Police perception amongst the general public.

[max-89supra(t)]

Thanks Dunkel. There are always two sides to a story, and theres always a bad apple in the bunch, it just sucks that they kinda screw it up for everyone else.

 

[Dunckel]

No problem guys.

 

[mattman]

I would just like to know if i should actually let a cop search my car. I have nothing to hide but also know my rights. I am usually respectful and always thank them for their service, after they either ticket me or let me off. another quick question is, is there a physical test that a cop must pass? Because usually I take one look at a cop and think to myself. "hmmm i bet i could out run him."
Anyways I would like to thank not only you but every Good law enforcer for keeping the roads and public safe.

 

[MDCmotorsports]

I would just like to know if i should actually let a cop search my car. I have nothing to hide but also know my rights. I am usually respectful and always thank them for their service, after they either ticket me or let me off. another quick question is, is there a physical test that a cop must pass? Because usually I take one look at a cop and think to myself. "hmmm i bet i could out run him."
Anyways I would like to thank not only you but every Good law enforcer for keeping the roads and public safe.

Some states and officers view this as "if you say no you're guilty."

Some officers know better: If you say yes you're a dumb ass.

As for physical test? It is different from state to state and department to department. Some departments have yearly physicals, and some have none.

My local dept has one, and that's the one to get into the department itself.

 

[ForcedTorque]

Over the years, I have personally known about 6 cops. 5 of the 6 have all told me the same story that I view as horrid. The other 1 seemed to be the genuine good guy like yourself Dunkel. The 5 all seperately told me the story of going into the projects, and cruising until someone starts to run. Then, it's time for a good foot chase, and an ass whooping. This story just makes me sick, and I have let each of these guys know my feelings on it. They defend it as "just having some fun!

Does your department have these guys too? Or is that just a southern red-neck thing?

 

[lewis15498]

First of all, thanks for this. I've thought about entering law enforcement for the same reason.

Why is it okay for state troopers, to drive down the left lane at 90-100 mph when patroling. I know they have high speed driving training, but even if I was a proven F1 racer I wouldn't be excused. Not saying I wouldn't do it if I was a trooper, but it would be pretty hypocritical to issue speeding tickets to someone who was driving in an otherwise safe manner.

Inversely I see people driving that are dangerously stupid everyday, often times blatently in front of cops, yet they never seem to get pulled over. If I had a dollar for every time I saw someone do something incredibly stupid in front of an officer, and thought "this idiots finally gonna get pulled over" and then the cop ignores it and i thought "are you fucking kidding me, I could never get away with that," I wouldn't be trying to figure out how to pay my tuition this semester.

 

[FullNelson]

Thanks Dunckel. Refreshing to hear the other side.

This. Thank you. We forget sometimes cops are human too.

 

[Dunckel]

I would just like to know if i should actually let a cop search my car. I have nothing to hide but also know my rights. I am usually respectful and always thank them for their service, after they either ticket me or let me off.

I guess it depends on whether or not you have something to hide. (You said you don't, but others reading this might.) If you do, and the Officer doesn't have enough PC to search the car, tell him to pound sand. If he does have PC for something, he'll find a way to get inside no matter what you say. If you don't have anything to hide, and you're not in a hurry to get anywhere, I say why not. You will be remembered as someone with nothing to hide, and being cooperative. It's really up to you.

is there a physical test that a cop must pass? Because usually I take one look at a cop and think to myself. "hmmm i bet i could out run him."

Departments all over the country are different. I've never heard of an agency that doesn't give some sort of physical test. Our hiring process here starts with a written civil service exam. Then a physical abilities test in which you must run a mile and a half in 12:30 or under, run 300 meters (3/4 the way arond a H.S. track) in under 50 seconds, 38 sit ups in under a minute, and 38 pushups in under a minute. Then the background check, then a polygraph, then a psych eval. The last step if you pass all that, is an oral board interview.

