Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
THAT I can agree with 110%
I Love My Town
- Thread starter tellner
- Start date
THAT I can agree with 110%
Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
In a "true emergency" HE would be parking there.
As to the speed limits and street lights, people dont know what the cop is truely up to when hes driving around. Sometimes its necessary to bust a light, go fast or weave through traffic to catch up to that car that just "didnt look right" that turns out to be stolen or driven by a wanted person. Sometimes he catches up to it to find that its not worth pulling over so he turns into a parking lot. Now the person behind him thinks he did all of that just to get to that store in the lot.
Sometimes the cop may be doing it just to get to lunch, sometimes they get spotted by their Lt or Sgt and get a chewing out. Cops need to use the phone as part of doing the job these days. Sometimes you need to be moving to a call while dialing up a detective to get details on a case or a contact to find out where a BG is..how do you know hes not making a personal call? You dont, I dont know how you are ever going to get around that.
If a cop is parking in a handicap spot THAT should warrant a call to the station so the supervisor can deal with the officer. Id rather he parked in the fire lane than take up a handicap spot.
Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
He was taking about Nordstroms and McDonalds employees getting those breaks. Nobody thinks THEY are "on the take".
Given the nature of the first post, I've stayed out of this so far.
I'm going to try to avoid rants, on either side.
What I suspect we have in this story is a smartass who decided he had a chance to get over on a cop. I'll go out on a short limb, and predict that many of the charges he made get dismissed, in part because there is a good deal of overlap. The charges were, according to the article, illegal stopping, illegal parking, "obeying parking regulations on a highway" - I suspect an error there! -, and illegal operation of an emergency vehicle. I've not reviewed the Oregon laws, but it seems that there was quite of bit of overlap between some of those charges, and I question whether the last was at all valid. (I see nothing supporting the validity of enforcing the sign at all; not all signs are legally enforceable.) But those are matters of fact or law for the judge to decide.
Let's look at what happened. A police officer, going about the course of his day, pulled into a restaurant, and picked up a meal, apparently to go. While waiting for the order to be delivered, he watched a few minutes of a ball game. There's no indication of the actual duration of the alleged parking infraction, but it seems to have only been a few minutes. When a fellow patron of the restaurant questioned him, the officer gave what I suspect was a rather sarcastic response about needing to be able to leave quickly. The patron took advantage of his knowledge of the law to get the last word by obtaining charges.
So... let's look at police officer parking. When I was in patrol, I generally tried to park reasonably in light of my duties and activities. If I was simply stopping in a business or checking the area, I used legal parking spaces as much as practical. But I had to keep in my the simple fact that I was still subject to calls; it wouldn't help the public if I had to respond to an emergency with a ten minute trip back to my car. At the same time, a cop car parked illegally with no apparent justification is just one of those things that (justifiably) irks the public... I'll admit to having done some creative parking on occasions, or taken advantage of being able to park in loading areas or other places that aren't generally available to the public. After all, nobody's gonna tow a cruiser, right? But the simple truth is that cops on patrol do have to be able to get back to their car quickly, and get out quickly. Sometimes, the normal parking isn't amenable to that.
I do think the officer could have handled the situation better; a sarcastic remark almost never improves a situation. Had he taken a moment to explain things without sarcasm, perhaps it would have gone no further.
Regarding police driving in general... There are a number of things cops do on duty that they discourage others from doing, sometimes even by citations. Let's begin with the most obvious... Multi-task while driving. A typical cop on patrol is: driving a car (which is already multi-tasking!), listening or talking on a police radio (sometimes covering several frequencies), listening to the "fun radio", looking at messages on an MDT/car computer (if he has one), looking for traffic violations, looking for other violations, looking for suspicious behavior, and doing all the usual mental gymnastics of life. Some do something I personally think is unprofessional, and chatter on the cell phone. (Note that work-related calls are a different question; some things cannot be sent over the radio.) Cops also routinely do things that are outright violations of the traffic code, like turn without signals, or drive faster, use cut-throughs and cut around parking lots, and more. I hope few cops routinely run red lights without justification -- but I'm sure some do. Similarly, some cops will flip the blue lights on to get through an intersection, then turn them off again. There are reasons why they may do this with justification (some calls should not be responded to hot, but are still urgent, or get cancelled as soon as you get started for lots of reasons, for example), and some are just lazy. Many cops don't always wear their seatbelt, because we may have to jump out of our car suddenly and unexpectedly. They are often exempt from wearing a seatbelt, as are (in Virginia) taxi drivers, and postal and other delivery drivers.
