Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday April 14 2014, @09:56PM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the rules-are-made-to-be-broken dept.

Alex Mayyasi writes that a close look at the cars outside Silicon Valley's venture capital firms reveals that the cars share a mysterious detail: they nearly all have a custom license plate frame that reads, "Member. 11-99 Foundation" which is the charitable organization that supports California Highway Patrol officers and their families in times of crisis. Donors receive one license plate as part of a $2,500 "Classic" level donation, or two as part of a bronze, silver, or gold level donation of $5,000, $10,000, or $25,000. Rumor has it, according to Mayyasi, that the license plate frames come with a lucrative return on investment. As one member of a Mercedes-Benz owners community wrote online back in 2002: "I have the ultimate speeding ticket solution. I paid $1800 for a lifetime membership into the 11-99 foundation. My only goal was to get the infamous 'get out of jail' free license plate frame."

The 11-99 Foundation has sold license plate frames for most of its 32 year existence, and drivers have been aware of the potential benefits since at least the late 1990s. But attention to the issue in 2006-2008 led the foundation to stop giving out the frames. An article in the LA Times asked "Can Drivers Buy CHP Leniency?" and began by describing a young man zipping around traffic including a police cruiser and telling the Times that he believed his 11-99 frames kept him from receiving a ticket. But the decision was almost irrelevant to another thriving market: the production and sale of fake 11-99 license plate frames. But wait the CHP 11-99 Foundation also gives out membership cards to big donors. "Unless you have the I.D. in hand when (not if) I stop you," says one cop, "no love will be shown."

[Editor's Note: I would also like to draw attention to a transport story that came out today.]

The BBC reports:

A rail union has claimed a hedge fund manager was able to "buy silence" after he repaid £42,550 in unpaid fares to Southeastern - but remained anonymous and avoided court action.

On Twitter, blogger Martin Shovel wrote: "Biggest rail fare dodger in history avoids prosecution because he's rich enough to pay back what he owed #OneLaw"

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Monday April 14 2014, @10:10PM

    by edIII (791) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 14 2014, @10:10PM (#31535)

    It's these little kind of corruptions of justice (It's the cops fault) that make people do anything to be rich. I'm sure this is just the tip of the iceberg.

    Really is the get-out-of-jail-free card.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    • (Score: 5, Informative) by bucc5062 on Monday April 14 2014, @10:47PM

      by bucc5062 (699) on Monday April 14 2014, @10:47PM (#31550)

      This story is disturbing on multiple levels. The idea of cops giving preferential treatment, the arrogance of some rich people, the stupidity of other rich people, and the naivete of the foundation (or their complacency.

      The Police

      If I were a decent, honest cop I would be pretty upset over an article and issue like this for it undermines my authority. Most people already understand that speeding tickets are not about safety, but filling the coffers of the municipality. As a cop I took an oath to protect and serve, I don't think it means except when someone has a special pass. A driver speeds in a BMW with member frame, a driver speeds in a 13 yo Nissan Maxima without and one gets a pass simply because s/he donated to a fund...safety my ass and thus society as a whole sees the police as a joke or a pawn of the rich. Neither is good.

      Rich People

      FFS, they need a plate to get out of jail/ticket? The arrogance is understandable, most are egomaniacs, but the stupidity...2500/5000 to get out of a 200 ticket is just bad thinking. Makes you wonder how they are successful, then you at the other dimbulbs that try to get on the gravy train with fake frames and say "yep, they'z is dumb....wez is dumber". The end of the article made a good point which would be a nice follow up. If the frame was traded for a coat, would McScrooge take the deal? Would love to see that followup.

      The Foundation

      You bring something back that has been a controversy at times in the past and then say "What's the problem?" The problem is you are stupid or greedy. Drop the frame. Just remove it from the gift list and see how many contribute. If numbers drop then yes, people were taking advantage of your "goodness" and shame on them. You want to be connected with that kind of crowd? Seems so. We cannot play nice which is why we have to have rules, but it seems rules only apply to one side of the island.

