Saying no to a ticket quota....

Something I would say was very justified

I've been accused, when I've run radar enforcement zones (aka a speed trap) of just doing this so the government can make money. Hate to disagree, no. I generally run radar in schools zones, so the locals are very supportive, they want someone slowing people down with the kids walking around. But I've had people complain, "You're just trying to make a quota..." etc. Sometimes, when I've had a really rough day, I respond, "Ya, three more tickets and I get a free toaster..."

But this, if an accurate report, is wrong. Sorry city council, traffic enforcement is a legitimate part of patrol. However, don't rely on it for government funding.

A Tennessee Police Department's Last Officer Resigns Over Ticket Quotas
Ridgetop no longer has any police officers after recordings captured city officials demanding that the department write 210 citations a month.

Ridgetop Police Chief Bryan Morris submitted his resignation on Friday. The Tennessee city is now without a police force and it's all due to a disagreement over illegal ticket quotas.

In January, FOX 17 released explosive reports that implicated Ridgetop Mayor Tony Reasoner and Vice Mayor McCaw Johnson in a scheme to generate revenue for the city of just over 2,000 by directing the police department as a whole to write a minimum of 210 tickets each month. The officers pushed back and finally took it upon themselves to secretly record Reasoner and Johnson. The recordings were then handed over to FOX 17.

In the recordings, Reasoner and Johnson talk about repayments to the city after the police payroll was $54,000 higher than the revenue from citations. The pair hoped that if the police wrote more tickets, it would generate new revenue that would fund the entire police payroll.

Section 39-16-516 of the Tennessee criminal code bars politicians and state agencies from disciplining a police officer solely based on the officer's ability to meet a ticket quota. The Ridgetop officers have argued that Reasoner and Johnson violated this law by demanding to see bi-weekly ticket reports from each officer. In one of the recordings, Johnson even attempted to leverage a raise for two officers and the rehire of another to encourage officers to meet the quota.

"Law enforcement is not about tickets. It's about trying to cut down on crime. That is a local government taking advantage of its people. That's not what we are here for," Officer Shawn Taylor, who captured the secret recordings on Chief Morris' behalf, declared at the time.

When asked by FOX 17 if he knew that ticket quotas were illegal, Reasoner replied, "Yes, we do. We know." McCaw, after denying that he demanded the quota, added that he was merely interested in "revenue stream."

The fight between the city officials and the police came to a head in June when officials voted to disband the department. After Robertson County Judge Bill Goodman blocked the city's decision, the police department was scaled down from five officers to one—Morris...

I often argue with people of police stereotypes, but in this case, the exception proves the rule, and it's not good. Ridgetop, you police force is there to enforce the law and protect and serve the people, not act as revenuers. Remember that.

So there is hope we can see a crime and act...

Over twenty plus years on the streets, I've initiated traffic stops for countless minor violations, that have led to greater crimes (narcotics, felony warrants, etc). I think it's simply good law enforcement, if we see something, we must do something. And it's looking like SCOTUS may actually agree with an officer doing his job.

Supreme Court seems prepared to rule for police in traffic-stop case

The Supreme Court on Monday seemed prepared to say it was reasonable for police to pull over a vehicle registered to someone with a suspended driver’s license even if officers don’t know for sure who is driving.

The court heard a case from Kansas that could have a big impact on when police may stop a motorist who has not otherwise broken the law, sorting through phrases such as “common sense” (18 mentions), “reasonable suspicion” (44 mentions) and “assume” and “assumption” (25 mentions).

Kansas Solicitor General Toby Crouse said it was “common sense” for sheriff’s deputy Mark Mehrer to stop a truck owned by Charles Glover after a routine license plate check showed Glover had a suspended license.

“It would have been poor police work for Deputy Mehrer not to initiate the stop in this case and investigate further to confirm or dispel his suspicion,” Crouse said.

Justice Department lawyer Michael R. Huston agreed. “The purpose of reasonable suspicion is simply to conduct further investigation,” Huston told the court.

