Law Enforcement
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 431
Bikes: Surly Krampus
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Law Enforcement
It seems like most discussions on safety have one thing in common: The rules don't work because they aren't being enforced.
So I did a google search and found some numbers. In 2012, about 10 000 people were murdered in the U.S. There were about 30 000 traffic fatalities in the same year. I fully expected Canada to follow the same trend, but we actually had 500 murders and 300 traffic deaths.
I've always said that gangs are dangerous, but the real killer is the ordinary bad driver, racing home on the freeway. Maybe I was half right.
I say you should take the entire DEA and put them on traffic duty.
So I did a google search and found some numbers. In 2012, about 10 000 people were murdered in the U.S. There were about 30 000 traffic fatalities in the same year. I fully expected Canada to follow the same trend, but we actually had 500 murders and 300 traffic deaths.
I've always said that gangs are dangerous, but the real killer is the ordinary bad driver, racing home on the freeway. Maybe I was half right.
I say you should take the entire DEA and put them on traffic duty.
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
4 Posts
The rules do work for the most part, but they can't be effectively enforced.
Outside of speed and traffic light cameras, I don't see any way to enforce most traffic laws that would make getting caught likely enough to deter breaking the law.
Even if you double or triple the number of police officers on traffic duty, that means instead of seeing two cops per week for a total of 30 seconds during your weekly drive time, you see four for a total of a minute.
How many time do you see cars speeding or running stop signs? How many times do you see cars stopped for doing that. Now, double the number of cars you see stopped. Think that will make a difference? Instead of having a 99.98% chance of getting away with running that stop sign, it'd be 99.96%. Do you think that's even going to register on the average driver?
Outside of speed and traffic light cameras, I don't see any way to enforce most traffic laws that would make getting caught likely enough to deter breaking the law.
Even if you double or triple the number of police officers on traffic duty, that means instead of seeing two cops per week for a total of 30 seconds during your weekly drive time, you see four for a total of a minute.
How many time do you see cars speeding or running stop signs? How many times do you see cars stopped for doing that. Now, double the number of cars you see stopped. Think that will make a difference? Instead of having a 99.98% chance of getting away with running that stop sign, it'd be 99.96%. Do you think that's even going to register on the average driver?
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,139
Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
9 Posts
I would think "law enforcement" would be a PO post.
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 2,712
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
A multi-billion, multi-year effort to enforce drug laws has not been effective. In fact, quite the contrary. Other examples can easily be cited. So, by what stretch of logic do you think that more stringent enforcement of traffic laws would be effective?
We had a period a few years ago when the national (US) speed limit was lowered to 55. I was spending a lot of time in Canada then and seem to remember theirs being similar. A resounding failure that resulted in changing the limits to what we have today.
Fact is external enforcement of laws that don't make sense to individuals is doomed to failure, often with dire social consequences. On the other hand people will docilely exercise self-discipline and conform to those that make sense.
The problem is not law enforcement. It is lack of citizen self-responsibility and courtesy. Work on that and you will have achieved something worthwhile.
We had a period a few years ago when the national (US) speed limit was lowered to 55. I was spending a lot of time in Canada then and seem to remember theirs being similar. A resounding failure that resulted in changing the limits to what we have today.
Fact is external enforcement of laws that don't make sense to individuals is doomed to failure, often with dire social consequences. On the other hand people will docilely exercise self-discipline and conform to those that make sense.
The problem is not law enforcement. It is lack of citizen self-responsibility and courtesy. Work on that and you will have achieved something worthwhile.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chico, Cali
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The drug war is not an analog to our war on cars. It targets a different, more susceptible segment of society. It's much easier to ask a soccer mom to drive 25 rather than 30 because it reduces fatalities amongst the kids she'll be running over than it is to ask a troubled youth not to experiment with marijuana or meth. You experience fewer messaging problems given that traffic fatalities are a truly massive issue unlike some of the eccentricities of the drug war (see reefer madness). Traffic offenses are also easy to catch and punish lightly and frequently. The threat of being caught is already very real to most drivers and their behavior has already changed accordingly. Drug offenses are much harder to catch and the subjects of the war on drugs, many not being particularly bright in the first place, typically view themselves as more clever than average. This is the "I drive better drunk than you do sober" crowd in action. The punishments against careless drivers are more effective at inducing a change in behavior. They whack a largely middle class audience where it hurts. In the drug war you're largely targeting lower class individuals with rare and ridiculous penalties that simply don't register mentally. Most people think they'll never get caught on drug offenses. Drivers expect to. You also have a situation where social engineering has been fairly ineffective, whereas traffic engineering can be remarkably effective at taming drivers if your engineers aren't committed to design speeds 20mph above the posted limit.