      Stories like this just make me sad for what the United States has become, a collection of greedy, get mine screw yours, let me kick you while you are down people. This country is a shell of what it was and has lost the potential to be something great. We tipped, we are sliding, not climbing and soon we will tear ourselves apart.

      --
      The more things change, the more they look the same
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @03:09AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @03:09AM (#31643)

        but the stupidity...2500/5000 to get out of a 200 ticket is just bad thinking. Makes you wonder how they are successful,

        Stupid? How long does a plate last and how much time and DMV/demerit points (and suspended/revoked licenses) would they save during that time assuming they will speed very often?

    • (Score: 2, Interesting) by rancid on Monday April 14 2014, @10:50PM

      by rancid (4090) <reversethis-{ten.rotliam} {ta} {izbas}> on Monday April 14 2014, @10:50PM (#31551)

      No, this is a get out of jail free card: Law Enforcement Courtesy Card [leoprocards.com]

      Or slap a thin blue line sticker [wikipedia.org] on your whip.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by mhajicek on Monday April 14 2014, @11:16PM

      by mhajicek (51) on Monday April 14 2014, @11:16PM (#31560)

      I have an issue with financial punishments such as the fines for speeding tickets. They punish the poor disproportionately to an extreme.

      • (Score: 1) by frojack on Monday April 14 2014, @11:41PM

        by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 14 2014, @11:41PM (#31569) Journal

        Really? You're going with that?
        Maybe the price of a dozen eggs should be on a sliding scale too?

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
        • (Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Monday April 14 2014, @11:58PM

          by sjames (2882) on Monday April 14 2014, @11:58PM (#31576) Journal

          Unlike eggs, a fine is supposed to be a deterrence/punishment. As such, it most certainly acts more harshly against people with less money. It can vary anywhere from meaning you have to choose between rent and food on the low end to a minor cost of doing business at the high end (that is, not a deterrence at all).

          If it really is a deterrence, then it should scale with your means.

          • (Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:20AM

            by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:20AM (#31580) Journal

            Nonsense.

            People should be treated equally for equal offenses.
            10mph over the limit by a rich person is the same offense as 10mph over the limit by a poor person.
            Fines represents the cost to society as a whole for bad behavior. It costs no more for a rich person to drive too fast than a poor person.

            Where did you get the cockamamie idea that equality of outcome is what society guarantees?

            --
            No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
            • (Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:50AM

              by sjames (2882) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:50AM (#31617) Journal

              No, fines are by definition punitive/deterrent in nature. You're thinking of reparations which has nothing to do with a fine.

            • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:46AM

              by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:46AM (#31634) Homepage

              While I agree in principle, the way these fines are used does disproportionately penalize those least able to pay. A speeding ticket might be, say, $200... but in some court systems that's not quite how it works. It's the ticket, plus various costs and fees which at least in Los Angeles County, can amount to up to 8 times the value of the ticket. And then you're dinged points on your license, which makes your insurance go up. And the end result is more people taking the risk of driving without insurance, because someone making $1500/month can't afford $400/mo. for insurance.

              No, I don't think justice should be applied differently according to your means... but in our zeal to show how tough we are on such offenses, usually by increasing the fines, the system of financial punishment has gone beyond the means of average people.

            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @11:46AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @11:46AM (#31745)

              10mph over the limit by a rich person is the same offense as 10mph over the limit by a poor person.

              So let's give them the same fine; 10% of their monthly income.

          • (Score: 4, Interesting) by edIII on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:34AM

            by edIII (791) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:34AM (#31584)

            Which is why it should not be monetary. A rich man may have a million dollars, but he has 24 hours just like everyone else does.

            You can be forced to pay with that equality too. Doesn't matter who you are, you owe your hours. The sheer number of things the state could tell you to do that are harmless and not controversial. Like cleaning streets of debris, light maintenance of city property like painting, and possibly gardening.

            Nothing extreme, and the punishment can fit your means. If you flat out can't do something outside, I'm sure there are reasonable things that can be done inside that amount to bullshit grunt work.