The operation of a police car is one of the things that most often causes dissent for all these reasons. It's also something that causes huge liability for departments. Each agency and each officer has to balance the operation of a police vehicle with the demands of public safety as well as public relations. Officers are subject to discipline for actions that an ordinary driver is, at most, required to fix the damage. (I know someone who got disciplined for simply making contact with a post -- no damage to either cruiser or post!) And officers get complained on for things that are sometimes mind-boggling when driving; I once had someone complain that I was driving too fast while running lights and sirens to a call!
Now, let me return to the original situation. It's something I've seen happen a lot. Usually, unless someone was parked in a way that was causing a major safety problem, I would wait a few minutes before writing a parking ticket. Sometimes, I'd go inside the business, and suggest that the driver needs to move the car -- or else. Because I sometimes had to do the same thing, for reasons I've already discussed.
OK... one short soapbox moment. If you're concerned about the behavior of cops, there's a simple approach. CONTACT THE AGENCY. If it's about driving or parking, note the time and vehicle number, and the location. Complain. In many agencies, even an anonymous complaint gets investigated, no matter how small the matter. That cop has a supervisor, even if he's the chief of police, who answers to the mayor or town manager or whoever. It might be there's a legitimate problem -- or it might be that the officer has justification for what he or she was doing. But the brass can't address the legitimate issues if they're never told of them. I have had weeks when I had very little contact with my supervisors (in my current assignment, I answer to two sets of supervisors -- and can still have days go by when neither set sees me because of my duties), and that's not uncommon for cops. Just like we rely on the public to be our eyes and ears for crimes when we're not there -- you're also the eyes and ears for the supervisors.
I'm going to try to avoid rants, on either side.
What I suspect we have in this story is a smartass who decided he had a chance to get over on a cop. I'll go out on a short limb, and predict that many of the charges he made get dismissed, in part because there is a good deal of overlap. The charges were, according to the article, illegal stopping, illegal parking, "obeying parking regulations on a highway" - I suspect an error there! -, and illegal operation of an emergency vehicle. I've not reviewed the Oregon laws, but it seems that there was quite of bit of overlap between some of those charges, and I question whether the last was at all valid. (I see nothing supporting the validity of enforcing the sign at all; not all signs are legally enforceable.) But those are matters of fact or law for the judge to decide.
Let's look at what happened. A police officer, going about the course of his day, pulled into a restaurant, and picked up a meal, apparently to go. While waiting for the order to be delivered, he watched a few minutes of a ball game. There's no indication of the actual duration of the alleged parking infraction, but it seems to have only been a few minutes. When a fellow patron of the restaurant questioned him, the officer gave what I suspect was a rather sarcastic response about needing to be able to leave quickly. The patron took advantage of his knowledge of the law to get the last word by obtaining charges.
So... let's look at police officer parking. When I was in patrol, I generally tried to park reasonably in light of my duties and activities. If I was simply stopping in a business or checking the area, I used legal parking spaces as much as practical. But I had to keep in my the simple fact that I was still subject to calls; it wouldn't help the public if I had to respond to an emergency with a ten minute trip back to my car. At the same time, a cop car parked illegally with no apparent justification is just one of those things that (justifiably) irks the public... I'll admit to having done some creative parking on occasions, or taken advantage of being able to park in loading areas or other places that aren't generally available to the public. After all, nobody's gonna tow a cruiser, right? But the simple truth is that cops on patrol do have to be able to get back to their car quickly, and get out quickly. Sometimes, the normal parking isn't amenable to that.
I do think the officer could have handled the situation better; a sarcastic remark almost never improves a situation. Had he taken a moment to explain things without sarcasm, perhaps it would have gone no further.
Regarding police driving in general... There are a number of things cops do on duty that they discourage others from doing, sometimes even by citations. Let's begin with the most obvious... Multi-task while driving. A typical cop on patrol is: driving a car (which is already multi-tasking!), listening or talking on a police radio (sometimes covering several frequencies), listening to the "fun radio", looking at messages on an MDT/car computer (if he has one), looking for traffic violations, looking for other violations, looking for suspicious behavior, and doing all the usual mental gymnastics of life. Some do something I personally think is unprofessional, and chatter on the cell phone. (Note that work-related calls are a different question; some things cannot be sent over the radio.) Cops also routinely do things that are outright violations of the traffic code, like turn without signals, or drive faster, use cut-throughs and cut around parking lots, and more. I hope few cops routinely run red lights without justification -- but I'm sure some do. Similarly, some cops will flip the blue lights on to get through an intersection, then turn them off again. There are reasons why they may do this with justification (some calls should not be responded to hot, but are still urgent, or get cancelled as soon as you get started for lots of reasons, for example), and some are just lazy. Many cops don't always wear their seatbelt, because we may have to jump out of our car suddenly and unexpectedly. They are often exempt from wearing a seatbelt, as are (in Virginia) taxi drivers, and postal and other delivery drivers.
