What Everyone Should Know About Laser Guns
February 27th, 2008 Posted in James Baxter, Traffic TicketsBy James Baxter, NMA President
The use of laser speed estimation devices, sometimes referred to as LIDAR, has been accompanied by a lot of heavy breathing and claims of infallibility on the part of law enforcement agencies. “Pinpoint accuracy, undetectable,” and “tremendous range” are common refrains.
Setting the flim-flam and propaganda aside, there are some things every motorist confronted with a laser ticket should know.
The number one selling point for laser guns is their advertised capability to selectively clock the speed of one vehicle that is traveling amongst other vehicles in moderate to heavy traffic. (Radar cannot reliably be used when there are multiple vehicles in its all encompassing beam.) Its ability to determine a target’s speed in a fraction of a second is another popular feature. Probably, laser’s greatest drawback is that it cannot legitimately be used in a moving mode.
So what’s the real story on laser speed guns? They work; they work if they are properly adjusted, properly used, and used within their limitations.
A quick primer on how laser guns work:
The laser gun has a “sight” where the officer can see the target vehicle and aim the device. When the trigger is pulled a thin beam of invisible infra-red light is emitted in distinct pulses. The beam gradually increases in size and at 1000 feet it is three to four feet in diameter. When the light beam hits a relatively perpendicular, reflective surface it bounces back toward the laser gun.
When the returning pulses of light are captured by the laser gun the electronics go to work and they have this kind of conversation:
OK, that first pulse took .0015 seconds to get out there and back, that means the target is 1000 feet away. The second pulse took .0014 seconds to get out there and back so now our target is 950 feet away. The third pulse went out and came back at .0013 seconds putting the target 900 feet from the laser gun. It took us one third second to gather these three measurements and that means the vehicle went 100 feet in one third second. Therefore the vehicle is going 49 miles per hour.
In actual practice the laser gun sends out far more than three pulses and measures the targets movements in much smaller increments, but this should give you some sense of the calculating processes the laser device employs.
From this elementary description of how a laser gun works you can begin to understand certain of the critical issues confronting a laser gun operator. First, this is a fairly complicated electronic instrument and it cannot be used to pound nails if a hammer isn’t available. Laser guns are more delicate than radar guns. And, because the aiming function is critical, the adjustment of the sighting mechanism is critical.
An honest and competent laser gun operator is going to take the following steps before he or she begins to use the device for enforcement purposes:
- Check the instruments internal testing and calibration systems.
- Check the sight alignment by picking an object at a reasonable distance (where the beam is still relatively narrow) like a utility pole, and then “sweep the gun past the object in both a vertical and then a horizontal position, with the trigger engaged, to make sure the laser gun records a distance reading at the same time the sight is on the testing target. This assures that the laser beam and the laser sight are coordinated.
- The routine external test is to shoot the laser at an object at a known distance and confirm that the laser distance reading is accurate. If it isn’t the gun needs to be repaired. However, this does not mean the gun is accurately estimating speeds.
- A simple test to check speed accuracy is to drive the patrol car at a fixed speed and then fire the laser at a fixed object, like the flat side of a building. The laser reading should be the same as the vehicle’s speedometer reading. Another option is to shoot a vehicle traveling at a known speed, such as another patrol car.
With a properly aligned sight and properly confirmed instrument operation the officer can use the laser gun with relative confidence that it will yield accurate speed readings, PROVIDED it is used properly and respecting its limitations.
Proper use means a steady rest, no sweeping or other movement of the gun when taking readings, not shooting through glass or in the midst of a rain storm or snow fall.
While it’s possible to clock a target that is 2000 to 3000 feet away the speed reading is of dubious accuracy and highly prone to error. On a clear day with no other traffic in sight a good laser operator can obtain reasonably accurate readings out to 1200, perhaps 1500 feet. However, if there are other vehicles present those distances should be halved.
Remember, at distances in excess of 700-800 feet the laser beam is easily large enough to not only be reflecting off of different parts of the target vehicle (which are simultaneously different distances from the laser gun), but also off of other vehicles, some traveling at different speeds. At distances in excess of 800 feet, the laser operator has no way of knowing what vehicle surfaces or entire vehicles are responsible for the laser speed readings, especially if other vehicles fall within the scope of the laser beam.
Most laser operators prefer to aim at the license plate because it offers a very perpendicular and highly reflective surface.
A vehicle without a front license plate and a low sloping hood, think Corvette, has to be much closer before a good laser reading can be made. However, at distances in excess of 800-900 feet the license plate is indistinguishable from the car as a whole and the laser beam is washing over the entire vehicle.
To put this in another context; think about the challenge of hitting a target the size of a license plate three football fields distant, with a handgun.
In an honest courtroom, any laser reading in excess of 800 feet would not be accepted for evidentiary purposes. The State of New Jersey has set the limit at 1000 feet, which is a step in the right direction. The rest of the country is oblivious to the limitations of this technology, with judges and legislators believing the propaganda, instead of exercising the caution and judgment we have entrusted them to exercise on our behalf.
Feel free to copy this blog and send it to a judge or legislator(s) of your choice.
Other Related Articles
58 Responses to “What Everyone Should Know About Laser Guns”
By Bob on Aug 15, 2008
Dave, I have also been reading that there are new Lidar guns that have the technology of producing an actual photo of the targeted vehicle and when the reading is obtained the photo is being taken simultaneously as to remove the doubt as to which vehicle the actual reading is coming from.
