Sleeping 7-Year Old Shot by Police During Raid

[Terralthra]

There are some underlying issues here that make resolving the differences between countries difficult.

One is that in the U.S.A., there are numerous laws which are routinely broken. Speed limits are one. For example, on freeways where I live, the speed limit is 65 mph (105 kph). But people routinely drive 75-80 (120-130). Everyone knows you have to be doing 80+ to get pulled over. Under the German (or many other EU systems), with mandatory enforcement, the highway patrol would be giving out tickets all day, every day. But in the United States, it is taken for granted that everyone can break the law, because the de facto speed limit isn't what's on the sign. Turning right on a red light after making a complete stop, jaywalking... I could go on. As long as the U.S.A. has an expectation that laws are guidelines, of course there will be pushback against actually enforcing them.

Also, at the "policeman's wife" canard. Maybe she shouldn't be speeding? I mean, come on."It would be very awkward for the policeman if he catches a loved one committing a crime and punishes them for it, therefore policemen should be able to just let people go"? Really?

[jcow79]

How many times have you been asked to testify in court on a traffic violation?

In the US, any contested ticket requires the officer to show up. It's part of our due process. (Right to face your accuser, and all that) So naturally cops that do a significant amount of traffic stops tend to get a lot of overtime in court. If the officer fails to appear, the ticket is dismissed.

One of the main tactics they tell you to fighting tickets is to simply contest it in court because fairly frequently the officer doesn't show. Half the time if the officer does show they may lower the fine or waive it if you attend traffic school or whatnot. I suspect this is another reason the German system would work against us in the US.

[Spoonist]

I understand what you're saying. I didn't understand how it was enforced. If it isn't enforced then human nature will always win out...at least that's been my experience.

Am I really that shitty at explaing this? This is just going in circles. First you say its human nature, I try to point out why that is less relevant, you say you understand and then proceed to say that human nature always wins out, showing that no such understanding exist.
I'll simply give up on this now. Hopefully at some point you will get to travel the world and talk to colleagues who can explain this better than me.

The biggest issue is with people in your own social circle. Like giving your wife a ticket. How do you stomp that out?

Then your partner issues the ticket. It will probably be a bit embaressing but as I said no biggie. Likely you'd get some friendly bantering for not teaching your wife the law by your colleagues.

[His Divine Shadow]

One is that in the U.S.A., there are numerous laws which are routinely broken. Speed limits are one. For example, on freeways where I live, the speed limit is 65 mph (105 kph). But people routinely drive 75-80 (120-130). Everyone knows you have to be doing 80+ to get pulled over.

It's not that different here, the govt. recently made it so that speeding offences as low as 3kph above the limit merits a warning but so far the cops haven't bothered stopping me even though I've been doing 125kph on 120kph roads. I suppose they have better things to do, I figure the 3kph thing is mostly polticians blowing hot air to make it look like they are doing something.

[Kamakazie Sith]

But that makes me wonder, when a cop tells me or someone else "Don't take it personal I'm just doing my job" if it's something he has discertion over, isn't it kind of personal at that point?

Edit: Just asking because I kind of want to know what goes through a cops mind when they pull someone over for minor things.

It might be, but it is hard to say if it is against you. It might be a personal pet peeve against an offence. For example I'm very strict on people that drive around with no insurance...

[Kamakazie Sith]

Here is what I don't understand: why is discretion even an issue here? Surely, the point of discretion is that it is based on the offence, not the offender? Why should somebody get off because he's related to a cop? If anything, he should be punished HARSHER, since they ought to know better.

By the way, I am not related to a police officer, and yet I have 3 of the cards in question, from various colleagues with police connections. I don't use them, since I believe that the law actually applies to everyone equally. *shrug*

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

That's one point of view, but it ignores the realities of any personal relationship. So, it comes down to the same question again. Why do you feel traffic enforcement is so important that you won't allow a police officer to avoid a personal conflict?

Is his family the owners of Hoopes vision? Because if it's not, I'd say that was a pretty clear-cut case of corruption.