tl;dr: Traffic enforcement is very different than drug enforcement and the specifics mean that it's easier to change behavior. Drug users don't expect to be caught. Speeding motorists write it off as a cost of doing business. Making business more expensive reduces offenses.
tl;dr: Traffic enforcement is very different than drug enforcement and the specifics mean that it's easier to change behavior. Drug users don't expect to be caught. Speeding motorists write it off as a cost of doing business. Making business more expensive reduces offenses.
#6
Senior Member
The drug war is not an analog to our war on cars. It targets a different, more susceptible segment of society. It's much easier to ask a soccer mom to drive 25 rather than 30 because it reduces fatalities amongst the kids she'll be running over than it is to ask a troubled youth not to experiment with marijuana or meth. You experience fewer messaging problems given that traffic fatalities are a truly massive issue unlike some of the eccentricities of the drug war (see reefer madness). Traffic offenses are also easy to catch and punish lightly and frequently. The threat of being caught is already very real to most drivers and their behavior has already changed accordingly. Drug offenses are much harder to catch and the subjects of the war on drugs, many not being particularly bright in the first place, typically view themselves as more clever than average. This is the "I drive better drunk than you do sober" crowd in action. The punishments against careless drivers are more effective at inducing a change in behavior. They whack a largely middle class audience where it hurts. In the drug war you're largely targeting lower class individuals with rare and ridiculous penalties that simply don't register mentally. Most people think they'll never get caught on drug offenses. Drivers expect to. You also have a situation where social engineering has been fairly ineffective, whereas traffic engineering can be remarkably effective at taming drivers if your engineers aren't committed to design speeds 20mph above the posted limit.
tl;dr: Traffic enforcement is very different than drug enforcement and the specifics mean that it's easier to change behavior. Drug users don't expect to be caught. Speeding motorists write it off as a cost of doing business. Making business more expensive reduces offenses.
tl;dr: Traffic enforcement is very different than drug enforcement and the specifics mean that it's easier to change behavior. Drug users don't expect to be caught. Speeding motorists write it off as a cost of doing business. Making business more expensive reduces offenses.
Soccer mom late for precious child's soccer practice is not doing the speed limit... And since cops don't enforce +5mph over the limit, the majority of traffic is doing 30 in a 25.
The threat of being caught rarely figures into motorist mentality until and unless they see a cop by the side of the road. Punishments against careless drivers? What are you talking about? They don't really exist and certainly don't practically figure into the consciousness of most who I see texting or on a cell phone. Drivers do not expect to get caught, which is why so many of them flaunt laws so regularly.
Drug users don't think they'll get caught, so they use drugs; motorists who regularly flaunt laws don't think they'll get caught so they break driving laws. Totally analogous.
#7
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,699 Times
in
2,519 Posts
you occasionally see announcements where police departments announce that they are going after aggressive drivers, but that's really hard if there is a police cruiser involved. They probably need to get more unmarked cars that aren't identifiably police cars without the markings. I don't see speeding in and of itself being a problem, it's the people that are out of the norm that are the problem. And the drivers that continue to go nuts even when everyone else is slowing
#8
Jedi Master
The rules don't work because we have too many stupid rules that don't do anything to keep anyone safe. Just this morning I blew a 4-way stop on my bike without even slowing down right in front of a parked police cruiser. It was 5 AM on a very quiet residential street, and the only car in sight was the parked cruiser. Does anyone think that I would have been any safer or made anyone else any safer if I would have come to a complete stop before proceeding? Apparently the cop didn't because he didn't chase me down.
#9
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
The problem is that it is prohibitively expensive to enforce traffic laws in perpetuity. Rather than expect to pay for someone to sit and watch traffic on a daily basis, change the roadways so they discourage excessive speeds... the easiest way is to make roads and lanes narrower. This is a one time investment, with regular repairs that will be less expensive then funding a cop every few miles in perpetuity to enforce the laws.
Re configuring the streets could also result in room for quality bike paths.
But of course none of this will happen.... roads will get little more than paint, laws won't be enforced, and drivers will speed... and the beat goes on.
Re configuring the streets could also result in room for quality bike paths.