I have to assume that the argument about the reading being able to actually match the targeted vehicle has come up many times before promoting the need for this new technology. As I stated in my first response, how does the judge know that the reading from the officers gun actually belongs to my vehicle. I know you stated that it will be assumed that he is telling the truth, but can it not be assumed that I am also? Do I not carry the same respect as the officer in this case?
As I stated earlier, I am not trying to attack his integrity but there is a potential for human and or equipment error and it stands that there is a reasonable doubt here. I have to think that there is some burden of proof that needs to be placed on the officer in question also. After all he is a public servant and my tax dollars not only pays for his salary but that of the judge or pro-tem judge and I deserve the same assumption of honesty the officer will be receiving, do you not agree? With that in mind, why do you think the development of photo Lidar was created in the first place but to remove the potential for errors or integrity.
By Bob on Aug 15, 2008
Dave,Thanks for the response. I must admit I have not proceeded in this manner before. How do I subpoena the device records and the officers training records? I need to be in court on the 29th. Do I have enough time to get these records in your opinion?
By Dave on Aug 14, 2008
The best evidence in my view is the 175 foot distance you travelled befor alegedly reaching 54 MPH. While possible, it is not likely that this occurred. I can not speak for any judge as they are all individuals and handle things differently. Dark cars are less reflective than light cars, though they sometimes are easily detected. The cosine effect you desclibed will always result in a reading that is lower than the true speed of the target. This is if the unit was being operated properly and was in good working order. As for the the veracity of the officers stated opinion that you were speeding, it will be assumed he is being honest absent any concrete evidence to the contrary. The LIDAR i use has a beam width of 3 feet at a distance of 1000 feet, so properly used it can target a specific vehicle to the exclusion of any others.
Be prepared with real evidence, subpoena all records for the device used, officer’s training, and engineering traffic surveys, and study relevant case law. You may prevail.
Good luck.
By Bob on Aug 14, 2008
To Dave, the CA traffic cop:
Hello Dave, I have a question about potentially disputing a traffic citation where a laser gun was used.
I received a citation on a So. Cal city block. The ticketing officer was a motorcycle officer that was off his bike standing under a tree that protruded over the road. He needed to stand just off the roadway whilest he pointed his laser gun at on coming traffic.
I had just made a R/H turn from a red light that had turned green. The traffic that day (Saturday) was moderate. There was a white 2005 Camry flanked to my left and another vehicle that had just went through the intersection (2 lanes in both directions) before the light had gone green in ny direction. Within seconds I was signaled by the officer to pull over.
He said he pulled me over for a speeding infraction and said his laser reading had me at 54mph in a 35mph zone from 660 feet away. He also stated that he had been there most of the days policing that area. I stated respectfully that I was not speeding and that he was somewhat mistaken. He asked to show me the reading. I said OK. He promtly showed me the reading on his gun at 54.
I stated to the office that yes I recognized the reading but that doesn’t justify it was my vehicle that the reading came from. First let me point out some things about laser. I happen to work with and have been trained in laser technology. I was a manager at an aerospace corp. and we painted corporate aircraft. We would lay the lines out for applying the stripes by means of laser.
Lasers are very accurate if used in certain nanners and criteria. First in all the training we recived in using lasers, it was highly stressed that they were only accurate when used on a stationary apparatus such as a stand or tri-pod. Hand held units are subject to deflection, arm movements and sweeping when triggered and a 2 degree inflection can cause a false reading or inaccurate calculation.
A 2 degree inflection is no more than a flinch from a muscle tension. Also at the distance at which he said he targeted me (660ft) the laser beam widens and can cause the beam to reflect off of different parts of the targeting vehicle and cause the beam to delfect to other surrounding vehicles, some travelling at different speeds, which would in essence, the officer would not actually be able to know exactly what vehicle was calculated. The weight of the gun after hours of hand held usage and fatigue can cause slight arm deflections.
After, I went and measured the distance from where I made my turn to where the officer said he targeted me. The total distance was 835ft. So in a 175 feet I accelerated from 0-54 mph. Highly unlikely unless my intention was to race.
When he pulled me over I was able to bring my vehicle to a short and safe stop and I asked him if he thought I was trying to use a show of excessive speed. He replied that in his estimation it didn’t look like I was doing anything out of the ordinary. I also have a vehicle (2006 Mustang) that has been stated to have a very narrow front end that is perpendicular to the street offering a very minimal targeting area and has no real reflective surfaces like chrome bumpers etc. for the laser beam to reflect off of except my front license plate.
The color of the vehicles is a darker blue which when using laser doesn’t lend itself favorably to reflecting laser light. I was looking at my speedometer and noticed that I was indeed not speeding. again, I was not the only vehicle on the road or in his path.
In my laser training it was stated that the laser would not be effective on aircraft that had dark fuselages for laying out stripes and would have to be done manually with tape in those applications. Thats why the majority of airframes we painted were white for their base coats. Also keep in mind, when we used our lasers it was at a distance of 6-12 feet, keeping the laser beam as tight as possible.
As I stated the vehicle that was flanked to my left was white in color and travelling much faster than I was. Now also keep this in mind, aside from the potential flaws I have mentioned by using this laser gun by hand held methods at that distance, the size of my front license plate (Which the officers are trained to focus on) is about the size of a chicklet. The officer is off his bike and he has his helmet off and sitting on the mirror, gloves on the seat, and he pulled the gun from out of his plastic saddle bag as he pulled me over.
