A proven method to anger a vice cop and get away with it legally.
1: spot one of their sting operations aimed at John's.
2: walk or drive up to the bait cop.
3: Ask the cop a simple question. `
edited to add:
Question is: Your place or mine?
Do not say anything about money or any other form of compensation at all.
I should add that I actually saw that happen one time. A man who always asked any nice looking woman a question on that corner. Kept getting his face slapped a lot, for some reason.
One day he asked an undercover cop acting as a street prostitute. Her and her teammates cussed that guy up one side and down the other. I was dumb because I stood there and laughed my head off. They got mad at me. Heck I had observed him getting slapped a number of times, but just ignored it since it was none of my business. Turned out he asked all those women that question.
Could make an interesting plot point as a method of revealing vice sting operations, and how the local prostitutes/pimps end up supporting the guy for keeping them safe by constantly confronting the police who try to harass him.
However, it's not really a complete plot, merely an interesting side-plot. Alone, it's not really enough to carry a complete story other than a potentially humorous short story.
Given the current atmosphere surrounding the police in most of the US, I'm not sure that the fact that this is legal would be of much comfort while you are being thrown into the road, hand-cuffed, and arrested. Even if the charges were overturned later, it's pretty much impossible to successfully charge a cop these days.
Of course, that could well turn it into a more interesting story. Take some idiot character who got random advice on how to legally anger a cop then put him through what would probably really happen. Do the story from his lawyer's point of view after the fact, and write it as a very violent absurdest comedy. It could work.
it's pretty much impossible to successfully charge a cop these days.
True, and it changes from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. However, in many situations you can bring civil cases for damages against the officer / s and department concerned, and get some money.
Its funny how the laws which we have to obey. They will turn around and break constantly: Driving Laws for example are easily observed daily. The law does not apply to them for some reason.
The law does not apply to them for some reason.
I don't know about in the US, but there are some motor traffic laws the cops are allowed to violate due to other NSW laws, but only while on duty. A common one is total setting aside of the traffic laws when they're the first responder in an emergency call with siren and lights on. Partial setting aside of the laws when responding with lights on as a support unit.
Emergencies fall into their line of duty. I am referring to all those times they make illegal turns or run stop lights, without being an emergency situation. Other stunts which would have gotten me a ticket in a heart beat. Luckily I learned to drive paranoid expecting to be pulled over even if a tail light blew while they were behind me. Funny how few moving violations I got ticketed for.
Emergencies fall into their line of duty.
G'day Doc,
Not sure how it is in the USA, but in NSW there are many levels of duty responses the police have, and some give them total clearance from all the traffic laws, and some given them limited clearance.
An emergency situation occurs, an urgent response by police is identified. One vehicle, the closest is assigned to get their using lights and sirens - no traffic laws apply to them. Another vehicle or two (depending on the perceived severity of the situation) are assigned to race there with just their lights, and may only use their sirens for a few seconds at a time to clear traffic not moving out of the way - no traffic laws apply to them. These include chase scenarios.
The next most common level is a call comes in and they're ordered to attend a location, non-urgent. They aren't allowed to use their lights or sirens, they aren't allowed to speed, they aren't allowed to blow red lights, but other traffic law restrictions like u-turns etc do not apply.
While on general patrol all traffic laws apply, except when on open highway patrol where the Highway Patrol are instructed to (and given legal approval to) exceed the speed limit by up to 5 kilometres per hour so they are flowing through the traffic looking for problems, instead of sitting in the same line of traffic. Few officers take that option, most have more fun by driving 5 to 10 kph below the speed limit and waiting to see who speed to pass them in excess of the limit, and who is prepared to pass them at the legal limit - few drivers will.
That is what I was calling emergency situations. On the other end I have seen them making illegal turns across traffic just to enter a coffee shop for a break. Anyone else would get a ticket costing big bucks. Them you can't even write up a citizens complaint for the violation. The law didn't apply to them.
