Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What's the deal with motor vehicle violations?
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 211 of 239 (766805)
08-21-2015 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 207 by petrophysics1
08-21-2015 9:05 PM


Wyoming aka "The middle of nowhere"
"I live in the US not a POS place like Canada."
You live in the lowest population state in the U.S., and the 2nd lowest state in population density (after Alaska).
How do you manage to keep your paradise such a secret?
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by petrophysics1, posted 08-21-2015 9:05 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by NoNukes, posted 08-21-2015 11:11 PM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 212 of 239 (766806)
08-21-2015 11:03 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by Percy
08-21-2015 10:20 PM


Re: Police at Risk in Traffic Stops
You're not getting this somehow. Meter maids cannot arrest you, and the proposal is that neither could traffic maids. Traffic maids would be as easy to avoid as meter maids - if you don't want to stop then don't stop - the traffic maid will not pursue. She'll call it in and the real police will stop you, and likely arrest you. Traffic maids wouldn't be looking for non-traffic violations. They'd be non-threatening. Like meter maids.
I'm not an idiot, Percy. I do get your point. That's why instead of just saying, no you are wrong, without saying why, I instead provided an argument or two in support of my opinion that the situation with traffic stops might be different, but instead of addressing those arguments you just revert to 'no you don't get it'. What's the point of that kind of discussion?
And no, you cannot avoid a traffic maid. The interaction between you and the traffic maid is going to be face to face. You can always decide not to confront the meter maid.
Similarly, the second part of your post makes little sense to me.
NoNukes writes:
Currently, there is zero motivation for police not to shoot whenever they feel the least bit fearful. And apparently no way to get the city to take you seriously absent something like a large Rodney King style riot.
Percy writes:
Not much of a deterrent
Right Percy. That's why I suggested a change in policy, namely actually punishing police for bad decisions that lead to having to shoot somebody who should not have been shot, rather than excusing them as we currently do after they've created a killing zone. If the law did allow that rather than excusing police, then police would want training on how to stay alive and out of jail.
Perhaps you could respond that you don't think locking up the police is much of a deterrent, but you don't even bother instead you pull up something I clearly agree is not the way to go and tell me that riots are not a deterrent.
Perhaps this discussion has gone one too long. I've probably missed some of your points too. But your response here seems to miss my point without advancing a point of your own.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Percy, posted 08-21-2015 10:20 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by Percy, posted 08-22-2015 5:35 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 213 of 239 (766808)
08-21-2015 11:11 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by Minnemooseus
08-21-2015 10:38 PM


Re: Wyoming aka "The middle of nowhere"
How do you manage to keep your paradise such a secret?
Besides the point, which is of course, "Canada blows. USA! USA!" [1]
[1] I may need to point out that this post is sarcasm at some date in the future.
Edited by NoNukes, : GOJF card added

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-21-2015 10:38 PM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


(1)
Message 214 of 239 (766812)
08-22-2015 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 204 by Percy
08-21-2015 6:40 PM


Not S - M
We'll soon have statistics on injuries and fatalities in cars with nascent automatic driving capabilities like self-braking and lane maintenance and so forth. If the reductions are dramatic, and it seems like they should be, then there will be incredible demand to make these features, and eventually full self-driving capability, standard.
Not standard, mandatory! As autonomous vehicles roll out most of the world will see reduction in injuries and deaths of 90 or so %. Except in the US.
In the US drivers won't give up their god given right to drive and kill people.
(remember you read it here first)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Percy, posted 08-21-2015 6:40 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 215 of 239 (766832)
08-22-2015 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by petrophysics1
08-21-2015 9:05 PM


Re: Police at Risk in Traffic Stops
petrophysics writes:
I am not required in any way to give an ID or tell a policeman who I am.
So Wyoming cops don't ask for license and registration when they pull you over for running the red light?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by petrophysics1, posted 08-21-2015 9:05 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 216 of 239 (766859)
08-22-2015 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by NoNukes
08-21-2015 11:03 PM


Re: Police at Risk in Traffic Stops
NoNukes writes:
I'm not an idiot, Percy. I do get your point. That's why instead of just saying, no you are wrong, without saying why, I instead provided an argument or two...
Yes, you provided an argument or two, that read like you hadn't read my post.
And no, you cannot avoid a traffic maid.
This, too, looks like you haven't read my post. I wrote (and you quoted it), "If you don't want to stop then don't stop - the traffic maid will not pursue." So you *can* avoid a traffic maid. But why would you want to? Even if you had a bag of cocaine, a hand grenade and an underage hooker sitting in the passenger seat, all she can do is give you a ticket for a traffic violation. Her blindness to all non-traffic violations is for her protection and yours.
The traffic maid idea is not intended to be a complete and finished solution. It's just an idea, a proposal to separate traffic and criminal enforcement responsibilities so that the lives of innocent civilians who have violated a traffic law aren't inadvertently placed in danger. I understand that some people will like the idea and some people won't, and I have no problem with that, but it's a simple idea that you seem to be going out of your way to misunderstand.
Right Percy. That's why I suggested a change in policy...
Except that you're not proposing a change in policy. Laws already hold police responsible for their actions, and when cameras capture actual events so that we don't have to rely upon police accounts, then they already *are* held accountable. Cameras everywhere is just a different solution to the same problem that traffic maids were proposed to solve.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by NoNukes, posted 08-21-2015 11:03 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by NoNukes, posted 08-22-2015 8:35 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 217 of 239 (766868)
08-22-2015 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by Percy
08-22-2015 5:35 PM