Aside from the potential human error and distance, and without attacking the officers integrity, I think it is possible that the reading he received could have very well come from the car beside me but passed him before he could feasably put down his laser gun, put on and strap his helmet and gloves, satrt his bike and persue the other vehicle. It was much easier to pull over the next guy in line.
Besides, the reading on the gun can remain on the unit as long as he didn’t reset, turn off or retriggered the gun. So if he had an inaccurate reading or was just not prepared to go after the other vehicle, he may in his mind believe he has the correct vehicle to match his gun reading.
So my question to you is do I have grounds to effectively fight this in traffic court and will the judge actually listen to me and not use the attitude as I have noticed in the past where they really don’t want to hear it and side with the officer at all costs?
By Ken on Jul 28, 2008
Some cops are not the best, I’ll give you that. Police Officers don’t deserve the bad reputation for all officers just because of a few bad apples. I’ll give you an instance: If you get cheated by a taxi driver, does that make all of them rotten? If a CPA gets caught cheating, does that make all CPA’s bad? If a gas station employee steals gas for his own car instead of paying for it, does that make all the employees bad?
Everyone is so quick to bundle all police officers together just because they have a bad experience with some of us. Should I do that with other professions? If I have a bad experience with a doctor does that make all doctors quacks? We, as a society, are always quick to judge others and bunch people in a profession together, regardless of the merits of the profession or the people in it.
Think about that.
By Timothy on Jul 28, 2008
The problem I have is this: I received a parking ticket this past Saturday while following a friend back to their place. Since I did not know where they lived, I tried my best to keep up and stay within the ridiculous 55-mph speed limit (right outside the CITY of CINCINNATI on an INTERSTATE).
I was in the lane furthest from the police officer (he was 781.3 ft from me according to the ticket) in “in light traffic” as described on the ticket, and I was going the same speed as everyone else - if not slower - because I was trying to follow another vehicle.
Well, I get pulled over, of course, for going 75 in a 55. How convenient! Exactly 20 mph over in order to extract a higher fine from me pursuant to ORC 4511.21 D1.
That would be all fine and dandy if I hadn’t had CRUISE CONTROL (using the accelerate button when necessary) on and knowing for a fact that I never went above 70. I can’t prove this though… how can I? I don’t have a radar. No one is going to believe what I am saying!
Not only that, but I was asked if I had been drinking; not even waiting for an answer, he told me to get out of the car to take the “drunk test” which I passed with flying colors because I wasn’t drunk! It was insulting.
So, now, in a world where regular people aren’t seeing any rise in their paychecks with the cost of insurance and other necessities increasing, I have a huge fine and will probably have higher insurance costs… THAT is the problem.
I want police officers to have an IQ above 30 and start ticketing people that deserve it… not the last car in a series of cars going the same speed as myself… IN AN EMPTY LANE WITH NO DANGER BEING POSED TO ANYONE.
I hope you have the pleasure, Mr. Police Officer, of getting kicked off the force, getting a bogus ticket, and seeing how YOU like it. Police Officers DESERVE the bad reputation they get.
By Pissed in CO on Jul 12, 2008
I need your help!
I drive through a very well know, frequent speed trap twice a day- 5 days a week in Aurora, CO.
I am VERY aware of this fact & can almost always correctly predict when the PO-PO will be working on dept revenue.
Because of this & the car I drive I ALWAYS use my cruise control…it’s posted 40, I set my cruise between 44 & 47 based on traffic flow/speed. The average speed of others is between 44 & 53.
Two mornings ago they were out in force- no surprise to me as I expect to see them daily so I’m prepaired w/my cruise set at 46.
I have an ‘08 car- the speed is not off, the cruise works correctly…I use it all the time to control speed.
I am not perfect, I have been guilty of speeding & did not try to deny.
Upon being pulled over I tried to explain the cruise control, was very polite & professional…all I received in return was alot of “MAMMM & I can try to explain the laser….”
I want to fight this because it’s TOTAL BS & I am PISSED!!!!!!…I now question how many others have been given the same BS 55 in a 40 ticket in the name of easy rev!
Please, if you have advise that will help me get this dismissed I would love your advise…I’m not looking to reduce, I want this to be thrown out because it’s 100% FALSE.
I’d also love to bust this speed trap revenue maker…anyone out there in Aurora CO?
Thanks in advance!
By Ken on Jul 3, 2008
Again, it’s not about revenue for all of us. If that’s the case, why is the police department where I work still working out of a temporary double wide trailer? It was supposed to be a six month fix and now going on four years. It’s because the city doesn’t care enough about the police dept. to build us a new building or locate us in something better….goes towards a perceived lack of professionalism too. Tickets we write go to the city general fund, not to any police department fund…and our chief still has to fight tooth and nail to get the budget he does have. Bottom line, the city doesn’t care but most of our officers DO care about their job.
By Joe on Jul 3, 2008
Steve thanks for the comments. I live where James was raised but no longer lives. The fact that both of us are passionate about traffic control issues probably speaks to the fact that we are/were both influenced by the same policing mentality.
