Ticket Economics

This is one of the best articles I have read on the Police missuse of power. Everthing said in this artical is completly true. This is why everyone distrusts cops.

 

Amen.

 

SO TRUE!!!

 

EXACTLY!

 

REVEREND!!!

DL

 

Recent story here in Ct.
http://www.nbc30.com/station/2645130/detail.html

 

Here in Michigan they've begun cracking down on real hardcore driving criminals - those who don't wear their seatbelts. For a week they advertised that starting 11/17 they were going on mass enforcement for this horribly offensive crime. And sure enough I saw them up the road from my office pulling over people for hours and getting them for not buckling their seatbelt. I'm all for wearing seatbelts. I'm even all for giving a ticket for it. But come on - starting a mass advertising campaign and then tying up at least half a dozen officers at once (one to observe the rest to pull people over) just to raise revenue? And don't anyone tell me it's for anything different. This is far and away the STUPIDEST thing I have ever seen in my life. Especially when the advertising dollars and the manpower could have gone to fighting real crime. Give me a frickin' break.
(Steps off of soap box)

 

It's also pretty stupid not to wear your seatbelt. Just visit an emergency room.

Vincent.

 

Actually, one of the stupidest things youve seen in your life is people who are told about a statewide crackdown on not wearing belts, but continue not to wear them. Those idiots deserve a ticket.

 

like wearing a helment on a motorcycle, wearing a seat belt should not be optional behavior anywhere.

i personally think they should have mandatory organ donor status for any driver or motorcyclist who ends up brain dead as the result of a vehicle accident where they weren't wearing their seat belt or helmet, respectively.

and ticket them on the days they mange to not die to raise revenue.

taxing (ticketing) people for not using their seat belts (hey, it IS the law) is no stupider than the taxes we levy on cigarettes. if you want to end your life early, go for it. but it's gonna cost you along the way to help defray the insane costs that result from your death and the process thereto.

and for all those ultra-geniuses who didn't wear their belts after being warned? well, ownage hurts sometimes. sheesh. no pity.

doody.

 

Guys - keep in mind that this IS America, and we *should* have the freedom to decide our own safety. I never get in a car without a seatbelt, but that doesn't mean that the Government should start mandating how safely we live our lives.

Are people who don't wear seatbelts stupid? Yup. Just like people who smoke, drink a 5th each night, and skydive. Does that mean that the gov should start mandating that smoking is no longer allowed anywhere, drinking excessively in the privacy of your home is illegal, or that skydiving is banned?

Didn't think so.


Done with rant.

 

That's what I liked about California - citation funds went into the State's 'general fund' and not the local city or county. All they got was enough to cover court costs. No economic incentive to write tickets.

I feel that ANY agency that uses LE to generate funds is corrupt at the core. Turning LE from enforcing valid safety issues to fund raising invites abuse of power to satisfy financial demand imposed by the government. Taking discretion out of the hands of the enforcers turn otherwise professionals into non-thinking robots.The same goes for judges who face mandatory sentecing guidlines.

We spent a lot of time in the acadamy (south bay area) learning about the letter of the law, the spirit of the law and legislative intent behind a law. Before making an enforcement decision, we were trained to look at all 3 concepts - you have the 'letter of the law' i.e. the written, un-ambiguous statute being violated (say, 'no person shall make a u-turn in a business district'); the 'spirit of the law' i.e. is it really in the best interest of society to enforce this law under these circumstances (citing someone for making U-turn in business district at 2 a.m. vs noon) and what was the 'legislative intent' (to prevent accidents and protect pedestrians on busy streets during business hours).

As to drivers driving too slow, this was stricktly enforced on freeways. One night while on patrol, communication put out a city wide alert from the CHP: "CHP requests the officer north bound Hwy 17 @ 280 pls speed up or move into slow lane, you are holding up traffic". Money was NOT the incentive behind enforcement back then.

Seatbelt laws - they do save lives, but I have a Darwin perspective on this - not wearing seatbelts is stupid, and stupid people are SUPPOSED to die out, preferably before they multiply. Same with helmets - its your choice

 

I never knew any drunk that would skydive at night!

 

"i don't fault the police... 'cause the people that run 'em, got 'em on a short leash..."
Can't say i agree with that line, but it holds true; the state and local governments dictate what cops do to bring in money and it blows...

 

You oughtta try it! Really fun, but makes for a bad hangover...

 

Out here in the Hamptons, about 3-5 officers will stand in the middle of the road, checking everyone's inspection and reg. sticker and giving out tickets. You should see the traffic mess it creates and it is obviously just a way of producing more revenue. Never mind the main roads that have a speed limit of 25 when you could easily do 45-50 on the roads without any danger. Especially when they are miles of straigt road with few turns if any.

 

It disappoints me that so many americans think there should be seatbelt laws and helmet laws. I can understand having these laws for minors, but it should be left up to the choice of adults if they want to wear them. I don't care if these things save lives; you can also save lives by banning alcohol, tobacco and fast food, but that seems just as stupid to me.

As far as ticketing goes, Hawaii pulls that crap also. "Click it or ticket" campaigns to raise money. You'll end up with 2 cops minimum around your car with their lights blazing just because you don't have a seatbelt on.

 

randall - the counterargument is that these things that the vast majority of of the population consider "reasonable and responsible" (eg: seat belts and motorcycle helmets) do actually substantially prevent injuries in accidents. if accident injuries are lower, the cost to society is lower. no man is an island. the vast majority of the population does NOT have the financial resources to keep themselves on life support after a helmet-less motorcycle accident for the remainder of their 40, 50, or more years on the planet. eventually the taxpayers are gonna end up footing the bill.

unfortunately, our society will not permit (for better or for worse) terminations of lives due to non-payment of life-support bills. perhaps you can get a petition going .

i agree with you: i don't think we should have mandatory seat belt laws and motorcycle helmet laws. my preference is to create laws that deal with what happens if you choose what most of society considers irresponsible behavior (eg: mandatory organ donor status, etc.).

i'm all for people smoking and doing drugs too - just as long as they're not endangering anyone else with second hand smoke or stealing to pay for their habit. legalize it all and tax the holy bejeezus out of it!

doody.

 

"i agree with you: i don't think we should have mandatory seat belt laws and motorcycle helmet laws. my preference is to create laws that deal with what happens if you choose what most of society considers irresponsible behavior (eg: mandatory organ donor status, etc.)."

Good idea.

" i'm all for people smoking and doing drugs too - just as long as they're not endangering anyone else with second hand smoke or stealing to pay for their habit. legalize it all and tax the holy bejeezus out of it!"

Also good stuff! I don't see a causal link between occasional second hand smoke and serious illness, but hey, whatever floats your boat. I just don't like it when the state or fed tries to regulate smoking in private establishments(bars, restaurants).

It should be no shock that the main function of police is revenue generation. What else would they be for? Their ability to solve crime is for the most part comical.

 

But, you/we don't have to pass a law to establish common sense. We could just let the insurance industry refuse to pay medical expenses for injuries sustained when available and proper safety precautions wer not used.

So, for example, a helmetless MC rider leaves the road and collides with a tree. Ambulance arrives and sees no helmet, packs up and leaves the rider there to fend for himself.