Okay, I really missed something now. How did we get to Socialism?

Too many cops? You've got to be kidding. For every violator I see pulled to the side of the road, I can count ten violators around me in traffic that just "straightened up" for the period of time that they might also be under observation.

I see a LOT of stupid people doing stupid things on the highway---and not getting caught. Too many cops? Nah...

Tickets as a source of revenue? They are just enforcing the law, not collecting taxes. If you do the crime, pay the fine. That's the price of your fun outside the boundaries of the law.

DD

By the way, I think it comes down to respect. Highway patrol officers and troopers really get to deal with some real scumbags, and risk their life running into the wrong one or some goofball behind the wheel of a car that crashes into them. Highway 85 is Silicon Valley is named after an officer that was killed when someone crossed over the median (very wide) and hit him clear on the other side of the highway.

Show the officer some respect. He's not a tax collector. You're paying your dues when he issues you a ticket.
DD

Dangerous, you are missing a huge point. This action has been stepped up due to budget cuts and lack of tax revenue. Too many social programs...too many entitlements. Big government is running out of other peoples money and since it is almost impossible to raise taxes in the worst recession since the 30s (ala Kalifornia), they are attempting to exact a toll from anybody and anything...anyway they can. Law enforcement needs revenue to perpetuate themselves and they have gone from Protect and Serve to something like the tax man out of a Popeye movie. If we have enough policeman to hide in bushes outside of mall parking lots all day long, writing $300 tickets to cash strapped citizens who are trying to figure out how to make their next mortgage payment, we have way too many policemen. Way too many! Time to thin the ranks!

I can honesty say that is the craziest/dumbest post I think I have read on this site. You honestly think tickets for people who choose to not wear their seat belts will have an affect on the budget issue in Calif? Or, that the intent is NOT to save lives??

Too many cops? Time to thin the ranks? Wow... criminals out there would vote for you.

JMHO

More than 10% of Texans currently wanted by police

Sticking to my guns here. In today's economy, stepping up enforcement simply to raise more revenue is indefensible.

Where in there did it say enforcement was stepped up for the purpose of increasing revenue? And, Heaven forbid citizens obey the laws, and don't get fined. Sorry, if you have $3,500 in tickets... YOU are the problem. Not the cops doing their jobs.

I think your missing the point. The laws are being written to appease lobbyists (MADD, Insurance companies, etc...) and we are paying for "over enforcement" of these stupid laws. Have you heard "don't murder, or your freedom won't go further"? Of course not, because murder does not generate money.

There must be something to this click-it or ticket program generating dollars for the states.

I always put my seatbelt on, I am sick of being threatened if I do not have it on.

E

And again, if it's all about 'saving lives'..why the dichotomy with motorcycles?
I can ride without a shirt or helmet, wearing shorts and flip flops and that is ok? Where the rush to protect me from myself?
The government which governs least governs best.

Yes, but should you crash your bike without wearing a shirt or helmet, while wearing shorts and flip flops, you would have to accept the responsibility for your major injuries which could have been prevented. Just as those who choose to ignore a simple seat belt law have to accept their fines. :LOL:

I'm sure this issue could be debated for 10 more pages. But again.. wear you seat belt to help protect your own life, and prevent getting a ticket. Simple as that.

So, this "Mish" guy gets two tickets in what, about a month, then writes an article about "over-enforcement" and "revenue generation" in order to feel better about himself, and this substantiates the over-enforcement and revenue generation claim?

Hhmmmm....

I dunno. Who is the "Mish" blogger anyway, and why should I believe him? And citing a Car & Driver article as evidence? I'm not sure I'd be going to C&D for verification of any suspicions of mine.

The funny thing for me is that the troopers are just learning our ways and figuring out how to outsmart the violators. In CA, recently there has been a phenomena where CHP's would trail together, spaced by a mile or so. When people see a CHP pulling someone over, suddenly they get religion and slow down, but once out of eyesight, get right back on the hammer. CHP knows this, and now they have a guy waiting on the side of the road oh, just out of eyesight where you start getting right foot heavy again.

It's cat and mouse. If you choose to play, be prepared to pay.

And so what if it is a revenue generator? If you DESERVED it, you deserved it. When you didn't get a ticket before for the same violation and they turned a blind eye or let you go with a warning, they were just being nice and forgiving.

As for motorcycles? Helmet law in CA. Even Hells Angels and Monguls (sp?)wear "helmets" here in CA.

