โJul-17-2021 11:18 PM
โJul-19-2021 09:06 AM
โJul-19-2021 08:37 AM
toedtoes wrote:
I have no problem with a marked emergency vehicle driving over the speed limit. The assumption is that they are doing so in the performance of their duties and that the excess speed is necessary. I am willing to accept that assumption.
I do take issue with off duty law enforcement officers (or off duty emergency personnel) in private vehicles speeding and not being ticketed if stopped. The "good ole boy" wave 'em on attitude is wrong.
โJul-19-2021 08:29 AM
4x4ord wrote:
I think if they put the speed limit at 50 mph on every highway and limited the top end of every vehicle to 55 mph there would be next to zero traffic fatalities. I also think the speed limit on divided highways and many lightly travelled 2 lane highways could be 80 mph; almost all other highways could be 65 mph and the number of traffic fatalities wouldnโt change much from where we are at. Iโd be ok with the latter.
Edit: not sure how fast semis and RV should travel.
โJul-19-2021 08:29 AM
โJul-19-2021 08:28 AM
marpel wrote:
And a quick observation on the "speeding cop" comments.
Although I am human like everyone else and occasionally, even while on duty, would find myself travelling a couple kmh over the posted limit - almost impossible to keep under or at the limit all the time. However, I endeavoured to follow the limit, especially while in a marked pc. And would often find myself travelling down the street/highway, with a whole line of pissed off motorists following me, and a whole big empty road ahead.
Follow the rules, people are angry at you, speed a bit to alleviate the traffic jam and people are pissed at you.
And I should add, often a member is dispatched to a call that is not considered an emergency (so no authorized emergency equipment and higher rate of speed), but serious enough for the member to "step it up" a little. To some, he looks like he is just ignoring the speed laws, however....sometimes it's just easier to criticize.
And don't get me wrong, I don't condone any officer breaking the law, just thought I would add a bit of context to the discussion.
Marv
โJul-19-2021 08:25 AM
spoon059 wrote:JRscooby wrote:
IMHO, you have that bass ackward. If a cop is seen in traffic running over the limit, he better explain what is more important he is doing or head for unemployment line.
So you want to fire a cop for speeding?
โJul-19-2021 08:24 AM
rhagfo wrote:Bumpyroad wrote:bgum wrote:
If you don't believe speed kills just look at the pileups with 40-50 cars. Those who are driving the limit are not the problem the speeder is the problem.
IIRC most of those situations were caused by ice/fog/or some other "outlier". not necessarily breaking the speed limit.
bumpy
Well once again, driving too fast for conditions! Not looking far enough down the road, just stupid drivers!
โJul-19-2021 08:23 AM
valhalla360 wrote:bgum wrote:
If you don't believe speed kills just look at the pileups with 40-50 cars. Those who are driving the limit are not the problem the speeder is the problem.
Typically, that is poor visibility. They are rarely doing the speed limit. It's more often someone nervous who is traveling substantially below the average of nearby traffic (high differential speed).
Of course, until we have wide spread adaptive speed limits, the limits posted for normal conditions will be too much for icy white out conditions.
โJul-19-2021 08:22 AM
Bumpyroad wrote:bgum wrote:
If you don't believe speed kills just look at the pileups with 40-50 cars. Those who are driving the limit are not the problem the speeder is the problem.
IIRC most of those situations were caused by ice/fog/or some other "outlier". not necessarily breaking the speed limit.
bumpy
โJul-19-2021 07:42 AM
Groover wrote:
From what I understand going over the speed limit legally requires the use of emergency lights except in specific instances. Those instances require the police to have a judge approved warrant with the time and route on it.
Nobody, including police, should be expected to break the law intentionally. If the law is unreasonable the law should be fixed, not ignored. Loose enforcement of the law leads to subjective and selective enforcement that is too often corrupt or can give the appearance of being corrupt. More than ever we need police to avoid the appearance of being corrupt. Just think how much violence could have been avoided in the past year if police had watched their appearance more closely.