But of course none of this will happen.... roads will get little more than paint, laws won't be enforced, and drivers will speed... and the beat goes on.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Gaseous Cloud around Uranus
Posts: 3,741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 11 Times
in
7 Posts
Sending DEA to do traffic is a GREAT idea....They could actually make a difference.
It's not a war on drugs,it's a war on us....How to legally pick our pockets....
You want get rid of the bad elements in drugs,make it legal....Sure could use a case of bathtub gin....Know anybody selling?
It's not a war on drugs,it's a war on us....How to legally pick our pockets....
You want get rid of the bad elements in drugs,make it legal....Sure could use a case of bathtub gin....Know anybody selling?
Last edited by Booger1; 12-05-14 at 11:31 AM.
#11
24-Speed Machine
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Posts: 6,058
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
It seems like most discussions on safety have one thing in common: The rules don't work because they aren't being enforced.
So I did a google search and found some numbers. In 2012, about 10 000 people were murdered in the U.S. There were about 30 000 traffic fatalities in the same year. I fully expected Canada to follow the same trend, but we actually had 500 murders and 300 traffic deaths.
I've always said that gangs are dangerous, but the real killer is the ordinary bad driver, racing home on the freeway. Maybe I was half right.
I say you should take the entire DEA and put them on traffic duty.
So I did a google search and found some numbers. In 2012, about 10 000 people were murdered in the U.S. There were about 30 000 traffic fatalities in the same year. I fully expected Canada to follow the same trend, but we actually had 500 murders and 300 traffic deaths.
I've always said that gangs are dangerous, but the real killer is the ordinary bad driver, racing home on the freeway. Maybe I was half right.
I say you should take the entire DEA and put them on traffic duty.
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,547
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18378 Post(s)
Liked 4,512 Times
in
3,354 Posts
So, one would expect the numbers to be about 10 times higher in the USA.
That doesn't account for the entire difference, but some of it. I'm not sure about the rest of the difference. In the US, lower population density may be associated with higher fatalities. NYC may be an anomaly because of the high number of people using public transportation.
On some charts, Oregon is showing up with lower than expected traffic fatality rates.
I wonder if there is an element of extending courtesy to driving. So, in Oregon one has a tendency to leave holes for cars to merge, and etc.
I can remember in Missouri, one instance where the person behind me honked at me for waiting for a firetruck to pass, and another instance when a traffic light backed up traffic for more than a block, so I naturally stopped leaving the next interchange clear. 2 or 3 cars pulled into the center turn lane to get around me and clog up the interchange.
How does the winter affect Canadian driving? Perhaps half the year, Canadians drive much less.
Anyway, traffic safety has a lot more than handing out more tickets for stuff that probably would never make any difference for safety one way or another.
#13
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 431
Bikes: Surly Krampus
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Sending DEA to do traffic is a GREAT idea....They could actually make a difference.
It's not a war on drugs,it's a war on us....How to legally pick our pockets....
You want get rid of the bad elements in drugs,make it legal....Sure could use a case of bathtub gin....Know anybody selling?
It's not a war on drugs,it's a war on us....How to legally pick our pockets....
You want get rid of the bad elements in drugs,make it legal....Sure could use a case of bathtub gin....Know anybody selling?
Backlash against "stupid" laws is also something that is understandable, but then we're getting into pretty subjective territory. Some people think it's stupid that they aren't allowed to text and drive, some think it's stupid that a bicycle would even be allowed on the road.
Things like bike lanes or separate infrastructure are good things. But if you want to advocate for something that really helps, call for basic traffic enforcement. Everybody wants bad drivers off the road.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 7,048
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 509 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
8 Posts
I lived in a place at a time where traffic laws were seriously enforced. I think this policy was easier to sell to the patrol cops because all of them lived in that small city. It worked. It didn't take them long to demonstrate to everyone that if you get in the habit of speeding or rolling stop signs, you will get caught regularly enough to put your license in jeopardy. Besides, who wanted to spend time and money dealing with the annoyance of being pulled over when it was just as easy to obey the law. Pretty much the only people violating traffic laws were thieves who thought they could get away from the site of their crimes by speeding, only to find themselves being easily caught out by this behavior.
Oh, there was this other small effect. The cycling modal share, while never formally documented (it was the late '70s and early '80s) was through the roof. Bikes vastly outnumbered cars on the road in spite of the fact that those same police departments also had bike cops that had a zero-tolerance policy for traffic violations by cyclists. (I'm just now getting comfortable running stop signs on my bike three decades later.) Car parking lots stood largely unused while bike parking was always overflowing.