But what if a law-abiding citizen was simply borrowing the truck? “There’s literally nothing she could do to avoid being seized,” said lawyer Sarah E. Harrington, representing Glover.

As it turns out, Glover was driving near Lawrence, Kan., in 2016, and Mehrer charged him with habitual driving with a suspended license (and then let him drive away). The Kansas Supreme Court, however, said the officer had not done enough to justify the stop.

All that is needed for a traffic stop, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled, is reasonable suspicion that the law is being broken, which can be a low hurdle. But the Kansas Supreme Court said that Mehrer didn’t even have that: He had only an “assumption” that the driver behind the wheel must be Glover.

“The problem is not that the state necessarily needs significantly more evidence; it needs some more evidence,” the state court ruled...

OK, I run the license plate and it comes back with an expired registration, do I have find additional reasonable suspicion to initiate a stop? Or if I see one brake light out, do I have to wait for the next one to burn out before I pull the vehicle over? Or, if the vehicle and driver match the suspect in an armed robbery that just occurred three blocks away, is this not incumbent upon me, as a police officer, to detain the driver for further investigation?

...Some justices, particularly Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, seemed to agree with their Kansas counterparts about the Constitution’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Why should the court second-guess the trial judge, who said that in his experience, many people lawfully drive vehicles not registered to them, Sotomayor asked.

Kagan hypothesized about a municipality that required motorists to carry their licenses with them at all times, but a survey showed only 50 percent of teenagers did so. “So now it’s like common sense that if you see a teenager, she won’t be carrying her driver’s license with her,” Kagan said. “Does that give the police officer the ability to stop every teenager that he sees?”

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wondered whether it might be more likely that the person behind the wheel was not the registered owner with the suspended license.

Justice Neil M. Gorsuch said he was troubled that Mehrer did not testify, so there was no questioning about whether his experience or training caused him to “assume” the driver was Glover.

“There are no facts in the record at all, zero,” Gorsuch said. On the other hand, if all an officer had to do was say some “magic words” about his experience or training, “what are we fighting about here?” he asked...

Well I'm not surprised the Democratic judges question simple law enforcement actions. But again, Justice Sotomayor, why should you second guess the cop on the street with years of experience? Someone who knows the area, the usual suspects, and how they operate. If, in this example, the driver was not the operator with a suspended licence, he has been delayed for a few minutes. I've pulled over countless vehicles for a warrant on the license plate, the suspect is "John Smith, B/M, DOB 4/4/87," and the driver is actually "Juan Valdez, H/M, DOB 2/7/92." OK Justice Sotomayor, if I stop the vehicle and Mr Valdez is the driver, I, as part of my duties, must check him for wants and warrants. Can be very important, see how Timothy McVeigh was caught after the Oklahoma City bombing. If I find out he's wanted, I book him, would you throw out the arrest because I didn't have enough "reasonable suspicion" to stop?

Hopefully SCOTUS does the right thing. I would hate to see another action to bling cops in doing their duties.

Oh, come on officer, he's my friend....

I remember a friend in Virginia was so happy she could use the HOV lanes when her kids were in the car with her. Gotta say, never thought of this for the HOV.

Today we stopped a local funereal home hearse in the HOV lane. The driver had the dearly departed in the back, he thought the deceased could be counted as two people. I guess we should clarify this, living, breathing people count for the HOV lane. The driver was given a warning

A tip from the highway patrol: Carpooling with the dead doesn't mean you get to use the HOV lane

The black van was driving southbound in the carpool lane of Interstate 15, just past the Stratosphere hotel and casino in Las Vegas, when the Nevada Highway Patrol trooper noticed the driver appeared to be alone.

He flipped on his red and blue lights and pulled the driver over.

“Hi! Trooper Smaka, Nevada Highway Patrol,” he said as the man in the van handed him his driver’s license. “You got your registration and insurance as well?..”

