meddle with police operations (there have been exceptions). What Ministers *can* do is to intimate to the Commissioner that certain offences should be regarded more or less seriously. That, for instance " We are the government, and we believe that the people want speeding heavily cracked down upon". The Commissioner is not required to take any notice of such an intimation - but if he does not he may find the Minster less accomodating to things that he , in turn,wants. Backs must be mutally scratched.

So the question is not whether the policy has changed, but whether the present Ministers (of Police and Transport) are less "hung up" on speeding than their predecessors. My own opinion, based on nothing whatsoever, other than having met them and noted their comments in the media, is that Ms Collins and Mr Joyce (the latter especially) are somewhat more pragmatic than their predecessors; and probably less likely to take a demanding line about speeding.

How that actually translates into operational policing is not definable. Ultimately a more easy going attitude in the Beehive probably means that Sergeant Snakely makes less fuss about ticket numbers, and Officer Bumblebee feels more able to turn that blind eye. But no-one is going to explicitly state any of that.

Your starting to sound like a politician
of course you make valid points
I still think the question is vaild
another example is that speed cameras used to ticket the top 15% of speeders (Ithink thats right) when the labour governement came in that was changed.
If you are correct then there is no point of parliament or us discussing as its all up to the police (you could be right there)

[FJRider]

There are no quotas. There are only performance measurements and targets like in any other job.

Yep ... measurements in kilometers, and WE are the target ...

[Ixion]

Your starting to sound like a politician
of course you make valid points
I still think the question is vaild
another example is that speed cameras used to ticket the top 15% of speeders (Ithink thats right) when the labour governement came in that was changed.
If you are correct then there is no point of parliament or us discussing as its all up to the police (you could be right there)

The point is valid, but it is not a questiopn of the policy changinging. rather it is Sergeant S saying "Officer Bumblebee, you've more important things to do than sit round all day in the squad car to hand out a couple of speeding tickets" : rather than "Officer Bumblebee , I want EVERY speeding driver ticketed, no exceptions, no excuses, or else".

I'm not sure about the speed camera one. Certainly when they were introduced we were told that they would only snap the fastest 15%. And now they don't. Whether that was the politicians lying or the police I'm not sure.

[Usarka]

As they say in Italy - I quota you, you kiss'a my fathers'a meatballs while fingerin his'a fettucini.

[kwaka_crasher]

I quite like the 11km/h 'must issue ticket' and 3 contacts per hour mentality because it means that usually when I come along at 130km/h they're already busy with a 'customer' who was sprung at 114km/h in a 100km/h zone not harrassing me.

[Berries]

I'd never looked at it that way before.

[steve_t]

I quite like the 11km/h 'must issue ticket' and 3 contacts per hour mentality because it means that usually when I come along at 130km/h they're already busy with a 'customer' who was sprung at 114km/h in a 100km/h zone not harrassing me.

LOL. It's so true. How many times do u cruise past a cop car and they're already busy with someone else? I'm highly dubious of the "must ticket over 11km/h over" but am told the 3 contacts per hour policy still stands. 3 contacts per hour isn't really a lot. The must ticket for speed myth got dispelled by the girl that used to work for me that got told to "slow down pretty eyes" by the cop who clocked her at 140km/h. I guess cops are human too.

[Usarka]

The must ticket for speed myth got dispelled by the girl that used to work for me that got told to "slow down pretty eyes" by the cop who clocked her at 140km/h. I guess cops are human too.

Right, so a good looking woman gets off a speeding ticket with the worst come-on line I've ever heard, and you think that proves it?

[MSTRS:Me]

LOL. It's so true. How many times do u cruise past a cop car and they're already busy with someone else? I'm highly dubious of the "must ticket over 11km/h over" but am told the 3 contacts per hour policy still stands. 3 contacts per hour isn't really a lot. The must ticket for speed myth got dispelled by the girl that used to work for me that got told to "slow down pretty eyes" by the cop who clocked her at 140km/h. I guess cops are human too.

You missed the bit about him doing up his fly...

[CookMySock]

Why not just put a GPS tracking unit on the patrol cars? Then the boss can see exactly where they were all day, how often they moved, and every other damn thing about them.

Steve

[steve_t]

Right, so a good looking woman gets off a speeding ticket with the worst come-on line I've ever heard, and you think that proves it?

Oh yeah, and it was about a week prior to this that I got ticketed for doing 111km/h in a 100 zone. I know HEAPS of chicks that have been let off speeding tickets with warnings. Oh well, thems the breaks for being a guy.
Sorry, what do I think has been proven?

[vifferman]

So the question is not whether the policy has changed, but whether the present Ministers (of Police and Transport) are less "hung up" on speeding than their predecessors.