I don’t know of any organization for Canada but I would recommend contacting the NMA or do some searches. I have to agree that I’ve seen some reasonable LEO’s (law enforcement officers) on these blogs. Also noted the other kind. The more reasonable ones are willing to strike up a dialog without getting defensive. The others are probably acting the same way they would at a traffic stop e.g.….my way or the highway. I’ve never seen much benefit to butting heads with LEO’s just to be butting heads. If you’ve got reasonable LEO’s we should work with them to improve traffic safety. By the same token I believe we should vehemently oppose abusive behavior and that goes for motivation such as revenue generation. One thing I must stress. The municipalities who hire the cops and can affect their behavior are just as responsible, if not more, for bad LEO behavior.
There are a few laws that I believe should be standard on every states’ books. Anti-quota laws. Speed trap laws. Transparency by requiring detailed reporting of traffic enforcement data. There would be a number of benefits resulting from this disclosure. Speed traps laws could be automatically triggered. A related comment; Speed trap municipalities would be quickly discovered simply by comparing similar sized cites or towns to the number of citations they issued…and what they were issue for. If you start out with a good disclosure law you can build laws based on that. Information is power and that’s why you don’t see this information published. It’s obviously very revealing.
Using my best guess’ta’mate, the question I haven’t heard any LEO satisfactory answer is why 95% of the citations issued are for speeding when speeding (might) account for as much as 5% of the total accidents. I think we all know the answer to that question. Throughout this whole debate the most fundamental question still remains …..why we allow this huge conflict of interest to persist namely allowing a enforcement entity to keep the revenue derived from it’s enforcement.
They are laughing all the way to the bank at the driving public. Their brashness is such that they don’t even bother to deny it anymore.
The driving public really is in a state of paralysis. I guess what has surprised me, maybe more than anything else throughout all my years studying traffic control issues is how drivers who do get screwed by the system will gripe about it but fail to respond in any meaningful way. If you feel violated after a traffic stop why not join other drivers who suffered a similar fate and start a political effort to actually affect the problem. Bloging is OK but it doesn’t solve the problem. Failure to respond in my mind amounts to getting hit in the face psychologically and turning the other cheek. Symbolically, someone who would no more put up with a slap in the face somehow allows himself or herself to be belittled, sometimes repeatedly, without any response. It amazes me.
By Steve on Jul 1, 2008
I just wanted to say that I have been reading these NMA blogs over the last 2 days and am really impressed with Joe and James- you guys rock! You both know your stuff and present very logical and scientific arguments. Kudos to you guys for fighting the good fight!
I am also impressed with a couple of the LEOs on this blog- they seem to be more level headed than many cops out there.
I live in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, and will add that, unfortunately, the situation here is as bad if not worse than you describe for many US cities or municipalities. Despite the fact that we are an oil-rich province with a 17 billion dollar surplus, this city has to be one of the worse in Canada for over the top traffic enforcement - mainly speed traps (in the truest sense of the word), approx 50 red light cameras set up in the city, and photo radar everywhere ( especially in areas where is is very easy to exceed the posted limit). It’s truly sad, and as you mention, people just bend over and pay these ridiculous fines. I wish the cops on traffic duty would at least do something useful by setting up in playground zones or stopping distracted drivers on cell phones, but instead they always hide behind poles or bushes in areas where it is downhill, open road ahead, no danger to children or pedestrians, where the limit changes from 70km/hr to 50km/hr, ie places where they know they can maximize profit. Calgary is aleady one of the most expensive cities in Canada to live in, so I resent this extra “road tax” just for the sake of even more revenue. Greed, greed, greed…
I myself have been driving for about 25 years, with maybe a half dozen traffic violations (all speeding tickets) in that time, and 1 speeding ticket in the past 8 years. None of those was for dangerous driving in any sense of the word- all for 10-30km/hr (6-18mph) over the posted limit in open stetches of roadway. Not bad for a guy that has been driving a shiny red sports car for the past 16 years :) I simply paid all the previous ones but have decided from this day forward I will plead not guilty to all future offences and have my day in court. At least make the city pay if I’m going to have to…
James and Joe- do you know if there is an organization similar to the NMA in Canada?
By Ken on Mar 17, 2008
Joe,
Thank you for your last comments. I don’t spend a lot of time on the highway, most of my enforcement is in town…stop signs, seat belts, speeding in school zones, the like. I try to spend time each day in positive contacts with the public as well. I have a lot of EMS assist calls too.
Yes, we are indeed human. We ALL have our own faults and failings like anybody else, as well as having our strong points like everybody else. It just so happens our job is law enforcement….but for me, law enforcement coupled with compassion for those I come into contact with. There are actually many among us (cops) who feel as I do. Thank you for realizing we are just human beings like everyone else.
AC, as for your statement, I’m sorry but some officers are indeed like that. I, for my part, am not, however. I like to err on the side of caution and judgment. I am human like those I see every day. If I call a person on something and they give me a lame brained excuse that sounds like a fifth grade excuse, then yes, I will write them a ticket. If they have a real genuine reason for doing something and it is indeed plausible, I will usually just warn them, increase their own knowledge of traffic or city code, and we go about our business, confident they won’t do it again - and if they do…they should know and expect a ticket if they get caught.
There are a lot of cops out here like this, but unfortunately, the “shining” examples that we ourselves use as “what NOT to do or how NOT to act” are the ones who get spotlighted.
Case in point: The recent You Tube of an officer yelling and pushing around a teenage skateboarder. My first impression after seeing that was, “he needs to be fired.” Guys like that give those of us who actually do this because we care a very bad name. All I am saying is don’t put all of us in the same cart with the bad bushel of wheat. Give us credit for having brains and using common sense.
