Speed Traps - Beware As The Weather Warms Up

[gangrene]

First, let me preface this by saying I am by no means an avid speeder (although I fit that description once upon a time). That being said, I was ticketed for speeding on my way to/from work twice in December. One of those times was on the service road of I-35 in Carrollton, near Beltline Rd, where the speed limit is 35 MPH. I honestly, and wrongly, thought it was 45, but was going 50. I was going a tad faster because I was about to turn onto a short entrance ramp to northbound I-35, where the speed limit is 60. Anyway, I've routinely seen both Farmer's Branch and Carrollton PD set up on the NB SR of I-35 on my commute home.

This morning, on my way to work in downtown Dallas, I saw four Carollton PD motorcycle cops on the SB SR of I-35 between Luna and Beltline. One cop was shooting laser while the other three all had cars pulled over. I suspect this will be a much more common occurrence as the weather warms up this spring.

With many of the local city governments facing budget shortfalls, they are looking for every possible way to generate additional revenue. McKinney is even considering charging an "accident fee" of up to $215 for non-residents that have accidents in their city limits. McKinney considers accident fee for nonresidents Several members of McKinney's city council have said they are opposed to the proposal since that article was written.

Be careful driving out there. That money spent on a ticket would be much better served by investing in the Mean Green Club.

[LongJim]

Usually, (and I'm not speaking for Mayberry-type municipalities where Sheriff BJ McGillicuddy is the law) these types of "traps" are set up for a couple of reasons:

1. The local cops and FD's have been cleaning up accidents and/or fatalities in the area due to excessive speed.

2. There has been a complaint or pressure from citizens to patrol that area due to excessive speeders.

If you really think about it, the reason the cops were bagging them left and right (and you too, for that matter) is because it's a common problem there, and the cops are trying to slow people down rather than having to call the gut-wagon every 2 or 3 days at that location. I can assure you that cops would rather write tickets than show up to see quivering human remains and screaming, maimed families trapped in twisted wreckage as they burn alive.

I can also virtually assure you that they don't set these up (which are dangerous--to you and them--in and of themselves) simply to fill the local coffers--although that's a common theory, and one I used to subscribe to, as well.

That was before there were cops in my family and I began working closely with PD's for about a decade.

[MeanGreen61]

If you don't speed, you don't have to be concerned about so called speed traps. Obeying the law is so much easier than complaining about peace officers enforcing it.

Edited February 14, 2011 by MeanGreen61

[TheTastyGreek]

If you don't speed, you don't have to be concerned about so called speed traps. Obeying the law is so much easier than complaining about peace officers enforcing it.

I like to think of myself as a modern day Martin Luther King, Jr., only my "dream" is to get somewhere in a really big hurry.

(Not really... I'm not much of a speeder.)

[greenminer]

Don't speed. Seems pretty straightforward.

[gangrene]

If you don't speed, you don't have to be concerned about so called speed traps. Obeying the law is so much easier than complaining about peace officers enforcing it.

Unfortunately, I have to actually drive every day. I didn't think I was complaining, but rather informing. if you don't drive, er speed, then this post wasn't intended for you and you have nothing to worry about.

Oh, and speed traps don't exist just like PDs don't have "ticket quotas."

Are DPD Ticket Quotas Legal?

[UNT90]

Unfortunately, I have to actually drive every day. I didn't think I was complaining, but rather informing. if you don't drive, er speed, then this post wasn't intended for you and you have nothing to worry about.

Oh, and speed traps don't exist just like PDs don't have "ticket quotas."

Are DPD Ticket Quotas Legal?

Ticket quotas are illegal, but that doesn't mean police administrations don't pressure their officers to write tickets to "curb accidents." The results of not giving into these pressures are bad performance reviews. The pressure is not just reserved for the STEP program, but to regular patrol officers who work a beat.

Be mad at the administrations, not the officers. Odds are, if the officers aren't on a motorcycle, they would rather be doing anything else than writing you a ticket.

Edited February 15, 2011 by UNT90

[LongJim]

Ticket quotas are illegal, but that doesn't mean police administrations don't pressure their officers to write tickets to "curb accidents." The results of not giving into these pressures are bad performance reviews. The pressure is not just reserved for the STEP program, but to regular patrol officers who work a beat.