Of course, all good things must end. Real estate got so overpriced that cops couldn't afford to live in the same city they worked in. Gas got cheap. The city became less self-contained so that more residents worked in other cities and many people who worked in that city lived elsewhere. Eventually, the cops stopped enforcing the traffic laws and the bikes all but disappeared from the landscape (small comeback lately, though).
Those few years of living with "oppressive" traffic law enforcement sold me on its benefits. People who cry "revenue" and "hands in our wallets" are just lousy drivers who are blinded by their desire to continue their bad habits.
Oh, there was this other small effect. The cycling modal share, while never formally documented (it was the late '70s and early '80s) was through the roof. Bikes vastly outnumbered cars on the road in spite of the fact that those same police departments also had bike cops that had a zero-tolerance policy for traffic violations by cyclists. (I'm just now getting comfortable running stop signs on my bike three decades later.) Car parking lots stood largely unused while bike parking was always overflowing.
Of course, all good things must end. Real estate got so overpriced that cops couldn't afford to live in the same city they worked in. Gas got cheap. The city became less self-contained so that more residents worked in other cities and many people who worked in that city lived elsewhere. Eventually, the cops stopped enforcing the traffic laws and the bikes all but disappeared from the landscape (small comeback lately, though).
Those few years of living with "oppressive" traffic law enforcement sold me on its benefits. People who cry "revenue" and "hands in our wallets" are just lousy drivers who are blinded by their desire to continue their bad habits.
#15
What happened?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 7,927
Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
255 Posts
We are not at war with cars. If you are, you have missed the whole point.
We are here to promote the safer co-existence between all vehicles on the road together, and in general, bicycles being in harmony with auto traffic.
There is no Cyclista army. Us And Them a mere Pink Floyd song.
We are here to promote the safer co-existence between all vehicles on the road together, and in general, bicycles being in harmony with auto traffic.
There is no Cyclista army. Us And Them a mere Pink Floyd song.
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Kansas
Posts: 2,248
Bikes: This list got too long: several ‘bents, an urban utility e-bike, and a dahon D7 that my daughter has absconded with.
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times
in
48 Posts
Disagreement, we don't need more "secret police." We need consistent police. I am not going to dive too far into behavioral theory here, the science is there. Studies have shown that if a person contemplating a cim sees a police officer within 12 minutes, they are highly likely to forgo the criminal act. In traffic there is a calming affect of well marked police cars. Secret police would not have this affect and would, while possibly writing more tickets, have less impact on traffic behavior.
#17
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,056 Times
in
635 Posts
The biggest danger to cyclist like everyone else is the drunk driver. The penalties need to be far more harsh. If a drunk driver causes a crash, he or she needs to be fined $5000 for the first offense, and doubled each time after. Also their car should be impounded for six months the first time, and impounded and sold each time after. Harsh--------yes, but there is absolutely no reason to drive drunk and hurt or kill people.
#18
What happened?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 7,927
Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
255 Posts
The biggest danger to the cyclist....
is the cyclist themself.
The same as for drivers. Pay attention to everything you can.
There is no way to eliminate accidents entirely, even with a hive mind.
The goal is to REDUCE the number of incidents through education and increased awareness.
Those who believe in zero harm are living in a Thomas More book. Utopia was Todd Rundgren's band.
is the cyclist themself.
The same as for drivers. Pay attention to everything you can.
There is no way to eliminate accidents entirely, even with a hive mind.
The goal is to REDUCE the number of incidents through education and increased awareness.
Those who believe in zero harm are living in a Thomas More book. Utopia was Todd Rundgren's band.
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
#19
24-Speed Machine
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Posts: 6,058
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
The biggest danger to cyclist like everyone else is the drunk driver. The penalties need to be far more harsh. If a drunk driver causes a crash, he or she needs to be fined $5000 for the first offense, and doubled each time after. Also their car should be impounded for six months the first time, and impounded and sold each time after. Harsh--------yes, but there is absolutely no reason to drive drunk and hurt or kill people.
is the cyclist themself.
The same as for drivers. Pay attention to everything you can.
There is no way to eliminate accidents entirely, even with a hive mind.
The goal is to REDUCE the number of incidents through education and increased awareness.
Those who believe in zero harm are living in a Thomas More book. Utopia was Todd Rundgren's band.
But I think the 'me first' drivers are worse. Because, Drunk drivers while drunk, don't have a 'drunks first' attitude, just ignorance. Although the 'ignorant' drivers do seem to be in close competition with the 'me first' drivers'. Because the 'me first' drivers, don't give a darn who is on the road. They are the first ones' to commit road rage. Drunks don't commit road rage with premeditated intention, and 'ignorant' drivers' just aren't paying attention. But 'me first' drivers are BOTH.......selfish and ignorant
Last edited by Chris516; 12-06-14 at 01:05 PM.
#20
What happened?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 7,927
Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
255 Posts
Stay out of their way then.
What is so hard about that?
You fail to understand one thing...
If you were to tell me you are smarter than a locomotive I would have to tell you that the train doesn't care and won't come to a stop until it's a mile from your bugsplatter.
Apples and oranges. Never take a knife to a gunfight. Don't argue with anything that can easily kill you.
It's not a matter of your CIVIL RIGHTS. You only live once.
Keep pointing it out and work to get it prosecuted but don't assume you are going to stop it by your lone self.
Life isn't a mandatory arbitration. Things will suck and may never stop sucking. Work on that.
What is so hard about that?
You fail to understand one thing...
If you were to tell me you are smarter than a locomotive I would have to tell you that the train doesn't care and won't come to a stop until it's a mile from your bugsplatter.
Apples and oranges. Never take a knife to a gunfight. Don't argue with anything that can easily kill you.
It's not a matter of your CIVIL RIGHTS. You only live once.
Keep pointing it out and work to get it prosecuted but don't assume you are going to stop it by your lone self.
Life isn't a mandatory arbitration. Things will suck and may never stop sucking. Work on that.
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
But to the real point, it seems disregard for the law is increasing, it would be an epic battle to crack down on it, and most police departments are already spread out pretty thin.
I think one of the most effective things that could be done is make it a requirement to pay fines in person at the issuing jurisdictions courthouse, and make it a long, drawn out, miserable process.
Last edited by kickstart; 12-06-14 at 06:40 PM.
#22
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 431
Bikes: Surly Krampus
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You could include some cyclists in that statement.....
But to the real point, it seems disregard for the law is increasing, it would be an epic battle to crack down on it, and most police departments are already spread out pretty thin.
I think one of the most effective things that could be done is make it a requirement to pay fines in person at the issuing jurisdictions courthouse, and make it a long, drawn out, miserable process.
But to the real point, it seems disregard for the law is increasing, it would be an epic battle to crack down on it, and most police departments are already spread out pretty thin.
I think one of the most effective things that could be done is make it a requirement to pay fines in person at the issuing jurisdictions courthouse, and make it a long, drawn out, miserable process.
Another effective measure would be to make the penalties bigger. There is a thread on this forum about someone in Farmer's Branch, Texas getting a large ticket for running a stop sign. Some thought the fine was obscene, but I bet he hasn't done it since.
I would charge at least a $1000 fine for absolutely all moving violations. In my opinion, there is no such thing as a minor infraction. Breaking the law is always serious.
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
No argument; police are spread thin. But in a world of limited resources, traffic enforcement should get a bigger share.
Another effective measure would be to make the penalties bigger. There is a thread on this forum about someone in Farmer's Branch, Texas getting a large ticket for running a stop sign. Some thought the fine was obscene, but I bet he hasn't done it since.
I would charge at least a $1000 fine for absolutely all moving violations. In my opinion, there is no such thing as a minor infraction. Breaking the law is always serious.
Another effective measure would be to make the penalties bigger. There is a thread on this forum about someone in Farmer's Branch, Texas getting a large ticket for running a stop sign. Some thought the fine was obscene, but I bet he hasn't done it since.
I would charge at least a $1000 fine for absolutely all moving violations. In my opinion, there is no such thing as a minor infraction. Breaking the law is always serious.
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 7,048
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 509 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
8 Posts
You could include some cyclists in that statement.....
But to the real point, it seems disregard for the law is increasing, it would be an epic battle to crack down on it, and most police departments are already spread out pretty thin.
I think one of the most effective things that could be done is make it a requirement to pay fines in person at the issuing jurisdictions courthouse, and make it a long, drawn out, miserable process.
But to the real point, it seems disregard for the law is increasing, it would be an epic battle to crack down on it, and most police departments are already spread out pretty thin.
I think one of the most effective things that could be done is make it a requirement to pay fines in person at the issuing jurisdictions courthouse, and make it a long, drawn out, miserable process.
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 7,048
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 509 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
8 Posts
Isn't there a Northern European country that does just that? I seem to recall some rock star facing a speeding fine of hundreds of thousands of dollars.