Re: Police at Risk in Traffic Stops
Police in many situations are not held accountable when I think they should be. We have discussed a number of examples in this thread, and we've been discussed how bad decision making does not result in punishment. Fix that and you make some progress.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by Percy, posted 08-22-2015 5:35 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by Dogmafood, posted 08-23-2015 12:01 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


(1)
Message 218 of 239 (766881)
08-23-2015 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by NoNukes
08-22-2015 8:35 PM


Re: Police at Risk in Traffic Stops
Upon further consideration and after suffering through more of these shooting videos I have to agree that the police probably need to have a gun immediately available. I sure wouldn't go into some of those situations without one.
Police in many situations are not held accountable when I think they should be.
quote:
While the rate of police officers officially charged with murder is only 1.06% higher than the current general population murder rate, if excessive force complaints involving fatalities were prosecuted as murder the murder rate for law enforcement officers would exceed the general population murder rate by 472%.
Page not found – Unlawful Shield
If we got out of the war on drugs business we could eliminate about half of the criminals with a stroke of the pen.
Something else to consider is that US police forces generate about $6.2 billion/yr in revenue from speeding tickets.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by NoNukes, posted 08-22-2015 8:35 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by ringo, posted 09-13-2015 3:11 PM Dogmafood has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 219 of 239 (768712)
09-13-2015 11:32 AM


The James Blake Affair
Most here probably never heard of James Blake. He's an American tennis player, now retired, who was once ranked as high as #4 in the world. The U.S. Open has been taking place in Flushing Meadow, Queens, NYC, these past two weeks (the men's final is later today). Earlier this week while waiting for his ride to the U.S. Open for appearances with corporate sponsors he was tackled, wrestled to the ground, handcuffed and arrested by an plain clothes policeman who never identified himself. Here's a recent article: James Blake Says Officer Who Arrested Him Should Be Fired, for a Start
I mention this here because this thread has discussed the threat to personal safety at the hands of police officers conducting traffic stops, sometimes touching on the more general problem of driving while black. This James Blake incident, who is biracial, reminds us that the problem isn't confined to driving, and it can happen to anyone.
With great power comes great responsibility. We grant our police great power, but for the most part they're just average joes like us and are not able to wield the power responsibly.
--Percy

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 220 of 239 (768737)
09-13-2015 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by Dogmafood
08-23-2015 12:01 PM


Re: Police at Risk in Traffic Stops
ProtoTypical writes:
I sure wouldn't go into some of those situations without one.
That's based on the premise that adding guns to a situation improves the situation. I would suggest that a police officer is more likely to defuse a situation rather than escalate it if he doesn't have the means to escalate it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Dogmafood, posted 08-23-2015 12:01 PM Dogmafood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by Dogmafood, posted 09-15-2015 9:01 PM ringo has replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 221 of 239 (769046)
09-15-2015 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 220 by ringo
09-13-2015 3:11 PM


Re: Police at Risk in Traffic Stops
That's based on the premise that adding guns to a situation improves the situation.
It is based on the premise that adding your own gun improves your odds of defending yourself against someone who is shooting at you.
I would suggest that a police officer is more likely to defuse a situation rather than escalate it if he doesn't have the means to escalate it.
If someone is shooting at you then you either fight back, run away or hide. Those are your options. I am not sure that I want my police force to run away and hide when confronted with a violent person nor is it fair to expect them to confront gunfire with anything less effective.
The police need the authority and ability to contain any violent situation that they may encounter and the problems only arise at the level of the individual when they abuse or exceed their authority. So more screening, more training and more accountability. Requiring a degree in anything would be a good start.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by ringo, posted 09-13-2015 3:11 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by ringo, posted 09-16-2015 3:28 PM Dogmafood has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 222 of 239 (769102)
09-16-2015 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by Dogmafood
09-15-2015 9:01 PM


Re: Police at Risk in Traffic Stops
ProtoTypical writes:
It is based on the premise that adding your own gun improves your odds of defending yourself against someone who is shooting at you.
That premise is false. A gun is not a defensive weapon. If somebody "is shooting at you" you're most likely already dead. The only way to win a gunfight is to shoot first.
But you're missing the point. Having guns makes police more likely to use violence - and sometimes when they use violence it's inappropriate. The culture of "self defense" that you're preaching is what causes innocent people to be killed by police.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by Dogmafood, posted 09-15-2015 9:01 PM Dogmafood has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 223 of 239 (775609)
01-03-2016 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Percy
07-22-2015 5:56 PM


