Seat Belt Laws: At Any Cost

Wayne,

Excessive use of force is never justified in my book. There are some tough calls such as when dealing with terrorists, especially with that Brazilian guys getting killed by the London Police. If the officer abused his power, that is one issue. He should be reprimanded and should face civil liabilities for his police brutality.

If the guy that was killed was resisting, then pepper spray seems like a justifiable response (depending on whether a jury would agree the resistance was actual versus perceived). Lets not exagerate here and say that lethal force (firearm) was justified for just resisting. If that resisting arrest put the officer's life in danger, then he should have shot him. This may be the case if the person was driving towards the officer or trying to attack the officer with a deadly weapon.

Again, I ask you to seperate the issues at hand:
1. Salazar resisted arrest leading to the use of force (resistance is argueable and this point should be made clear when the final report is issued)
2. The police officer may have used excessive force (to be determined) We will probably require an autopsy to determine the actual cause of death. Salazar's death could be related to head trauma from being thrown on the ground.
3. Using pepper spray is hardly considered deadly force even though it caused death in this instance. Most people sprayed by pepepr spray do not die. Salazar may have had an allergic reaction or preexisting medical condition that caused him to go into cardiac arrest upon being sprayed. We are still uncertain of that until we get an autopsy report.

4. Had Salazar taken the responsible course of action, he would probably be alive today. That means showing up for court to appeal if he chooses not to pay the fine. He can not simply ignore the law just because he thinks it is stupid.

One more thing. What if I want to drive at 150 mph in the middle of the night and there are no cars on the road. Aren't I only a hazard to myself? Are speed limits put in place for the police to tax us or is it there to make the roads safer? What if I want to smoke crack rock in the comfort of my own home. Should that be allowed provided I'm not hurting anyone? How far do we want to take this? Yes, some of the laws are intended to improve the safety of the people.

Wearing seatbelts has been shown to significantly reduce injuries and save lives. This is not a disputable point. Maybe the cops are just sick and tired of needlessly having to contact parents and spouses in the middle of the night to inform them that their loved ones died in a car accident and that they died unnecessarily because they weren't buckled up? You may agree or not agree with the law guys, but please buckle up. We don't want to hear about our friends on thefiringline.com dying unnecessarily.
 
Captain Charlie,

I wish there were more police officers like you around. :D Kudos for using good judgement and common sense and training your officers to do the same. Please get more involved in police training nationwide. I also strongly urge all police departments to have video cameras with audio recording installed in all vehicles. This will protect both officers and the piblic. Police officers that abuse their power should face stiff penalties rather than simple reprimands. Documented cases of repeat abusers should result in termination, criminal charges, and civil liabilities. I'm sure that no police department wants to be on the receiving end of police brutality suits.
 
Wearing seatbelts has been shown to significantly reduce injuries and save lives. This is not a disputable point. Maybe the cops are just sick and tired of needlessly having to contact parents and spouses in the middle of the night to inform them that their loved ones died in a car accident and that they died unnecessarily because they weren't buckled up?
Click to expand...

Seatbelts saving lives is debatable. As far as cops having to contact family members to notify them of a death, well, thats part of the job. If it sickens you, find another job.
 
A guy gets killed because of unpaid tickets on seat belt violations....

that is def overkill.

and needs to be investigated.


kudos to CPT Charlie....and his approach on administrative warrants.

gives meaning to the words "Protect and Serve"
 
Re Officer discretion in enforcing laws; The peace officer is the last line of defense regarding "bad" law.

You all can debate this all you want, but sometimes, the "law" must be adjusted to fit the circumstance. To issue a Warrant of arrest for a seat belt violation is bad law. Suspend a license? Sure but anyone with a few functioning brain cells should be able to foresee the consequences that could arise if attempting to incarcerate someone.


Of course, the adjuster must be willing to pay bill, when demanded, for his work. We have less and less willing to do so.
 
Captain Charlie said:
By the way, a recently retired officer from my dept. had our dept's record number of arrests. Know how he did it? Believe it or not, by using the telephone. He would start off each day going over new warrants, and then phoning the defendant. He could charm the scales off of a snake, and had people, with both misdemeanor and felony warrants, coming in droves to be served. It's also interesting to note that, where his street encounters were concerned, he had the lowest number of uses of force on the dept. So while we can't always avoid the use of force, the Gift of Gab can go a long ways towards that end.
Click to expand...
Why is it that this sort of culture is dying in LE? Is it that elder LEOs aren't properly passing on their wisdom to new officers? Is it that LE attracts different sorts of people than it did in the past? Or is it simply chance that your department is decent when so many others have begun brutishly enforcing laws rather than carrying out justice?
 
Wildcard,

Please look up the statistics and speak from an educated point of view. If you want to stick your head in the sand and ignore the facts, thats fine by me.

If you truely believe that seatbelts don't save lives, then do what you want. Please make sure you have a good insurance policy for you family so they can benefit from your stupidity and stubborness.

I also wanted to inform you that I am not a police officer.
 
If you truely believe that seatbelts don't save lives, then do what you want.
Click to expand...