The problems lay mostly with agencies who hire unqualified persons just because they have a college degree in this or that discipline. I’ve seen plenty of cops who should be saying, “would you like fries with that?”; and plenty of people in other professions just as critical that should be pushing a broom too. So, the breakdown is really an administrative situation to put it in simple terms.
Some cities and administrators get caught up looking to “fill a spot” with a “warm body”. That’s where the danger comes into play. Where I work at, we strive to avoid that. It does happen, but we work to keep it from happening. Are we perfect? No. Do we try our best? Yes.
Thanks.
By AC on Mar 17, 2008
Ken,
I agree with you the second point I made is more of a legislation issue.
But being a cop should be treated as a career and not a job. It’s not a brainless position. And your threat of do I want to foot the bill? I had to pay for my college degree why do I have to pay for someone else’s. Because they’re a public servant? I think that what this is so heated. What public do they serve when issuing BS tickets. No one complained about them picking up the bad guys(wife beaters, drug traffickers, or terrorist). I’m not even complaining about people who get caught do 20 mph above the speed limit.
Case in point I received a ticket picking my child up from school. I parked went in, came out. 10 min at best. The sign posted said “No parking, only loading and unloading” My interpretation was that I was “loading”, I was able to catch up to the cop that issued the ticket. She said because my car was unattended she wrote the ticket. Her arrogance was evident. The ticket was mine to keep, and at just the right dollar amt. where contesting it isn’t worth it. I watched her afterwards and she would park around the corner and then quickly drive through and issue tickets. THAT’S GENERATING REVENUE!!! There’s no safety issue!
There was no sign stating that unattended cars would be ticketed. It’s interpretation. Oh well
Now I know, and knowing is half the battle.
By Joe on Mar 17, 2008
Geesh, you read a lot into my previous post.
{if you need counseling, see a counselor not a cop.}
Don’t think I said that, certainly didn’t mean it that way. It’s pretty obvious to even the densest of us that a cop is not a councilor. Maybe I can spell it this way. If I work as a chemist, I need a educational background in chemistry. If I work in aviation, I need a background in aeronautics. If I work in any aspect of the medical field, I need a background in medicine. If I work with humans (that’s you guys), I need at least a basic understanding of psychology. Human actions are based on psychology of some kind. A good understanding of the subject should make you a better cop. That’s all I’m trying to say….not that you need to be councilor or become a social worker. You must have read that into my comment… {If your working with rocks you wouldn’t need psychology or sociology in law enforcement.}? There’s a fundamental difference between a career in psychology or social work and ….only having a basic understanding of the subject to help you do your job better.
{And for your information, I only write about 35 to 40 percent of the people I stop…if that high a percentage…i.e…the spirit of the law is what I use}
Good for you, I salute because the damn cops around here rarely ever give anybody a break. They would be respected a whole lot more if they did. Your obviously no Okie cop. Now your beginning to make sense. When you said {Cops are Law Enforcers….plain and simple} that meant to me that you used no latitude in your job, a scary scenario to me.
{keeping them from speeding in the future}
Out of all the possible violations you could have mentioned why did you choose speeding. There’s a psychology there.
If you talking speeding in a residential area, school zones or some municipal streets then I agree with you to some extent on enforcement. But if your talking major expressways or similar type road the dynamics change and then I disagree with you.
Speeding has been exhaustively debated in these blogs, I’m not going to reiterate myself but I would recommend you look at some of them. Not saying it doesn’t happen but….I’ve been driving 40 + years and I have never heard a driver thank a cop for writing them a speeding ticket. That’s a new one on me.
[“No license plate” violations happen all the time}
Wow, I don’t know where your a cop but I ordinarily drive about 50 miles a day round trip to work and I can’t remember the last time I’ve seen a vehicle without a tag. So maybe in your case a missing tag wouldn’t raise a red flag but it would around here esp. if a major crime had just been committed such as the bombing. When Tim McVeigh was driving near a crime scene without a tag it certainly would have caught the attention of anyone, not just a LEO, thereby just asking to be caught. If I would have been him, I would have been the best driver on the road and certainly not had a missing tag like he did.
{Bottom line: As I have said before, Cops are people too.}
I thought so. Pretty much the same failings many of the rest of us have. Nobodies perfect, even you guys. If you’ll keep that in mind when your enforcing traffic laws, then you got my vote. Again, not the action I see around here. My driving environment is obviously not the same as yours and thus our experience may not be compatible. I just know what I personally observe nearly everyday or hear in the media.
By Ken on Mar 16, 2008
I will say it again for those of you who didn’t understand…if you need counseling, see a counselor not a cop. The cop isn’t there to rationalize what you did or didn’t do. Yes, common sense comes into play, but I ask you, should a cop stand around, or sit around, rationalizing why a person hits his wife and try to “work it out” or do his job by arresting said wife beater? Apparently Joe thinks the cop should just sit around and become a social worker…lots of cops have gotten injured or killed by being too much of a social worker and not enough of a law enforcer. Check out the ODMP.org website and browse through the officers who have been killed and how they have been killed. Think about that the next time you don’t like the way a cop treated you. They may not know you…they are doing their job and want to go home at the end of their shift…alive, to their own loved ones. Cops have been killed by so-called “friends” who just committed a crime; but the officer let his guard down because he or she knew the person.
