PO'd at police

[two_bit_score]

A good amount of people who claim to have insurance but no proof do not. If the officer would have let him go and he had a wreck down the road and no insurance, it would have been his butt. We all want law enforcement to do their job and ticket the other guy but not us. What if someonee the cops let go for no insurance then hit you? What would you say about his lenienncy then? If he has insurance the case will be dropped. If he doesn't then he is finded as he should be, no harm no foul.

Just to keep it straight -- he had insurance, just not his current card.

What do you think they do with people who dive w/o insurance? Take them to jail or something? No, mostly they give them a ticket and the offender "drives" on down the road. Hows that going to stop themfrom hitting you three blocks away???

Some states, including Texas, can impound your car for no insurance. That's not done all that often because if they did no wreckers would be available to respond to wrecks because they'd all be tied up towing insurance violators.

 

[Artimus]

Just to keep it straight -- he had insurance, just not his current card.

What do you think they do with people who dive w/o insurance? Take them to jail or something? No, mostly they give them a ticket and the offender "drives" on down the road. Hows that going to stop themfrom hitting you three blocks away???

Some states, including Texas, can impound your car for no insurance. That's not done all that often because if they did no wreckers would be available to respond to wrecks because they'd all be tied up towing insurance violators.

I realize he states he had insurance as do many who do actually not. Just like everyone in jail is not guilty. I am not negating that this poster had insurance but putting it in perspective. Some jurisdictions do indeed tow cars and put non insured drivers on foot but that is not the point. If the officer did not do what he was supposed to do he is in the wrong. As many seem to point out here, because he is doing what he is supposed to do he is wrong. It is a damned if you do and damned if you don't job that few wish to have but many think they can do better or criticize.

 

[two_bit_score]

Artimus, in Texas we have many millions of dollars in fines for such things as seatbelt tickets and insrance violations that are 'uncollectible' then they tack on other charges that multiply the amount owed until it's absolutely ridiculous. And guess what......we still have uninsured people driving and without seat belts............and the fines are still unpaid.

Seatbelt fines are a revenue raising tool but only for people who pay them.

Police officers ALWAYS have the option of descretion. A warning ticket is just as valid a 'violator contact' as a ticket. The cop in this situation just wanted to write a ticket. Some days that's what it takes to make him feel like he's 'somebody'. Sometimes that's what he does in response to a 'attitude'. Some are just jerks who like to exert authority. Some just haven't 'matured in the job' enough to realize when to apply descretion.

>>>I realize he states he had insurance as do many who do actually not. Just like everyone in jail is not guilty.<<< You haven't been around many people in jail have you? Almost all of them admit their guilt.

 

[Hooked_on_HP]

. If the officer did not do what he was supposed to do he is in the wrong. As many seem to point out here, because he is doing what he is supposed to do he is wrong. It is a damned if you do and damned if you don't job that few wish to have but many think they can do better or criticize.

Where does it state anywhere that the officer has to issue a citation. Unless it has changed it has always been up to the officers discretion on whether he issues a warning or a citation. This was a new officer that has been on the locale force for about a month. I just ran into one of the sargents I know at the store and he told me to go to the court house after work and show them my insurance card and it would be dropped. luckily I wont have to miss work to get this taken care of.

 

[brin]

Where does it state anywhere that the officer has to issue a citation. Unless it has changed it has always been up to the officers discretion on whether he issues a warning or a citation. This was a new officer that has been on the locale force for about a month. I just ran into one of the sargents I know at the store and he told me to go to the court house after work and show them my insurance card and it would be dropped. luckily I wont have to miss work to get this taken care of.

Hooked - You are exactly right ! Imagine missing a day of work for something the officer could have easily dismissed on the spot. It has always been and is up to the officers discretion whether to issue a citation or not. He just wanted to get his numbers on a cheesey ticket. If we keep going like this in this country the economy will screech to a halt. I mean unless the cop is stupid he can tell when someone simply forgot to put their new insurance ID card in the glove compartment or whether they really don't have insurance in that they can't produce any old cards. If you were such a hazard then why did he let you continue to drive...proves my point..he accomplished nothing.

 

[Dargo]

I think the only time I have really been ticked at a cop was when I got a ticket for running 63 in a 60 zone while I was driving in traffic. I was baffled at first and then ticked when the 23 year old trooper started giving me a verbal bashing and lecturing me that he can issue a ticket for 1 mph over etc.

I pulled in one of my favors from a political friend and the crappy ticket went away. Otherwise I can't say I've personally experienced any issues.

