| snugs |
I've been thinking about this latest revenue gathering incentive (crackdown) that the EPS is undertaking down on Whyte and just thought that I'd post some of the questions that have come to mind, if you've got anything to add please do so.
As we all know the letter of the law here in Alberta dealing with exhuast modifications is grossly vague at best, leaving all the discretion and determination of what constitutes a violation up to the individual officer. Now, regarding this discretion, I was wondering what type and how much training do these officers undergo to be able to effectively enforce these laws?
Since they do not have a defined sound level requirement and do not use any mechanical means of sound amplitude determination do they receive training in sound amplitude identification (can they effectively determine the decible level of a passing car by ear alone)?
Do they receive training in identification of stock exhaust sounds for the most popular models? Can they tell the difference between the stock exhaust sound on my cobra and a GT?
Do they receive training in identification of the physical appearance of the stock exhausts on most popular models? Some cars come with 4" tips, some cars have factory options for larger chrome tips, do the officers know which ones these are?
I'm just trying to get a handle on what justification they have for giving these tickets. As the law is extremely vague, if the police force has not provide recognised training to the officers in the proper enforcement methods and violation levels of these laws would that mean that all the tickets issued are null and void?
What do you think? Does anybody know what training they get? I'm just curious. :dunno: |
|
|
| TrevorK |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
Some cars come with 4" tips, some cars have factory options for larger chrome tips, do the officers know which ones these are?
Just because a car comes off the car lot a certain way does not make it legal.
I'm sure you could pay 300 and get any dealer to put a 5" tip onto any new car. As well, many dealerships will tint the front 2 windows if you ask as a "factory option". |
|
|
| 2003specv |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
I'm just trying to get a handle on what justification they have for giving these tickets.
Thats easy. Old Billy at city hall wants to crack down on evil street racers. And as we all know, anyone who modifies their car is up to no good. Thanks for keeping the streets safe Bill!!!!!
:rolleyes:
Noce for mayor. |
|
|
| energie |
| I remember a guy on here that has an STI and was given a ticket for his stock exhaust system, but got it dropped at court |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by TrevorK
Just because a car comes off the car lot a certain way does not make it legal.
I'm sure you could pay 300 and get any dealer to put a 5" tip onto any new car. As well, many dealerships will tint the front 2 windows if you ask as a "factory option".
Tint is a non-starter, its illegal, end of story, a dealer that does that can be charged.
Tip is a little different. If it is a published option then it has not technically been widened because it is stock equipment. Otherwise all cars that have tips on them from the factory (which is basically all of them) would be deemed illegal. :blink: |
|
|
| TrevorK |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
Tint is a non-starter, its illegal, end of story, a dealer that does that can be charged.
Tip is a little different. If it is a published option then it has not technically been widened because it is stock equipment. Otherwise all cars that have tips on them from the factory (which is basically all of them) would be deemed illegal. :blink:
A dealer will do whatever you ask - I'm positive a dealer will tint the front windows (Maybe not limo, but remember that ANY tint is illegal) if asked.
As for the tip - it doesn't have to be a published option. The dealer will do what needs to be done to make a customer happy - if you say you'll only buy a car with a 5" tip, guess what? They'll slap one on for you.
I'm just saying that just because it rolls off a dealer's lot, doesn't make it legal. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by TrevorK
I'm just saying that just because it rolls off a dealer's lot, doesn't make it legal.
Agreed, I'm just talking about the stuff that you can legally back up with a paper trail not the questionable "extras" some dealers will do. :bthumbup:
What I want to know is if there are legal grounds to get all of these tickets thrown out of court.
No training = No reasonable judgement = Invalid ticket
For example, if an officer is not trained in the operation of a radar gun he cannot issue tickets to speeders he caught by using the gun, if an officer is not trained on how to conduct a field sobriety test he cannot administer field sobriety tests, etc.. :dunno: |
|
|
| redbaron303 |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
No training = No reasonable judgement = Invalid ticket
This is the biggest problem. To much discretion left to the officer to "judge" whether or not your car exceeds some law. Standard guidelines are needed in writing for the officer to make a valid call as to whether your car breaks the law he is writing you a ticket for. This would apply to such things as the exhaust Db law (I thought it was something like 80Db) where if the car sounds loud and he pulls you over but according to the "inaccurate" Db meters you're under the "legal" limit then he can't give you a ticket, but if you're indeed over you get the ticket.
If they've recieved all their training and they're supposed to be able to judge the loudness of your car amongst other things and just give you a ticket... if you don't feel it's just then FIGHT it, don't throw in the towel too soon! (IE: guy w/ STi who fought and won his "enlarged tip" ticket).
