Text 16193, 63 rader
Skriven 2005-11-14 17:16:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 15926 av Raymond Yates (1:3613/48)
Ärende: Plates
==============
Hello Raymond,

 MV>> constitution they say. In other states it is quit all right to
 MV>> frustrate the law enforcement by "FCC approved radar jammers", and
 MV>> "laser veil" spray. Driving under the influence? No problem, the cops
 MV>> are not allowed to hold routine alcohol checks. They may only stop you
 MV>> for "cause". So as long as you are still able to drive without showing
 MV>> too obvious signs of intoxication you are all right.

 MV>> It seems they just don't care all that much about the thousands of
 MV>> people killed on the roads.

 MV>> But don't even *think* about sex with a fourteen year old....

 > Fortunately you are extending the exceptions into the rule.

Am I?

 > Not all cops are bad, some are very porfessional.

Wait a minute, this wasn't about bad cops, this was about the attitude of the
US public towards road safety.

We have to take the source into account of course, but if I havbe to believe
Roy, many ASAians put a higher value on their "right" to frustrate law
enforcement and to exceed the speed limit or not be subjected to alcohol tests
than on preventing accidents.

And the US does not score all that well on road safety....

 > not all radar jammers are FCC approved, nor are they legal
 > in all states. the rule vary widely here as does the
 > professionalism of the police force. In most states you have
 > to be certified to be a police officer at the very least,

Over here eveyine who wants to become a police officer has to finsih the police
academy.

 > and the State Patrol usually requires attendance at a specialised
 > Academy. Some states however have no such requirements for local
 > law enforcement and the ethics and attitudes vary widely. There
 > is one county I am aware of where the Commissioners are peeved
 > because the Sheriff has instructed the deputies to not write
 > speeding tickets unless there is a flagrant violation, and the
 > County is suffering as the revenue from those tickets
 > constitutes 30% of the budget.

So the county would go broke if every driver observed the speed limit. There is
something wrong there....

 > Now is the object of the exercise road safety, or revenue?

You tell me. To me it looks like road safety does not come first....

 > There seems to be a file line between protectng the citizens
 > and oppressing them..

I say that if revenue has priority over road safety, one is on the wrong path.

Cheers, Michiel

---
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.nodelist.org (2:280/5555)