 

[deepNdirt]

A good amount of people who claim to have insurance but no proof do not. If the officer would have let him go and he had a wreck down the road and no insurance, it would have been his butt. We all want law enforcement to do their job and ticket the other guy but not us. What if someonee the cops let go for no insurance then hit you? What would you say about his lenienncy then? If he has insurance the case will be dropped. If he doesn't then he is finded as he should be, no harm no foul.

well I must say, after thinking more on this subject and reading this reply,it got me wondering! If this Cop actually did think he had no insurance why should he have turn him loose in the first place? isn't the thing to do is arrest him and have the car impound? not let it back on the roadway, wouldn't this still hold the cop accountable if an accident did happen in results of turning him loose without Insurance?

 

[dave1949]

In Maine, if your auto insurance lapses, for whatever reason, the insurance co. is required to notify the state. Then the state sends a letter notifying you. There is some rigamorole involved in getting off the state's lapsed insurance list, but it is possible

I discovered this when I changed carriers. We are required to carry proof of insurance in the auto, but I wonder if a LEO can reference the state's list on-line. ? It would be easy to get an annual proof of ins. card then stop paying or cancel the policy.
Dave.

 

[Rob-D]

That said. I am against the seat belt law. It's just a revenue raising move by government.

The belt saved my life.
I kept me in the seat so I could control my car when I blew a tire back in 1969 and hit a truck on the interstate. Belts weren't required then but I knew it was a good idea.

You only have to be in one bad accident to know the benefits of seat belts.

As for police. I got stopped about 6 mos. ago for doing 68 in a 55. I saw the lights come on, he was going in the opposite direction. As soon as i saw the lights I pulled over so he wouldn't have to chase me. I don't speed but Nancy had an appointment and we were late. I took the blame and said I didn't have a ticket in thirty years. He checked the licence, came back and said don't get another one in the next thirty years. Decent of him I thought. I'm more careful now and haven't sped since.

I figure these guys are doing a job I don't want and they get all kinds of lip and excuses. I was wrong and admitted it. Goes to show you!

Rob

 

[Bedlam]

I think the only time I have really been ticked at a cop was when I got a ticket for running 63 in a 60 zone while I was driving in traffic. I was baffled at first and then ticked when the 23 year old trooper started giving me a verbal bashing and lecturing me that he can issue a ticket for 1 mph over etc.

I pulled in one of my favors from a political friend and the crappy ticket went away. Otherwise I can't say I've personally experienced any issues.

This solved the immediate problem But I'm sure the kid didn't know it went away and he will just continue on down the line. Its up to the more mature seasoned cops to mold the younger ones and up to the high ups to weed them out if they continue to use abuse their power. Unfortunately now adays they are afraid of this...

 

[Bedlam]

maybe the money goes to fund this baby
[

 

[SPYDERLK]

In Maine, if your auto insurance lapses, for whatever reason, the insurance co. is required to notify the state. Then the state sends a letter notifying you. There is some rigamorole involved in getting off the state's lapsed insurance list, but it is possible

I discovered this when I changed carriers. We are required to carry proof of insurance in the auto, but I wonder if a LEO can reference the state's list on-line. ? It would be easy to get an annual proof of ins. card then stop paying or cancel the policy.
Dave.

There is enuf electronics in cars now to let big brother invalidate it remotely as well as interrogate it for violations.
larry

 

[eepete]

I was coming back from a fire call one morning when a person ran a red light as I was turning left. I caught a glimpse out of the corner of my eye as I was double checking the intersection as I entered it. The road was wet so I couldn't stop, but I did avoid getting T-boned on the driver side (always bad) . Got hit on the driver side front tire, vehicle totaled. Had my belt on, walked away (ok, well, really I was stompin' mad but glad to be able to be stompin' mad).

The person had an expired license. No insurance. Vehicle was not registered. The person was all over the officer on scene about how I ran the red light. Fortunately, a witness who saw it all stopped and waited and made a statement to the officer. It also turns out this person has a record of multiple moving violations, and the vehicle had been un-insured for years. I have a 100% clean record. You scoop enough people off the pavement and it's pretty easy to do the limit.

Someone showed up with a car, the person ended up driving away :confused2:.

So in reference to the OPs situation: I'd support discretion in both directions. Pulled over, clean record? Give a break. Pulled over, big history? don't let them back on the road.

It was in a 10 year old Ford Ranger that was in _Perfect_ condition. Insurance gave me $5K to replace it. My new F-150 was $20K. The person went to court, got another conviction, and is still driving. I'm out $15K for volunteering, the person is out still driving around. I know no good deed goes unpunished, but can't the idiots loose just once in a while?

On seat belts: When we have fatality wrecks, seems like 80% of the time seat belts were not used. So I wear one because statistically it's the way to bet :thumbsup:.