I grew up in Huntsville, Alabama and remember when their police department sought certification about 35 years ago. The first thing that they had to do was give up all official policies that were illegal. Can you imagine what would happen to a company that had policies that required illegal behavior? And think about how it undermines the very authority that the police represent.
I am strongly in favor of law and order. But it should be reasonable and clear and it must apply to EVERYONE equally. And that includes judges, other police and especially lawmakers. Actually, since those people are the ones responsible for the laws they may deserve an extra dose of enforcement instead of the total immunity that many are privileged with now.
I understand that being a law officer is a tough job and that many work too many hours. Some of that needs to corrected but keeping a clean image would take away a lot of the disrespect that they suffer from now.
โJul-19-2021 07:11 AM
BobsYourUncle wrote:
A point perhaps worth considering regarding a LEO and driving is that they are not an average driver taught by mom and dad how to pilot a car.
They undergo rigorous training behind the wheel. They are taught to be observant of all things and situations. They are taught to be keenly aware of their surroundings and more.
Their drivers ed teaches them by actual scenarios how to react in a multitude of traffic situations. Things like a pursuit chase - they learn by controlled training how to react to their surroundings, what to expect from other drivers etc etc.
Bottom line is that a LEO is far better equipped to handle a vehicle than the average driver is.
โJul-19-2021 06:57 AM
โJul-19-2021 06:52 AM
ShinerBock wrote:
I have no problems with a cop doing 10 over without his lights on. There are a lot of times where they need to get somewhere in a hurry, but it does not constitute the use of emergency lights. Many people just assume that they only do it because they can, when in fact there are many instances where it is needed.
A friend of mine who was a Sheriff assigned to graveyard shift DUI had to this all the time. It is a lot harder to see if someone is swerving and drunk looking from the side of the road so he had to catch people while he was driving. He would come up to a batch of cars and check their driving. If they were not swerving or acting erratically then he would speed up(many times over the speed limit to catch up) and go to the next batch of cars. He got many drunk drivers off the road doing this versus those who waited on the side of the road just checking radar.
He also did this when he caught a DUI suspect and they resisted a breathalyzer. Case in point was one accident wear a drunk driver killed four members of a family of five. Only the young daughter remained alive and in critical condition. The drunk driver refused a breathalyzer so my friend had to get a warrant for his blood to be drawn at the nearest hospital. Every second counts and the longer you wait the lower his blood alcohol level gets. It is imperative that he got there fast as possible so the @$$hole does not get off from killing a family, but it does not constitute emergency lights.
Then there is my dad who was a police officer for over 30 years before he retired several years ago. When he was a sergeant, he had to stay readily available to his officers when they needed him which were anywhere between 3-9 officers on a shift. When he got a call where one of his deputies needed his assistance, then he had to rush over there so they can get their problem solved and move on to the next task. Many times he got multiple calls from different deputies. He would use his lights when it was a true emergency, but many times the call did not warrant emergency lights yet he still needed to get their ASAP. Being short handed as he was, the longer the deputies were on a call, the less deputies he had available if an emergency did pop up.
So no, I don't care if they go over the speed limit without their lights because I know there are many instances that warrant it. These are just a few off the top of my head.
โJul-19-2021 06:43 AM
JRscooby wrote:
I understand every cop can justify breaking the traffic laws to do his job better, but where do you draw the line? If a salesman runs a few over, maybe he can make a extra demo today. What is his limit? If I crowd the traffic lights, maybe I can dump 6 loads today instead of 5. Should I get a pass for that red?
Something that is overlooked is while your drunk, me or my salesman also face civil penalty for our actions. Our insurance will pay to the limit, then it is on us to pay. Until laws change, the cop has no money on the table.
โJul-19-2021 06:42 AM
however....sometimes it's just easier to criticize.