Over the years, I have personally known about 6 cops. 5 of the 6 have all told me the same story that I view as horrid. The other 1 seemed to be the genuine good guy like yourself Dunkel. The 5 all seperately told me the story of going into the projects, and cruising until someone starts to run. Then, it's time for a good foot chase, and an ass whooping. This story just makes me sick, and I have let each of these guys know my feelings on it. They defend it as "just having some fun!

Does your department have these guys too? Or is that just a southern red-neck thing?

Those Officers are the ones that make me sick. First off, this job is fun, but I'm not going to just chase someone for the fun of it. That person is probably running for a reason. If I don't have the legal right to chase him and detain him, I'm not going to take the chance of getting shot running around a blind corner after someone, just for the fun of it. Second, I touched on the legal right to detain. *If* I were to do that and unlawfully detain someone, I'm going to get my ass sued and lose everything I have. That doesn't sound like fun to me. I've had people take run from me as soon as they see me. Part of me thinks they are wanted, or have someting to hide they don't want me to find. Part of me wonders if they are smart, and want me to chase them knowing they don't have anything just so they can sue. Criminals are opportunists. Usually taking the easy way out. What better way to make some easy money than to let a cop unlawfully detain them, and possibly assault them in the process. I know I'll take an ass whoopin for a few hundred thousand. Especially in places like Oregon, where it is now legal to resist (fight) arrest if you have done nothing wrong. "Wait, you mean I can get a cop to chase me and I can physically assault him without being charged with anything, and even make some money?" Yup.

I can honestly say there is nobody in my department like that. The people I work with a true professionals, and they make me proud of the uniform I wear, and the department I represent.

First of all, thanks for this. I've thought about entering law enforcement for the same reason.

If it's what you have your heart set on, do it. But know what you are getting into. http://www.heavybadge.com/efstress.htm

Why is it okay for state troopers, to drive down the left lane at 90-100 mph when patroling. I know they have high speed driving training, but even if I was a proven F1 racer I wouldn't be excused. Not saying I wouldn't do it if I was a trooper, but it would be pretty hypocritical to issue speeding tickets to someone who was driving in an otherwise safe manner.

Police, while on duty, are not bound to State law. They can speed going to a call, run stop signs, point guns at people, park in the middle of the street, u-turns in business districts, ect. To answer your question, I do the same thing. I do it when I am running license plates looking for stolen cars, or looking for people that are driving while their license is suspended. The reason why, is if I do the speed limit with the rest of traffic, I look at the same license plates. Lol. So I'll speed to get to the next car ahead of me. Run the plate, comes back clear, I speed up to the next one. And so on. When I say I speed, I mean 15-20 over. If traffic is really heavy, I won't do that. I don't need to jeopardize me or anyone else for a suspended license.

Inversely I see people driving that are dangerously stupid everyday, often times blatently in front of cops, yet they never seem to get pulled over. If I had a dollar for every time I saw someone do something incredibly stupid in front of an officer, and thought "this idiots finally gonna get pulled over" and then the cop ignores it and i thought "are you fucking kidding me, I could never get away with that," I wouldn't be trying to figure out how to pay my tuition this semester.

They might me lazy, or busy. Or there might be other factors. In my city, we stay very busy. And it isn't with stupid stuff like cats in trees, or writing parking tickets. We have a shooting, robbery, assault, fights with weapons every day. (The day before yesterday my first two calls were chasing a robbery suspect who had a gun, and then pulling a gun off a wanted guy at a traffic stop.) Yakima has a huge gang problem, and they keep us very busy. I might be the only clear and available Officer in the city to respond to a call, as everyone else is tied up already. In that situation, I need to stay available in case a hot call comes out.

This. Thank you. We forget sometimes cops are human too.

Thank you.

 

[OneJArpus]

In the police academy do they train officers to "Shoot to Kill?"

 

[Dunckel]

In the police academy do they train officers to "Shoot to Kill?"