I'd have to ask. It was someone with that authorization though. It wasn't a under the table deal...at least according to him.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Jury members are not the same because they are members of the public with no special training. Judges and prosecutors are allowed to recuse themselves because the things they are asked to do have a larger impact on the life of the persons in question than writing a ticket.

That's part of the reason. The other part is so bias can be avoided in the court room and you're dealing with an impartial person.

And quite frankly, anybody who can't handle punishing his friends when they break the law is probably not best suited to the job anyway. C'mon, we are talking about parking tickets and speeding fines here, not jail time. And any friend who faults you for doing your job and severs connections due to a speeding ticket is probably not worth having in the first place.

I think you're confusing the emotional realities of your system with the emotional realities of ours. They are not interchangable. In your system it is "look if I didn't write you this ticket then I would be fired". In my system that is not even remotely a risk. Furthermore, there's also the fact that I do not want to write my friends tickets. I would not like that, but I'm still a damn good cop. So, your assertion that I'm not suited for the job is plain nonsense.

How many times have you been asked to testify in court on a traffic violation?

Most of the tickets I write our non-moving violations like not having insurance. I get those about once a month despite the fact that it is a no win situation for the defendant. I probably get summoned to court for roughly 70% of the moving violations that I write.

Just a piece of interesting information. In US courts police have to damn near be able to tell the defense how to build a LIDAR. Showing that it was inspected and maintained is not good enough. They want to make sure the officer knows the science behind it. (I've never had to go through that because I have yet to write a speeding ticket).

[Kamakazie Sith]

Also, at the "policeman's wife" canard. Maybe she shouldn't be speeding? I mean, come on."It would be very awkward for the policeman if he catches a loved one committing a crime and punishes them for it, therefore policemen should be able to just let people go"? Really?

Awkward? I think that seriously undercuts the reality of the situation. Sure, she shouldn't be speeding but that doesn't change the fact that the officer still has the choice on whether to cite or not. It is completely up to that officer. In addition he would be punishing himself as well since it is likely they share the same finances not to mention whatever other arguments this would lead to then the court time if she decided to fight it and then then the possibility of the wife dragging their personal life out onto the floor. Marriage with police is already challenging enough for the spouse without adding those factors to it.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Am I really that shitty at explaing this? This is just going in circles. First you say its human nature, I try to point out why that is less relevant, you say you understand and then proceed to say that human nature always wins out, showing that no such understanding exist.
I'll simply give up on this now. Hopefully at some point you will get to travel the world and talk to colleagues who can explain this better than me.

Yes, you did point out why. I understand what you're saying. I'm pointing out that human nature is overridden when enforcement exists. I understand that you don't think this is the case but I'm not convinced. You said your officers do things like not nailing other cops for domestic violence violations and such so I don't see why you're having a hard time accepting that I don't buy your culture argument.

Then your partner issues the ticket. It will probably be a bit embaressing but as I said no biggie. Likely you'd get some friendly bantering for not teaching your wife the law by your colleagues.

Sorry. Traffic violations don't work that way in the US. I can't write a citation for something that I did not witness. My partner can't write a citation for something he/she did not witness. It must be the witnessing officer.

[Captain Seafort]

KS, a quick question tangentially related to the subject: do you have speed cameras in the US? If so, how does the culprit get to confront the witnessing officer when the "witnessing officer" is an inanimate lump of metal?

[Thanas]

I think you're confusing the emotional realities of your system with the emotional realities of ours. They are not interchangable. In your system it is "look if I didn't write you this ticket then I would be fired". In my system that is not even remotely a risk. Furthermore, there's also the fact that I do not want to write my friends tickets. I would not like that, but I'm still a damn good cop. So, your assertion that I'm not suited for the job is plain nonsense.

And now we get to the crux of the whole issue - that people are punished or not punished based on whether they are your friends or not. I am sorry, but to me this sounds incredibly horrifying and just screams banana republic to me. And yes, the perception that there is nothing wrong with it does make you an incredibly unqualified person for this job, at least according to my standards. Yeah, the system is different, but then again I do not see people taking that in account when casually dismissing other countries as corrupt holes either.