Pete

 

[niemeyjt]

You only have to be in one bad accident to know the benefits of seat belts.

Likewise - I had a head on collision with a Ford Fiesta going so fast that took out my Volvo! Apart from bruising on shoulder and back pain, I walked away. The other driver was less fortunate and had to be cut out.

Yes - the other car was a Police car! Needless to say my car was examined in minute detail (aparently they could tell I was wearing a seatbelt as the webbing stretches where it goes through shoulder bracket - although the fact that I had not gone through the windscreen might have been a clue), all paperwork scrutinised and I was breathalised as the Police looked for a "get-out". They did not find it.

J

 

[dave1949]

Likewise - I had a head on collision with a Ford Fiesta going so fast that took out my Volvo! Apart from bruising on shoulder and back pain, I walked away. The other driver was less fortunate and had to be cut out.

Yes - the other car was a Police car! Needless to say my car was examined in minute detail (aparently they could tell I was wearing a seatbelt as the webbing stretches where it goes through shoulder bracket - although the fact that I had not gone through the windscreen might have been a clue), all paperwork scrutinised and I was breathalised as the Police looked for a "get-out". They did not find it.

J

Well, I can see you were driving on the 'wrong' side of the road

Police cars in accidents looking for an 'get out' must be a universal thing.
Dave.

 

[RTII]

If the law in IL states you need to carry proof of insurance or risk a ticket, then I'd not blame the cop but myself for screwing up. Shoulda had the proof in the car. Pretty simple. What drew attention to it was the original infraction in the first place. No seat belt. I would guess when a violator ends up having 2 infractions in a single stop the officer would be less inclined to give a warning for either.

On the bright side, the fine's to be waived upon showing proof. I'd be happy with that. To me the cop was doing his job. No point in complaining.

 

[Artimus]

Artimus, in Texas we have many millions of dollars in fines for such things as seatbelt tickets and insrance violations that are 'uncollectible' then they tack on other charges that multiply the amount owed until it's absolutely ridiculous. And guess what......we still have uninsured people driving and without seat belts............and the fines are still unpaid.

Seatbelt fines are a revenue raising tool but only for people who pay them.

Police officers ALWAYS have the option of descretion. A warning ticket is just as valid a 'violator contact' as a ticket. The cop in this situation just wanted to write a ticket. Some days that's what it takes to make him feel like he's 'somebody'. Sometimes that's what he does in response to a 'attitude'. Some are just jerks who like to exert authority. Some just haven't 'matured in the job' enough to realize when to apply descretion.

>>>I realize he states he had insurance as do many who do actually not. Just like everyone in jail is not guilty.<<< You haven't been around many people in jail have you? Almost all of them admit their guilt.

Two bit I'm not attacking you but making a point. The insurance laws were not meant to be discretionary. An officer writing a warning ticket for no insurance would be in trouble. If it were me I would have gave a seat belt warning and issued the insurance ticket though GA has a database system to show valid insurance though it can be wrong. Sadly I am routinely around those in jail. They may end up officially pleading guilty but whenever you talk to them many do indeed insist they were/are not guilty regardless of their "official" plea.

Some laws suck and there are bad officers just as there are bad people. They come from the same general population that you and I come from and idiots do walk among us. Newer officers are indeed less likely to use discretion and make mistakes as they are doing as they are told by the book and have not learned the difference between "right," "wrong" and real. Regardless they will always be second guessed when following the law. Many laws are not obeyed and fines are not paid. The law like locks are made to keep most people honest and in check with a system of penalties. Because some won't abide by them is no reason to abandon them.

Let's tallk about tractors. : )

 

[Rob-D]

Well, I do agree mostly with your thinking. But what bothers me is where do you draw the line?

Should everyone in a vehicle suit up like a football player? It would definitely cut down on injuries and the cost to society.

How about making it illegal to use tobacco? Fast food? Alcohol? All of these things would probably benefit society as a whole. So where is that line drawn? Personally, I think seat belts crossed that line.

That's a good point.
For me it's when your actions could possibly cause harm to others. I guess that means if you want to smoke, drink, do drugs, etc. it's your business but the trouble with that is now everyone pays because you get sick and insurance rates in general rise for the masses.
So now you get down to the state decides what's reckless. The state deciding I'm reckless means that some politician going to the Bahamas on the perks of a lobbiest gets to decide what's good for us. Which equates to: You can drink like a fish and smoke till you have lung cancer but you have to do it wearing your seat belt!

Rob

 

[Toyboy]

You always get two insurance cards. One for the vehicle and the second to keep on your person. You didn't have either one??? You had two chances to get it right and you blame the cop??

 

[Pops15]

I don't get two cards.