Not exactly. We shoot to stop. Unfortunately, when someone's nervous system is overloaded with stimulants, one, two, in some cases 10+ rounds to the body doesn't work. So we shoot for the "T zone" on the head. (Eyes, nose, mouth)

I don't think anyone of us wants to kill anyone. Not even when having to pull the trigger. The link I provided in my first post mentions other Officers in my dept. that have shot and killed someone. I've spent some time talking to each Officer about the situation. None of them shot thinking, "I need to kill this person." They thought, I have to stop this person from killing me, another Officer, or another person.

So, we don't shoot to kill, but we train to shoot areas on the body that are more likely to cause death.

Edit: We don't aim for the head at first. We train to shoot 3 to the chest, and 2 to the head. Always center mass first.
Another edit for random facts: Out of 130 or so Officers in my dept., I rank 15th overall for speed/accuracy. A good friend and fellow Officer just set a speed record with an AR15. From the low ready position, he raised and shot 3 targets in the head, hitting each target twice in 1.52 seconds.

 

[Kai's Better Half]

Hey, I was wondering how much time you actually spend out on the road if you will compared to the time doing paperwork in the office? Here in the UK/Channel Islands, there are less police on the street because a lot of the time they will be in the office doing paperwork and not keeping people safe. (Damn bureaucracy!) I know that the government in the UK has recently changed to conservative/lib dems, which say they will get more officers out there on the streets, but I am still doubtful.

Also another thing that I wonder is how do you make sure the streets are safe at night for young women coming out of bars/pubs/etc and making sure they get home safe? It's a really big issue over here and I wondered how the americans did it.

Thanks also for being a good cop from what I have read so far

 

[fixitman04]

"Talking on the phone while driving is a stupid law."

having been hit twice now myself by people talking on the phone and having a friend disabled by a texter, i completely disagree. please do your job and enforce this law! phones have no place being used in cars that are moving.

 

[SupraMario]

"Talking on the phone while driving is a stupid law."

having been hit twice now myself by people talking on the phone and having a friend disabled by a texter, i completely disagree. please do your job and enforce this law! phones have no place being used in cars that are moving.

I was going to post this, talking on the phone or texting is more dangerous than a Drunk or sleep deprived driver...I don't know how many times it has been proven but people (general public) cannot drive for shit to begin with.

 

[GrimJack]

"Talking on the phone while driving is a stupid law."

having been hit twice now myself by people talking on the phone and having a friend disabled by a texter, i completely disagree. please do your job and enforce this law! phones have no place being used in cars that are moving.

I was going to post this, talking on the phone or texting is more dangerous than a Drunk or sleep deprived driver...I don't know how many times it has been proven but people (general public) cannot drive for shit to begin with.

The problem here is that the law as written is useless. It's talking on the phone that causes a distraction, not the act of holding the phone. Unfortunately, banning phone conversations entirely while in the car isn't possible, there's a LOT of money into bluetooth from cellular tech, phone, and automobile companies, and none of them want their gear / services banned.

Furthermore, statistics show that cell phone usage has no discernible effect on accident rates. If cell phones were really dangerous, you would expect to see the accident rates increase as cell phones were adopted - and this has not happened. Also, you would expect accident rates to decrease as cell phone use in cars has been banned - and this also has not happened. Maybe the bad drivers used to be distracted by shaving, reading the paper, eating, and applying makeup, and now they have moved back into those areas again.

The bottom line is that bad drivers will find something to distract them from their primary task.

 

[Dunckel]

Hey, I was wondering how much time you actually spend out on the road if you will compared to the time doing paperwork in the office?

I spend as much time away from the station as possible. If I can, I'll write reports from inside the car while staying in my district. That way if something goes down near me, I'm able to put aside the paperwork for a while and handle what needs to be handled. Different situations require different amounts of time depending on how many people/vehicles involved, charges, property being seized, etc. If I had to give you an average, I would say I spend about 2-3 hours per day doing paperwork during a 10 hour shift.

