Scary
Ryan
Looks like the police in Colorado Springs are trying a new tactic to nab
speeders.
I'm in the middle on this one. Yeah, the fact that people travel 70 in the
marked 45 zone is a good reason to take the extra step. Do the police need
to play dress-up though?
Interesting side note to this: CSPD has done something like this in the
past. One officer on foot has a radar gun. He radios his findings to a
swarm (literally: I've counted 10) of motorcycle cops waiting around the
corner. The police were only ticketing for people going 15 over; they
advertised that they were running this operation on the VMSs. They still
pulled over countless numbers of motorists. Drivers in this town just don't
get it sometimes.....
Do any other police forces have tricks like this?
Arif Khokar
> http://www.gazette.com/display.php?id=1309853
>
> Looks like the police in Colorado Springs are trying a new tactic to nab
> speeders.
>
> I'm in the middle on this one. Yeah, the fact that people travel 70 in the
> marked 45 zone is a good reason to take the extra step.
> [...]
> The police were only ticketing for people going 15 over
So the police are saying that it's ok to go 60 mph in a 45 mph zone?
What a bunch of hypocrites.
Steve Riner
Especially galling since I've been pulled over (though not cited) by
the Colorado State Patrol for going less than 5 mph over the limit ---
and not in a construction zone.
Steve Riner
Pueblo West CO
Explore New Mexico and Minnesota Highways
http://www.steve-riner.com/nmhighways/nmhome.htm
http://www.steve-riner.com/mnhighways/mnhome.htm
Ryan
news:1124503503....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Yeah, that sounds about right. I'm not exactly sure why they chose such a
high limit, but I know that most drivers on the interstate here easily do
70-80 through town. I normally do 60 and get passed like I'm standing
still. Steve, sounds like I better slow down... :)
Actually, it's even worse than the 60 in the 45 comment. This is from the
article:
"Officers issued 27 tickets Thursday to people suspected of driving at
least 20 mph more than the limit. They issued 11 warnings to people going
11 to 19 mph more than the limit."
Seriously, what's the point?
US 71
"Ryan" <ye...@right.com> wrote in message
news:C7ednXS-zfk...@adelphia.com...
>
>
> Do any other police forces have tricks like this?
>
Sure! Benton County (AR) Sheriff likes to set-up dummy cars to trick people
into slowing down. Another trick is to say "Drug Checkpoint Ahead" forcing
guilty parties to turn off at the next side road and get stopped anyway
(going straight ahead there's NO Checkpoint).
Shawn K. Quinn
from US 71 <us...@sbcglobal.net>
in message <9YxNe.4849$hF1....@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>
> Sure! Benton County (AR) Sheriff likes to set-up dummy cars to trick people
> into slowing down. Another trick is to say "Drug Checkpoint Ahead" forcing
> guilty parties to turn off at the next side road and get stopped anyway
> (going straight ahead there's NO Checkpoint).
Wasn't this declared illegal? I remember the Harris County Sheriff's
Department trying this once, but they have never done it again to my
knowledge for this reason.
--
___ _ _____ |*|
/ __| |/ / _ \ |*| Shawn K. Quinn
\__ \ ' < (_) | |*| skq...@speakeasy.net
|___/_|\_\__\_\ |*| Houston, TX, USA
elaich
> Looks like the police in Colorado Springs are trying a new tactic to
> nab speeders.
>
> I'm in the middle on this one. Yeah, the fact that people travel 70 in
> the marked 45 zone is a good reason to take the extra step. Do the
> police need to play dress-up though?
Why is it any different from using unmarked cars?
I'm all for this one. A construction zone where workers are vulnerable is
where the speed limit should be enforced without tolerance, and offenders
should have the book thrown at them. People who speed in construction zones
are not only scofflaws, but have no respect for the lives of the workers.
They should pay heavily and dearly.
The Chief Instigator
>begin quotation
> from US 71 <us...@sbcglobal.net>
> in message <9YxNe.4849$hF1....@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>
>> Sure! Benton County (AR) Sheriff likes to set-up dummy cars to trick people
>> into slowing down. Another trick is to say "Drug Checkpoint Ahead" forcing
>> guilty parties to turn off at the next side road and get stopped anyway
>> (going straight ahead there's NO Checkpoint).
>Wasn't this declared illegal? I remember the Harris County Sheriff's
>Department trying this once, but they have never done it again to my
>knowledge for this reason.
I know they've tried the dummy cars, but have they tried the drug-checkpoint
scam? (The only ones of those I've encountered were up in Iowa on I-29 in the
early 1990s, and I only saw actual patrol cars in the area under alleged
surveillance once in the four times we passed through.)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Chicago 5, Houston 3 (April 26)
NEXT GAME: Friday, October 7 vs. San Antonio, 7:35
John F. Carr
The police around here have explicitly said that is is OK to drive 60
in a particular 45 MPH work zone. I don't consider them hypocrites.
The Turnpike Authority says drive 45. The police say drive 60. In
practice there is minimal enforcement and the three tickets I heard
of were for 67, 68, and 123, not 61 or 62.
--
John Carr (j...@mit.edu)
Doug Broda
>
>I'm all for this one. A construction zone where workers are vulnerable is
>where the speed limit should be enforced without tolerance, and offenders
>should have the book thrown at them. People who speed in construction zones
>are not only scofflaws, but have no respect for the lives of the workers.
>They should pay heavily and dearly.
I agree absolutely.
However, I think that DOTs often do things that lead to disregard of
work zones. So often, we see work zone speed limits in force when they
don't need to be -- e.g. a 45 zone at 3 a.m. on an interstate where
there is no work being done at night and there are no safety issues. I
really do believe that fewer people would violate work zone speed
limits if DOTs were careful to restrict speeds only when work is in
progress or safety issues (e.g. narrowed lanes or lane shifts) exist.
This is absolutely *no* excuse for speeding in a work zone, but rather
only a thought as to whether DOTs are in part inviting the trouble
they have.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug Broda, Troy, NY, USA
Shawn K. Quinn
begin quotation
from The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com>
in message <szkek8p...@eris.io.com>
posted at 2005-08-20T05:43
> "Shawn K. Quinn" <skq...@speakeasy.net> writes:
>>begin quotation
>> from US 71 <us...@sbcglobal.net>
>> in message <9YxNe.4849$hF1....@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>
>>> Another trick is to say "Drug Checkpoint Ahead" forcing guilty
>>> parties to turn off at the next side road and get stopped anyway
>>> (going straight ahead there's NO Checkpoint).
>> Wasn't this declared illegal? I remember the Harris County Sheriff's
>> Department trying this once, but they have never done it again to my
>> knowledge for this reason.
> I know they've tried the dummy cars, but have they tried the
> drug-checkpoint scam?
I remember seeing this on the news one day, and hearing that it was
declared illegal as you have to have probable cause to stop someone.
Simply taking an exit off of the freeway in the presence of "narcotics
checkpoint ahead" signs is not probable cause.
Sorry for the confusion. I should have made it clearer that I was
referring specifically to the fake drug checkpoints.
> (The only ones of those I've encountered were up in Iowa on I-29 in
> the early 1990s, and I only saw actual patrol cars in the area under
> alleged surveillance once in the four times we passed through.)
Has any law enforcement department actually ran the drug checkpoint on
the freeway itself? I would hope not, but government officials are not
exactly known for their intelligence. Remember a beached whale in Oregon
some three decades ago?
The Chief Instigator
> The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> in message
> <szkek8p...@eris.io.com> posted at 2005-08-20:05:43
>> "Shawn K. Quinn" <skq...@speakeasy.net> writes:
>>> from US 71 <us...@sbcglobal.net>
>>> in message <9YxNe.4849$hF1....@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>
>>>> Another trick is to say "Drug Checkpoint Ahead" forcing guilty
>>>> parties to turn off at the next side road and get stopped anyway
>>>> (going straight ahead there's NO Checkpoint).
