Report: LA police officers who alleged ticket quota system win $2M judgment
#31
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
you are seriously saying that people should be questioning themselves on doing things that are legal? on the contre, i think it should be illegal for cop to make you wait 90 minutes on the side of the road for minor thing like tinted window. it is his problem if he doesnt have the tint checker in his car.
Really, please explain exactly how an officer makes money for the city. That's a myth and has no factual basis that people keep spreading for their own agenda. The money from tickets rarely (IF EVER) stays within their own jurisdiction so why would the officer care about the money aspect? It's not like they get a bonus of whatever revenue is produced.
#32
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
wow, lots of opinions on this.
probably not much but judging a cop simply on how many tickets/arrests they do is tricky because it can be so easily abused by the cop.
i thought maybe there might be a ratio of serious crimes vs. traffic citations but then the cop's at a disadvantage if they happen to work in an area that doesn't have much serious crime or for whatever reason the crime rate drops, so it's tricky.
a vigilant police officer should do their job, which is obviously writing tickets and/or arresting people who break the law. when a quota comes into play, they're likely to go for the 'low hanging fruit' - or whatever gets the quota done most easily - it's human nature.
it's not the cop's fault either that so many of the laws are so utterly stupid. like requiring front license plates in california. yes, someone here will say why it's a good idea, but why then do countless states not require them and don't have a problem with that? why is dark tint illegal? is it because of concern the driver can't see properly, or because cops are worried about approaching a car they can't see into? i think such a law is a waste of time. if someone in a tinted car wants to shoot a cop for example, they can do it through the glass whether the cop can see in or not, and from a distance they couldn't see much anyway.
requiring 3 seconds of stop at a stop sign in NY? that's stupid. i guarantee 99% of people don't do it. why? because it's stupid and unnecessary. but some safety **** decided it would be a good idea.
in many states the speed limits are without question DELIBERATELY TOO LOW for reasonable driving, so that it's EASY to write speeding tickets. there's a town in florida (starke i think) that is such a place, and activist citizens fought and won the right to erect billboard signs outside town warning people of the speed traps! the police weren't happy but they lost, and the public won against police abuse of power.
police don't have an easy job. but they make the public like them less when they do stupid things and abuse their power. but not just the police, the politicians and 'do gooders' push for and pass stupid laws.
true but how does a quota help that difference?
agreed - stupid drivers are no better than stupid police or stupid laws.
i disagree that quotas will do much of anything to root out lazy cops. instead of 'quotas', departments could just analyze the stats for the cops (without quotas in place) and interview cops whose arrest/citation stats are far below their peers to understand why.
he who is without sin cast the first stone. i can guarantee you break the law one way or another every time you drive.
why yes, yes you can, if the laws are stupid and the police are enforcing stupid laws to achieve a stupid quota.
qft.
oh yeah.
i agree!
again, statistical analysis of all the cops activity is a better way than quotas.
i thought maybe there might be a ratio of serious crimes vs. traffic citations but then the cop's at a disadvantage if they happen to work in an area that doesn't have much serious crime or for whatever reason the crime rate drops, so it's tricky.
a vigilant police officer should do their job, which is obviously writing tickets and/or arresting people who break the law. when a quota comes into play, they're likely to go for the 'low hanging fruit' - or whatever gets the quota done most easily - it's human nature.
it's not the cop's fault either that so many of the laws are so utterly stupid. like requiring front license plates in california. yes, someone here will say why it's a good idea, but why then do countless states not require them and don't have a problem with that? why is dark tint illegal? is it because of concern the driver can't see properly, or because cops are worried about approaching a car they can't see into? i think such a law is a waste of time. if someone in a tinted car wants to shoot a cop for example, they can do it through the glass whether the cop can see in or not, and from a distance they couldn't see much anyway.
requiring 3 seconds of stop at a stop sign in NY? that's stupid. i guarantee 99% of people don't do it. why? because it's stupid and unnecessary. but some safety **** decided it would be a good idea.
in many states the speed limits are without question DELIBERATELY TOO LOW for reasonable driving, so that it's EASY to write speeding tickets. there's a town in florida (starke i think) that is such a place, and activist citizens fought and won the right to erect billboard signs outside town warning people of the speed traps! the police weren't happy but they lost, and the public won against police abuse of power.
police don't have an easy job. but they make the public like them less when they do stupid things and abuse their power. but not just the police, the politicians and 'do gooders' push for and pass stupid laws.
There is a difference between a cop going out and writing a bogus summons than a cop going out and writing valid summonses to show they are doing their job.
There's also a difference in a cop just pulling you over for no reason and checking to see how many tickets he can get off you. But if you get stopped for speeding while having illegal tint and are lowered beyond regulation (damn I just described my car), then how is the 'quota' system at fault for that?