...Then the driver sort of nodded and motioned toward the back of the van. He said there was a body back there.

“Oh, you have a deceased in the back?” Trooper Travis Smaka repeated coolly.

He did.

And so began the brief, unusual attempt by a mortuary driver in Las Vegas to claim a corpse as his passenger.

The traffic stop Monday came amid increased HOV lane enforcement on I-15 running parallel to the Las Vegas Strip. Since mid-June, it’s a $250 fine to drive solo in a carpool lane — a change from before when enforcement occurred only during morning and evening rush hours. On the first day of enforcement, the department reported dozens were ticketed.

The change has been met with a lot of gripes among locals.

Nevada Highway Patrol Trooper Jason Buratczuk said officers expected to hear some of the usual excuses that they’ve encountered while enforcing the HOV lanes on U.S. Route 95: rushing to work, rushing to the hospital or rushing to an important appointment.

But rushing the dead to a funeral home? Weird, Buratczuk said.

...“Yes, it’s a person, but they’re not in a seat and they’re not living and breathing,” he said. “This body was in the rear cargo area and that doesn’t qualify as a seat.”

What if the dead were riding shotgun?

“The HOV violation is the least of your concerns,” Buratczuk said...

Traffic in Houston is horrendous, and I'm often impressed by the ways people take to get around it. Too cool to not pass on.

Buses used for patrol....

I've often said, no matter what the context, if you in the public (e.g. walking on the street), you have no expectation of privacy. And knowing how dangerous distracted driving can be, I like this. Using the assets available to accomplish the mission.

Hopefully this will reduce accidents.

Like to speed...we got an app for that...

I've been in traffic court countless times. For a while I was a terror with a radar machine and it was really fun when people said, "I'll see you in court!"

My answer was always, "Thanks! I need the overtime."

Now I've been questioned by multiple defense attorneys over my time in court, and it looks like some lawyers are getting even more advanced.

Lead foot got you in trouble? Reach for your phone

THEN, the flashing police lights and miserable pull-over. It can happen anytime and anywhere: along rural roads, in speed traps, big cities or daily commutes.

A few new platforms have emerged to offer drivers a chance to fight back — by playing the courtroom odds and helping customers choose the most successful lawyers. While automated ways to fight traffic tickets have been around for a while — mostly serving to refer customers to law firms or simply paying charges through a court website — entrepreneurs behind the new platforms say they offer greater flexibility for payments and a deeper understanding of traffic violation and court data.

Off The Record is a Seattle-based platform launched in September 2015 covering 18 states including California, Washington, New York, New Jersey and Texas. Its mobile app links to a digital platform, connecting aggrieved drivers and local attorneys.

The startup idea formed after a group of friends, including co-founder Alex Guirguis, were pulled over when returning from a camping trip in Oregon over Labor Day weekend. Four cars in the group were pulled over at different times and cited for speeding.

The friends looked for a digital solution to finding local attorneys to fight the violations. They had little luck and ended up paying the tickets, he said. “We realized there was definitely an opportunity here,” Guirguis said.

Guirguis and his co-founders found estimates that about 40 million tickets are issued to U.S. drivers annually, and less than 5 percent are disputed in court.

Guirguis quit his software engineering job at Amazon and formed Off The Record in January 2015. The company recruits local lawyers to sign up. The attorneys set their own rates, court locations and expertise.

Drivers take a picture of their ticket and include other relevant information through the website or mobile app.

Clients are referred to lawyers, and the two sides can communicate over the secure platform or by phone and email. An attorney will make court appearances and file papers challenging the ticket. Off The Record charges attorneys a fee for each case they accept...

..When the company opened the platform in San Francisco, legal fees ranged from $195 to $1,100 to handle similar, routine violations, he said. Legal fees on the platform for San Francisco lawyers now average between $200 and $250, he said. Rates have also fallen in Silicon Valley courtrooms, he said.