While on general patrol all traffic laws apply, except when on open highway patrol where the Highway Patrol are instructed to (and given legal approval to) exceed the speed limit by up to 5 kilometres per hour so they are flowing through the traffic looking for problems, instead of sitting in the same line of traffic. Few officers take that option, most have more fun by driving 5 to 10 kph below the speed limit and waiting to see who speed to pass them in excess of the limit, and who is prepared to pass them at the legal limit - few drivers will.
Yeah, I remember a California Highway Patrol Officer they brought on base in San Diego to do a "Holiday Safety Brief" for us on traffic safety.
I remember he covered a lot of good things and made a number of valid points(all of which I was already aware of), but the new "take away" for me was his comment about him driving on I-10 in Mission Valley and seeing just how slow he could go before people would start to pass him. His record at the time was going 43 MPH in a posted 55 MPH zone.
Although the most thrilling one I've personally encountered was doing 90 MPH through LA on Interstate 5(posted 50MPH zone) and seeing a County Sheriff cruiser in my rear view with no lights on, particularly given my out of state plates. Evidently he was fine with my "moving at the speed of traffic" since I changed lanes shortly after spotting him, and he continued on his way.
What I enjoy most is the fact that the same things they supposedly use to catch criminals. Can be turned against them as well. Habits are habits whether its a criminal or a cop. Reactions fall into the same categories as well. Cops also have habits and reactions due to their training and experience.
The same principles they use to catch people can be used against them.
What I enjoy most is the fact that the same things they supposedly use to catch criminals. Can be turned against them as well. Habits are habits whether its a criminal or a cop. Reactions fall into the same categories as well. Cops also have habits and reactions due to their training and experience.
Interesting case in North Wales a few years ago. The legal speed limit is 70mph but a traffic cop was caught on radar at somewhere over 120mph (albeit very early morning when traffic was minimal). He got taken to court where he claimed he was testing a new police vehicle. He got off.
Interesting case in North Wales a few MONTHS ago. The legal speed limit is 70mph but a traffic cop was caught on radar at somewhere over 130mph (albeit very early morning when traffic was minimal). He got taken to court where he claimed he was testing a new police vehicle. He got off.
It was the same officer!!!!! He is still a police driver
It was the same officer!!!!! He is still a police driver
What would have happened to anyone else caught doing that and giving the testing excuse.
I THINK that over 100mph it becomes a criminal offence and could get distinctly nasty the first time like prison plus loss of driving licence plus fine and maybe seizure of the vehicle. Difficulty in getting insurance after even exceeding the limit.
Second time? more of that but longer, more expensive ......
I THINK that over 100mph it becomes a criminal offence and could get distinctly nasty the first time like prison plus loss of driving licence plus fine and maybe seizure of the vehicle. Difficulty in getting insurance after even exceeding the limit.
It varies by State, but for most of them, a ticket for more than 15 MPH over the speed limit is a Felony and comes with other "enhanced" penalties. (But they're not likely to cart you off to jail on that alone) If you hold a Commercial Driver's License, a ticket for 15+ MPH over the speed limit is just below a DUI, by Federal Regulation.
It varies by State, but for most of them, a ticket for more than 15 MPH over the speed limit is a Felony and comes with other "enhanced" penalties.
Not in Wisconsin, at least not for speed alone.
If your speed endangers people however, you could be charged with reckless driving. 2 or more convictions for reckless driving in a 4 year period can result in up to a year in jail, which could make a second conviction on reckless driving considered a felony under federal law.
Recently in Virginia there was a woman stopped three times within 45 minutes for 20+mph over in a 75. First two stops resulted in warnings but third cop arrested her. The woman, a recent college graduate, tried to claim she was being harassed because of her race.
The one time I got pulled over just outside of Wendover (straddles border Nevada/Utah). I had a woman lying on the backseat. I got off because the cop didn't want to have to deliver the baby. Nearest Hospital I knew of was about 80 miles away. I pointed to back seat and said "You deliver". He gave me an escort to the hospital for some reason.