            I'll bet practically anything you would see rich people put on the brakes just as fast as you would see poor people. Poor people don't have the time to waste, and rich people have so much time to waste and luxuries to be enjoyed.

            You have to be sentenced to community service. Most people don't do it willingly for a reason.

            People would be on there best behavior all around and people with hours would deserve them.

            --
            Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:03AM

              by sjames (2882) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:03AM (#31622) Journal

              That makes a lot of sense. Make the activity completely useless though to remove perverse incentives from the picture.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @03:17AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @03:17AM (#31648)
                I'd rather the activity be more social and useful - feeding the poor, taking care of the old (changing adult diapers ain't fun) etc. They might learn more from that.
                • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:13AM

                  by sjames (2882) on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:13AM (#32175) Journal

                  I would rather that in one sense, but the problem is then local governments will use traffic tickets as a conscription system in lieu of hiring enough people, much as they now use tickets as a form of taxation.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @03:11AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @03:11AM (#31645)

        Not everywhere:
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1759791.stm [bbc.co.uk]

        Anssi Vanjoki, 44, has been ordered to pay a fine of 116,000 euros ($103,600) after being caught breaking the speed limit on his Harley Davidson motorbike in the capital, Helsinki, in October last year.

        In Finland, traffic fines are proportionate to the latest available data on an offender's income.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by gallondr00nk on Monday April 14 2014, @10:12PM

    by gallondr00nk (392) on Monday April 14 2014, @10:12PM (#31537)

    With things like this, when you draw enough publicity to it the unspoken benefits often quickly erode.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Nerdfest on Monday April 14 2014, @10:15PM

      by Nerdfest (80) on Monday April 14 2014, @10:15PM (#31539)

      ... or cheap copies to be made. That's what will really end it.

      • (Score: 4, Interesting) by bob_super on Monday April 14 2014, @10:22PM

        by bob_super (1357) on Monday April 14 2014, @10:22PM (#31542)

        Are the cops going to have to verify your corruption membership card as they check your license?

        What's the penalty for impersonating someone corrupting the cops?

        • (Score: 2) by frojack on Monday April 14 2014, @11:43PM

          by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 14 2014, @11:43PM (#31570) Journal

          That's just it. There is no law against faking up a license plate frame or a membership card except possible copyright violation, which is a civil matter. Which is why fake frames are already readily available.

          --
          No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by davester666 on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:44AM

            by davester666 (155) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:44AM (#31614)

            Except the cops WILL implement a way to validate these things if people start forging them, so that when you whip out your fake card, suddenly you get the ticket AND the cop will find a reason that your vehicle will need to be searched at the impound lot. And you will need to be arrested, fingerprinted, and released the next day with charges dropped...

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Monday April 14 2014, @10:27PM

    by bob_super (1357) on Monday April 14 2014, @10:27PM (#31544)

    Ok, at some point we need to have a debate about having the same stories as that other place, but days and days later...

    I know it's hard to get original content, and I'm guilty of only 3 submissions so far. But until the other place become unbearable, editors should keep in mind how long ago most of us already discussed a topic there, and whether it is fully worthy of showing up here, late, and with mainly the same audience.

    What do others think?

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by tibman on Monday April 14 2014, @10:40PM

      by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 14 2014, @10:40PM (#31546)

      I completely abandoned slashdot so it's fine with me : ) Though if i'm in the minority i would still accept a rule that prevents article copying from any number of news sites. I know there has been plenty of complaints about TFS linking to a blog that links to the actual article. So a rule about only linking to original content would be fine for me. As far as the copying goes i think that is largely a race condition. Did both sites receive the submission at the same time? If slashdot publishes first does that mean SN cannot publish the submission at all? No idea what would make a good rule there.

      --
      SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
      • (Score: 2) by No.Limit on Monday April 14 2014, @11:34PM

        by No.Limit (1965) on Monday April 14 2014, @11:34PM (#31568)

        I completely abandoned slashdot so it's fine with me : )

        Same here.