Off The Record has about 250 lawyers and has handled about 5,000 tickets. It boasts a high success rate at reducing violations and preventing points from accumulating on a driver’s record...

Not knocking the app developers or the lawyers, but I'll lay money a lot of the success is from cops not making it to court. Unless the municipal or county attorney request a reset, it will be dismissed. But I gotta say I like it when someone sees a market and develop a service for that market.

Another person tells cops, "Don't do your job."

I've subscribed to Reason magazine for years and I regularly listen to their podcast. I've often described my politics as conservative with some libertarian tendencies. But I have many issues with the the Libertarian Party's platform. They are for open borders (as opposed to the current Democratic party which wants no borders.)

Now I've found this article interesting. The author (A columnist for the Chicago Tribune) basically wants cops to cease making traffic stops. My first thought was, "Moron, to be effective, police work has to be assertive..." Here are some of the highlights.

Curbing Traffic Stops Would Save Lives

So why do cops rely so much on the practice? Enforcing traffic laws is a large share of what they do.

Steve Chapman

Last weekend, in the wee hours of the night, Chicago police stopped a car carrying four people. When officers approached it, they saw a passenger holding a gun. The outcome was a familiar one: an 18-year-old man was shot by police...

Mr. Chapman, perhaps you missed the story from the Chicago Tribune. You are giving the reader an impression of four kids just joyriding and the police shot for no reason. From your newspaper's article:

...Officers stopped the car in an alley between Mulligan Avenue and Mobile Avenue. While the officers were asking the driver for a license and registration, the officers saw that one of the backseat passengers, the 18-year-old man, had a gun, Nagode said.

"The subject did have a weapon in his hand," he said. "He was making several statements where he was threatening in nature."

The officers exchanged words with the man, but Nagode said the 18-year-old did not put down the gun...

Mr. Chapman, perhaps you didn't know this, but private possession of a firearms in Chicago is basically illegal. Also, an 18 year old cannot possess a pistol, period. You are trying to imply the cops were wrong in stopping the vehicle and defending themselves. News flash, they were not.

...Too often, traffic stops lead to tragedy. Philando Castile was shot to death in his car by a police officer in Minnesota. Last week, a mistrial was declared for a University of Cincinnati officer prosecuted for killing 43-year-old Samuel DuBose, whose car had a missing front license plate. Sandra Bland, yanked out of her car by a Texas state trooper after allegedly failing to signal a lane change, died in jail. All three victims were black.

Yes, I saw the video of the Castile stop. Not the Facebook live stream his girlfriend did, but the one of the officer. Where the first thing he does is tell him, "Don't reach for it...Don't reach for it!" Can we say we say Mr. Castile did "reach for it," no, we didn't have that point of view. But it's not the lie put out that the cop fired without warning and for no reason.

I've been a cop for almost two decades and yes, occasionally, I get stopped. And it's rare I am not carrying a weapon. So the first thing I do as the officer approaches is put my hand out and announce, "Officer, my hands are where you can see them! I am armed!" I show him my ID, he knows I am authorized to carry a weapon, and we go on.

By the way, Sandra Bland did not "die in jail," she killed herself in jail. And the trooper is at no fault for her death. Once she was accepted by the county jail, she is their responsibility. From what I've read there are some issues with the jail staff, but the trooper is not responsible for that.

...Cops are also at risk. In March, a police officer died in a shootout with a passenger who ran from a car that had been pulled over in Tecumseh, Okla. In June, a police lieutenant was fatally gunned down after a stop in Newport, Arkansas..."

Actually LT Weatherford was investigating a vehicle break in, not on a traffic stop:

The Arkansas State Police said on Tuesday that Weatherford was responding to a vehicle break-in when he was shot.

...When an officer stops and approaches a vehicle, both the cop and the driver are vulnerable. Any wrong move or misjudgment can turn the encounter deadly.

"Traffic stops and domestic violence are the highest-risk calls—you have no idea what you're walking into," John Gnagey, executive director of the National Tactical Officers Association, told the Orlando Sentinel in 2010...