I just remember being pulled over in Utah for doing 89 in a posted 75(it's now posted 80) while letting my Cruise Control do the throttle control(the car's cruise control didn't use the brakes). The officer ticketed me for 4 over, but I remember looking at the back side of the ticket and seeing the categories and fees associated with the severity of the speeding offense. 15+ MPH over posted speed in Utah at the time had "(felony)" under it. I didn't investigate further. (Also 5 to 15 MPH over the posted speed was its own category in Utah)
I just remember being pulled over in Utah for doing 89 in a posted 75
Of course to be legal you can always use the Bonneville Salt Flats. If you hit over 200 mph recorded speed. The State Line Casino hosts a club with that as a minimum entrance requirement. The track varies in length from one year to the next. Some years it might be a 1/4 mile others it might be well over a mile in length. Speed is based on the distance and time with recorded speed being the average of both directions.
Of course your vehicle could sink hub deep in the salt, costing huge money from the towing companies.
There are always a few bad apples in any profession and law enforcement is not excluded.
One of the things not mentioned in the above regarding the police not complying with traffic laws in an emergency situation, at least in the US, is police officers receive training in how to handle their vehicles in an emergency. That training includes things such as: how to safely drive at speeds much higher than those around you and how to go through a red light without creating a hazardous situation. Granted the police do make mistakes in this type of situation, but if I am in trouble and need their assistance, I would want them to arrive as soon as possible.
From my point of view, the biggest driving problem here in the US is drivers who do not comply with the Motor Vehicle Code; their actions seem to say that those laws do not apply to them. Things like deliberately running red lights and stop signs, illegal turns, exceeding the speed limit by an excessive amount, and parking illegally (i.e. beside red curbs, in handicap slots, in the middle of the street, etc.)
Emergency situations are different. What I personally object to is the fact that the majority seem to have the attitude that the laws we have to obey, they are exempt from because of their job.
They seem to have the attitude of: "Do what I say, not as I do."
From a friend's facebook post:
(town name) police said Sgt. #### ###### recently stopped and gave a motorist a ticket for driving 71 mph in a 45 mph zone. The driver cited, however, was apparently a police officer from New York. ... "(town name) is a posted 45 mph zone, this driver is alleged to have been driving 71 mph."
"If police lives truly mattered brothers then professional courtesy should be given! What a disgrace!" one comment read.
"Cops don't summons other cops. With everything going on with war declared on cops, what are you thinking? Unless you have never done any real police work in your life," said Joe ###### in his negative review of the department on the (town name) Police Department Facebook page.
I believe that this comment seems to express my belief perfectly:
"All that the commenters have done is given the world more reasons to think that 'we' (the police) believe we are above the law and should not be accountable for our actions. Several comments have been made about the state of the world today, this just gives ammo to the people that already hate us and think that we are a corrupt and unaccountable group. Shame on you all for making a public mockery of law enforcement and defaming this Officer on social media," said the post by the (town) Police Department.
I have seen some of the cop protecting cops that you are talking about. My brother is a retired police officer so I have heard a lot of stories also.
I agree police are not above the law and while you hear a lot about them getting away with a lot of things that we wouldn't, you rarely if ever hear about those times when they are held accountable for their improper actions when off duty and behind the wheel.
Did you also know that in some police departments, a cop can lose their job or be placed on suspension for receiving a moving violation? It isn't right that a cop has to pay the same fine as a civilian, and possible lose his job for making an honest mistake, but it happens.
Setting aside those cases where an off duty cop flagrantly and intentionally violates the speed limit (i.e., 71 in a 45), there are also those cases where an off duty cop makes a mistake like all of us. Cops don't always ticket us civilians when they believe we made an honest mistake. They frequently let us go with a warning. Yes, they are more likely to let a fellow cop off with a warning than a ticket in many cases.
My brother told me about the time he was speeding on his motorcycle and got pulled over by a cop. The cop knew my brother was a cop and cited him for his violation telling him that cops need to set an example by obeying the laws they enforce. Not all cops protect brother cops.
"All that the commenters have done is given the world more reasons to think that 'we' (the police) believe we are above the law and should not be accountable for our actions. Several comments have been made about the state of the world today, this just gives ammo to the people that already hate us and think that we are a corrupt and unaccountable group. Shame on you all for making a public mockery of law enforcement and defaming this Officer on social media," said the post by the (town) Police Department.
As a former victim of a pedophile cop, I feel I have a right to express my opinion as to the honesty of cops in general. Even after he was caught in the fucking act raping a young girl, all he received as a punishment was: Forced early retirement, records sealed so he became untraceable. Meaning he couldn't even be sued by his victims. Calling that honesty and justice will never go over. So yeah, I have a very low opinion of all cops and police forces. I will always have that opinion and will probably Never ask a COP for help in any form.
I will always have that opinion and will probably Never ask a COP for help in any form.
I can understand your opinion and am not disputing your right to hold it.
However, as I said earlier in this thread, there are a few bad apples in every profession. Law enforcement, the priesthood, athletics, and other professions not only have their bad apples, but they also have people who protect the bad apples from being punished for their crimes. It isn't right, but it happens.
I do have my own personal code of ethics however which I try to live by.
Only do harm if its required for either self protection or to protect someone who can't protect themselves.
Never ask for even a thank you when I help someone. (makes the reason for helping wrong)
However, as I said earlier in this thread, there are a few bad apples in every profession.
Sorry, but there is significant evidence that there are more than just a few bad apples in Law Enforcement.
The blue wall of silence is one piece of that evidence. Would it really exist if the bad apples were the few rather than the many? I doubt it.
Sorry, but there is significant evidence that there are more than just a few bad apples in Law Enforcement.
The blue wall of silence is one piece of that evidence. Would it really exist if the bad apples were the few rather than the many? I doubt it.
I agree to a point. I believe that things would change if they were held to a higher standard instead of being allowed 'professional courtesy' and 'protection from prosecution'. However, I do believe that there are those who actually DO try to uphold the law for everyone. Whether they are a majority or minority, I cannot say, but I do appreciate them.
As for the number of 'bad apples', I think there is a higher percentage in politics and the 'justice' system.
"An honest politician/lawyer is one that stays bought."
The blue wall of silence is one piece of that evidence. Would it really exist if the bad apples were the few rather than the many? I doubt it.
The (insert color here) wall of silence also generally follows firefighters, military personnel, and other such groups that tend to put their lives on the line a lot(or otherwise tend to be judged as groups). I'm sure airline pilots likewise do their share of ass-covering for their fellow pilots. It's human nature for any community that is (relatively) closely knit to want to protect one another from the "stupid shit."
The social/group challenge in all of that is where people decide to draw the line on "stupid shit" that warrants protecting, and the "stupid shit" that warrants tossing them under the proverbial bus. Which is where those bad apples come into the mix.
Because realistically, it isn't just the "fraternal type" groups that behave that way(although they're among the few that will possibly do it based on "membership" rather than any kind of in depth knowledge of you as a person), families will do the same thing. If you're in a neighborhood that interacts with each other a lot(in a positive way; as low as the odds are these days), comparable things tend to happen there as well.
People will tend to protect other people they know, and not do much of anything for people they don't. Unless that person is clearly being ("unjustly") abused(and even then...). That they are freely giving such protections to their associates does not mean that they are inherently corrupt and out to commit criminal mischief.
Edit: Note that freely giving (limited) protection is not to be construed as "unlimited protections" or to be considered the same thing as outright expecting to receive any kind of protection from others. The ones who adopt the entitlement mindset are ones that do need to be taken down a few pegs.
I concur.
The Wall of Silence is not limited to law enforcement. It is present in many professions. One of the better known is the medical profession. A doctor makes an honest mistake and the medical profession closes ranks. A doctor who is no longer competent makes a mistake that kills someone and the profession closes ranks. It is rare for medical people to come out and say a doctor is incompetent even when they know he should not be practicing medicine. Then there are the unethical doctors who perform unnecessary procedures, prescribe drugs for non-medical use, and many other improper actions.
The media bombards us with story after story of improper actions by cops. Stop and think for a moment. There are over 1,000,000 law enforcement personnel in the US. If only 5% are bad apple, then there are 50,000 bad cops on the street. If those bad cops commit only 1 offense in a 20 year career, then that works out to about 2,500 improper actions per year. Yes many offenses are hushed up, but the number per year in the media is in the hundreds, which is far less than 2,500.
