Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: dealing with a police officer
From: case1@husc4.harvard.edu (John Case)
Date: 19 Dec 92 18:19:44 EST
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Dec18.230629.8244@pacdata.uucp> pacdata!jimh@uunet.UU.NET (Jim Harkins) writes:
>
>Maybe the cop should try being a firefighter, or a coal miner, or a nurse in
>an AIDS hospital.  You know, something really dangerous?  Maybe if the cop
>frets all the time s/he shouldn't be pulling people over for doing 70 in a 65
>zone.

Let me see, are you saying that the firefighter should not wear his heavy coat,
long necked hat, and air mask unless he/she is SURE that there is (possibly 
toxic) smoke to breathe, and that burning embers WILL go down the back of his/
her neck?  Or are you saying that the nurse in the AIDS hospital should only 
take precautions when she KNOWS she WILL get AIDS otherwise?  Or should members
of the EMS system (First Responders, EMTs, Paramedics, etc) only get hepatitis
shots if they KNOW they are going to be exposed.  

The actions of an officer during a traffic stop are, if done correctly, 
designed to maximize the officer's chances of survival while providing a 
minimum of inconvenience to the offender.  Someone who feels that an officer 
did not exhibit professionalism has several options, including fighting the
ticket on that basis, making complaint to the department, or making complaint 
to the media.  But the penalty for taking undue precautions to an officer is
extremely mild compared to not taking the precations that are due.  BTW, the 
procedures for making a stop when there is known danger are equally 
professional, but substantially less concerned with the offenders' dignity.

>
>Like a lot of people, most of my dealings with cops are negative.  Either I
>get nailed by a revenue enhancement officer for following traffic when said
>REO needs to fill his quota, or my house is burgled and the cops don't
>want to take a report, or my car is stolen and the cop says 'Well, we might
>have time to investigate in 1998'.  Granted, the last 2 aren't the cop's 
>fault, but it's still a negative experience for me.
>
>What really scares the hell out of me is the TV show Cops.  These people
>assume everybody is a Jeffry Dahmer wannabe and act accordingly.  What's

See above.  The penalty for guessing wrong can be severe.  Professionalism
means doing it right, with the minimum of exposure to hazard.

>really scary is the realization that the show is trying to make the cops
>look good.  Last year a drug bust was filmed when the cops got the wrong
>house and terrorized an innocent family, the producers aren't airing that
>segment.  Why not?

Good question.  Let me know what the producers say when you ask them.>

>And don't feed me the line of 'next time you're in trouble call a hippie'.
>I *am* a hippie :-)  I realize we need cops, and they deal with scum all day
>long, but I resent the hell out of being (politely) treated as scum.    

Rightly or wrongly, doctrine is to treat the stop as much as possible as a
non-event.  Maximum safety for the officer, minimum hassles for the offender.
Minimum time involved for both.  


By the way, I have been in contact with a number of departments in various ways
over the years, and while an officer on traffic duty with get noticed (and
possibly moved to some more interesting work) if he/she writes a lot of 
citaions, 1) I have never found anywhere that had "quotas" (except maybe in
hiring, and 2) one bad citation can do more harm to the officer in the eyes of
his superiors that a fistful of good ones.  There's no need for quotas.  At the
rate that you and I break the myriad of regulations that our elected officials
throw at the police to enforce, no one needs the incentive of a quota.
>
>Can ya'll tell I'm in the process of fighting what I consider an unfair ticket?
>
>jim
>
John Case
case1@husc.harvard.edu
>
>


Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns