Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-19-2010, 11:25 AM   #41
Buzglyd
Founding Member
 
Buzglyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,904
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seruzawa View Post
Jeff, your points are well taken but I just try to look at it this way: The guy was merely speeding on a motorcycle. This posed little danger to anyone other than himself. If he'd been driving a 3/4 ton pickup at 120 that would be different. An off duty cop out of uniform in his personal car stops in front of this guy, jumps out looking like a maniac and pulls his gun. Whoa. Big over reaction. Then the guy posts a video of this cop. So now the police department in usual thin blue line fashion get a fishing warrant from a coward of a judge.... who himself is merely a jumped up lawyer.

In all this is lost the original offense which is not much of an offense at all. Except for the overblown propaganda that police agencies use to justify their lazy practice of sitting and staring at radar guns, speeding wouldn't be that much an issue. If the cops really cared about traffic safety they'd be going after people who blow through red lights or weave around yakking on cell phones. The concentration on speeding is just a method of justifying laziness and exists mainly for revenue enhancement. Before the invention of radar guns the cops never spent a lot of time on speeders because generally speeding on highways isn't all that dangerous.
The cops don't write cell phone and texting tickets because they do it themselves. I've pulled up at stoplights several times now and have seen cops sitting there staring at their cell phones.
Buzglyd is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 04-19-2010, 12:43 PM   #42
The_AirHawk
Founding Member
 
The_AirHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Leanin' Tower O' P-P-P-P-POWAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Posts: 11,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzglyd View Post
The cops don't write cell phone and texting tickets because they do it themselves. I've pulled up at stoplights several times now and have seen cops sitting there staring at their cell phones.
I was just reading an article in the paper today about the new anti-texting driving-laws in AR - there have been 11 "convictions" since it was started earlier this year. The Law's sponsor was quoted as being "disappointed that no more have been ticketed and convicted".

Meh.
__________________
Parfois, on fait pas semblant
Sometimes, it's not pretend
Oderint Dum Metuant
Let them hate so long as they fear
политики предпочитают безоружных крестьян
Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants
Nothing to see here, Citizen. Move along now...
The_AirHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 12:46 PM   #43
jeff10236
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Annapolis, Maryland
Posts: 124
Default

OK, now that we've switched gears a bit I will add my $0.02. Talking policy instead of whether the cop did anything wrong, we are closer together here.

Seruzawa, I think the speeds he was running are dangerous (and even on a motorcycle, I think they endanger others). But, I also agree that most of the emphasis on speeding isn't really for public safety as most garden variety speeding is no big deal (who wants to argue that modern cars on the interstate are unsafe at 70, 80 or even 90+MPH- though most drivers probably cease to be safe somewhere between 80-85). It is something that can easily be proven (the radar gun) unlike reckless driving where it can be the cop's word v. the driver's (though guess which side most judges will take). It is also an easy statistic to point to when they want to say they are doing something to keep the roads safe. It is also a "nice" way to raise revenue for local governments without raising taxes. So, police departments like it.

AirHawk, I do think it is a good law. I don't want people taping what I say without my permission and possibly releasing it out of context, or worse, edited. I'm a teacher so my job is somewhat dependent upon my public reputation. However, a felony that can carry 10 years or longer in jail, that's a bit much. A misdomeanor (at least for a first offense) and grounds to sue if used to smear someone seems more appropriate to me.

If we want to talk about poor police policies my first choice would be 'no knock' warrants, talk about an abomination, though that would be a bit off topic for this website.
jeff10236 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 12:50 PM   #44
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_AirHawk View Post
I was just reading an article in the paper today about the new anti-texting driving-laws in AR - there have been 11 "convictions" since it was started earlier this year. The Law's sponsor was quoted as being "disappointed that no more have been ticketed and convicted".

Meh.
I guess this idiot lawmaker forgot that the purpose of the law is to eliminate such behavior. Therefore few tickets should be a positive thing. The purpose of passing such laws is not to fill the courts and prisons. Or at least it shouldn't be.

What am I saying? The purpose is revenue enhancement of course. I'll bet the govt was predicting the law would result in so many million dollars in fines. Too bad for them.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 12:56 PM   #45
Buzglyd
Founding Member
 
Buzglyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,904
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seruzawa View Post
I guess this idiot lawmaker forgot that the purpose of the law is to eliminate such behavior. Therefore few tickets should be a positive thing. The purpose of passing such laws is not to fill the courts and prisons. Or at least it shouldn't be.

What am I saying? The purpose is revenue enhancement of course. I'll bet the govt was predicting the law would result in so many million dollars in fines. Too bad for them.
I'm sure that didn't stop them from "pre-spending" the money.
Buzglyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 01:06 PM   #46
The_AirHawk
Founding Member
 
The_AirHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Leanin' Tower O' P-P-P-P-POWAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Posts: 11,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff10236 View Post
AirHawk, I do think it is a good law. I don't want people taping what I say without my permission and possibly releasing it out of context, or worse, edited. I'm a teacher so my job is somewhat dependent upon my public reputation. However, a felony that can carry 10 years or longer in jail, that's a bit much. A misdomeanor (at least for a first offense) and grounds to sue if used to smear someone seems more appropriate to me.
The thing is, there is no Reasonable Expectation of Privacy on the Highways (or for that matter any Private Property frequented by the Public - such as Malls, Stores, Fairgrounds, etc.). This has gone to the Supreme Court in several states (but apparently not Maryland, yet), and every ruling has been FOR the party doing the recording (mostly Police agencies, BTW).