I cant do what I want, my Government wont let me. I must wear a seatbelt. Thats the whole point of this. Government needs to stay out of our lives in regards to seatbelts.
 
Wildcard,

You can always do what you want as long as it is physically possible. You just have to be prepared for the consequences. For you, I just hope it is getting hassled by a few cops every now and again. I hope you do not get tickets or injured in an accident. Don't forget that no matter how safe you drive, there are plenty of idiots on the road.
 
I'm not seeing an answer to the fundamental question:


Why do we need to issue arrest warrants based on non-payment of seatbelt fines?

Why can't we penalize people for nonpayment of minor fines in a way that does not involve the risks associated with an arrest by armed police?
 
Why is it that this sort of culture is dying in LE? Is it that elder LEOs aren't properly passing on their wisdom to new officers? Is it that LE attracts different sorts of people than it did in the past? Or is it simply chance that your department is decent when so many others have begun brutishly enforcing laws rather than carrying out justice?
Click to expand...

Training. Trust me, I went through it. It's the training.
a quote from one of my instructors......
"We(LEO) are not paid to talk to people, to convince them to act correctly. We are paid to enforce the law. If someone doesn't behave, we will make them behave. Your #1 priority is to go home safely at night."

It was mostly like that, save for the few old timers we had helping out.
 
Wearing seatbelts has been shown to significantly reduce injuries and save lives. This is not a disputable point.
Click to expand...
Then why is it, do you suppose, that the only remaining state with no mandatory seat-belt law for adult drivers still somehow manages to post the fourth-lowest MVMT highway fatality rates in the nation? And on top of that, auto insurance rates are among the lowest in the nation here as well?

There's something else going on that folks are too blinded by the searchlight of the Nanny State's guard tower to see clearly.
 
Then why is it, do you suppose, that the only remaining state with no mandatory seat-belt law for adult drivers still somehow manages to post the fourth-lowest MVMT highway fatality rates in the nation? And on top of that, auto insurance rates are among the lowest in the nation here as well?
Click to expand...

I imagine it has something to do with the liquor store rest stops on the highway. Drivers are much more relaxed when they can make a pit stop for a fifth of Jack Danials on a long road trip. :p

In all seriousness, though, I don't like to fly so I tend to go on road trips somewhat regularly to visit family, so I've driven through quite a few states. I would have to say that in my experience New Hampshire has better roads than many other states I've been in, and I think that contributes to a lesser rate of fatalities.
 
Which state is that?

I'd imagine it has to do with less congested roads, resulting in less wrecks.

And you'd have to look at the state with the lowest seat belt usage, not the one with no laws. Just because there isn't a law saying you have to do it, doesn't meant that everyone won't.
 
"Why can't we penalize people for nonpayment of minor fines in a way that does not involve the risks associated with an arrest by armed police?"

Well, they have already demonstrated that they wont show up in court after being released on an On Recognizance bond, nor pay out the fine, so they are by definition scofflaws. Suspend their license and registration? Yeah that'll stop'em them, no one ever drives under suspension. Then what, A Stern Talking To?

Some people need to be arrested after they abuse every break they get.
 
Amazing that a few people cannot stay on any topic.

Folks-
This thread is not about the effectiveness of seat belts.
This thread is not about whether pepper spray in the instant case was warranted.

This thread is about one simple issue:
The trend of .gov to FORCE confrontation between those with a badge and those without over the most unimportant matters imaginable....and the willingness of some, on both sides, to buy into that trend; arguing that investigation after the fact is enough to prevent future tragedies.

Three cops here have demonstrated that "They" ARE "Us".....meaning that they understand we're all human and we're not all potential enemies. Capt Charlie, Invstsgt and stevelyn....you each are a credit to those breaking down the growing wall. Thank you.

Compare that to this:
Why can't we penalize people for nonpayment of minor fines in a way that does not involve the risks associated with an arrest by armed police?"

Well, they have already demonstrated that they wont show up in court after being released on an On Recognizance bond, nor pay out the fine, so they are by definition scofflaws. Suspend their license and registration? Yeah that'll stop'em them, no one ever drives under suspension. Then what, A Stern Talking To?
Click to expand...
Note the difference? In this case, the writer clearly equates breaking an administrative law with willingness to break all laws. It's a "Zero Tolerance" attitude...should your name pop up for any reason, you are to be treated as a wanted criminal. The natural corollary: Anything Goes, so long as it can be justified in the after action report.

That, people, is the Poster Child post of the "Us vs Them" attitude.
Rich
 
The trend of .gov to FORCE confrontation between those with a badge and those without over the most unimportant matters imaginable
Click to expand...

It's a trend that shows up with disturbing regularity these days, IMO. But what do we do about it?
 
"We(LEO) are not paid to talk to people, to convince them to act correctly. We are paid to enforce the law. If someone doesn't behave, we will make them behave. Your #1 priority is to go home safely at night."
Click to expand...


That sums it up. Its all about control. I would say more, but Rich would ban me. :eek:
 
What have I learned? That a "good cop" is one who agrees with you, and a "bad cop" is one who doesnt. :rolleyes:

Rule of thumb in LE work - for any given call or situation approximately 50% of the people there think you are great, the other 50% think you are the Antichrist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top