Be mad at the administrations, not the officers. Odds are, if the officers aren't on a motorcycle, they would rather be doing anything else than writing you a ticket.

This is right on. Any police chief will tell you that if he has two patrol officers and one averages writing 10-20 tickets a day, and the other is writing 4 or 5, then one is not doing his job. Gangrene's original post bears this out. A cop can go to a specific place where speeders are rampant, and cherry pick tickets all day if he *wanted* to. The facts are that the cops know where speeding occurs frequently. When it gets out of control, or there are complaints, that means that they are not doing the job there and need to step up patrols. And that's what they do. Then they move on to another area, and it happens all over again eventually, because people are going to continue to speed.

But, some will just keep blaming Barney Fife hiding behind the billboard on his "cycle", and his nefarious money-making schemes for Mayberry RFD. It's easier than just slowing your ass down.

Edited February 15, 2011 by LongJim

[KRAM1]

Just be happy it was Carrollton rather than Denton. I picked up a ticket doing 45 on 6-lane Beltline Road on a Sunday morning about 9AM. No one else on the road ...six lanes mind you with a 35mph limit....and, YES, I was doing 45...no complaints...except me and the Carrollton Cop. I was about 1/2 mile from I-35. When i went down to pay the fine...then sign up for on-line driver's training...the ticket/amount I paid was less than 1/2 what I paid for the same thing in Denton just the year before. Yes, I am a slow learner, but a speedy driver at times. I think I am a 4-5 time graduate of the driver's training course.

When turning onto I-35 from Beltline I saw that Carrollton Cop sitting exactly where you said you saw him...I was doing over 40 (thought the speed was 45...like you), but turns out it is 35mph. Lucky for me he was preoccupied with someone else.

Those limits in those areas seem much too slow to me and seem to be there for one reason...pick up a few tickets and help fund the City of Carrollton. BUT, I am in 100% agreement with those who said...easy fix...just don't speed. One is, in fact, in 100% control of whether they will get a speeding ticket or not. I have "reformed" a bit...A bit!

Somewhere Brad Olson must be listening!!!!!! Rocket man...Rocket man!!!! Are you listening??????

[MeanGreen61]

This is right on. Any police chief will tell you that if he has two patrol officers and one averages writing 10-20 tickets a day, and the other is writing 4 or 5, then one is not doing his job. Gangrene's original post bears this out. A cop can go to a specific place where speeders are rampant, and cherry pick tickets all day if he *wanted* to. The facts are that the cops know where speeding occurs frequently. When it gets out of control, or there are complaints, that means that they are not doing the job there and need to step up patrols. And that's what they do. Then they move on to another area, and it happens all over again eventually, because people are going to continue to speed.

But, some will just keep blaming Barney Fife hiding behind the billboard on his "cycle", and his nefarious money-making schemes for Mayberry RFD. It's easier than just slowing your ass down.

BINGO !

[mad dog]

Ticket quotas are expressly illegal. A peace officer may not be evaluated on a number or type of traffic citations, nor can they be required to issue a number or type of traffic citations within a certain period. Violating that is grounds for a removal of office or dismissal from their job. Having worked for local governments for years, I can tell you that we are far too busy to be concerned with the cloak and dagger - that stuff sounds great in papers, but it is usually nothing more than a sales driver. Personally, I find people in general much too tired, stupid, or busy to perpetrate grand schemes of conspiracy.

While there are certainly police chiefs (especially in smaller backwoods Texas towns) who may violate that regularly and get away with it, let me assure you that chiefs in the larger cities (particularly here in D/FW) are held to a much higher standard. Officers in the Metrocrest area (Carrollton, Addison, Farmers Branch, and Coppell) are particularly concerned with image and how they are viewed. Councils at three of the four cities have expressed concern within the last three years that an image of a "speed trap city" is something they'd rather avoid. Speed traps decrease speeding over time, but they also reduce traffic. Lower traffic counts kill business, and their tax payments are of far more gravity to area local governments than traffic fines.

Citations issued by motorcycle officers, as with the ones you observed, are usually just enough to cover the cost of hiring them. So, in the case you mentioned, it is more a a zero-sum game in terms of revenue. The main thrust of having these officers out, as another poster expressed, is to reduce speed based on the reservations of either the council, the community, or both.

