What's the deal with motor vehicle violations?

How twisted are things when a free citizen has to fear for their life because their tail light has burned out? The whole thing has gone sideways. If you have to worry about being shot as a result of such a thing then you are not a free citizen and instead are a slave to your security. Take the policeman's gun away until it is clear that they need one. Use a robot or drone to interact with the citizen. The biggest problem with our police forces is their sense that they need to resolve issues immediately and there is no room for just letting things play out. Most of the pressure comes from the police.Sometimes you have to come with the big hammer but not usually and never by mistake.

Oh probably but not that I know of. What is your point though? It is certainly not unusual.http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/bobby-canipe/abe; Why should this officer be absolved of his mistake? I can go to prison for making a mistake on my taxes.Edited by ProtoTypical, : No reason given.

What is made up? The fact is that interacting with the police is a fairly dangerous thing to do. The majority of people on this thread are afraid of their police forces to the point that they would silently comply with an illegal request. Unfortunately, it is good advice.

No doubt about that and that is sad. I don't dispute that they have good reason to be. What is it? 1 in 20 are a sociopath. 1 in 40 have PTSD. Not to mention all of your other garden variety mental disorders. Sprinkle in some guns and alcohol and a bad day at work. Yeah I would be afraid as well. However, the truth is that a truck driver has more to fear about going to work than any policeman. I keep coming back to the idea that if the police didn't have a gun on their hip that it would go a long way to solving the problem. In the trunk maybe or at the end of the phone but not on your hip.I appreciate that the police have to be able to apply pressure and that they must be able to force compliance but I don't see why it has to be so immediate and lethal.

Well it is good advice for surviving but not so much for being a free citizen.Sure, pick your battles but having the right to not have the shit beaten out of you isn't much good if you have to wait to have the shit beaten out of you before you can enforce the right.

Talk about your bovine scatology.

Are you from around here? Sort of like driving a car but why the hurry when you are parked on the side of the road? There is all the time in the world usually and usually the policeman is holding the clock.'Shoot you before you shoot me' is not the mindset that I want my police to be working under.

Unlawful Shield – A Cato Institute Website Dedicated to Abolishing Qualified Immunity

OK how about the first one on the list for today but what are we looking for? Evidence that the police are people and are prone to errors in judgment? That there are some bad eggs in the mix or evidence that they generally have way too much authority? Or maybe evidence that the police routinely lie in order to protect their fraternity. Are you really disputing the fact that there is a problem?What we should really look at is how the addition of a body camera can reduce the use of force by something like 60%. Are the citizens suddenly more compliant or are the monitored police suddenly behaving as if they are accountable for their actions?

A very little of one and a whole bunch of the other I would say. In any case more evidence can only be a good thing. Body cams should be the standard and the recordings should be immediately available to anybody charged with an offence. I don't see any downside. What they don't have is appropriate oversight and accountability. We monitor the actions of our bank tellers closer than we do our police forces.It also seems to me that they are judged under a different standard from the rest of us. I find it disgusting that an officer can justify killing someone armed with a screwdriver or a shovel or a jack knife or even a pellet gun. If they have the authority to use lethal force it really should come with the condition that they cannot be wrong. Feeling threatened is not a high enough standard. They should know beyond a doubt that their life is in danger. Well no that should not be the first step. The gun should stay in the trunk until it is absolutely clear that they need to use it. That is the whole point. You eliminate most of the possibility for erroneous shootings and you also reduce the likelihood that the hostile criminal will decide that they need to shoot the unarmed policeman. Load them up with non-lethal weapons for immediate use. It works in some parts of the world.I appreciate that it is wishful thinking to want to take the guns off of the hip of the police but also how sad it is that we would accept any level of danger presented by the police at a routine traffic stop. It is just a sad state of affairs when an innocent civilian has anything to fear from the police.

By this reasoning everyone needs a gun all the time.I think that Percy has the right idea of separating traffic enforcement from general policing.

Yes there are 2 problems. The first one is people and the second one is other people. The solution is for all of the people to treat the other people as they would be treated. Cops and criminals don't do that so much.

It's not gish galloping it's the free citizen agitation boogie. I can't focus on this topic for too long without getting pissed off. I realize how important the law is to a free society and to see it abused is just depressing.I have no problem with empowering the police but they need to be absolutely accountable as opposed to enjoying some immunity from the laws that they are sworn to enforce. Under what conditions can anyone else assault or shoot someone by mistake and walk away unpunished?This idea of just doing as you are told so that you don't get shot or beaten is absolutely fucked. How does this differ from being ruled by thugs? It is the integrity of the police force that allows the promise of justice after the fact to work. It doesn't take much rot to ruin the whole thing.The problem lies in human nature and you can't give someone the power of life and death and then expect them to think like Gandhi. So take away the guns and put a camera on them. Get them firmly into the mindset that they are functionaries with no personal authority.

If there is trouble then they should investigate. A burnt light or failure to signal is not a sign of criminal behaviour.

Hogwash.A criminal means to do you harm and a minor traffic violation is in no way even remotely similar. Using a minor violation as an excuse to violate your civil rights is draconian. We don't treat people like criminals until we know that they are, in fact, criminals. If you can't tell that they are a criminal then I would suggest that they are not a criminal and shouldn't be treated like one.