[Kamakazie Sith]

KS, a quick question tangentially related to the subject: do you have speed cameras in the US? If so, how does the culprit get to confront the witnessing officer when the "witnessing officer" is an inanimate lump of metal?

We do and each state is handling it differently. Some states have outright ruled those traffic enforcement cameras as illegal. In others you might see the defendant asking for the state to prove that the technology was maintained and actually works. Other states have taken different approaches towards it. Basically, it is highly controversial.

[Serafina]

I think you're confusing the emotional realities of your system with the emotional realities of ours. They are not interchangable. In your system it is "look if I didn't write you this ticket then I would be fired". In my system that is not even remotely a risk. Furthermore, there's also the fact that I do not want to write my friends tickets. I would not like that, but I'm still a damn good cop. So, your assertion that I'm not suited for the job is plain nonsense.

Now you've got it - your system is putting emotional pressure (even on good cops) to let people get away with crimes.
Otherwise, they may risk a friendship.

Our system doesn't do that - if i would get caught speeding by a friend, i have no reasonable reason to be angry at him
I might resent it for a while, but i could easily forgive him, since he would have had no other choice.

Plus, your system can also allow much more corruption - if i slip a cop a lot of money, that might just convince him to apply discretion. Sure, he would be a corrupt cop - but for me, not much more corrupt than letting someone go due to friendship.

[Kamakazie Sith]

And now we get to the crux of the whole issue - that people are punished or not punished based on whether they are your friends or not. I am sorry, but to me this sounds incredibly horrifying and just screams banana republic to me. And yes, the perception that there is nothing wrong with it does make you an incredibly unqualified person for this job, at least according to my standards. Yeah, the system is different, but then again I do not see people taking that in account when casually dismissing other countries as corrupt holes either.

Actually, they are punished/not punished based off a whole range of reasons from I'm personally involved with them to I feel like being a nice guy to they have a good driving record and just made a mistake. You, and others, keep trying to narrow it down as if personal reasons are the only reason anyone ever gets a break. This is simply untrue and those warnings given to those within an officers social circle represent a very small number of the warnings issued, and there's no way to tell if that person would have been released on warning anyway.

The reasons for not wanting to punish those within your social circle are valid reasons that have real consequences that is extended to others within the judicial system but for some reason you feel police should be made to bear those consequences because "they are members of the community who command a great deal of respect and get special provisions others do not, so IMO they should be able to deal with personal discomfort" as if a judge or a prosecutor doesn't also command a great deal of respect and shouldn't also be expected to "deal" with the discomfort.

You dismiss certain differences between our cultures. The most important is that the majority of the people in the US do not have a problem with police discretion as how it is applied. If they did you would see protests out in front of city halls across the country. You fail to acknowledge that US police discretion is shaped by society and not by the police.

You say you're horrified by this? Really? Could you be more dramatic, please. Since you feel you're qualified to evaluate my qualification as a US police officer (you aren't) then here's my assessment of you. You are offended not horrified, and you're offended because this system is different from your own, and you hold an elitist view of your own system because you work and live in it.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Now you've got it - your system is putting emotional pressure (even on good cops) to let people get away with crimes.
Otherwise, they may risk a friendship.

Right, because traffic offenses and other victimless crimes are that serious...

Our system doesn't do that - if i would get caught speeding by a friend, i have no reasonable reason to be angry at him
I might resent it for a while, but i could easily forgive him, since he would have had no other choice.

Agreed. That is one of the advantages of a no discretion system. Is it better than a system with discretion? I think that is hard to quantify. How do you measure it? Or are we just going to harp on an idea while ignoring other factors.

Plus, your system can also allow much more corruption - if i slip a cop a lot of money, that might just convince him to apply discretion. Sure, he would be a corrupt cop - but for me, not much more corrupt than letting someone go due to friendship.

