[MMARSH]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

MM, I understand your point of view, but this is rationalization plain and simple. It's the same exact position that someone took a page or so back - that the occasional lucky and coincidental discovery of a more serious violation somehow justifies the means. I disagree with this position.

Ultimately what's more likely to catch you an honest-to-goodness bad guy - picking people that happen to have no front plate or targeting a vehicle that's "out of place" in the wrong neighborhood, driving around erratically or suspiciously? It's easier to just "roll the dice" and hope you get a "fish on" that day I guess, but I suspect keen situational awareness and attention to details (identifying something/someone "out of place) would yield better success rates. . .

Is it more likely that you'll bust an honest-to-goodness bad guy because you happened to guess right that day by plucking the "right" car out of the pack, or because you were part of a deliberate and targeted campaign to patrol known crime areas or follow up on a systemic pattern of robberies, break-ins, carjackings, assaults or other crimes that are on the rise in a particular area? I suppose it's a lot more easy/convenient/simple to just pull over people at random; it's far more work to actually put thought into it, track and identify criminal behavior trends and then respond to them. It sounds like you're advocating taking the "easy way out" and then using luck to justify the heavy-handed tactics.

Is it more likely that you're going to catch an honest-to-goodness bad guy or drug slinger by just plucking some random commuter out of a "fast pack" moving down the road coming home from work, or stopping the "sideways hat/baggy pants" guy with the tattoos and piercings who's cruising around in the "pimped out" ricer car, fart can exhaust, illegally modified engine & suspension and what-not? You've got to ask the question, "how is that kid affording that stuff?" (or maybe you're not allowed to ask those questions - at least not "on record"?)

Sorry, but your above position is rationalization. Plain and simple. I ain't buying it. The game is all about sucking in money for a failing and inefficient state/local government and frankly they've got you trained well to rationalize getting it for them - this comes across loud & clear in your post. It's all about generating revenue and then using the occasional, coincidental and lucky "successes" that net you something actually more serious as justification to continue the extortion.

Look, I'm not discounting your service. I mean it when I say this - cops do a lot of things in the course of an "average day" that I wouldn't want to do. I respect that. I really do appreciate you guys trying to keep the bad guys off the streets and keep some semblance of order in our society. It's a hard, dangerous and probably (more often than not) thankless job. I really do appreciate the fact that there are some people willing to step up to the plate and do the job. However, at some point you've got to take a step outside the situation and look at the "big picture" here. In the capacity of traffic enforcers, there are some things that matter and there are some things that don't. You can go on a taxpayer-funded crusade to try and change the world because of some misguided belief that you're "doing the right thing" (and naturally the government stooges and bureaucrats love to have you think that, because like pimps, they take the lion's share of what you "go fetch" them, so they can waste it). The reality is it's a sand castle against the tide.

There's some things that matter and there are some things that don't.

Catching bad guys? ? Way to go!

Trying to find ? Right-on brother!

On the roadways, trying to increase efficiency by clearing traffic jams, addressing road hazards (debris, breakdowns, etc.), going after the jerkoffs who are blasting along at 40 mph over the limit weaving in and out of lanes? Cracking down on illegally jacked-up vehicles that pose a hazard to other vehicles? Citing people that have "junk" piled up in the back of their trucks that can come loose and nearly kill someone on a motorcycle behind them (I've had this happen to me incidentally, twice)? Going after the "clunker/junk" vehicles with four bald tires, cracked windshields and spewing smoke? Sure. Go for it.

But when it comes to just sitting on the roadside and plucking someone out of a pack for doing nothing more than going the speed of traffic, I can't respect that very much. You're devaluing your own service by allowing yourself to simply be a patsy for a bunch of inefficient bureaucrats who need some grunts to go "round 'em up some more greenbacks" so they can continue funding their orgy of spending and government inefficiency. That's the game. I'm sorry you're reduced to doing that. That's the part I find offensive - that dedicated men & women who are willing to strap on a badge and a uniform on behalf of the rest of us get reduced to being nothing more than tax-collectors. I feel for ya'. That sucks, frankly. It pisses me off to see that there are people in government that would see good, dedicated people willing to lay it all out there misused in this manner. It's offensive that they'd use you that way (same reason I get irritated with our federal administration's willingness to put soldiers in harm's way for political gain). It's wrong, and you guys are the ones in the trenches who bear the brunt of it. My beef isn't with you folks in uniform doing a job (although I think your reasoning is flawed, FWIW), it's more with the ones handing you the orders and enjoying a life of excess and irresponsibility on the backs of your sacrifice and effort. I'm on your side really, when you think about it. I'd like to see your sacrifice count for something more than just pulling in more $$$ for bloated gubmint yokels.

Ride safely. It's a jungle out there.

Jeff. I understand your point of view as well. But in regards to your statement of "I suppose it's a lot more easy/convenient/simple to just pull over people at random; it's far more work to actually put thought into it, track and identify criminal behavior trends and then respond to them. It sounds like you're advocating taking the "easy way out" and then using luck to justify the heavy-handed tactics" let me clarify a couple of things. First I don't randomly pull over anyone, I don't pluck someone out of a bunch of cars moving at the same speed. If stopping someone for going 15 mph over the speed limit is in your mind simple a act of generating revenue, being heavy handed then I'm guilty as charged. Not sure how that is taking the "easy way out" but whatever. So If I understand you correctly, Police officers time should only be be targeting taggers, vandals, sex predators and animal abusers, Getting murderers and rapists and gangbangers off the street? Busting crackheads, thieves, muggers and traffickers and only stopping speeders who are are blasting along at 40 mph over the limit weaving in and out of lanes. So those are your concerns as well as most peoples concerns.

Couple of questions though. Where exactly do murderers hang out? what exactly does a sex predator look like? What about the lastest Sex predator in the LA area. He was the Vice principal of his school. what about these animal abusers? So your more concerned about an animal abuser then the unlicensed uninsured motorist driving next to you. Ok, what does he look like? What crime trends or profiles should I be looking at exactly. On one hand your telling me that I should stop the saggy pants wearing guy with tats driving a pimped out ricer car. Because I should ask how he can afford that stuff. So I should be profiling? What about the same kind of guy driving a porsche. What if you were profiled for something? Then there would be a post about that.

Jeff, I'm not rationalizing anything and I'm not on a crusade to save the world, but my experience in the field (I know many here are experts but do you have any actual police experience) has shown me that believe it or not people also have concerns over people speeding thru their neighborhoods or like slodave mentioned running stop signs or any number of moving violations. The facts are you have a better chance of getting involved in an accident by someone running a redlight, or being otherwise distracted then you do to being a victim to a violent crime. (okay, maybe not in long beach)

I've worked prostitution stings, Bait car stings, ABC stings, bandit taxicab stings, served warrants, dealt with transients, taggers, and narco issues. While in a specialized unit these were all concerns of the people who lived in those areas. Our job as a Police force is to try to address the concerns of many many different citizens in different communities and there are officers that are specifically assigned to address those different areas of concern. The latest are sport bike riders. In my area, seven of the last eight fatalities have been sport bike riders. Guess who will not be seeing the love. Several have run from us, one group rolled up to a motor on the freeway, looked over then took off. They were doing at least 135 mph. A task force is in the works right now.