PO'd at police

[BobRip]

So if someone chooses to not wear a seat belt, and gets all mangled up, and chooses not to buy insurance, we should just let them lay in the ditch, right? We should let their mangled kids lay there, too, right?

Sheesh. Americans do not let people lay in the ditch, no matter how stupid their poor choices are. We pick them up and take care of them, even though they are stupid and make poor choices. So we do make laws that try to protect the majority of us from stupid peoples' poor choices, even if it "infringes" on their god given right to be stupid and make poor choices.

Moss, I really just want to point out that you cannot have it both ways. You can have total freedom, or you can have the state protect you. If you try to be in the middle, then the responsible pay for the irresponsible. You will also tend to turn the responsible into the irresponsible. This is what bothers me. I think we need to encourage people to be responsible for their own behavior. This means be prepared (as much as possible) to take care of yourself. The direction we are heading is everybody is working for the government or is on welfare. It will probably take a long time to get there, but it is a direction. I want to go the other way. What social changes can we make to encourage this.

 

[two_bit_score]

No, it is not fact. There are laws on the book that REQUIRE an officer to make an arrest. The chain of command can also tell officers what they can and cannot do. Finally the officer can decide, which is discretion, to always write a citation. Why would an officer do this? If the officer ALWAYS writes a citation for every stop it minimizes accusations of favoritism or worse "profiling".

Later,
Dan

At first I thought we disagreed but then I read ("Finally the officer can decide, which is discretion, to always write a citation.") So I guess we do agree.

There are probably some 'officers' who would ALWAYS write a ticket but only those very inexperienced or very 'chicken shid' would not realize that a warning ticket is within their discretion and counts for the same 'violator contact' as a citation to court.

 

[two_bit_score]

I have never been in a wreck where I was at fault and the other party was injured but I have always worried that someday I might not pay attention for one second and this could occur.

What would be a real tragedy would be if it was a minor accident but the other driver was not wearing a seat belt and got ejected from the car and killed when he would not have even been injured with the seat belt on.

Besides the tragedy of him being killed, I could spend a long time in prison for negligent homicide and lose everything I own and have worked for my whole life.

This would be MY fault for causing the wreck but two tragedies could have been averted by the driver wearing a seat belt. It isn't just the one not wearing the seat belt who suffers.

Then everyone should be required to wear a bullet proof vest because someone might accidentally discharge a round from a legal gun and shoot them and kill them and possibly be sued outta everything they own for negligence.

You are saying that others should be required to take action to protect themselves from your negligence in order to protect you.

People should be protecting themselves, or not, because they decide to do so, or not.

Your argument is specious. It sounds good but makes no real sense. Anything can be carried to the extreme degree which is what you do in that argument.

 

[sld]

Does anyone remember when if something bad happened to you, you just sucked it up and said "bad break" but I will get thru it.

Now days, everyone wants compensated for everything. Your neighbors dog pees in your yard and you want money for it.

I know there are gray areas, but people can't always be compensated just because something bad happens to them. This is the root of a lot a silly laws.

Sometimes you just have to take the good with the bad and protect yourself as well as you can.

 

[Pops15]

I know someone that was given a warning ticket in Illinois for not having proof of insurance so I'd say in IL the officer has discretion to ticket or not.

I've done work for several cops from much larger departments that where the OP lives. I think most would have followed a driver a short distance to give the driver a chance to produce his insurance card.

I'm familiar with the OP's town as I live fairly close. It's a small town and small town police departments in this area are notorious for writing tickets as a way to generate revenue. It has nothing to do with trying to keep anyone safe. It has nothing to do with trying to reduce the cost to society. It has everything to do with generating revenue. Such is life in small town Illinois...and some of the bigger ones too.
BTW...there are exemptions to the IL seat belt law!

 

[firefighter jim]

You are blaming the policeman for something that you're guilty of. A: you weren't wearing a seatbelt and B: you didn't have proof of insurance with you. Put the blame on yourself and quit wining. That's the problem these days, no one takes responsibility for themselves. It's always someone else's fault.

 

[RickB]

You are blaming the policeman for something that you're guilty of. A: you weren't wearing a seatbelt and B: you didn't have proof of insurance with you. Put the blame on yourself and quit wining. That's the problem these days, no one takes responsibility for themselves. It's always someone else's fault.

Thanks. That's pretty much where we started, before the posts about choosing what laws to obey, why we have laws at all, and why it is necessary (or not) to create laws to help protect folks from their own stupidity and more importantly the stupidity of others.

 

[RickB]

Does anyone remember when if something bad happened to you, you just sucked it up and said "bad break" but I will get thru it.

Now days, everyone wants compensated for everything. Your neighbors dog pees in your yard and you want money for it.

I know there are gray areas, but people can't always be compensated just because something bad happens to them. This is the root of a lot a silly laws.

Sometimes you just have to take the good with the bad and protect yourself as well as you can.

Which includes putting on the big boy pants and paying whatever fines are incurred when one is caught breaking the law without whimpering to all us TBN members.
I'd be a lot more sympathetic if Hooked on HP had posted about the absurdity of seatbelt laws and proof of insurance requirements the day BEFORE he got busted. But of course, it didn't cross his mind.

 

[dave1949]

Then everyone should be required to wear a bullet proof vest because someone might accidentally discharge a round from a legal gun and shoot them and kill them and possibly be sued outta everything they own for negligence.

You are saying that others should be required to take action to protect themselves from your negligence in order to protect you.

People should be protecting themselves, or not, because they decide to do so, or not.

Your argument is specious. It sounds good but makes no real sense. Anything can be carried to the extreme degree which is what you do in that argument.

Here is a very interesting database query form allowing lookup of cause of death or injury by age group and cause. The drill downs are good too.

WISQARS Leading Causes of Death Reports


If you do queries for 'unintentional injury' and compare auto fatalities to gun fatalities, you will find a very significant difference (orders of magnitude) in how likely you are to need that bullet proof vest versus a seatbelt.

I understand the concept you wish to illustrate, but a bullet proof vest doesn't work for your argument in the real world.
Dave.

 

[tulenutn2o]

Man, brutal responses.

While I agree that you were in the wrong, he could've let the insurance thing slide. I have shown cops my insurance card before that was expired and they let it go. It seems like everytime I turn around I have a new insurance card in the mail. I know I don't always have the current one.

In this day and age I don't see why your proof of insurance is not verified online by the cop in the car.

I'm for the insurance on the license myself. Insure the driver not the vehicle. You can add comprehensive to vehicles. Seems the only people to use the mag strip on my license, is wal-mart when I get my hunting and fishing "license".