I haven't found the actual wording of the Maryland law (yet), but I'm willing to lay-on that what this rider has done is not covered. It will be a stretch, to be certain. But that never stopped Authority from exercising a Law outside the Intent of its Definer. Look at how misused RICO has become - essentially we're breaking it Right At This Moment.............

Law and Conviction isn't really about Legality, but Precedent. If they continue to press this issue, and if he's got a enough money and a good-enough Lawyer, the law he's being charged under will be overturned (and rightly so). Stare decisis et non quieta movere; "Maintain what has been decided and do not alter that which has been established".

If not, then every time some the dash-cam on some Police Cruiser somewhere goes on; They. Are. Breaking. The. Law. ALL of those cameras record sound (for use as evidence) - and all of them are somewhat unobtrusive (concealed) - But, who has any expectation of Privacy in a Traffic Stop? Nobody. NOT because you're in front of a Cop, but because you're alongside the road. Ergo, no "wiretapping". Everything you say or do is all in full-view of any passersby - all Public Domain.
__________________
Parfois, on fait pas semblant
Sometimes, it's not pretend
Oderint Dum Metuant
Let them hate so long as they fear
политики предпочитают безоружных крестьян
Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants
Nothing to see here, Citizen. Move along now...

Last edited by The_AirHawk : 04-19-2010 at 01:10 PM.
The_AirHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 01:15 PM   #47
pplassm
Founding Member
 
pplassm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,875
Default

I think the elephant in the room is, around here, just about every sportbike rider will run from the cops. I am sure that Trooper Euhler had his share of runaways.

There was a high profile runaway case last year where the pursuing officer crossed the centerline and killed two people. The rider escaped, as far as I know.

That probably has a lot to do with his reaction and obvious agitation.
__________________
Mongo just pawn in game of life.
pplassm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 01:52 PM   #48
The_AirHawk
Founding Member
 
The_AirHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Leanin' Tower O' P-P-P-P-POWAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Posts: 11,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pplassm View Post
I think the elephant in the room is, around here, just about every sportbike rider will run from the cops. I am sure that Trooper Euhler had his share of runaways.

There was a high profile runaway case last year where the pursuing officer crossed the centerline and killed two people. The rider escaped, as far as I know.

That probably has a lot to do with his reaction and obvious agitation.
But he wasn't running. Hooning a bit prior to the "stop", maybe. Neither of the Troopers (at the time) apparently believed so - if they thought he WAS, why didn't one of them initiate an Arrest (which they most-assuredly would have if either believed the rider had been doing-so)? Because neither thought he was a "runner". The thought that the plainclothes Trooper "needed" a gun to defend himself against some guy on a bike is ludicrous (who only reacted in a way any sane person operating a much-smaller vehicle would when confronted by an apparent Road-Rager attempting to assault them - i.e. he gave Captain Insano some room - "if you want that space, F-Bomb'n TAKE it, dude!").

Some dude just pulls in front of your bike, hops out, and starts waving a gun and screaming - WTF are YOU gonna do? (aside from shatz yer pants)

What the Trooper has had happen in the past with other riders is irrelavant - this is HERE, this is NOW. By comparing THIS stop with others where the rider ran, you're only adding to the B.S. perception that "All Sportbike Riders Run" - I don't. None of my friends do (although Bullshyte like this makes myself and other definitely consider it!).

The whole stop has been "settled", anyway - at issue is whether or not this guy broke a Wiretapping law (which is ridiculous!), or if this is just some trumped-up Bullshyte a Pig with a Ginormous Ego is attempting to stuff up this guys Ass because he made himself out to be a First Class Pr!ck, and it was recorded and posted to Youtube for the World to observe.

I believe we all can see what's the real issue here.
__________________
Parfois, on fait pas semblant
Sometimes, it's not pretend
Oderint Dum Metuant
Let them hate so long as they fear
политики предпочитают безоружных крестьян
Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants
Nothing to see here, Citizen. Move along now...

Last edited by The_AirHawk : 04-19-2010 at 01:54 PM.
The_AirHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2010, 05:01 AM   #49
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default

The thought that the plainclothes Psychotic "needed" a gun to defend himself against some guy on a bike is ludicrous (who only reacted in a way any sane person operating a much-smaller vehicle would when confronted by an apparent Road-Rager attempting to assault them - i.e. he gave Captain Insano some room - "if you want that space, F-Bomb'n TAKE it, dude!").

There. fixed it.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-20-2010, 07:21 AM   #50
sarnali2
Aging Cafe` Racer

 
sarnali2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sittin' down by my window, lookin' at the rain.
Posts: 8,719
Default

Yeah, the stop isn't the point. The guy was speeding and he got popped end of story, the point is an off duty cop in a private vehicle in civilian clothes jumping out pulling a gun on some guy. The wire tapping and video taping rule is total bullsh*t if in fact it's a law. That makes bank lobby's, ATM's, convenience stores and red light cameras all illegal because they all record you without your permission. Making it a felony is f*cking ludicrous and one more reason I'm glad I don't live on the East coast..
__________________
"Carpe` Throttelum -Loud Suits Save Lives"

"He said he's farting because of his medication"...
sarnali2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off