“No license plate” violations happen all the time…that in of itself is not a sign that the driver blew up a federal building. Once again, those with no insight or forethought rationalize and minimize the work of law enforcement officers.
And for your information, I only write about 35 to 40 percent of the people I stop…if that high a percentage…i.e…the spirit of the law is what I use. When a state law says an Officer “WILL” arrest, then by God we do…or we can lose OUR jobs. We have a lot of latitude and I personally use that.
I know when I write tickets I am giving them to people with children just like me…but maybe, just maybe, by me reminding said citizen to obey the traffic laws or whatever they may be, I might be able to affect that person’s life in such a way as to save it in the future. Once you’ve had a person come to you and thank you for saving their life in this way, keeping them from speeding in the future and getting run over by a train, you realize you can do some good. If one life is saved, it’s worth it….isn’t it? Perhaps that one life will end up being yours…or somebody you love.
Bottom line: As I have said before, Cops are people too. They have families and little league practice and PTO/PTA meetings, etc, etc…like everyone else. If they were firemen you’d love them, but they aren’t…they are the law enforcers…and people don’t like getting caught…simple as that.
By Joe on Mar 15, 2008
{Cops are Law Enforcers….plain and simple. If you want someone to coddle you because your momma didn’t treat you right as a child and that’s why you beat up your wife, talk to a social worker…the cop is there to arrest your ass.}
Wow, take out the brain, install the computer. Hitlers dream. No feelings, nothing that makes you uniquely human. I’m right, your wrong. My way or the highway, case closed. Black and white. Digital vs analog. Certainly no understanding of human nature here.
I know you guys in law enforcement have a lot of enforcement latitude. If this is such a robotic business as you seem to suggest, there’s no need for latitude. The many driving laws I see broken out on the public streets everyday makes things start looking like a lawless society. Arrest’em all!!
And AJ how true {too many laws that are based on “opinions” and not “fact”}. Laws are a human creation and thus subject to human interpretation. If laws were so “black and white” as Ken seems to be leaning towards, we wouldn’t need judges in the justice system.
I’ve watched politics long enough to observe that a phrase occasionally is uttered in the hallowed halls of the legislature “enforcement in the spirit of the law”. E.g. {Conversely, when one obeys the spirit of the law but not the letter, he is doing what the authors of the law intended, though not adhering to the literal wording.} (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) Neither does this seem to suggest that law enforcement is “plain and simple”. Even Gods laws (physics) seems to suggest a linearity instead of hard, fast, digital rules. Computers that are designed to effectively operate with humans operate with something called “fuzzy logic”.
If your working with rocks you wouldn’t need psychology or sociology in law enforcement. Law Enforcement is one of the most human jobs I can think of. To think that you can enforce laws in a robotic manner, as Ken seems to be suggesting is counterintuitive.
And Timothy McVeigh was caught driving down I-40 away from OKC after the bombing by a trooper who noticed a vehicle with NO license plate. E.g. McVeigh might as well been running around with a big sign on his car saying “CATCH ME, I DID IT!”
By Ken on Mar 15, 2008
The problem with requiring cops to have a degree in some social science is this: Cops are not meant to be sociologists or social workers….there is another agency for that…social services! Cops are Law Enforcers….plain and simple. If you want someone to coddle you because your momma didn’t treat you right as a child and that’s why you beat up your wife, talk to a social worker…the cop is there to arrest your ass.
Many very bad people have been caught on “simple” traffic stops..for instance, the guy who blew up the Oklahoma City Federal Building was stopped for a simple license plate violation. nuff said?
Your suspended license comment, while heart rending and tragic, is not in the power of cops…but yet again…legislators.
Perhaps a cop might have been able to be there and catch that guy before he sped through the area….but wait…you don’t want them there in the first place….and oh wait…they were probably dealing with somebody’s barking dog complaint because that person was too lazy to talk to their neighbor and ask to have the dog shut up. Some states do have inspections…however, like anything else the government requires, less than stellar citizens of our country have come up with ways to get around those inspections by going to shady people who run shady businesses and just hand out inspection stickers for X amount of dollars.
The bottom line is people don’t want cops to do their jobs unless it’s happening to somebody else or they actually need a cop. Right? I thought so. AND….if you require all cops to have degrees, are you going to foot the bill for higher wages?
By AC on Mar 10, 2008
I know this may be off top. But I think most cops should be required to have a degree in psychology or sociology. The job needs more training than I think is currently required.
There is a crisis where LE view themselves as monitors watching a room full of kids running around with scissors in their hands, instead for facilitator or their fellow man’s good will.
The powers that be also have pitted LE and society against one another. I’m sure LEO want to make a different but there are too many laws that are based on “opinions” and not “fact”.
I see when this is pointed out LEO go on the defense and say what if there was no one there to protect you or your loved ones. No one wants to get rid of LE, but personally I don’t want unless your helping me.(And pulling me over hunting for violations is not helping me). Turning law-abiding citizens in to “criminals” over minor-traffic infractions is not helping.
I lost my stepson this fall to an idiot driving 85 down a 35mph street who hit him as he was getting off the bus. I you’d like to fix something. It would seem like common sense in this “age of information” for a person who has a suspended license in one state to not be able to get a license in another. Currently most state do not communicate this information. But he was issued a license. Not saying that would have stopped him from getting behind the wheel. But one could only hope.