        Since both sites target a very similar audience, you can't really avoid it.

        Besides, I don't even understand why you would still go to the other site. That way you're still supporting them.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @10:34AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @10:34AM (#31731)

          Chicken and egg. Not enough comments/stories/etc yet. When they eventually force the beta for everyone for real some of that problem might get solved though :)

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:29PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:29PM (#31757)

        Slashdot is unreadable on my mobile these days, so I dont mind.

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14 2014, @11:10PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14 2014, @11:10PM (#31557)

      Papas Fritas is, judging by the website he links to, the productive Hugh Pickins, which would explain the double posting. Personally, I don't mind the fact that he double-posts; I only visit here, now, so I only see it once.

      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:08AM

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:08AM (#31624) Homepage

        Thanks for the tip, Hugh.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @10:52AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @10:52AM (#31734)

          You may suspect that I'm Hugh, but I _know_ you're a NSA plant, so so there.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Kymation on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:54AM

      by Kymation (1047) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:54AM (#31594)

      Why do you expect that the two sites will have completely different content? If you read two newspapers, do you expect them to have completely different stories?

      If you really can't stand duplication, just read one site. I recommend this one.

    • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:48AM

      by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:48AM (#31635) Homepage

      Actually, lately I'm seeing more of the same stuff here first.

      And I don't really care if stories get duplicated here and there... it's the comments that are interesting, and they're certainly not the same from one site to the other, even with a lot of the same people commenting.

      • (Score: 2) by rts008 on Tuesday April 15 2014, @05:42PM

        by rts008 (3001) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @05:42PM (#31892)

        Good point about the commenting not being the same.

        I have noticed the comments 'over there' have markedly dropped in 'quality'. It's more like reddit or 4chan, with all the wingnuts in charge.

        I gave up on /. because of this.

        So, to be honest about it, I could not care less about the same articles being submitted here, but I do wish SN would institute a rule that submitted article links go to the source, and not be used to increase blog views.

        Aside from the shady nature of that practice, I truly despise clicking on a submitted link only to find that I have to search the blog for links to the source, and hoping the source links actually exist on the blog(sometimes they do not).

        • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Tuesday April 15 2014, @11:46PM

          by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @11:46PM (#32073) Homepage

          Not like we don't have wingnuts here (if only due to the user overlap) but the overall tone is different. And there seems to be more outright babble over yonder.

          Good thought on the article links. I too become annoyed when it's just some damned blog pulling hits. Granted sometimes a blog is THE source, but if the blog is discussing something with links of its own... okay, give us the original links and a synopsis of the blog, if need be. But don't TRICK us into going there. (Assuming we're some n00bs that still RTFA :D

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @07:50AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @07:50AM (#31700)

      Slashdot is over. RIP

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Drew617 on Monday April 14 2014, @10:42PM

    by Drew617 (1876) on Monday April 14 2014, @10:42PM (#31547)

    I don't like the practice but I think "ultimate corruption of justice" is maybe extreme.

    As far as I understand it, in most places it's within an officer's discretion to write a ticket, warn you, do nothing, whatever. Certain things - addressing the cop respectfully, not whining, not driving like an idiot (speed and recklessness are different things), your car not being a safety hazard - will affect the cop's opinion of you and will factor into the decision he or she makes. This is one of things. Maybe shouldn't be, but it's not bribing a judge, either.

    • (Score: 2) by sjames on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:06AM

      by sjames (2882) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:06AM (#31598) Journal

      Anyone can be respectful and not whine. Nobody should drive like an idiot and nobody's car should be a safety hazard. But not everyone has an extra $2500 burning a hole in their pocket.

      That and 'donating' some bux seems to be a lot more reliable.

      • (Score: 1) by Drew617 on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:53AM

        by Drew617 (1876) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:53AM (#31618)

        Can, should, yet some people don't.

        This is not a binary decision between donating $2500 and getting tickets every day. There's a lot of room in between those extremes to avoid or mitigate tickets in the first place, like speeding only at +10, etc.