Quota's are fine. There needs to be a system to root out lazy cops who do anything at all costs to meet them.
I'll bet most of these mandates are from state/local governments that desperately need revenue.
So we are all allowed in our everyday lives to have ambition within our jobs and go out and be 'great' but cops aren't? That's basically what the people who are crying over quotas are saying. You don't want the cop to do his job to the best of his ability and give you a break. But the question becomes: Why do YOU deserve a break today from the officer?
#33
I'm a cop. Today I wrote a guy a ticket for rolling the front HALF of his car into an INTERSECTION (beyond the crosswalk) while waiting for his red light to turn green (I was offset, two cars behind him). He was impatient waiting for the light to turn green. I pulled him over, wrote him the ticket and also cited him for being unlicensed and not having insurance. I don't have quotas, but yeah, I thought this guy should be ticketed. I usually just warn people, buy not this time.
#34
Lexus Fanatic
why yes, yes you can, if the laws are stupid and the police are enforcing stupid laws to achieve a stupid quota.
Last edited by mmarshall; 04-13-11 at 09:19 AM.
#35
Lexus Fanatic
I talked to the cop in my family about this (the topic being quotas, not all the other unrelated rhetoric that we see here).
He said he has no quotas in his jurisdiction, he does not want or like quotas, he does not need quotas. I respect his opinion as LEO, knowing his character, professionalism, education/training, discipline (ex-military).
He said he has no quotas in his jurisdiction, he does not want or like quotas, he does not need quotas. I respect his opinion as LEO, knowing his character, professionalism, education/training, discipline (ex-military).
#36
Lexus Fanatic
I talked to the cop in my family about this (the topic being quotas, not all the other unrelated rhetoric that we see here).
He said he has no quotas in his jurisdiction, he does not want or like quotas, he does not need quotas. I respect his opinion as LEO, knowing his character, professionalism, education/training, discipline (ex-military).
He said he has no quotas in his jurisdiction, he does not want or like quotas, he does not need quotas. I respect his opinion as LEO, knowing his character, professionalism, education/training, discipline (ex-military).
Originally Posted by mmarshall
What you're overlooking here is that, on any given day, in almost any part of the country (but especially in the D.C area where I live), there are so many scofflaws on the road, breaking so many traffic laws, that, in effect, quotas aren't needed. All that almost any cop has to do is put down the coffee and donuts, open his or her eyes, and just look at what's constantly going on all around...people running red-lights and no-turn-on-red, speeding, yakking on cell-phones and texting while driving, cutting through private-property to avoid red lights and backups, illegal U-Turns, parking in unauthorized spaces, blocking fire hydrants, etc.....
An attentive cop, if he or she keeps their eyes open and has a real desire to enforce traffic laws, has more opportunities to write more tickets than almost any artificial "quota" a jurisdiction could come up with...so I see quotas as a moot point.
An attentive cop, if he or she keeps their eyes open and has a real desire to enforce traffic laws, has more opportunities to write more tickets than almost any artificial "quota" a jurisdiction could come up with...so I see quotas as a moot point.
Last edited by mmarshall; 04-13-11 at 09:41 AM.
#37
Lexus Fanatic
Well, that's pretty much what I said in an earlier post....that any cop with two eyes and two ears, particularly in a dense-traffic area, because of the sheer number of scofflaws, can probably write more tickets, on any given day, then any quotas that the politicians or their bosses can come with.
That's exactly why no quotas are needed and they should not be dictated by ignorant politicians. Quotas can actually interfere with effective law enforcement and public safety by misdirecting law enforcement resources.
I give the thumbs up to the officers noted in article. I also respect the opinion of the officer on my wife's side of the family. I know the strength of his character, having known him well before he became a sworn officer.
#38
No Sir, I Don't Like It
iTrader: (4)
Really, please explain exactly how an officer makes money for the city. That's a myth and has no factual basis that people keep spreading for their own agenda. The money from tickets rarely (IF EVER) stays within their own jurisdiction so why would the officer care about the money aspect? It's not like they get a bonus of whatever revenue is produced.
So you saying that cops benefit nothing by running the quota system, I'll argue that if they aren't receiving the money, they're probably running a similar system that I was under. If that is the case, their jobs DEPEND on giving people tickets, THUS nullifying the whole ideal that it's based on safety, and not generating revenue.
In many states the speed limits are without question DELIBERATELY TOO LOW for reasonable driving, so that it's EASY to write speeding tickets. there's a town in florida (starke i think) that is such a place, and activist citizens fought and won the right to erect billboard signs outside town warning people of the speed traps! the police weren't happy but they lost, and the public won against police abuse of power.
