[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by UncleWede

It's late at night. You are headed west thru ag fields, 2 lane road. You are 1/2 mile from the next intersection, light-controlled. You see a single vehicle eastbound, enter the protected left turn pocket that normally does change once a car enters and no traffic oncoming. The eastbound vehicle proceeds to make the left turn while you still observe the westbound traffic has a green light.

Once you reach the intersection, do you A) continue west B) turn north and pull me.. er ah my friend over?

Enjoy your turn. I'm hunting for donuts. Lol!

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by pennsiveguy

One of the most egregious examples of this ill-informed armchair quarterbacking was a case near me where several units responded to a call of a guy acting erratically and brandishing a sword. Four or five cops had their pistols on him, in a small bedroom, talking with him and trying to de-escalate. He lunged at one of the cops with the sword raised and they all fired, as expected. They guy went down and died on the scene.

The news media expressed shock and outrage that all the cops fired at him, and that he was hit so many times. In addition to being sensational and disrespectful, it demonstrates a profound and willful ignorance of what cops are up against on every shift, and how few options they have in some situations. Everyone with any sense was appalled at how the media handled this, but the media have still not learned to show restraint and patience when it comes to covering use-of-force stories. Even in the era of body cams, important context can be missing if that's all that's taken into account in analyzing an incident.

Very well articulated.

[pennsiveguy]

Originally Posted by jamesinaz

I'm there. I recognize that not all use of force is "pretty". And if it is justified someone could get injured seriously. Or if forced to escalate someone might get dead. I withhold judgement both ways until the evidence is completely in.

I remember the Rodney King incident. The media should be sued into non-existence for their role in the riots and deaths that happened when they showed the short clip of what happened. Did Rodney get a few licks he shouldn't have? Yes. Should some of the cops there have been given demotion and/or remedial training? Yes. But Rodney was clearly a scary dude high on something and brought much of it on himself. He was not an innocent motorist pulled over "driving while black". My guess is had he not resisted he would not have been hit at all. We will never know.

On the flip side if an officer is clearly shown to use inappropriate force I want that SOB in prison for a long time. We accord police a level of power in order to allow them to protect us. One abusing that power needs to be handled harshly. But until it is clear the cop was in the wrong I am inclined to believe the cop over the perp.

Clearly at least some in the media get a sick sense of satisfaction by stirring up controversy, even if it results in violence and destruction. Or maybe especially when that happens. I suppose it gives them a sense of power. They then hide behind the "reporter/observer" ruse, to shrug off responsibility for the consequences of their work. Deplorable.

[mahalom3]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Enjoy your turn. I'm hunting for donuts. Lol!

Exactly!! Except for the donut part lol!

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by mahalom3

Exactly!! Except for the donut part lol!

I wanted to say, "Hunting for gummy bears and various flavors of Mountain Dew," but it didn't fit the stereotype. Lol!

[mahalom3]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

I wanted to say, "Hunting for gummy bears and various flavors of Mountain Dew," but it didn't fit the stereotype. Lol!

[F30lolz]

When it comes to stolen auto related parts (wheels/tires/spoilers), how low of a priority are they for you? Do you actually take the time to view any evidence/footage and if it’s legitimate, try to apprehend/find the perp(s)?

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by F30lolz

When it comes to stolen auto related parts (wheels/tires/spoilers), how low of a priority are they for you? Do you actually take the time to view any evidence/footage and if it's legitimate, try to apprehend/find the perp(s)?

We do, IF there's video and other identifiable information available. Absent any information to follow up on, no real investigation is done.

[mahalom3]

Originally Posted by F30lolz

When it comes to stolen auto related parts (wheels/tires/spoilers), how low of a priority are they for you? Do you actually take the time to view any evidence/footage and if it’s legitimate, try to apprehend/find the perp(s)?

Well it all depends, here in SoCal property crime in progress then it would be a priority 2A 10852 VC (Tampering or removing parts from a vehicle etc). I would respond then do a thorough investigation by doing an area check, ask if the bird (Helicopter) is available, attempt to locate any suspect or suspects by having other units set up a perimeter, interview the reporting party or the victim and any witness or witnesses, video surveillance if available. Hope to get a descriptions of the suspects and their DOT. Have ID tech come out to dust for prints and take photographs. Find the suspects, take them to jail. Before you even finish writing your report, they'll be out jail...
If its a past property crime then it would be a priority 3 or maybe even 4A meaning if the crime happened last night and you called to report it the next day. Do the same process without using the bird.

[Samurai of 2day]

Originally Posted by mahalom3

Well it all depends, here in SoCal property crime in progress then it would be a priority 2A 10852 VC (Tampering or removing parts from a vehicle etc). I would respond then do a thorough investigation by doing an area check, ask if the bird (Helicopter) is available, attempt to locate any suspect or suspects by having other units set up a perimeter, interview the reporting party or the victim and any witness or witnesses, video surveillance if available. Hope to get a descriptions of the suspects and their DOT. Have ID tech come out to dust for prints and take photographs. Find the suspects, take them to jail. Before you even finish writing your report, they'll be out jail...
If its a past property crime then it would be a priority 3 or maybe even 4A meaning if the crime happened last night and you called to report it the next day. Do the same process without using the bird.

Seems pretty thorough!

In NY, all you get is a Police report for stolen property to run through your insurance. Nothing further

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by mahalom3

Well it all depends, here in SoCal property crime in progress then it would be a priority 2A 10852 VC (Tampering or removing parts from a vehicle etc). I would respond then do a thorough investigation by doing an area check, ask if the bird (Helicopter) is available, attempt to locate any suspect or suspects by having other units set up a perimeter, interview the reporting party or the victim and any witness or witnesses, video surveillance if available. Hope to get a descriptions of the suspects and their DOT. Have ID tech come out to dust for prints and take photographs. Find the suspects, take them to jail. Before you even finish writing your report, they'll be out jail...
If its a past property crime then it would be a priority 3 or maybe even 4A meaning if the crime happened last night and you called to report it the next day. Do the same process without using the bird.

....all for them to be cited out and released the next day. Damn California!

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Samurai of 2day

Seems pretty thorough!

In NY, all you get is a Police report for stolen property to run through your insurance. Nothing further

If it's a crime that already occurred, that's basically all that my department does as well. We'll respond and take a 484 P.C./487 P.C. report if the informant wants one. A crime in progress would be handled how mahalom3 outlined.

[UncleWede]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Enjoy your turn. I'm hunting for donuts. Lol!

On a deserted ag road?


Umm, you're doing it wrong

[pennsiveguy]

Originally Posted by mahalom3

Well it all depends, here in SoCal property crime in progress then it would be a priority 2A 10852 VC (Tampering or removing parts from a vehicle etc). I would respond then do a thorough investigation by doing an area check, ask if the bird (Helicopter) is available, attempt to locate any suspect or suspects by having other units set up a perimeter, interview the reporting party or the victim and any witness or witnesses, video surveillance if available. Hope to get a descriptions of the suspects and their DOT. Have ID tech come out to dust for prints and take photographs. Find the suspects, take them to jail. Before you even finish writing your report, they'll be out jail...
If its a past property crime then it would be a priority 3 or maybe even 4A meaning if the crime happened last night and you called to report it the next day. Do the same process without using the bird.

Fingerprints and helicopters for stolen car parts? Seriously? I've never heard of a department doing prints or DNA or any other lab work except in felony crimes against persons.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by pennsiveguy

Fingerprints and helicopters for stolen car parts? Seriously? I've never heard of a department doing prints or DNA or any other lab work except in felony crimes against persons.

They are talking about California, where you can call it in as a person in possession of aftermarket automobile parts without a CARB sticker...which is punishable by the death penalty.....

[F30lolz]

On my way to Boston back in 2011 from NY picking up my new to me e39 M5, I was driving my friends e46 ZHP maybe doing 15 over the limit in the middle lane on a three (3) lane highway. Over the hill we see numerous troopers on the shoulder with a few cars pulled over. A trooper was standing near the shoulder and we both made eye contact. He points over to me to pull over but I just kept going thinking to myself oh shit lol. There was traffic behind me but I didn’t see them chase me down.

Thinking was he bluffing? Even though they didn’t come out and get me, was he hoping I would have pulled over in ‘good faith’?

[UncleWede]

Originally Posted by F30lolz

was he hoping I would have pulled over in ‘good faith’?

I did that once. I was taking the shortcut across campus at UCSB, it was supposed to be for staff running carts to/from dining commons. Two officers, in shorts, on bikes, and I pulled over. Not ticket was written.

[Samurai of 2day]

Originally Posted by UncleWede

I did that once. I was taking the shortcut across campus at UCSB, it was supposed to be for staff running carts to/from dining commons. Two officers, in shorts, on bikes, and I pulled over. Not ticket was written.

Yeah, to this point, most Leo's, Military Service Members and other first responders are people just like everyone else.

If you just show a little mutual respect and carry yourself with honesty and dignity, you might be pleasantly surprised on the outcome of that short interaction.

I will try to post a pic later, but I remember a long time ago I was on a motorcycle run with about 8-10 guys from various military branch services. Not a large group by most standards.

Since the group was made up of random dudes who decided to meet up after bumping into each other on the shared installation over the course of a few months, the run was very tame and not aggressive by any means.

Got lit up by a State Trooper and everyone one of us pulled over. The cop was noticeably appreciative of the fact that we didn't run, so he let all of the modified, less than legal bike owners off with a warning and well wishes. It's possible the military IDs helped, but State Troopers are notoriously less forgiving than local Leo's towards military guys.

As for the reason we got pulled over, I remember the cop saying someone in a car we passed a few miles back dialed 911 and called us in for being too loud early in the morning, lol.

[UncleWede]

Originally Posted by Samurai of 2day

Yeah, to this point, most Leo's, Military Service Members and other first responders are people just like everyone else.

If you just show a little mutual respect and carry yourself with honesty and dignity, you might be pleasantly surprised on the outcome of that short interaction.

I will try to post a pic later, but I remember a long time ago I was on a motorcycle run with about 8-10 guys from various military branch services. Not a large group by most standards.