The pictures are the result of a social contact, that turned into PC and a search warrant to search the car 4 gang members were in. 2 were adults, 2 were juveniles. The juveniles were charged with possession of drug paraphernalia, possession of marijuana under 40 grams, and minor in possession of alcohol, and released to their parents. The 2 adults were charged with possession of marijuana under 40g, and possession of drug paraphernalia. Evidence seized was a bong, a glass pipe, 2 digital scales, 15 grams of marijuana, and 2 bottles of Tequila. I was in the field working on this for about an hour and a half. I was at the police station doing paperwork for 5 hours. The only reasons I spent so much time on it, was because they were all gang members, they all lied to me after explaining that if they told me the truth, I wouldn't be so hard on them. (It was obvious they were smoking marijuana in the car cause the smoke was rolling out the window cheech and chong style) I told them if they just gave me the weed they would get a ticket and a court date. But nope, they all lied about it. So I had to take the time and write a warrant, and bother a judge.

Also another thing that I wonder is how do you make sure the streets are safe at night for young women coming out of bars/pubs/etc and making sure they get home safe? It's a really big issue over here and I wondered how the americans did it.

Thanks also for being a good cop from what I have read so far

We really don't have the manpower to make sure anyone gets home safe. I will however, if it's a slow night and I'm not busy, sit in the parking lot in a marked patol car while the bars are closing. Fights and bars go hand in hand. So I've found that the property owners are greatful to have an Officer in the parking lot at closing time. There are less fights, and less shitbags, leaving the good people that just want to go out and have a good time.

And you are very welcome. I really try to do my part in reversing the public's perception. I volunteer to speak at schools about the importance of education, and spend as much time as I can volunteering with the special olympics.

"Talking on the phone while driving is a stupid law."

having been hit twice now myself by people talking on the phone and having a friend disabled by a texter, i completely disagree. please do your job and enforce this law! phones have no place being used in cars that are moving.

I am very sorry to hear that. There are many Officers that will stop people and cite them for driving while on the phone. Let me also say, that I will stop and cite someone for texting while driving. I have to agree with Dave though for the reasons mentioned in his post. I also can't bring myself to tax someone for doing something I do myself. That's the same reason I won't tax someone for doing less than 10mph over the speed limit. There have been thousands of accidents involving fatalities because someone took their eyes off the road to change the radio station. I think it would be stupid to outlaw radios in cars. And if they did, I wouldn't enforce it. Like Dave mentioned, a bad driver is going to find a way to crash somehow, no matter what we outlaw.

Again I am sorry you've had to go through what you have, and I do respect your opinion.

 

[Poodles]

I find my perception is based off traffic cops and not what I refure to as "real" cops. City I lived in had a fleet of motorcycle cops just to write speeding tickets (where hired specificly to do it to increase revenue), and their cruisers were marked "Traffic Enforcement." The "real" cops just had police on the side and one other thing, can't remember what it was, but it was generally an officer called from the station for investigations.

Traffic cops have always given me grief, even for something minor. Like pulling me over for a missing front license plate....that was clearly attached. He even checked when I told him it's there, but he still hunted all over my car for something to get me on. Or the motorcycle cops that lean over to look in people's cars in traffic. I think that's the real issue with public perception when traffic cops have become tax collectors.

I don't think it's like this everywhere, but here, it sucks. The "real" cops are awesome and have always been great people to deal with.

 

[mattman]

2 more question. i have had a friend that was driving up a hill. at the top he met a cop, the cop then pulled a U-turn and pulled him over for speeding. theres no way that cop could have had time to radar him to know if he was speeding. so i was just wondering if you could ask to see the speed they clocked you at, or do you have to take their word for it. Also i have a "fuzz buster" which are LEGAL when i live, so i will know when their trying to pull something on me, but would like some proof before i run my mouth.
the other is that most my friends believe that a radar is inaccurate when driving head to head. I on the other hand believe the radar is "smarter" than that, and will deduct moving speed. so are my friends right?