Let's not forget that law enforcement is a violent profession. Cops deal with violent and potentially violent situations every day. When cops go into a situation where they have to deal with an angry, armed person, the situation is very likely to escalate to the point where the cops must use force to subdue the person and possibly lethal force to prevent the person from harming themselves or others. When you are trying to subdue a person who is or may be armed and is refusing to comply with your verbal directions, then force may be the only answer. As we all know, the use of force can result in the person being injured or killed.
Let's not forget that law enforcement is a violent profession. Cops deal with violent and potentially violent situations every day.
That's a reason for holding them to a higher standard, not for making excuses for them.
When cops go into a situation where they have to deal with an angry, armed person, the situation is very likely to escalate to the point where the cops must use force to subdue the person and possibly lethal force to prevent the person from harming themselves or others.
And if they can't handle those situations without accelerating the escalation, they shouldn't be cops in the first place.
When you are trying to subdue a person who is or may be armed and is refusing to comply with your verbal directions, then force may be the only answer.
No, it's not. Stop, think, is it actually necessary to subdue this person in this moment?
Not all verbal directions given by cops are lawful orders that non-cops are legally bound to obey. Cops should not escalate to force if someone is ignoring directions that are not lawful orders.
There are over 1,000,000 law enforcement personnel in the US. If only 5% are bad apple, then there are 50,000 bad cops on the street.
Every cop who defends a bad apple is a bad apple.
But it's not 5%.
I've seen the following which comes from an experienced police trainer who does use of force training
http://www.vox.com/2015/5/28/8661977/race-police-officer
On any given day, in any police department in the nation, 15 percent of officers will do the right thing no matter what is happening. Fifteen percent of officers will abuse their authority at every opportunity. The remaining 70 percent could go either way depending on whom they are working with.
The way I count it, that's 85% bad apples.
I am surprised at you DS. I was under the impression that we were discussing law enforcement in general. Then you send me to a Blacks vs Police article written by an obviously angry man who claims to have been a cop for five years. He cites his personal opinion regarding percentage of cops good, bad, and maybe. There is no factual basis cited for the numbers he is throwing around. Then you take his numbers and label 85% of all cops as bad apples.
It is obvious that you hate cops. You blame them all for the actions of a very small percentage of all cops. If you can set your anger aside and want to discuss this further, let's do it by email rather than here in the forum.
Then you send me to a Blacks vs Police article written by an obviously angry man who claims to have been a cop for five years.
The number aren't from the author himself. They are from a friend of his who was/is a use of force trainer for police.
Regardless of who came up with the numbers, there are no facts to support the numbers.
Regardless of who came up with the numbers, there are no facts to support the numbers.
There are no facts to support your 5% either. Truth is the police are so good at covering up officer misconduct (at least when it doesn't end with a dead body on camera) that there are no facts at, and without major reforms, there never will be.
You blame them all for the actions of a very small percentage of all cops.
1. I dispute that it's a small percentage, and as much as you claim I have no factual basis for that, you have no factual basis to say it is just a small percentage.
2. I don't think it's unfair to blame them for not doing more to stop the bad cops.
If / when they start treating bad cops no different than any other criminal suspect, I will reconsider.
If / when police unions stop filing grievances / appeals over misconduct discipline I will reconsider.
...unions stop filing grievances / appeals over misconduct discipline...
It's not just police unions. I worked in a union shop where one man had been fired 8 times for misconduct and every time the union managed to get him back in. One of the instances I witnessed was when he 'accidentally' started a fire because he was playing around with flammable liquids and a lighter.
I believe unions started out good, but they have morphed into something that is no longer.
So who watches the watchers watcher?
the watch maker
Would that be the 'Powers that Be' from Old Man With a Pen's Wendy's Worlds
Would that be the 'Powers that Be' from Old Man With a Pen's Wendy's Worlds
Sounds as good as any other possibility to me. For now all we can do is go on our individual experience with the authorities regardless of the label.