Since the group was made up of random dudes who decided to meet up after bumping into each other on the shared installation over the course of a few months, the run was very tame and not aggressive by any means.

Got lit up by a State Trooper and everyone one of us pulled over. The cop was noticeably appreciative of the fact that we didn't run, so he let all of the modified, less than legal bike owners off with a warning and well wishes. It's possible the military IDs helped, but State Troopers are notoriously less forgiving than local Leo's towards military guys.

As for the reason we got pulled over, I remember the cop saying someone in a car we passed a few miles back dialed 911 and called us in for being too loud early in the morning, lol.

Damn bikers!

Somehow, the baffles fell out of my V&H on my cruiser

[F30lolz]

Sedan_Clan, earlier I asked you about your opinion on traffic doing/going under the speed limit whenever they see a marked police vehicle on the road and IIRC it annoys you which is understandable as it disturbs the flow of traffic.

Today on the highway a cruiser was driving on the left lane doing the speed limit (55) with a line of cars behind (3 lanes). He moves over to the right and merges onto another highway that I’m getting on as well. This highway now has two lanes and he’s on the right lane going the speed limit (70). I’m about 2 cars back so I proceed to pass. On this highway I do 80 and have been clocked by troopers w/o getting pulled over. So as I’m passing this officer (75), he immediately gets into the left lane and turns his lights on.

I pull over, lower my window and he approaches asking for the normal paperwork. This is how it went down:

Officer: can you explain why you would ever pass a marked police vehicle?
Me: ?????? (I’m thinking he must be in a bad mood or bored).
Me: you were doing 70 in a 70 and I passed you going 75.
Officer: so you admit you were speeding.
Me: yes at 5 mph. I know it’s a major offense (sarcasm).
Officer: this constitutes a $250 ticket.
Me: ???? (I just stared and nodded my head up/down)
Officer: do you want a $250 ticket?
Me: no, I’m good.
Officer: take care and please don’t pass marked police vehicles.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by F30lolz

Sedan_Clan, earlier I asked you about your opinion on traffic doing/going under the speed limit whenever they see a marked police vehicle on the road and IIRC it annoys you which is understandable as it disturbs the flow of traffic.

Today on the highway a cruiser was driving on the left lane doing the speed limit (55) with a line of cars behind (3 lanes). He moves over to the right and merges onto another highway that I’m getting on as well. This highway now has two lanes and he’s on the right lane going the speed limit (70). I’m about 2 cars back so I proceed to pass. On this highway I do 80 and have been clocked by troopers w/o getting pulled over. So as I’m passing this officer (75), he immediately gets into the left lane and turns his lights on.

I pull over, lower my window and he approaches asking for the normal paperwork. This is how it went down:

Officer: can you explain why you would ever pass a marked police vehicle?
Me: ?????? (I’m thinking he must be in a bad mood or bored).
Me: you were doing 70 in a 70 and I passed you going 75.
Officer: so you admit you were speeding.
Me: yes at 5 mph. I know it’s a major offense (sarcasm).
Officer: this constitutes a $250 ticket.
Me: ???? (I just stared and nodded my head up/down)
Officer: do you want a $250 ticket?
Me: no, I’m good.
Officer: take care and please don’t pass marked police vehicles.

So I pass marked and unmarked police cars all the time, if they are doing the speed limit which is unusual or even a bit over. I slid by going just a bit faster and never get bothered. Having said that the speed limit is the speed limit so it's a bit of a gamble. My advice is always be polite, always apologize politely and offer up a reasonable explanation and did I mention be polite. He might one of those guys who's a prick, maybe he was told to enforce the speed limit strictly by his hook, and rather than laying charges he was sending a message by doing the speed limit in the outside lane. Who knows.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by F30lolz

Sedan_Clan, earlier I asked you about your opinion on traffic doing/going under the speed limit whenever they see a marked police vehicle on the road and IIRC it annoys you which is understandable as it disturbs the flow of traffic.

Today on the highway a cruiser was driving on the left lane doing the speed limit (55) with a line of cars behind (3 lanes). He moves over to the right and merges onto another highway that I'm getting on as well. This highway now has two lanes and he's on the right lane going the speed limit (70). I'm about 2 cars back so I proceed to pass. On this highway I do 80 and have been clocked by troopers w/o getting pulled over. So as I'm passing this officer (75), he immediately gets into the left lane and turns his lights on.

I pull over, lower my window and he approaches asking for the normal paperwork. This is how it went down:

Officer: can you explain why you would ever pass a marked police vehicle?
Me: ?????? (I'm thinking he must be in a bad mood or bored).
Me: you were doing 70 in a 70 and I passed you going 75.
Officer: so you admit you were speeding.
Me: yes at 5 mph. I know it's a major offense (sarcasm).
Officer: this constitutes a $250 ticket.
Me: ???? (I just stared and nodded my head up/down)
Officer: do you want a $250 ticket?
Me: no, I'm good.
Officer: take care and please don't pass marked police vehicles.

Honestly, I feel like he was taking himself a bit too seriously. Your speed difference wasn't egregious. I would've just let you go on about your business.