Island cops
 

This time of year they import a ton of cops here...waaaay more cops per person than in the real world....anyway, I am crusin' in my vehicle (front cooler...rods on roof vehicle stuffed to the gills with fishing gear, etc) down a road that goes fro 40 to 25 mph...and right at the 25 mph sign he jumps out with and points a radar gun at me, he kind of frighten me...I though WTF? (I thought he was going to shoot me!) So I did what any island guy would do ... I pulled out my gun and shot him first just to be safe! :)
No, he got me at 42 mph as I crossed over into the 25mph zone. He signals me over and I obey. He tells me what transpired and looks at my lic and reg. Comes back to my car and says...I know your out here chasing fish and I will give you a warning on the speeding (a $175) fine but I have to give you a $25 fine for not wearing a seat belt. (I normally always wear a seat belt when I am on the mainland, all the time, but I normally tend to wait until my vehicle complains a couple times to put one on here and I was in a be-line to my boat and I wasn't thinking) Then he asks about the fishing and how have I been catching them.:) You gotta love it. Everyone talks fishing here...even the cops that are brought in to fine us. (First violation for me in 31 years...besides parking, I got one in RI about 10 years ago but beat that in court)

Good old West Tisbury. I know just the spot. I've seen them there many times over the years.

It really helps to have a local address on the ol' DL. ;)

They're doing this on the Cape, too. I can tell you every road in Bourne where they'll pull you over for more than 5 over. Gotta make up the shortfall in state aid to local towns :doh:

A good friend of mine was a cop on the Island for 28 years, the stories about the part time summer cops would fill 2 books.

Anybody see the story on Channel 5 a couple of weeks ago.....did a think on the Towns that are doing this the most. one of the towns was Georgetown.....they are all over everybody coming through the town speeding.

If the sign says 25....you better be doing 25

Yep Route 133 is known as a toll road. One of the toll booths is the VFW! Also has about four different speed zones.:rude:

Hawaii has gone heavily into video enforcement - personally, I think that's the way to go for traffic violations. We're the most heavily policed nation in the world - video cameras don't need pensions, salaries or health benefits. We need cops, we just don't need them writing traffic tickets. They're staking out stop signs in my town, looking for roll-throughs.

Funding re-acquisition programs.

I was under the impression that a ticket for no seat belt had to be in addition to another offense such as a moving violation. If there is no moving violation you should contest it on those grounds.

"Click-it or Ticket" There's been a big awareness campaign but you might have missed if you're not aware.

My understanding is that you cannot just be pulled over for not having your seat belt on. You have to be stopped for something else, then you can be cited for not having the belt on. So, if you're stopped for speeding, running a stop sign, etc.... you can be cited for the belt violation whether you get a ticket for the other infraction or not. Maybe Swimmer can chime in on this?

Not explicitly stated in this is that you can be pulled over for not wearing a seat belt as the primary reason. Outdated rule was not wearing a seat belt could only be as a secondary offense.

It's secondary enforcement. So they have to pull you over for something else first like speeding or being black. For not buckling children, they can pull you over as a primary offense. Mass and NH are about tied for the least seat belt usage.

The internet is an amazing thing......

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/90-13a.htm

PART I. ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT

TITLE XIV. PUBLIC WAYS AND WORKS


CHAPTER 90. MOTOR VEHICLES AND AIRCRAFT


MOTOR VEHICLES
Chapter 90: Section 13A. Seat belt use required; exemptions; penalty
Section 13A. No person shall operate a private passenger motor vehicle or ride in a private passenger motor vehicle, a vanpool vehicle or truck under eighteen thousand pounds on any way unless such person is wearing a safety belt which is properly adjusted and fastened; provided, however, that this provision shall not apply to:

(a) any child less than twelve years of age who is subject to the provisions of section seven AA;

(b) any person riding in a motor vehicle manufactured before July first, nineteen hundred and sixty-six;

(c) any person who is physically unable to use safety belts; provided, however, that such condition is duly certified by a physician who shall state the nature of the handicap, as well as the reasons such restraint is inappropriate; provided, further, that no such physician shall be subject to liability in any civil action for the issuance or for the failure to issue such certificate;

(d) any rural carrier of the United States Postal Service operating a motor vehicle while in the performance of his duties; provided, however, that such rural mail carrier shall be subject to department regulations regarding the use of safety belts or occupant crash protection devices;

(e) anyone involved in the operation of taxis, liveries, tractors, trucks with gross weight of eighteen thousand pounds or over, buses, and passengers of authorized emergency vehicles.

[ Clause (f) of first paragraph added by 2008, 225 effective October 29, 2008.]

(f) the side facing seat on which the factory did not install a seat belt in any car owned for the purpose of antique collection.

Any person who operates a motor vehicle without a safety belt, and any person sixteen years of age or over who rides as a passenger in a motor vehicle without wearing a safety belt in violation of this section, shall be subject to a fine of twenty-five dollars. Any operator of a motor vehicle shall be subject to an additional fine of twenty-five dollars for each person under the age of sixteen and no younger than twelve who is a passenger in said motor vehicle and not wearing a safety belt. The provisions of this section shall be enforced by law enforcement agencies only when an operator of a motor vehicle has been stopped for a violation of the motor vehicle laws or some other offense.
Any person who receives a citation for violating this section may contest such citation pursuant to section three of chapter ninety C. A violation of this section shall not be considered as a conviction of a moving violation of the motor vehicle laws for the purpose of determining surcharges on motor vehicle premiums pursuant to section one hundred and thirteen B of chapter one hundred and seventy-five.

True. Not explicitly stated in the law is the reality that they can pull you over whenever they want for no reason at all and if you mouth off about the general laws you'll find yourself intimately aquainted with the knobby end of a tonfa. I'd rather just get a ticket in the mail.

Yes the internet is a great resource and I stand corrected in that the "you" as the driver can not be pulled over for not wearing a seat belt as the primary offense, however you better be sure that no under age/weight/height kids are without their seatbelt(s) as this would be the justification needed to pull someone over:

CHAPTER 90. MOTOR VEHICLES AND AIRCRAFT

MOTOR VEHICLES
Chapter 90: Section 7AA. Child passenger restraints; fine; violation as evidence in civil action

[ First and second paragraphs effective until July 10, 2008. For text effective July 10, 2008, see below.]

Section 7AA. No child under age five and no child weighing forty pounds or less shall ride as a passenger in a motor vehicle on any way unless such child is properly fastened and secured, according to the manufacturer's instructions, by a child passenger restraint as defined in section one.

No child who is five years of age or older, but not older than twelve years of age, shall ride as a passenger in a motor vehicle on any way unless such child is wearing a safety belt which is properly adjusted and fastened according to the manufacturer's instructions.

[ First and second paragraphs as amended by 2008, 79, Sec. 2 effective July 10, 2008. For text effective until July 10, 2008, see above.]

A passenger in a motor vehicle on any way who is under the age of 8 shall be fastened and secured by a child passenger restraint, unless such passenger measures more than 57 inches in height. The child passenger restraint shall be properly fastened and secured according to the manufacturer's instructions.

Unless required to be properly fastened and secured by a child passenger restraint under the preceding paragraph, a passenger in a motor vehicle on any way that is under the age of 13 shall wear a safety belt which is properly adjusted and fastened according to the manufacturer's instructions.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to any such child who is: (1) riding as a passenger in a school bus; (2) riding as a passenger in a motor vehicle made before July first, nineteen hundred and sixty-six, that is not equipped with safety belts; (3) physically unable to use either a conventional child passenger restraint or a child restraint specifically designed for children with special needs; provided, however, that such condition is duly certified in writing by a physician who shall state the nature of the disability as well as the reasons such restraints are inappropriate; provided, further, that no such certifying physician shall be subject to liability in a civil action for the issuance of or for the failure to issue such certificate. An operator of a motor vehicle who violates the provisions of this section shall be subject to a fine of not more than twenty-five dollars; provided, however, that said twenty-five dollar fine shall not apply to an operator of a motor vehicle licensed as a taxi cab not equipped with a child passenger restraint device.

A violation of this section shall not be used as evidence of contributory negligence in any civil action.

A person who receives a citation for a violation of any of the provisions of this section may contest such citation pursuant to section three of chapter ninety C. A violation of this section shall not be deemed to be a conviction of a moving violation of the motor vehicle laws for the purpose of determining surcharges on motor vehicle premiums pursuant to section one hundred and thirteen B of chapter one hundred and seventy-five.

Well...Yeah, as this is a violation of a Motor Vehicle Law....so they can pull you over.

photo radar tickets
 

sure thats fine but how long between snap shot an removel from the roads for a drunk or 100mph+ racer. thats right a camera can't do that. only a officer can haul their butt in on the spot. in the mean time the camera lets them go on for weeks. And if they cant read the plate right or get a perfect driver id shot, or name doesn't match gender on registration, or its reg to a p.o. box, its not even sent out.
i know this because we have it in az.
sucks, traffic slows down for the camera and then jumps up 10-15mph till the next camera over and over.
besides the state/city give a big piece of change to the camera guys for rental and proccessing.
real policemen cant be replaced

True. However, the ones that pull people over for 43 in a 40, not properly yielding to on-coming traffic or sitting at a place where the speed limit randomly drops and the driver wouldn't know better unless they expected it - those cops are wasting my tax money, while losing credibility with the public.

When the job description goes from, "enforcing the law and protecting our citizens" to "harassing anyone and everyone so we can make a buck" while crime continues to climb, the actual value of a police officer decreases.

I'm not making a blanket statement about LEO. There are many in my family, along with many of my friends. I also understand that in many of these cases, the pressure to enact "enforcement" as they have comes from higher up the ladder. But almost daily, I hear a story about some frivolous pull-over, or ridiculous thing that's going on in XXX town to make some money. These stories severely harm the public's perception of LEO.

Seatbelts
 

First of all I wouldn't give Sandman a ticket because his wife is a doctor and probably works at the hospital where I might be brought in after being injured on duty, ya think.
Seatbelt violation on an adult is a secondary violation. Officer can stop for something else and just write for the seatbelt violation. He just has to have the PC for the stop other than the secondary stop violation.

Seatbelt violation on a child is a primary stop, all day every day. A very common cause of death of any child in the front seat of a car was the crushing injuries that occurred during a crash when the adult is thrown forward into the dash while holding a child.

I never knowingly wrote a nurse a citation either, ever, nurses are truely saints.

I remember the stories about Skip Manter after he graduated frrom the State Police Academy in May of 1976 with me. Hiding in the bushes, waiting for people to shed thier clothes and run in the water to go swimming. He'd run down to thier clothes and take them back to the station, making the owners of the clothes come into the station to get them back. Thats a direct quote from his story about doing that. I am not repeating someone elses story. The island a quirky place. Forty people will write letters to the editors of the Gazette about the local heroin dealer, and how the family is such a nice family, but the same people will chastise someone for clear cutting property they own in violation of MVC rules.

A buddy of mine was in Georgia visiting his son a few years ago. He got stopped for doing 41 m.p.h. in a 40 m.p.h. zone. Cop gave him a break because he was the retired chief of our auxilliary police department. Next day same guy stops him for the same violation 41 in a 40. He wrote him up.

Wealth Redistribution Officers. :) I used to get a ticket every year at a spot in CT. Road went 45 to 25 in about 200 yard stretch. They put a man in the bushes right at the sign and then pulled you over about 1/4 mile down the road. The one guy with the gun could keep 5 others busy writing the tickets down the road. They claimed it was a school zone but there was no school anywhere in site. Supposedly through the woods about 500 yrads there was a school! Unfortunately that kind of crap makes even the usually law abiding people pissed. It gives the cops ordered to raise revenue a bad name as ball busters.

This is exactly my point. Just as sales people are sometimes pushed to sell products they don't stand behind, I believe many cops are being pushed to "enforce the law more strictly" - Read: Bring us some more money. Although as in all walks of life, some are just pricks for the sake of it - we've got a couple in town that have been that way since I moved here 12 years ago.

Fine money
 

I can't honestly say I know of any departments who have ordered thier officers to write tickets, but it doesn't take a dummy to know if they replenish the towns coffers that money just might be funneled back to the department for saleries.

Thier is only one town in Massachusetts where the money comes directly back to the police dpeartment legally, and that is my department. Any other town that specifically detours money from checks recieved from the state or courts that is related to fines to a police agency is laundering money. It is not legal in any way. My town had a pending layoff in the early 80's, and our state rep at the time intrduced legislation that made earmarking fine money directly to an account that pays saleries and expenses completely legal. Not once did it ever get used for saleries, but we have had cruisers in excellant condition ever since.

When I read stories like Salthearts, being stopped right where speed signs go from 45 to 25 I get pissed, because thats not what enforcing the rules is about. If the posted speed before and after the 25 zone is 45 then it must a road in good shape, fairly uninhabited, rural probably, and under most circumstances you wouldn't get stopped on the road unless you were going 55 or better. High crash-rate intersections, roads where the speed limits is higher, and/or the offending drivers go even fatser, where if a crash were to occur it would be serious if not fatal, are areas that officers should be concentrating on. I am sure you can write just as many citations on those roads, just not as quickly as on a road like Saltheart described.

And you are exactly the type of officer whom I have the utmost respect for, appreciate that you are on the job and am grateful there are at least some officers like you protecting our streets.

I can take you to two places in Bourne where it goes from 35 to 25, and where there's a radar car more often than not. Both are on curves, but there are no cross streets entering blindly, and the curves themselves are easily and safely negotiable at 35 mph. And who are they stopping at 5:30 AM, except local residents on their way to work.

But they'll piss and moan when there's an expenditure question for new cruisers on the town meeting warrant, and the same people who get ticketed show up to say, basically, "sorry, but I gave at the office".

The place I wrote about in Ct was a classic speed trap. It was so safe that it was OK to pull over 4 , 5 ,6 cars at a time along this straight away because there was no problem with safety , even if you had several cars and officers on the side writing the tickets. Now it only happened once a year on a sunny day in the spring time but I know I get nabbed each and every time. The worst part is the repercussions down the road with insurance premiums. the actual fine is the cheapest part of the whole thing.

Now just to be even handed here , I remember one time I was in RI and late to meet my girlfriend in Worcester to go out to dinner for MY birthday. I was flying up 146 and saw way down the road my headlights hit the emblem on the side door of a police cruiser. I just came in for a landing right next to him in his hideaway spot . No need to argue , I was way over the limit. He just laughed at me pulling over without him even blinking his lights and gave me a warning along with a "Happy Birthday". . I appreciated it too cause at that time I was worse than broke.

Never wrote anyone on thier birthday either, Saltheart.

We have one of those trailers that myself and the safety officer placed at different areas around town. It not only scores popints with the taxpayers putting it someone for a few days, it actually helps to slow people to a respectable speed.

With the increase of tail-gating women, I find I can now speed with relative impunity. I just pull over, let the biotch go by and hang back and let her run the gauntlet.
Sometimes after they get pulled over, I'll sow down, open the window, and yell a take off of the John Wilkes Booth quote he exclaimed after he shot President Lincoln, "Sic semper tailgatus!" ("Thus always to tailgaters!") as I go by them after they are pulled over.
Of course being stupid, they don't get it, but I always get a good charge out of it. It's days like that that make life worthwhile.

We call people like that "minesweepers" :jester:

Send them to Middletown please.....

You want to take point? Be my guest.