 

[GrimJack]

Keep in mind that any old LEO are likely to have been through the specialized training that teaches them how to gauge your speed without the help of radar. Not sure about your area, but here it's regarded by the courts as more accurate than radar, and trying to fight it is a lesson in frustration.

This training isn't as common any more, because radar units are cheaper than the training.

 

[Dunckel]

2 more question. i have had a friend that was driving up a hill. at the top he met a cop, the cop then pulled a U-turn and pulled him over for speeding. theres no way that cop could have had time to radar him to know if he was speeding. so i was just wondering if you could ask to see the speed they clocked you at, or do you have to take their word for it.

His radar was probably a dash mounted unit, and was probably on. In which case it only takes a fraction of a second to know if he was speeding. You can ask to see it, but that's a good way to get a ticket. There is no state or federal law that says an Officer has to show you.

Also i have a "fuzz buster" which are LEGAL when i live, so i will know when their trying to pull something on me, but would like some proof before i run my mouth.

Your "fuzz buster" is a rather crude radio receiver tuned to “X-band” radar frequencies. Problem is, many other microwave devices share X-band with police radar, such as burglar alarms, supermarket door openers, etc. Result: constant false alarms. On a basic level, radar detectors are still radio receivers. At first, they were all tuned to the X-band frequency. However, in the past 20 years, there’s been an ongoing “arms race” between the radar gun and the radar detector makers. The first big change the gun makers made was to switch to K-band. Older detectors were completely blind to it. The detector-makers caught up, so the next change was to Ka-band. Today, all three radar frequencies are in common use. Detectors make different sounds when they detect each kind. X-band is the most “polluted” (by door openers, etc.) and has the highest number of false signals. K-band is usually radar, although some openers operate on this frequency too. Also, cheaply made radar detectors in other people’s cars can “leak” and cause false alarms on your K-band detector. Ka-band is almost always radar.

The radar gun I use is an "Instant on" radar. The gun is set up and ready to go, but not transmitting. I have your speed locked on before your radar detector goes off.

the other is that most my friends believe that a radar is inaccurate when driving head to head. I on the other hand believe the radar is "smarter" than that, and will deduct moving speed. so are my friends right?

Your friends are wrong. Radar is most accurate head on. The greater the transmission angle of the gun to the target vehicle, the greater the error. However, the angle is always to the advantage of the driver. It always shows a speed less then the actual speed. An example would be a radar gun transmitting at a 10' degree angle from the approaching target vehicle. The target vehicle's actual speed is 60 mph but the radar gun shows 59.

A side note: I had a lady tell me once, "I want to see HARD EVIDENCE that I was speeding." I told her, "I want to see HARD EVIDENCE that she wasn't. She said, "I was looking at my speedometer." I told her, "I was looking at my radar gun. It's metal and doesn't get much harder than that." It may have been an asshole response, but I don't like liars, and I don't like being accused of being a liar. That's another sure way to get a ticket 100% of the time.

Keep in mind that any old LEO are likely to have been through the specialized training that teaches them how to gauge your speed without the help of radar. Not sure about your area, but here it's regarded by the courts as more accurate than radar, and trying to fight it is a lesson in frustration.

This training isn't as common any more, because radar units are cheaper than the training.

I think you are referreing to VASCAR.

 

[te72]

Good thread man, thanks for the insight. Question though: what's up with Utah Highway Patrol? If I drive through Utah in any Supra, regardless of my driving habits, I get pulled over. Multiple times, I have been told that I was going as much as 15 over the limit with my cruise set, on stock sized tires. I learned my lesson the first time I paid a $360 ticket there (admittedly, I was hauling ass, wasn't used to a car so quiet at such speeds yet), so I try not to speed anymore, especially through Utah.

Is it just an out of area thing, are they just looking to pull over anyone not contributing to their church?