Submitted via IRC for Fnord666
Law enforcement officers tend to frown on citizens interfering with their revenue generation. This has led to a number of First Amendment lawsuits from people arrested for warning others about [check notes] the existence of police officers in the vicinity.
One citizen was told as much when he was arrested for holding up a sign reading "Cops Ahead." One cop kept on script, referring to the man's actions as "interfering with an investigation." It wasn't an investigation. It was a distracted driving sting. The cop actually hauling him to the station was more to the point, telling the man he was arresting him for "interfering with our livelihood." First Amendment violation or felony interference with a business model? Why not both?
A lawsuit was filed in 2018 seeking a declaration that honking a car's horn is protected expression. And, all the way back in 2011, a class action lawsuit was filed over citations and arrests for flashing headlights to warn drivers of unseen officers.
A federal judge has decided -- albeit not very firmly -- that at least one of these actions is protected by the First Amendment. Wisconsin Magistrate Judge Stephen Crocker says flashing your headlights to warn drivers of speed traps is expressive speech -- something cops would be better off not trying to punish. (via Volokh Conspiracy)
(Score: 5, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday May 08 2019, @02:42AM
As NewNic points out, it works. A town in Ohio used to use it. The police car was on the corner about half of the time, it seemed. I guess about 80% or more of the time, the dummy was in the driver's seat. Now and then, there would be real cop at the wheel. But, you couldn't tell until you were pretty close, so if the real cop were there, he already had your speed. A department could have thirty cars, and ten officers, and still spread themselves out pretty effectively if they use the idea.
Of course, calling for backup might be confusing. Especially if one of the dummies responded!