A seven year old quote, kinda weird. I guess Google was lazy the day you wrote this.

Even when motorists get off unharmed, the experience can be frightening, infuriating or humiliating. Stops breed fear and distrust of law enforcement, particularly among minorities.

"Even when motorists get off unharmed,..." You are implying people getting "off unharmed" is not common. From the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2011 62 million Americans had interaction with police, of which approximate 13 million were traffic stops. If 10% of those stops/investigations ended in injury or death of the officer or a citizen, we would be talking about 1.3 million people. Hate to tell you, there is not an epidemic of violence around traffic stops.

...So why do cops rely so much on the practice? Enforcing traffic laws is a large share of what they do. Ignoring motorists who drive too fast or ignore signals could foster chaos on the road...

And to let you in on a secret, it also leads to other crimes, such as Driving While Intoxicated, Operating with a Suspended License, no insurance, etc. Also, going back to that 18 year old who was shot in Chicago. Did it occur to you the four kids (around 20, at least one armed, out at 3:00 am) what were they doing. Likely planning a criminal act. The fact they were stopped (speculation on my part) may have prevented another crime later on in the night. You stop them with a traffic stop, arrest them for illegally carrying the weapon, and the armed robbery they were planning never occurs.

But there are other ways to combat bad driving. University of California, Berkeley law professor Christopher Kutz points out that police in France do traffic stops at less than one-third the rate that American cops do. In England and Wales, it's one-fourth.

The obvious alternative is using cameras. Speeders and red-light runners can be detected and ticketed by electronic means. Upon paying the fine, says Kutz, the offenders could be required to show that they are licensed and insured.

I've gotten citations from red-light and speed cameras, and while I resented the fines, I was grateful that I wasn't detained on the roadside by an armed officer. The time I got a mere warning for (barely) failing to come to a complete stop on an empty suburban street after midnight was considerably less pleasant.

Forgive me, but you claimed to have "...(barely).."failed to come to a complete stop. OK, we'll take you at your word for the moment. However, if police switched to only camera enforcement of traffic laws, what will preclude people from covering their license plates, steeling license plates of similar vehicles, etc? BTY, I will lay money the next column comes up from you will be complaints about being fined without being proven guilty of a crime, such as running a red light.

...Being a gray-haired white male, I've been pulled over only three times in my adult life. Castile, 32, had been through that experience 49 times—and "was rarely ticketed for the reason he was stopped," according to the StarTribune of Minneapolis-St. Paul.

Joel Anderson, an African-American reporter for BuzzFeed, said on Twitter last month that he's been stopped more than 30 times since he started driving—including five times for seatbelt violations when he was wearing his seatbelt...

"...rarely ticketed for the reason he was stopped?" OK, was he ticketed for something else? I didn't see a breakdown of what Castile had been stopped for and the results, if you have that, please put it out. Oh, to be fair, why don't you restate Mr Anderson's claim, "He alleges he was stopped five times for seatbelt violations when the was wearing his seatbelt."

Traffic stops are often an excuse for cops to search a car for drugs and guns. Curtailing police reliance on this pretext would free motorists from being dragooned to "consent" to searches for which the cops lack probable cause.

If the cop doesn't have probably cause, the driver can say, "You ain't going in there without a warrant..." I agree, stand up for your rights.

...True, the change would let criminals operate at less risk. But hassling the innocent to catch the guilty is an abuse of our constitutional principles. In Illinois last year, police conducted 2.17 million traffic stops. Just 8,938 yielded contraband—one bust for every 242 stops...

Yes, it would let criminals operate at less risk. And the general public at more. Before Rudolph Giuliani came in and instigated, among other things, "Stop and Frisk," New York was a war zone. The Big Apple had over two-thousand murders in 1990.