Accepting a bribe is highly illegal and refusing doesn't cause any harm. Applying discretion with a friend allows the officer to avoid an uncomfortable personal situation for something that isn't really that important. (just a reminder we're talking about victimless crimes and traffic offenses of a non serious nature)

[Serafina]

You say you're horrified by this? Really? Could you be more dramatic, please. Since you feel you're qualified to evaluate my qualification as a US police officer (you aren't) then here's my assessment of you. You are offended not horrified, and you're offended because this system is different from your own, and you hold an elitist view of your own system because you work and live in it.

Actually, yes, horrified is pretty accurate - because so am i.

You see, the idea that a police officer can someone let go for speeding is bad enough.
But what horrifies me is the potential to go further - where does it stop?

Sure, in a stable society and under normal circumstances that is no problem - but what if you slip into more extraordinary circumstances?
For simple historical reasons, i find the notion of living under such a lax system horrifying.

[Thanas]

Actually, they are punished/not punished based off a whole range of reasons from I'm personally involved with them to I feel like being a nice guy to they have a good driving record and just made a mistake. You, and others, keep trying to narrow it down as if personal reasons are the only reason anyone ever gets a break. This is simply untrue and those warnings given to those within an officers social circle represent a very small number of the warnings issued, and there's no way to tell if that person would have been released on warning anyway.

The reasons for not wanting to punish those within your social circle are valid reasons that have real consequences that is extended to others within the judicial system but for some reason you feel police should be made to bear those consequences because "they are members of the community who command a great deal of respect and get special provisions others do not, so IMO they should be able to deal with personal discomfort" as if a judge or a prosecutor doesn't also command a great deal of respect and shouldn't also be expected to "deal" with the discomfort.

The degree of punishment a prosecutor and a judge is expected to wield is entirely different, as I pointed out several times. But yet you still persist that a Judge and a prosecutor is the same. Do you think there is a difference between being forced to try to send your wife to death row or writing her a parking ticket? If you think so, then why should you be allowed to exercise discretion on the sole basis of people being related?

In case you do not notice, this creates a second class of citizens, those that can speed, park in the wrong spots and when caught, whip up a card or name people and then get off with almost 100% certainty. This is what horrifies me.

You say you're horrified by this? Really? Could you be more dramatic, please.

Yes, I am horrified by it, that a state that is supposed to have equality before the law just does not - but not because of wealth or merit, because they are a different sort of people.

Since you feel you're qualified to evaluate my qualification as a US police officer (you aren't) then here's my assessment of you.

I am of course not qualified to evaluate you as a police officer. I am however qualified to express an opinion on the moral validity of your point of view and given that your only excuse so far is that it is somehow impossible to change the system (gee, wonder how we Europeans managed it, given that a mere 100 years ago the situation was exactly the same in Europe) or that it would force you to have some discomfort - well, neither reason is very convincing.

You are offended not horrified, and you're offended because this system is different from your own, and you hold an elitist view of your own system because you work and live in it.

I've also worked and lived under the US system, so this point of view holds no validity.

[Keevan_Colton]

Traffic offenses risk the saftey of everyone else using the roads in a country...they're hardly a victimless crime.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Actually, yes, horrified is pretty accurate - because so am i.

Each to their own. That does make me laugh though...

You see, the idea that a police officer can someone let go for speeding is bad enough.
But what horrifies me is the potential to go further - where does it stop?

Right. I'm sure that is due to your distrust of government.

It stops the same place where it stops for anything else. Where the law says it stops.

Sure, in a stable society and under normal circumstances that is no problem - but what if you slip into more extraordinary circumstances?
For simple historical reasons, i find the notion of living under such a lax system horrifying.

Currently the US system views police discretion as a valuable tool. In some cases it is more important to educate the public than to simply punish them for mistakes that everyone makes from time to time.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Traffic offenses risk the saftey of everyone else using the roads in a country...they're hardly a victimless crime.

Then you agree that those who purchase drugs should be aggressively prosecuted since the money from drugs goes to fund dangerous people? If you think that then I applaud your consistency...

[Keevan_Colton]

Traffic offenses risk the saftey of everyone else using the roads in a country...they're hardly a victimless crime.

Then you agree that those who purchase drugs should be aggressively prosecuted since the money from drugs goes to fund dangerous people? If you think that then I applaud your consistency...