DD

Powershift1038 & Dangerous Doug make some very good points,

.
The police enforce the laws they don't make them, and if there is a fine for disobeying a law, and you disobey it, then don't complain about being called on it; whether it's speeding (none of us do that?) burn outs? nnaaah, loud pipes, never. Once in a while you gotta pay your dues, if your lucky, (or you obey they law, odd choice) not too often.

My favorite item of choice here in Sunny Kalifornya (after recent legislation prohibiting all but hands free cell phone while driving) would be to have several unmarked cars driven in local traffic by sworn officers issing citations to those offenders. It would become a big cash generator and more than pay the Officers wages.

As far as the woman in Texas with $3500 in fines.....get her ass off the road regardless. It's YOUR car she might run into, but don't send her here we have enough of our own. She's obviously not a "Responsible" Driver, and please do not attempt to defend her circumstances.

A revenue enhancer, plain and simple.

I have not had a ticket in over 10 years, 3 weeks ago I was reparking my car on my street I moved the car about 10 feet and now I have a $150.00 ticket for no seatbelt.:eek:
"A revenue enhancer, plain and simple."

Exactly "my" point here, along with government bullying via bill boards, signs, and radio spots tossed in for good measure.

E :cool:

Okay, so it's "No more Mr. Nice Guy" from the authorities. If you feel like you didn't deserve a ticket, then contest it. However, if you got a ticket, and you deserved it (only you and the arresting officer would know), then pay the fine and get on with your life.:rolleyes:

Enough said.
DD

A great deal has changed as it is all about generating money now. Not the police officers fault as they are just doing what they have to. But there has been an on going fight in Redding for the past couple of months now over the traffic cameras versus police handing out tickets. One person is going to court, not because he didn't break the law twice in the same spot but because of the way the fines are set. He turned right on a red light without coming to a complete stop and an officer saw him and gave him a ticket. I believe the paper said it was around $75 but am not sure on that. A week or so later he did the same thing at thee same spot and the traffic camera caught him and that ticket was $475. That I am sure of because there have been so many of them lately. His complaint and what he is fighting is that tickets issued because of being caught on camera in other states averages out to just over $100 I believe it is and here it is $475. Also why the huge difference if an officer stops you and writes a ticket and if you get caught by a camera? It is going to be interesting when he gets to court to see how that is handled.
My last ticket was in 1969. I now drive within the speed limits and make sure that I come to a complete stop at all stop signs or lights.

Ron :)

Ron,

The company that supplied the cameras may have an open-ended contract with the city or county, calling for a percentage of the revenue generated through use of the camera. A proposal to introduce cameras at intersections in the city of Billings included a 'fee' of twenty percent. The city was ready to accept the proposal - the company picks up the costs for intallation and maintenance - until the state legislature voted against their use anywhere in Montana. Proponents saw a way to increase effectiveness (and revenue) with no change in staffing; opponents argued law enforcement could not be responsible when enacted at a distance.

Hawaii is a big click it or ticket state for quite a while. I use my seat belts
so it doesn't impact me. I don't think anyone would want to have an accident
without a seat belt that had an air bag fire on them. Glad I had mine on
when a bimbo on a cel phone decided to make a u-turn and drilled me.

Yup. THAT is revenue generation. BTW, to all the guys who believe that the cops are out there to support themselves with ticket revenue; the only program that I personally know of that directly supports LE in the enforcement role are drug seizures and that's only support not saleries. All the other monies go into the municipality's general fund. In other words into a pot where the polititions control of it. Again, if you want different laws or laws enforced in a different way then get involved, communicate in your community and above all be involved in the political process and VOTE for the leader whom you want to have the purse strings. You might be surprised at how many cops are with you.

Steve

I guess I did not state my point clearly enough. IF the seat belt laws are all about saving lives (as opposed to revenue generation/powerful lobby manipulation) why are the laws on motorcycles so lax? Clearly a motorcycle presents a greater danger (to operator) in case of accident, yes? And if so the laws for safety should be tighter, should they not?
And if a collision occurs (regardless of vehicle) I accept what happens so how does the state get to mandate what is good for me? This to me (a religious seat belt user, btw) is another example of nitwit legislatures being manipulated into performing work for a powerful lobby (insurance). It is no more about 'saving lives' than the 55 mph speed limit was/is. In my view, what I do (and the risks I accept) are my responsibility, not the states. And finally, I believe the red light cameras showcase this clearly! Here in Texas, the cities are raising he// because revenue from the cameras has been dropping drastically, and some of the contracts prohibit moving them w/o substantial fees. If it were all about safety, the municipalities should be overjoyed that the cameras did their stated purpose...and people became safer drivers. Instead...the mantra goes lets move them to make more money.