Sorry Mr. Chapman, effective policing, by it's nature, must be aggressive. We must go out and find the criminals, if possible, before they strike (see your example of the 4 hood rats stopped by CPD). You may not like the fact we do this job, but don't worry. In spite of your bad opinion of the cops, we will still respond to you when you're getting your ass kicked. To paraphrase Jack Nicholson's great speech:

We live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives.

You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall -- you need me on that wall.

We use words like "honor," "code," "loyalty." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.

I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand the watch. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

An important message about texting and driving...

If a bit nerdy:


Thanks Buddy B for the link.

Some people just don't get it....

One of the questions I have when I pull someone over is, "Do they get a ticket or warning." With people like this, the question answered itself.

Ouch.....

I've had my feet run over twice and it's no fun. In this short video a Saudi prince seems to not like getting a ticket and tries to drive off. Mistake.

Yes, people are that stupid....

The stupidity of the human animal never ceases to amaze me. You think you have hit rock bottom, then someone takes out the pick ax and starts breaking the rock into pieces.

I was on a Traffic Hazard-Urgent and I stopped in the middle of I-610 to pick up a tarp that had fallen into the road. This is an accident waiting to happen. Thankfully a unit pulled up behind me to block other cars. I’m pulling this tarp into my Tahoe (it was huge) and this idiot in a SUV moves to the left shoulder, stops and is taking a picture of me, completely oblivious to the fact she can cause a wreck.

I screamed at her, “Get the hell out of here!” and she seems shocked I was yelling at her. She drove off annoyed.

It’s times like this I’m scared I got a gun, I may not resist the urge to cleanse the human gene pool!

Not exactly an Absolute Genius...

I've often said you don't know stupidity until you direct traffic. And here we go:

A GRAFFITI ARTIST PAINTED A ROAD RUNNER TUNNEL ON A WALL AND SOMEBODY TRIED TO DRIVE THROUGH IT

And he suffered the same fate as Wile E. Coyote did every time he tried to drive through those damn things.

According to Mirror, a man attempting to drive his Fiat through what he was thought was a tunnel instead crashed his car because it turned out to be a painting of a tunnel on a wall.

guy tries driving through painted roadrunner tunnel The accident happened a few months ago despite the fact that the graffiti artist also painted a large depiction of the Looney Tunes Road Runner next to the tunnel.

Even funnier than somebody thinking that was actually a real tunnel? You guessed it: The comments left on Imgur after one "rburn" posted the photos.

"Nice to see that Wile E. Coyote finally got his driver's license," said EvilGenomic.

"This is why we can't have nice things," added CoalCuts.

And of course our favorite: "He's lucky, a train could've come out of there," courtesy of Greub.

Is comment needed? :<)

Why we get the hell off of highways....

A point I made in Field Training my rookies was if you have an accident or other incident on a highway, you get the hell out of there. Unless there is a reason to stay (e.g. waiting on an ambulance) you simply grab IDs from the drivers and move it off the road. Why? As I've said more than once, "It's an excellent place to get killed!"

I once had to explain to an idiot, err citizen, why I wasn't going to wait for his own tow truck. I told this....gentlemen, "I have four reasons, in order of priority:

1. I really don't want to get killed today and this is an excellent place for that to happen.

2. While we're out here people are looking at us and not paying attention to driving. This may cause another accident. BTY, this happened once when I was waiting on the side of I-10 in New Orleans back in 1996. Two people looking at the us and one rear ended the other.

3. While people are gawking at us this is slowing down traffic for miles.

4. Finally, you may also get injured out here."

With that as some background, here is an excellent video from Utah Highway Patrol on the hazards of being on the side of a highway.

Another day in the life of a Street Lawyer....

In my years on the street I have, from time to time, come in contact with a creature I call the Street Lawyer. Generally there are not attorney's by trade or training but they believe they know the law better than the police, city and district attorneys, or even defense attorneys. Here is an example of one.