Personally I don’t care what the speed limit is. It’s would be hard to make sure every car on the interstate was capable of operating safely at higher speeds. But the gov’t could generate extra revenue by having an annual inspection! LOL
By Joe on Mar 10, 2008
There’s a ton of text and detailed posts here that should answer your question. If you can’t glen your answer from those then I don’t believe any further explanation is going to help you. As far as {Driving is a privelage!} is concerned, Mr. James Young as eloquently answered that question several times on these blogs. Look’em up. Sounds like you already have your mind up and you just want to make a statement or your trolling so move on.
By Quin on Mar 10, 2008
For all of you who dislike LEOs what would you do without them? Who would you call to assist you in handling your problems. This country was built on a set of rules. Why is it necessary to bash the men and women who uphold the laws that your elected leaders have placed on the “books”.
Yes, when officers are called to a scene, most of the time they arrive after the crime has been committed. However, that is why they also have investigators. Also for those of you who hate traffic officers, how often do you swear at the guy that just cut you off on the hwy, endangered your children as they played in your neighborhood or just finished off the 12 pack and is now doing 100 mph through your so-called speed traps.
I guess this is where you take care of the situations on your own. No, you will do just as everyone else does and call your local police agency. Whether it’s a traffic officer or patrol officer, I am sure you will be more than happy to see them.
As most of you have said LEOs have a job to do and it sounds to me that if they do it well, then its something illegal (speed traps)or they are trying to pad the pockets of the of the municipality, county or state government for which they are employed. I am sure that most of you know that once you receive your drivers license, you agree to follow the laws that govern your state or any state you drive in. If those laws are obeyed, I don’t think you would have a problem with any LEOs despite their enforcement practices. Driving is a privelage!
By Joe on Mar 9, 2008
The last post actually belongs to anouther blog “More Silly Numbers From AAA” but it won’t hurt to read it anyhow. My mistake.
By Joe on Mar 9, 2008
Well the number thrown up here sounds like a large number until taken within the context of the billions of miles driven by the millions of drivers of every driving skill level, across the entire country annually. Then the numbers begin to look pretty subtle. Throwing these big numbers up there without providing the context is always a trick used by those who want to gain from more enforcement.
We seemed to have reached a plateau in which these numbers are not changing much in recent years despite more laws and enforcement. This fact has not gone unnoticed by groups wanting more enforcement and the resulting revenue. Here’s a snippet from a recent article by the AP.
“In announcing the fifth-annual report by the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, Judith Stone, the group’s president, expressed “professional frustration” over how little has changed in recent years as the nation’s road-death statistics remain unchanged or rise. “Where’s the outrage?” Stone asked. “Enough is enough.”
I have a theory about that. I believe we’ve reached the point of what might be called diminishing returns. A point that no matter what we do we are only going to see small incremental changes.
Under the current circumstances I don’t see anything significant happening that will change those numbers. I probably can’t explain it but I guess I would call it the human factor, maybe something like a constant. I haven’t studied risk assessment but I surmise that there’s a point at which a given number of drivers will always error a certain percentage of the time. Out of this percentage there will be a certain number of fatalities. You can shake it, bake it, massage it all you want but it’s not going to change significantly.
This is good news for groups such as the aforementioned that want heaver enforcement and more laws to generate more money. They realize that this means there will always be a constant supply of revenue. It goes without saying that higher enforcement and more laws will kick up the revenue but have little discernible effect on the accident/fatality rate. You could hand a speeding ticket out to every other driver in the country and it won’t make a difference. But, keep your eye on the money.
By Dave on Mar 9, 2008
JJ wrote: It is up to the people to demand their government comply with releasing public data for public inspection and judgement concening effect on traffic safety. I suspect most members of the driving public would agree, if asked. Do any cops reading this board disagree?
I agree that as much LE activity as possible should be made public. If I need to hide my work for any reasons other than safety of compromising an investigation, I would expect the distrust of the public. Therfore LEOs need to have transparency.
I joined this blog not to defend any particular practice of LE, but to provide a cop’s perspective. One thing I’ve noticed is that cops tend to be painted with a very broad brush. We actually are all individuals that are admittedly affected by the culture of the orginizations for which we work. I do not look for people to pity me because I’m possibly under paid, or people act hostile toward me, or I might die at work. I chose to do this work and chose all that comes with it. I am not bitter or jaded because of my job. Every day I go to work and do my best to be fair, reasonable, and just as I exercise my duties. I’m not a badge heavy jerk, but I know many cops who are. As long as humans are part of the LE community, there will be errors. We need to strive to improve the way we relate with people.
As for the wannabe cop story, all I can say is that for every 100 applicants at my department, only 1 is hired. And about 1/3 of those are unable to complete field training.
This is not the case everywhere, and a higher percentage of unsuitable individuals are hired in other areas.
I believe LE should be supported, but I also understand the need for courtesy, professionalism, and compassion when we carry out our duties.
By Joe on Mar 9, 2008
Ken, “technically” illegal is just that. You performed a illegal act by breaking the law but you were otherwise a safe driver. I believe most people could digest the term just fine. When I hear some co-worker get a traffic ticket I try to ascertain the circumstances that it occurred. If I sense it was one of the revenue tickets then I usually tell them “even though you were a driving safely technically you were breaking the law, that’s all the ticket is about.” I guess you could say the term sanitizes a dirty act.