If you would agree that those who use services ought to be liable for paying for them, then I'm sure you'd also find the McKinney accident fee to be good policy. Otherwise, the cost of paying for emergency and accident-related services are borne by the those who live in the city on behalf of those who do not. In other words, if I am a McKinney citizen, my property tax and any sales tax I generate from shopping locally go towards paying the salary and program costs of accident-related services; I have in essence "paid my dues." If I live in Arlington, but get in an accident in McKinney, then I am getting the same service without paying for it. That is all the fee is intended to be - making sure those who use a service actually pay for it.

[ColoradoEagle]

If you would agree that those who use services ought to be liable for paying for them, then I'm sure you'd also find the McKinney accident fee to be good policy. Otherwise, the cost of paying for emergency and accident-related services are borne by the those who live in the city on behalf of those who do not. In other words, if I am a McKinney citizen, my property tax and any sales tax I generate from shopping locally go towards paying the salary and program costs of accident-related services; I have in essence "paid my dues." If I live in Arlington, but get in an accident in McKinney, then I am getting the same service without paying for it. That is all the fee is intended to be - making sure those who use a service actually pay for it.

I definitely don't see hit and runs increasing under that policy. There's absolutely no possibility that people wouldn't stick around to pay an additional $215 on top of the expenses they're already going to incur.

[Army of Dad]

If you would agree that those who use services ought to be liable for paying for them, then I'm sure you'd also find the McKinney accident fee to be good policy. Otherwise, the cost of paying for emergency and accident-related services are borne by the those who live in the city on behalf of those who do not. In other words, if I am a McKinney citizen, my property tax and any sales tax I generate from shopping locally go towards paying the salary and program costs of accident-related services; I have in essence "paid my dues." If I live in Arlington, but get in an accident in McKinney, then I am getting the same service without paying for it. That is all the fee is intended to be - making sure those who use a service actually pay for it.

First of all, you would not be a citizen of McKinney as cities in our country do not confer citizenship upon their residents. Similarly, I absolutely hate it when cops refer to non-cops as civilians. All serving police officers are civilians. Even those that are a part of the reserves or National Guard are civilians when not on duty with the military.

As far as the service without paying for it you may be partially right, but if I am shopping at McKinney businesses then I am paying sales tax in that city and at least in part paying for the service(s) I would receive. That contribution would be much smaller than if I were a resident in McKinney of course, but I am sure the business community in McKinney can't survive by selling only to McKinney residents.

[MeanGreen61]

First of all, you would not be a citizen of McKinney as cities in our country do not confer citizenship upon their residents. Similarly, I absolutely hate it when cops refer to non-cops as civilians. All serving police officers are civilians. Even those that are a part of the reserves or National Guard are civilians when not on duty with the military.

As far as the service without paying for it you may be partially right, but if I am shopping at McKinney businesses then I am paying sales tax in that city and at least in part paying for the service(s) I would receive. That contribution would be much smaller than if I were a resident in McKinney of course, but I am sure the business community in McKinney can't survive by selling only to McKinney residents.

Police are a semi-military organization and have always referred to non-officers as "civilians" or "citizens". Even when off duty, officers normally carry their badge and weapon. Ironically certain organized crime groups also have referred to the general public as "civilians".

Edited February 15, 2011 by MeanGreen61

[Army of Dad]

Police are a semi-military organization and have always referred to non-officers as "civilians" or "citizens". Even when off duty, officers normally carry their badge and weapon. Ironically certain organized crime groups also have referred to the general public as "civilians".

How does that make them a member of the armed forces and not civilian? They are not military (though the we could debate whether the current trend towards paramilitary style policing is a good thing) they remain decidedly civilian or they would not be allowed to operate as they currently do under the Constitution.

[MeanGreen61]

How does that make them a member of the armed forces and not civilian? They are not military (though the we could debate whether the current trend towards paramilitary style policing is a good thing) they remain decidedly civilian or they would not be allowed to operate as they currently do under the Constitution.

T

You are just playing a game of semantics. Think what you will, but there is really no debate about it. The police are now and have always been considered as a semi-military type organization. Ranking structure, chain of command, etc. If you have a problem with them calling non-police officers civilians, then so be it. Your opinion still won't change a thing.