Last edited by Jewcano; 04-13-11 at 09:54 AM.
#39
Lexus Test Driver
Furthermore, if quotas really aren't needed as you argue, then there's no reason for the LAPD to use such a system. If it's truly an issue of avoiding underperforming cops, there are other ways of handling it that actually attack the problem - not by implementing some absurd, effortless, brainless, hands-off (mis)management style that is ripe for abuse. If there are bad cops out there who really are sleeping on the job, implementing a quota system isn't suddenly going to make them good cops - in fact, I'd argue that they are most likely to abuse the system.
So we are all allowed in our everyday lives to have ambition within our jobs and go out and be 'great' but cops aren't? That's basically what the people who are crying over quotas are saying. You don't want the cop to do his job to the best of his ability and give you a break. But the question becomes: Why do YOU deserve a break today from the officer?
Your attempt to equate "ambition" to "quotas" is a bit silly. The problem here is that cops aren't regular people so comparing them to regular people doesn't work. While on duty, they have considerable power, which if abused can be used to affect innocent people far more negatively than how others can. Even abuse of traffic citation powers can have tremendous financial impact on a driver - not just directly from the fines, but also long-term from rising insurance costs. That's why any systemic causes of abuse within the police system must be avoided - and why quota systems should always be rejected.
#40
Lexus Fanatic
(I was just being facetious about the coffee and donuts, as that is a comonnly-held, but sometimes incorrect, stereotype)
#41
Lexus Fanatic
Well, I give a lot of respect to most police officers, too. I don't think that you and I disagree on that point. Most of them, though, if they are really diligent, could write more tickets than there are hours and minutes in a day, quotas or no quotas.
(I was just being facetious about the coffee and donuts, as that is a comonnly-held, but sometimes incorrect, stereotype)
(I was just being facetious about the coffee and donuts, as that is a comonnly-held, but sometimes incorrect, stereotype)
The reality is I see more cops at Starbucks than any other chain store (not at doughnut shops like the outdated stereotype).
Last edited by IS-SV; 04-13-11 at 10:40 AM.
#42
Lexus Fanatic
Your assumption is that everyone who is getting pulled over or ticketed is actually breaking the law, and to the extent that the citation claims. That's what's being questioned when we're talking about abuse of power, isn't it?
#43
i would love police officer to give out ticket to those who aren't driving in the proper lane (e.g. driving 50 on the fastest lane and refuse to move), or one does illegal mod (e.g. unauthorized HID on a raised tuck) instead of hiding in the corner and set up speed trap.
but that would require too much of work. i.e. chasing people down and observe traffic flow. obviously no one would do it when you can just set up a nice speed trap and relax in you car.
i am not against quota, but i believe the ticket should be weighted accordingly.
a ticket going 35+ should not be weighted as low as a ticket going 15+. a ticket for illegal mod should not be weight as light as a ticket for forget turn on your light at night.
but that would require too much of work. i.e. chasing people down and observe traffic flow. obviously no one would do it when you can just set up a nice speed trap and relax in you car.
i am not against quota, but i believe the ticket should be weighted accordingly.
a ticket going 35+ should not be weighted as low as a ticket going 15+. a ticket for illegal mod should not be weight as light as a ticket for forget turn on your light at night.
#44
Even with Habious' example above. What is the beef? Cop thought the tint was illegal and wanted it tested. Cop was wrong and driver was sent on his way. How is that related to a quota and what is the beef? Obviously the tint was dark enough to be called into question. If one cop stops you everyday for the same tint test then you need to ask yourself if having tint in your area where it obviously is an issue is worth the hassle?
If everyone's driving along, traffic is flowly freely, and everyone's doing what they're supposed to be doing...this should be a GOOD thing.
A police officer observing this should think "Yeah...nice!"
Throw in a quota...and his attitude suddenly changes.
He's going to look for something. "That tint looks legal, but it could be close. I'm gonna pull him over and find out."
Oh, and by the way...IT REALLY SCREWS UP THE TRAFFIC FLOW WHEN THE COP IS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD WITH HIS BLUE BLINKY LIGHTS GOING!!
And, and in my example above...the cop got paid for those 90 minutes...my friend didn't. He was late for work.
#45
one of the reason for traffic congestion is because present of police. people get scared and start stepping on brake.
so guess which one is safer?
1. everyone is doing 90 MPH
2. 1/3 of vehicle is doing 65 MPH, 1/3 of vehicle is doing 50 MPH, 1/3 of vehicle is doing 30 MPH. and people start changing lanes.
speed is not the problem. driving education and traffic law is the problem. if you can get ride of all the slow moving cars from the fast lane, you will reduce traffic accidents significantly.