James certainly knows what he’s talking about. It’s easy for you guys to say “if you don’t like the law get it changed”. Making a statement like that, it’s pretty obvious you don’t have a clue. I too have been involved, not as much perhaps as James, but I certainly understand some of the complexitys behind the politics that can affect this problem. As James eluded to, there’s a line of lobbyist waiting to pounce on any bill they don’t like. They deal with these congressmen all the time.
Take’em out to lunch, contribute significant sums to their campaigns. Do you really think an average citizen has a chance in Hell of changing anything under those circumstances. Were you born yesterday? But just because it’s a law doesn’t make it right. So under the current circumstances, it’s easy for cops and their sympathizers to say “change the law”. Rest assured when you look into why speed limits are set they way they are, enforced the way they are, and the politics behind it all, it all boils down to money and has very little to do with safety. Put quite simply, the system is broke.
You can start a blog on just about anything on this web site. There’s one on the value of old cars. But even on those blogs speed always pops up. No matter what subject you pick or where you go on this web site, speed enforcement is always part of the discussion. Why do you think all these people think there’s a problem…..because there IS. Many of us see it every day. We get tired of seeing a senseless law enforced while leaving the laws that could REALLY affect safety, alone. That’s why I talk about it at length. I’m constantly reminded of the problem on my 50 mile trek back and forth to work. I’m sick of the situation. My friend, as John McCain would say, you can set there and slice it or dice it anyway you want. You can massage it any way. You can justify your actions anyway you want, you can try to sanitize it; it doesn’t’ make it right. It may not be true all over the country but at least in my driving environment the system is clearly broke.
By jj on Mar 9, 2008
I was stopped for going 45 in a construction zone (dry pavement, no other traffic, clear skies, evening - no construction activity). The normal limit is 45. The construction limit was 35 with triple fines, and triple points for speeding. The cop was very self-rightous and huffy. He calmed down when he saw I was giving him no back-talk, and in fact, kept my responses to an absolute minimum, with no admission of guilt.
I contested and the prosecutor, upon seeing I had a spotless record, was willing to lower the offense to a parking ticket, but would leave the fine up to the judge. The judge kept the triple fine and lowered the offense to a zero point parking ticket. I figured this was the best I could do.
I am stopped very very very infrequently for very minor things. Usually, they see I have a spotless record, and let me off with a verbal warning.
I have a friend who has applied to be a cop. He says “They have bitchin uniforms and get to carry a gun!”. I have heard other people say they have heard the same expression from cops, and cop wannabes.
So, while I slow down in construction zones, it is primarily to avoid some cop from using the zone to forcibly coerce money out of me to fatten the collective (think Borg) coffers. Also, my experiences related above indicate there are cops who make the digital-to-analog conversion rather well. There are also cops who do not.
Finally, data connecting speeding tickets to traffic safety should be a) gathered, and b) released to the public. Evidently, such data is gathered, but not released for bogus reasons. That it is not released is damning evidence that a) there is indeed an us-vs-them mentality in traffic LE, and b) perhaps the data is not favorable to continued use of speed traps, and cops running out in front of you holding up a clipboard with a stop sign on the back, except as a money-generation technique.
It is up to the people to demand their government comply with releasing public data for public inspection and judgement concening effect on traffic safety. I suspect most members of the driving public would agree, if asked. Do any cops reading this board disagree?
By James Young on Mar 9, 2008
Ken writes:
{They are people just like you and I. They have a job to do. }
No, they’re not like you and me. They have been given massive authority to affect others’ lives — even to the point of using deadly force — but have abrogated the responsibility attendant to that authority. As I have written many times, LE has gotten itself into this mess and now they want to blame the public.
{If you want to change the speed limits and the “technically” illegal speeding issues, talk to your legislators, don’t blame the cops. They just enforce the law, they don’t write it.}
I have talked to legislators in 4 different states (and written to more in other states). I have also been refused an audience by legislators in OK and CA because I had not contributed to their campaigns. The insurance industry, anti-motorist lobby groups, law enforcement agencies and unions, and municipal leagues have regular, invited access to these legislators because they offer financial and/or political support. So, it’s not quite true that LE doesn’t write the law.
Even given the tilted playing field, we in the NMA got the hated and dangerous NMSL rescinded and limits have risen to as high as 80 mph. The anti-destination league types predicted a “bloodbath” were this to happen but it didn’t happen. We were right and they were wrong, yet they keep trying to revert to a bad system, albeit one in which they benefit to the tune of billions of dollars.
{Question: If something is “technically” illegal, at what point does it go from illegal to legal? Does technically illegal mean it doesn’t count? “You caused the accident sir, by running the stop sign, but that’s only technically illegal so I’m going to let you go; by the way, the person who hit you is going to the hospital; but they should have been looking for you to run the stop sign anyway.”}
Wrong question. If it is true that speed limits affect traffic safety, then should we not set those limits at the point where crashes minimize? That is exactly how engineers determine what limits should be: the 85th percentile speed (95th on Interstate-grade roadways). And that is exactly what those legislators (who won’t listen to the public) ignore when they set limits based on what is politically safe for them. Should limits not be set at the point – more realistically a range – where anything faster would elevate the crash rate? What we have, however, is technical limits that prohibit perfectly reasonable behavior and that generate nearly $100 billion a year in fines.
I also find your conflating an arbitrarily low limit (which has no effect on improving traffic flow) with a violation of a fundamental organizing rule more than a little disingenuous.