Are they taking reckless risks with 1ton plus projectiles that can maim and kill other people?

[Kamakazie Sith]

The degree of punishment a prosecutor and a judge is expected to wield is entirely different, as I pointed out several times. But yet you still persist that a Judge and a prosecutor is the same. Do you think there is a difference between being forced to try to send your wife to death row or writing her a parking ticket? If you think so, then why should you be allowed to exercise discretion on the sole basis of people being related?

How about a judge that is going to apply the fine for his/her spouse for the traffic violation...

In case you do not notice, this creates a second class of citizens, those that can speed, park in the wrong spots and when caught, whip up a card or name people and then get off with almost 100% certainty. This is what horrifies me.

Yes, I can see that. What horrifies me is that SVPD and I have been saying since the start of this conversation that it is not 100% certainy.

I am of course not qualified to evaluate you as a police officer. I am however qualified to express an opinion on the moral validity of your point of view and given that your only excuse so far is that it is somehow impossible to change the system (gee, wonder how we Europeans managed it, given that a mere 100 years ago the situation was exactly the same in Europe) or that it would force you to have some discomfort - well, neither reason is very convincing.

I never said it was impossible to change the system. I've argued that doing so will cost a great deal and place as huge burden on the system as it is currently designed. All so you can strict enforcement of traffic violations. Doesn't seem worth it to me.

I've also worked and lived under the US system, so this point of view holds no validity.

It's not a point. It's my opinion of you. Futhermore, just because you lived and worked here doesn't mean you can't have an elitist view of your own system. In fact, I would say that's pretty damn normal.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Are they taking reckless risks with 1ton plus projectiles that can maim and kill other people?

They are helping to support groups of extremely violent murders who have brutally murdered thousands of innocent people in Mexico and are contributing to the destabilization of that region of the world and other regions in which they operate.

Also, to clarify again I'm talking about mild traffic violations. Nothing excessive. If I caught my friend doing something that I would give another person a warning for then I would give my friend a warning. If I caught my friend engaged in reckless behavior such as excessive speeding (10+), DUI, speeding in a school zone with children present, etc then yeah I'd give him a ticket.

[Thanas]

How about a judge that is going to apply the fine for his/her spouse for the traffic violation...

As the judge is still the final authority on the fine, then yes, he should have the same privilege. Unless the case has obviously no merit, then it should be thrown out.

Yes, I can see that. What horrifies me is that SVPD and I have been saying since the start of this conversation that it is not 100% certainy.

Have you ever knowingly ticketed a relative of a police, with him or her saying that he was a relative of a police officer, for "harmless speeding"? Or is it departmental policy to let those slide as a rule? If the latter, then the different class is already created.

I never said it was impossible to change the system. I've argued that doing so will cost a great deal and place as huge burden on the system as it is currently designed. All so you can strict enforcement of traffic violations. Doesn't seem worth it to me.

I guess I value equality of the law a bit more highly than you then. To me, a law that is not equal is no law at all.

It's not a point. It's my opinion of you. Futhermore, just because you lived and worked here doesn't mean you can't have an elitist view of your own system. In fact, I would say that's pretty damn normal.

Yeah, but it may just be that I consider the other system far better due to the reasons outlined in this thread by me many times. Unless, of course, you consider a choice based on those reasons elitist. In short, this is nothing but a cheap shot, especially considering how I gave ample evidence why I prefer the German system.

[Kuroji]

We do and each state is handling it differently. Some states have outright ruled those traffic enforcement cameras as illegal. In others you might see the defendant asking for the state to prove that the technology was maintained and actually works. Other states have taken different approaches towards it. Basically, it is highly controversial.

We're having some fun with this out here in New Mexico, actually -- I believe it was a lawyer who received a ticket for speeding due to one of those damned cameras. He had, however, lent the car to a friend while he was at work, and the courts are trying to say he's responsible for breaking the law despite that it was not him that broke the law; they acknowledged that he was not the driver and tried to fine him anyway. It's going to the state court of appeals, and I have a feeling that no matter which way it goes, it'll keep getting appealed.