Texas Officer smashes out a car window of uncooperative suspect... The end of this video ROCKS!Be sure to like our page!#SupportPolice #ThinBlueLine #WeSeeYouLike and Share!
Posted by Thin Blue Line HQ on Friday, June 12, 2015

To knock off the questions before they come, in Texas if a Peace Officer has reasonable suspicion to detain you for a traffic offense, you are required to present to him both your license and proof of financial responsibility. If you do not, that is a Class C Misdemeanor. And yes, the officer may use "reasonable force" to take you into custody. Seeing he spent almost four minutes asking for the license and/or name, that is reasonable in my book and I'll bet it will be reasonable in the eyes of the judge.

But one thing these Street Lawyers never seems to grasp. This is not the place for the argument. He can make his case in front of a judge or jury at a later point. The ticket is not a conviction and signing the citation is not an admission of guilt. It is simply an acknowledgement by you of receipt of the ticket and a promise to appear in court.

One of my officers watched this and he made the point is the likely a Sovereign Citizen. They believe that traffic codes only apply to commercial motor vehicles and the only legitimate law enforcement is the sheriff and his deputies (they are elected).

Haven't had to use the baton yet, but yes, that draw it from me.

Karma can be a beautiful thing...,,

In the last few years there's been one group or another that think they are immune from law, such as the Sovereign Citizen's movement or Black Panthers. And we have CopWatch.org or this new group, CopBlock.org, that only want to "police the police", if you will..

Now there is a question of the propriety of using checkpoints. Personally, if it's on the public streets and done in a random manner (e.g. every fifth driver or all drivers) I see no issue with Constitutionality. Apparently Mr. Watkins believes he should warn people of this. Fair enough, he has a right to protest. But Karma is a bitch!

“Cop Blocker” Kory Watkins Hit by Drunk Driver After Protesting Police Safety Checkpoint

ARLINGTON, TEXAS-On his way home from protesting an Arlington Police Department traffic safety checkpoint, self-proclaimed “Cop Watcher” Kory Watkins was rear-ended by a drunk driver. Watkins’ car was hit by a vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed while driving home from the checkpoint protest on Interstate 287.
“So last night on my way home from cop watching a drunk driver was going around 100 mph and smashed into the back of me,” Watkins said. “I could not control the car , I went sideways, then flipped 3 times, hit a cement piller to stop my roll and put me in a ditch on The side of 287. I was 2 miles always from being home. I am incredible lucky to be breathing. I can’t tell you how lucky I am to be alive.”...

Damned, sucks to be you pal. Forgive me if I don't have much sympathy. We get to deal with these morons every night and see, we even deal with jerks who don't like us. Seems like Mr. Watkins don't like people making fun of him.

“I see a few sick I individuals taken time to think this is a joke or it’s funny that the cops helped me,” he said. “Let me say this. I am happy the police showed up to catch him but I’m trying to figure out where they helped me any….. Was it the part where they showed up 15 minutes after the crime or was it when they wrote me a 300$ ticket after my car was totaled? Any sick f— that thinks this is the time to crack irony jokes can go the he’ll away. I’m lucky to be alive. There are some sick people that try to take a situation and spin it to fit their beliefs when they don’t know crap. Some sick people …. Mother F—-r almost dies and people are joking about it. Disgusting.”

Mr. Watkins, you kiss your mom with that mouth? No, it's not disgusting, it's just laughing at someone who takes themselves far too serious. Waaaaaa!

Watkins was issued a summons for driving without a license. ” I don’t ask for permission to drive a car I paid for on a road I paid for,” he said.

Watkins was protesting a police department checkpoint by alerting drivers of its presence prior to the checkpoint. Watkins stood next to the police vehicles yelling, “You criminals!” at the police officers.

Mr. Watkins, actually you do. Driving is a privilege, not a right. So if you want to drive on the public street you need to be licensed, as well as have your vehicle insured, registered, and inspected. Don't like that, take the bus. Sounds more like you are the criminal to me.