>>> Wasn't this declared illegal? I remember the Harris County Sheriff's
>>> Department trying this once, but they have never done it again to my
>>> knowledge for this reason.
>> I know they've tried the dummy cars, but have they tried the
>> drug-checkpoint scam?
>I remember seeing this on the news one day, and hearing that it was
>declared illegal as you have to have probable cause to stop someone.
>Simply taking an exit off of the freeway in the presence of "narcotics
>checkpoint ahead" signs is not probable cause.
>Sorry for the confusion. I should have made it clearer that I was
>referring specifically to the fake drug checkpoints.
That would make a difference, though of the ones I encountered in Iowa, I have
no idea if the three instances where we spotted no patrols were fake or not.
>> (The only ones of those I've encountered were up in Iowa on I-29 in
>> the early 1990s, and I only saw actual patrol cars in the area under
>> alleged surveillance once in the four times we passed through.)
>Has any law enforcement department actually ran the drug checkpoint on
>the freeway itself? I would hope not, but government officials are not
>exactly known for their intelligence. Remember a beached whale in Oregon
>some three decades ago?
At least it was long enough ago to not have been transferred to more modern
media...otherwise, it'd be one of the most popular videos of all time. ;-)
Meanwhile, I'd hope I don't see HPD trying that on any of the local freeways,
which are already full enough as it is. (If they ever do try it, chances are
they'll go for the Katy, construction or not...)
Shawn K. Quinn
begin quotation
from The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com>
in message <szk64ts...@eris.io.com>
posted at 2005-08-27T05:23
> "Shawn K. Quinn" <skq...@speakeasy.net> writes:
>> I would hope not, but government officials are not exactly known for
>> their intelligence. Remember a beached whale in Oregon some three
>> decades ago?
> At least it was long enough ago to not have been transferred to more
> modern media...otherwise, it'd be one of the most popular videos of
> all time. ;-)
Actually, it is one of the most popular videos of all time; it was
transferred from whatever videotape format was in vogue in the early
1970's to a Quicktime movie.
>> Has any law enforcement department actually ran the drug checkpoint
>> on the freeway itself?
> Meanwhile, I'd hope I don't see HPD trying that on any of the local
> freeways, which are already full enough as it is. (If they ever do try
> it, chances are they'll go for the Katy, construction or not...)
Well, I did mention Harris County specifically in my original message.
Houston city cops, I would expect to be a bit smarter, though their
crime lab is another story.
The Chief Instigator
> The Chief Instigator <pat...@io.com> in message
><szk64ts...@eris.io.com> posted at 2005-08-27 05:23
>> "Shawn K. Quinn" <skq...@speakeasy.net> writes:
>>> I would hope not, but government officials are not exactly known for
>>> their intelligence. Remember a beached whale in Oregon some three
>>> decades ago?
>> At least it was long enough ago to not have been transferred to more
>> modern media...otherwise, it'd be one of the most popular videos of
>> all time. ;-)
>Actually, it is one of the most popular videos of all time; it was
>transferred from whatever videotape format was in vogue in the early
>1970's to a Quicktime movie.
Now I'm worried. ;-) (If nothing else, that's an incentive to upgrade this
old Win98 box.)
>>> Has any law enforcement department actually ran the drug checkpoint
>>> on the freeway itself?
>> Meanwhile, I'd hope I don't see HPD trying that on any of the local
>> freeways, which are already full enough as it is. (If they ever do try
>> it, chances are they'll go for the Katy, construction or not...)
>Well, I did mention Harris County specifically in my original message.
>Houston city cops, I would expect to be a bit smarter, though their
>crime lab is another story.
At least there's hope for it to regain some credibility...but since this is an
election year, don't be surprised if the red-light cameras are held off until
after the election, and then the real fun starts.