I understood that the 'performance targets' had to do with ACC funding the Police to improve road safety (and thereby reduce claim ACC costs) and requiring the police to show that they were actually using the funding effectively, by producing summary reports showing the number of 'contacts' made.
Unfortunately, some simpleton statisticians somewhere decided it was as simple as focusing on speeding, seatbelts and drink driving to reduce the road toll and injuries. Moreover, with the possible exception of seatbelts, these are the easiest things to police, because they require virtually no thinking. Driving around with the pingy thing on, or sitting on the side of the road with the hairdryer out the window, or setting up a checkpoint and checking everyone is all it takes.

Unfortunately, none of these address the real iissue, which is shit driving caused by shit attitudes. And the public generally knows that the focus on speeding is bogus because the speed limits are illogical and arbitrary (like, if it's deemed safe to travel at 100km/h on a narrow dual carriageway with corners, why is the motorway also restricted to 100?). So, Joe Public resents what is seen as an example of wasted police resources and an unfair focus on only one aspect of driving, and the attitudes don't change, and the driving standards as a whole continue to fall. It also means that the public resent the police, who are only doing their jobs (albeit in what is an unintelligent and ineffective way), and continue to drive badly while keeping an eye out for speed cameras and cops with laser/radar units.

I don't have a problem with the police issuing tickets for speeding. However, it galls me that they are focusing on it while ignoring other things, like failing to indicate, following too closely, failing to give way or stop, etc. They also don't don't temper their speed policing with a bit of pragmatism. After Christmas, when D'Auckland motorways were lightly trafficked, several times I saw cops just sitting on the side of the road with a laser out the window. So what?
If people are going to work or wherever, and there's bugger all traffic on the motorway, so what if they do 115 or even 120, if the traffic's flowing nicely and people are driving OK? If everyone's doing 95, and somebody's weaving in and out at 112, then that's different. The other lack of pragmatism is the seeming intent to "ticket no matter what", that sees a cop car screaming along through traffic at whatever maximum speed they're allowed to travel at, forcing other law-abiding motorists to get out of the way the best they can, just to hand out one ticket for a minor offence. Which causes the most danger to safe motoring: someone passing safely and momentarily exceeding the speed limit, or ensuring that the offence doesn't go unpunished?
At least the Gubmint has realised public opinion is agin it as far as this goes, as witnessed by the recent news item decrying the number of deaths and injuries caused by police pursuit. Hopefully, instead of PC Plod going, "Awriiiight!! An opportunity to put the pedal to the metal and liven up my shift a bit, he/she will think first.
But probably not.
[/rant]

[peasea]

Excellent post, have some bling.

[kwaka_crasher]

Shame they don't have the same quotas for the catchng of burglars...

Excellent post, have some bling.

Ditto. Sorry that it doesn't carry much weight!

[Spearfish]

Lousy Cop

Well Mr. Citizen, I guess you have figured me out. I seem to fit neatly into the category you place me in. I'm stereotyped, characterized, standardized, classified, grouped, and always typical. I'm the "lousy" cop.

Unfortunately, the reverse isn't true. I can never figure you out.

From birth you teach your children that I am a person to be wary of...and then you're shocked when they identify me with my traditional enemy, the criminal.

You accuse me of coddling juvenile criminals, until I catch your kid doing something.

You may take an hour for lunch and several coffee breaks each day, but point me out as a loafer if you see me having just one cup.

You pride yourself on your polished manners, but think nothing of interrupting my meals with your troubles.

You raise hell about the guy who cuts you off in traffic, but let me catch you doing the same thing and I'm picking on you.

You know all the traffic laws, but never got one ticket you deserved.

You shout "Foul!" if you observe me driving fast enroute to an emergency call, but literally raise hell if I take more than ten seconds responding to your call.

You call it "part of my job" if someone strikes me. But its "police brutality" if I strike back.

You wouldn't think of telling your dentist how to pull a badly decayed tooth, or your doctor how to take out your appendix, but you are always willing to give me pointers on law enforcement.

You talk to me in a manner and use language that would assure a bloody nose from anyone else, but you expect me to stand there and take it without batting an eye.

You cry, "Something has to be done about all the crime!" but you can't be bothered with getting involved.

You've got no use for me at all, but, of course, it's OK if I change a tire for your wife, deliver your baby in the back seat of my patrol car on the way to the hospital, save your son's life with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, or work many hours overtime to find your lost daughter.

So, Dear Citizen, you stand there on your soapbox and rant and rave about the way I do my job, calling me every name in the book, but never stop a minute to think that your property, your family, or maybe your life might depend on one thing - me, or one of my buddies.

Yes, me, the lousy cop.

- Author unknown