“Cop Blockers” are people who are overly critical of the state of policing in the United States and seek to promote and publicize acts by police officers, often sensationalized, to portray police departments as over aggressive para-military forces. In this incident Watkins said his goal was to expose the checkpoint as nothing more than a revenue generating operation for the department.

No, we just protect and serve. The last officer my agency lost was from a drunk driver so it's not a "revenue generating operation for the department". Hope you enjoy your time at court as I know the officers will enjoy their overtime. With an attitude like yours I know they will show up. And please, don't hire a lawyer, hate to see you put out the money like that! ;<)

An unusual wreck....

You don't see this every day:



 

 

From accident I checked by on.  The "brakes failed" according to the driver.  Yea, right! :<)

I'm not a grammar NAZI, but these people should be better than this....

I'm not a particularly good speller but these are supposed "journalist" and make their money communicating. Proficiency in the English language should be expected.

HPD: Ambulance crash scene causes deadly motorcycle crash

Police said a crash that landed two paramedics in the hospital triggered a series of events that led to a deadly motorcycle crash.

Paramedics were treating a female dancer from Fantasy Plaza for an injury around 2:30 a.m. Saturday, according to Houston police....

...HPD said while that scene was being cleared, traffic was backed up on the opposite side of the freeway. Apparently a motorcycle rider did not see that traffic while he was coming over a hill and ended up braking suddenly, losing control of his bike, and slamming into a wall.

Two cars behind the motorcycle could not stop and ran over the rider.

Police say one of the cars did not stop and left the scene. The other vehicle waited for police and was questioned by officers.

The motorcycle rider died at the scene. His name was not immediately released...

Some great quotes:

1. "The other vehicle waited for police and was questioned by officers."

I wonder what the vehicle told the police?

2. ...Ryan Jones writes like an A&M grad.

3. Attention grammar police!

Clean up on aisle 5!

4. The person(s) that wrote this story should return to ESL class immediately...!

Pardon me, a car does not decide to drive away or not. The driver, i.e. a human operating the car makes that decision. Just like in the final paragraph, the motorcycle didn't die, its rider did. The pathetic example of writing here is far too common.

I think the proper term is "Failed to Yield Right of Way-Entering Moving Lane of Traffic

It's fail to say which vehicle had "Right of Weight"!

Thanks to Michael Berry for the link.

A new method of traffic enforcement....

Tenn. Troopers Use Heavy Duty Truck To Catch Traffic Scofflaws

A group of Tennessee Highway Patrol troopers stationed in Chattanooga have been using an innovative approach to catch traffic scofflaws who text or drink while driving. They've been using a heavy-duty truck.

Troopers with a commercial truck license have been taking out the Highway Patrol's 18-wheel Peterbilt tractor-trailer so they can see down into vehicles and catch moving violations.

"The purpose of the truck is to educate drivers to safety drive with trucks," Jennifer Donnals, a Highway Patrol spokeswoman, told POLICE Magazine. "They're taking this truck and repurposing it for this campaign."

The Highway Patrol's Lt. John Harmon headed up the initiative as part of his "Stay Alive on 75," a program to raise awareness among motorists traveling Interstate 75 with heavy-duty trucks. The department operates what troopers call a "No Zone" truck so drivers can avoid entering a truck's blind spot.

Lt. Harmon was given approval to use the truck for highway interdiction. Of the 783 Tennessee troopers, 96 have a a commercial license. Many of those are Class A, which is required to operate an 18-wheel rig.

The agency seized the truck a decade ago from a marijuana trafficker and reformatted it for safety education work. The rig was painted to look like one of the patrol cars. A lightbar was affixed to the roof. And radio equipment has been installed in the cockpit.

"We were driving down the road and watching people text and drive," Lt. Harmon said. "We realized we could see everything up here."

The Highway Patrol doesn't make traffic stops with the truck. Instead, troopers radio ahead for a trooper in a patrol car to pull over the suspected violator. A second trooper rides in the truck's "jump" or passenger seat to operate the radio.

One world. Cool!