Edited February 15, 2011 by MeanGreen61

[Army of Dad]

T

You are just playing a game of semantics. Think what you will, but there is really no debate about it. The police are now and have always been considered as a semi-military type organization. Ranking structure, chain of command, etc. If you have a problem with them calling non-police officers civilians, then so be it. Your opinion still won't change a thing.

Not semantics, but basic civics. Sorry you are unable to grasp basic concepts like this. I really am.

BTW, they have not always been semi-military, certainly not if you go back to the first shire reeves (where the word sherriff comes from).

[TheTastyGreek]

Did I ever tell you guys about the time in middle school when a Cub Scout troop staged a coup of the student government?

Hideously repressive regime. Bloody mess, many lives lost.

But while they ran things... Unlimited, delicious popcorn for everyone. And every bird that flew within 200 yards of the feeder was precisely identified and documented.

I guess what I'm saying is... When a semi-militaristic organization starts using (some may say "abusing") their power, some people suffer. But maybe it ends up being an overall better world for society as a whole?

Personally, I don't like neckerchiefs. But you take the good with the bad, I suppose.

[MeanGreen61]

Not semantics, but basic civics. Sorry you are unable to grasp basic concepts like this. I really am.

BTW, they have not always been semi-military, certainly not if you go back to the first shire reeves (where the word sherriff comes from).

My last on the subject

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/adjunctprofs/2008/11/a-police-force.html

The Appellate Division said that "A police force is a quasi-military organization demanding strict discipline" and "great leeway” must be accorded to “determinations concerning the appropriate punishment, for it is the [Chief of Police] . . . who is accountable to the public for the integrity of the Department."

[Army of Dad]

My last on the subject

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/adjunctprofs/2008/11/a-police-force.html

The Appellate Division said that "A police force is a quasi-military organization demanding strict discipline" and "great leeway” must be accorded to “determinations concerning the appropriate punishment, for it is the [Chief of Police] . . . who is accountable to the public for the integrity of the Department."

My last on the subject

One can only hope.

[Coffee and TV]

I blame Obama.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

---There are good quarterbacks and bad quaterbacks... same with the police... A relative of mine who worked for a county law enforcement agency near here said he knew some who 'delighted" in giving tickets to people who were not residents and would let locals go for the same or worse "crimes". A friend of my son ( a cop) has pretty much said the same about speeding .. he often ignores it if slightly over limit and driving safely (for more important matters) while others would run them down and issue a ticket. A problem here are so many going through lights turning red. A neighbor was run over while on a motorcycle by one of these.

---I guess you are implying in cold weather they don't want to get out of their car to give a ticket ... unlike in warm weather when they will.

---Sometimes speed limits/traffic signs make zero sense and some are a total surprise. 3-4 years ago they changed an intersection near my house into a four way stop.. Two days later a cop was sitting there writing tickets left and right.... Probably most cars had driven through it for years with no stop sign on their side... Seemed like a bit of a cheap shot to me. One street had about zero traffic from one side (only one house on it before it went to a dead end).

Edited February 15, 2011 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[GreenMachine]

If you would agree that those who use services ought to be liable for paying for them, then I'm sure you'd also find the McKinney accident fee to be good policy. Otherwise, the cost of paying for emergency and accident-related services are borne by the those who live in the city on behalf of those who do not. In other words, if I am a McKinney citizen, my property tax and any sales tax I generate from shopping locally go towards paying the salary and program costs of accident-related services; I have in essence "paid my dues." If I live in Arlington, but get in an accident in McKinney, then I am getting the same service without paying for it. That is all the fee is intended to be - making sure those who use a service actually pay for it.

this could easily be turned political. I agree with the fee, and i especially believe that somebody that is receiving a service should be paying for it.

[GreenMachine]

My last on the subject

http://lawprofessors...lice-force.html

The Appellate Division said that "A police force is a quasi-military organization demanding strict discipline" and "great leeway" must be accorded to "determinations concerning the appropriate punishment, for it is the [Chief of Police] . . . who is accountable to the public for the integrity of the Department."

I was in the military and don't recall anybody (I'm sure there were some individuals) grossly overweight and out of shape. It's sad to see so many heavy set police officers today, guess they better be a good aim with a tazer because they aren't running anybody down on foot.

[yyz28]

I blame Obama.

I blame Bush.