        I'm not arguing that it's fair, only that it's clearly not the same thing as buying off a judge or slipping that $2500 directly to a cop. It's not directly corrupt, and how do you reasonably correct the problem anyway? Outlaw the local PBA? Outlaw stickers on cars? Require 100% enforcement of all moving violations? Prove that a group of officers systematically DIDN'T ticket people, knowing records don't exist of the drivers they didn't ticket?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @03:24PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 15 2014, @03:24PM (#31836)

          "Outlaw the local PBA? Outlaw stickers on cars?"

          Absolutely! What's unreasonable about outlawing something whose sole purpose is to abet corruption of public servants?

          Hey nice Friends of Meat Inspectors sticker ya got there. Hey is that an SEC Christmas Club emblem on your broker terminal?

        • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:11AM

          by sjames (2882) on Wednesday April 16 2014, @04:11AM (#32173) Journal

          That depends on how surely a nice donation gets you out of the ticket. If it's nearly a sure thing, it *IS* a bribe. Collecting it at arms length through what is effectively a bribe clearinghouse for legal reasons doesn't actually change that.

          Not all bribery transactions involve a lot of throat clearing and winking.

    • (Score: 1) by Leebert on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:10AM

      by Leebert (3511) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:10AM (#31600)

      As far as I understand it, in most places it's within an officer's discretion to write a ticket, warn you, do nothing, whatever.

      I do not pay law enforcement to be a judge or jury. I pay him to observe legal infractions, identify and detain a suspect as necessary, document the incident, and testify.

      LEOs having selective enforcement capabilities leads to all sorts of abuse. It also doesn't bring the home the consequences of bad laws to the average citizen.

      • (Score: 1) by Drew617 on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:25AM

        by Drew617 (1876) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:25AM (#31607)

        I understand your argument, but selective enforcement is reality with or without expensive license plate frames in the equation. It's another discussion entirely. If police were unable to exercise discretion, ticketing at every observed infraction - think every time I've rolled through an EZ pass gate at 18 mph - most of our licenses would be revoked.

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Leebert on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:38AM

          by Leebert (3511) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:38AM (#31610)

          If police were unable to exercise discretion, ticketing at every observed infraction - think every time I've rolled through an EZ pass gate at 18 mph - most of our licenses would be revoked.

          No doubt; I recognize the practical impossibility of what I purportedly support (and I admit that it's somewhat hyperbolic.)

          However, if everyone got a ticket, guaranteed, for rolling through an EZPass gate at 18 MPH, one of two things will happen:

          - The speed limit will be changed to something more sane, or
          - People will go the speed limit.

          Either of those is a much more highly desirable outcome than "let the cop decide if he likes this white guy or wants to search the car of this black guy."

          The funny thing is, I'm rabidly anti photo enforcement. Only because of the fact that they can't issue a ticket, on the spot, to a driver. The assumption that I'm guilty because it's my car is just the antithesis of due process. HOWEVER, if we could fix that issue, I'd be all behind them. They issue tickets without any bias. Cops get 'em, politicians get 'em. THAT is the way we should be enforcing laws.

          Yeah, I know, if wishes were horses I'd have all the glue I could ever need.

          • (Score: 1) by Drew617 on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:08AM

            by Drew617 (1876) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @02:08AM (#31625)

            All good points, and I agree absolutely re: photo enforcement. I don't understand how that hasn't generated more outrage.

            Part of the reason that I appreciate the policeman's discretion is that it allows for some of my own. Where I drive, the limits often seem too low, though I'm not a highway engineer. Thing is, even if they were all raised, the speed limits and traffic rules would still be arbitrary to a degree. In dense areas especially - thinking of Boston because it's where I drive these days - safe speed (as determined by me) varies greatly depending on wildly fluctuating traffic conditions, weather, time of day, visibility, which stretch of a road I'm on when the DOT applied a single standard to the whole thing.

            As it is, the system lets make my own determinations (within a sane variance, say +25% at most) and be left alone for it. The system assumes we have some intelligence.