He only told her to get out of the car when she refused to put out her cigarette. Seems to me, and it apparently seemed to Sandra, too, that he had begun a process of hassling her trying to get her to give him an excuse for escalating things beyond a mere traffic stop. But she became outraged and ended up taking the bait.
That's how I interpreted the encounter as well. I think what probably happened was he thought she was acting like an uppity bitch, which he took great exception to, and instead of de-escalating the situation he inflamed it by giving her a "lawful order," probably secretly hoping that she wouldn't comply so he could teach her a lesson in humility.
It was a comedy of errors on the part of both of them. Both of them let their emotions dictate their actions. She should have remained calm and compliant, within reason, of course. Going off the rails like she did only exacerbated the situation. And he, well, he should have known better. His complete lack of tact and professionalism by demanding she do something that was in fact not a lawful order (extinguishing the cigarette) is what set the incident in to motion.
It just spiraled out of control after that.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Percy, posted 07-22-2015 5:56 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 224 of 239 (777599)
02-04-2016 8:34 AM


Michigan Speed Limits Could Reach 80
Michigan's legislature is considering speed limits as high as 80 mph on some rural freeways (80 mph speed limits could hit some Michigan highways under new House proposal). They're following an "85th percentile" guideline that says speed limits should be set "to reflect the average speed at which 85 percent of motorists are already traveling safely." They're also considering excluding "speeding violations of 5 mph or less from a motorist's official driving record."
But then there was a comment about speed limits in a related article (The Physics of Going 5 Over: How Speed Impacts Car Crashes) that describes the increasing dangers associated with increasing speeds:
quote:
Car crashes they can happen anywhere at any time.
First Lieutenant Joseph Thomas of the Michigan State Police says driving at higher speeds is the biggest problem.
In the State of Michigan, people often feel that they are allowed five or ten miles an hour over the speed limit, Lieutenant Thomas said. That’s not the case.
Where I live almost no one drives the speed limit, and that includes police cruisers and driver's ed cars. I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that this is true all across the United States and Canada. I think it is an almost universal assumption that despite what most police departments will say about going five or ten miles an hour over the limit there is little risk of a ticket when exceeding the limit by only that much.
But this "85th percentile" rule seems problematic to me. If the speed limit is 70 mph then most drivers will travel at 75 to 80 mph, because it's only five to ten miles an hour above the limit and likely doesn't risk a ticket. If they raise the limit to 75 mph because of the "85th percentile" rule then drivers will begin traveling at 80 to 85 mph, again, because it likely doesn't risk a ticket. But the higher driving speeds should result in more and deadlier accidents and could easily violate the "85th percentile" rule, so they'd have to lower the limit again.
So I think the "85th percentile" rule might not work well with the almost universal assumption that it is okay to travel five or ten miles and hour over the limit.
As an aside, in the last couple years I've encountered slightly more cars traveling the back roads at pretty much the speed limit, and I think I may have an explanation. I recently learned that one of my wife's friends has a car that knows the speed limit for all the roads, and it will beep if she exceeds the speed limit. She could have turned the "beep when over the limit" option off, but she chose not to and instead just drives the speed limit everywhere she goes. I hope I'm never behind her, but I think such cars may explain the increased number of cars traveling at the speed limit.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by NosyNed, posted 02-04-2016 9:13 AM Percy has replied
 Message 230 by NoNukes, posted 02-04-2016 2:46 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 225 of 239 (777600)
02-04-2016 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 224 by Percy
02-04-2016 8:34 AM


Limit on Sign isn't All
I've read about this before. And driven (way to fast) in Montana and Utah (which have an 80 mph limit in many places).
It isn't just the speed limit that keeps driver's speeds down. People seem to decide that "this is fast enough" and drive at the speed they like. Even I settle into a cruise that isn't all that fast considering the car has a 255 kph limit in the computer and is rock solid at well over 200 kph. (I haven't tried to push the limit on this one (yet) )
What I found was that the traffic was moving at a little over the 80 mph and there were few going slower than the surrounding traffic and very few going significantly faster. I've read that this is not because of the legal limits but because of what people are comfortable with.
In Montana, as I recall, this was just around the 80 mph and up the middle of Utah (on 3 occasions through there) it was around 90 mph. The lighter traffic and very wide highway in Utah may account for that.
In some circumstances it is possible that traffic moving at a more uniform speed even if a little higher nets out to safer than traffic with 20 or so mph difference in speeds.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Percy, posted 02-04-2016 8:34 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by Percy, posted 02-04-2016 10:07 AM NosyNed has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024