The operation of a police car is one of the things that most often causes dissent for all these reasons. It's also something that causes huge liability for departments. Each agency and each officer has to balance the operation of a police vehicle with the demands of public safety as well as public relations. Officers are subject to discipline for actions that an ordinary driver is, at most, required to fix the damage. (I know someone who got disciplined for simply making contact with a post -- no damage to either cruiser or post!) And officers get complained on for things that are sometimes mind-boggling when driving; I once had someone complain that I was driving too fast while running lights and sirens to a call!
Now, let me return to the original situation. It's something I've seen happen a lot. Usually, unless someone was parked in a way that was causing a major safety problem, I would wait a few minutes before writing a parking ticket. Sometimes, I'd go inside the business, and suggest that the driver needs to move the car -- or else. Because I sometimes had to do the same thing, for reasons I've already discussed.
OK... one short soapbox moment. If you're concerned about the behavior of cops, there's a simple approach. CONTACT THE AGENCY. If it's about driving or parking, note the time and vehicle number, and the location. Complain. In many agencies, even an anonymous complaint gets investigated, no matter how small the matter. That cop has a supervisor, even if he's the chief of police, who answers to the mayor or town manager or whoever. It might be there's a legitimate problem -- or it might be that the officer has justification for what he or she was doing. But the brass can't address the legitimate issues if they're never told of them. I have had weeks when I had very little contact with my supervisors (in my current assignment, I answer to two sets of supervisors -- and can still have days go by when neither set sees me because of my duties), and that's not uncommon for cops. Just like we rely on the public to be our eyes and ears for crimes when we're not there -- you're also the eyes and ears for the supervisors.
As nearly always in these threads that we have on the odd occasion, I am indebted to those of our members who actually are LEO's and know of what they speak.
In this case in particular, I have had my own views modified by your words gentlemen. At first I was of the mind that it was good that civilians in America have an effective way of enforcing complaints against the police (and I still do think that to be a good thing). Then I thought excuses were being made for the officer in question and I felt that to be understandable but not such a good thing. Now I find that I have a deeper appreciation of the day-to-day annoyances that a cop has to go through just to do his job.
Thanks gentlemen.
In this case in particular, I have had my own views modified by your words gentlemen. At first I was of the mind that it was good that civilians in America have an effective way of enforcing complaints against the police (and I still do think that to be a good thing). Then I thought excuses were being made for the officer in question and I felt that to be understandable but not such a good thing. Now I find that I have a deeper appreciation of the day-to-day annoyances that a cop has to go through just to do his job.
Thanks gentlemen.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
I will have to look this up and this would of course only apply to NYS but I do believe in the VTL (Vehicle and traffic law) of NYS that the "Car" meaning the police car can do pretty much whatever it wants.
That sounds a bit silly I know but the main point is that the car can be parked absolutely anywhere it needs to be for any reason what-so-ever, it can run stop sighs and red lights, speed, etc. and it is not breaking the law.
But I really need to look that up to be sure since it has been a long time since I have had to pay much attention to the VTL.
That sounds a bit silly I know but the main point is that the car can be parked absolutely anywhere it needs to be for any reason what-so-ever, it can run stop sighs and red lights, speed, etc. and it is not breaking the law.
But I really need to look that up to be sure since it has been a long time since I have had to pay much attention to the VTL.
Most states have similar traffic codes. In Virginia, an emergency vehicle, operating under emergency conditions, may do any or all of the following:
* park or stand anywhere
* disregard regulations or signs regarding turning
* pass on right, siren not required
* disregard speed limits
* disregard a red light or stop sign, with due regard for safety
* pass slow moving or stopped vehicles by crossing over a yellow line
* pass at an intersection.
(46.2-920)
I think it is worth noting that, if you read the code section, you'll note that phrases like "due regard to safety" and that the operator of the emergency vehicle is not automatically exempted from liability for their actions.
Generally, the official line iit's that, outside of an emergency situation, police officers are supposed to be model examples of obeying the traffic code, including where they park. But the reality is that to do so is often in conflict with our mission. I may have to speed in order to catch up to a violator; I may not use my turn indicators in order to not advertise my intentions as I drive, and so on... and I don't even want to discuss some of the things I've ended up doing while conducting surveillance. In each case, I accept some risk by disregarding a rule that I feel is outweighed by the needs of my mission.