            • (Score: 1) by DrMag on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:30PM

              by DrMag (1860) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @12:30PM (#31758)

              Part of me wants to agree about policeman's discretion, but the side effects of such a thing existing cause far more problems than you might think. In Montana, for quite a while, we had a literal speed limit of "Reasonable and Prudent". It was wonderful. It got struck down. Why? Out-of-staters would contest their violations in court, despite there being nothing reasonable nor prudent about driving 95 mph at night during a snow storm. A law has no value if it can't be (or isn't) enforced clearly and specifically. So set a hard limit--you'll get the ticket if you're 25% over--but at that point, why not just set the speed limit to a more reasonable value, and then enforce it?

              Laws need to apply to everyone equally. I can't tell you how many times in the DC area I'm tailgated by a cop who then swings past me at a high speed; when I glance over to be sure there's enough clearance, I often see that they're chatting on their cell phone. When I look back at my dash, I'm usually going 5-10 mph over the speed limit already. How can anyone take a law seriously when 1) it's not enforced, and 2) the "enforcers" themselves have no regard for it?

      • (Score: 1) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:31AM

        by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:31AM (#31608)

        "As far as I understand it, in most places it's within an officer's discretion to write a ticket, warn you, do nothing, whatever."

        "I do not pay law enforcement to be a judge or jury. I pay him to observe legal infractions, identify and detain a suspect as necessary, document the incident, and testify.

        LEOs having selective enforcement capabilities leads to all sorts of abuse. It also doesn't bring the home the consequences of bad laws to the average citizen."

        Well, yes and no. The law might be considered an absolute but justice should rarely be so. A good officer, and there are some, should be capable of making a determination as to whether escalation of the justice system's involvement in an incident is warranted. I'm not going to make a list of cases where it is correct to do so and where it is not, but I will point out that a lack of discrimination (the proper kind) or an inability to apply it because of legal restraints leads to things like three strikes laws or zero tolerance policies, and you don't have to be a long time reader of this site or its predecessor to know how wrong that can be.

        • (Score: 1) by Leebert on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:50AM

          by Leebert (3511) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:50AM (#31616)

          A good officer, and there are some, should be capable of making a determination as to whether escalation of the justice system's involvement in an incident is warranted.

          Fair enough; and as I noted elsewhere I was being somewhat hyperbolic in my reply. The big thing is that I'm talking largely in the context of traffic enforcement.

    • (Score: 1) by broggyr on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:33PM

      by broggyr (3589) <{broggyr} {at} {gmail.com}> on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:33PM (#31783)

      A bit hyperbolic, no?

      As long as it's not hypergolic.

      --
      Taking things out of context since 1972.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by e_armadillo on Monday April 14 2014, @10:45PM

    by e_armadillo (3695) on Monday April 14 2014, @10:45PM (#31549)

    But I was about to post a similar comment, I bailed on /. and haven't looked back, so cross site dupes mean nothing to me.

    --
    "How are we gonna get out of here?" ... "We'll dig our way out!" ... "No, no, dig UP stupid!"
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14 2014, @11:02PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 14 2014, @11:02PM (#31554)

    True or not, the suspicion has long been that any advertisement of donation to a police charitable society 'buys' leniency. In my jurisdiction, for example, the police association will give you a sticker if you donate to their charity, and the assumption has been that that buys you the good graces of a cop should you ever encounter one.

    It was said that Caesar's wife must be above suspicion. The same is true of police. Their registered charities shouldn't be allowed to distribute insignia that identifies donors.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by tomp on Monday April 14 2014, @11:28PM

    by tomp (996) on Monday April 14 2014, @11:28PM (#31567)

    > most of us already discussed a topic there

    Are you sure about that? I think most of us have abandoned Dice's website in favor of other options. It might be just a vocal few that still happy to be their audience.

    • (Score: 2) by Kilo110 on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:41AM

      by Kilo110 (2853) on Tuesday April 15 2014, @01:41AM (#31611)

      yes, I haven't been back since the slashcott started