How much power is too much, how do we know they're properlly enforcing the laws they've been "trained" to enforce? |
|
|
| Nis240 |
| While driving down Castle Downs road i must have seen about 3 bus shelter with all of the glass shatter which probably happened last night. If the cops would focus on catching some of these :asshole: s who do this shit instead of doing their "Crack Down" i think it would be time better spent. |
|
|
| lovemytrx |
It would seem that the vocal and visible minority are saying crack down on street racing. While the people who are involved in modifying their cars do nothing for the most part.
When was the last time anybody or any group of car enthusiasts has called, written letters, emailed faxed or whatever complaints about the laws and the enforcement of the laws. My guess would be hasnt happened yet.
Well we can all get on this forum and complain about the situation as it is and that will accomplish nothing or phone in, write in and communicate with the people who represent us as to how we want the law to deal with us.
Its time for people to stand up, but until then, this issue will resurface in another month or so and so on and so on, ad nauseum.
Talk is cheap.
The best place to get the ball rolling on getting something done would be at an SCN, VUB or other meets where a lot of enthusiasts gather. Make some points put it on a petition and send to that to the EPS, RCMP, MLA'S, Aldermen, etc.
This is not directed at anyone just my opinion of how the situation is as I see it.
PS Whens the last time there was a sit down with sport car enthusiasts and the police. Is there a way to facilitate that?
Also dont expect police or anyone to be involved if its going to turn into an abusive situation. Civility must prevail. |
|
|
| snugs |
Just read the article in today's Edmonton Journal about the crackdown, it says the legal noise limits are 82dB for cars, and 84dB for bikes.
http://www.canada.com/edmonton/edmo...67-93e1eb798bcc
"The legal noise limit for a motorcycle in the city is 84 decibels. For a car, the limit is 82 decibels."
I'm trying to find what law this is specified under, but I know that it is not specified under 61(1). :confused: |
|
|
| silksheets |
quote:
Originally posted by lovemytrx
I
Talk is cheap.
quoted for truth.
Dont want to get a ticket, dont break the laws, they a pretty clear in the way they are writen, some require knowledge of the car, but not all.
Tint: illegal on the front two windows, plain and simple, gennerally a cop wont give you any hassel if your driving nice, and can still see through it.
Sound: if its 2 in the moring, dont have your system turned up so loud your ears ring, no one thinks your cool.
Exhaust: law states that widening of the exhaust outlet is not legal. if you have a 9" folgers can the cop can assume your car didnt come with it.
Lots of aftermarket exhausts have the brand name stamped into the top edge of the tip, even stupid cops knows a 97 civic didnt come with a stainless mugan (or whatever) exhaust.
Whinning on the forum sure lets the city know some of these laws are unjustified.
But some of the laws are for the better of everyone, and not to cater to the wants of the tuners. |
|
|
| snugs |
Ok, found it. This is kind of odd. They're ticketing under section 61(1) of the VER, but the general local bylaw has completely different fines and measurement requirements.
Edmonton City By-Law #7255
http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache...bylaw&hl=en
They defined what is needed for measurement and prosecution but under general abatement provisions you can be fined without having the sound level tested....but under vehicle noise abatement there are specific sound measures and associated fines that require testing..... :dunno:
---------------------------------------------------
PART 3 - VEHICLE NOISE ABATEMENT
300. No person shall operate, cause or permit to be operated, a motor vehicle having a gross vehicle weight of less than 3,600 kilograms so as to create noise of a level greater than 82 dBA in a sixty (60) kilometres per hour zone or less.
301. No person shall operate, cause or permit to be operated a motor vehicle having a gross vehicle weight of 3,60l kilograms or more so as to create noise of a level greater than 89 dBA in a sixty (60) kilometres per hour zone or less.
302. No person shall operate, cause or permit to be operated a motorcycle so as to create noise of a level greater than 84 dBA in a sixty (60) kilometres per hour zone or less.
303. No person shall operate, cause or permit to be operated any recreational vehicle on any public or private property so as to create noise of a level greater than 84 dBA.
304. Any motor vehicle, motorcycle, recreational or commercial vehicle which has been the subject matter of three (3) convictions under Part 3 of this Bylaw shall be prohibited from operating within the City until alterations are made thereto such as are necessary to render the vehicle capable of operating within the noise levels permitted for that class of vehicle.
(S.2, Bylaw No. 7634, January 8, 1985)
305. Part 3 of this Bylaw does not apply to the operation of signalling devices used in the normal operation of a vehicle.
306. A person who is the owner or occupier of a retail outlet offering exhaust mufflers for sale shall display in a conspicuous place within the premises, a notice in the form of Schedule "A" annexed hereto.
307. A person who is the owner or occupier of a retail outlet offering motorcycles for sale shall display in a conspicuous place within the premises, a notice in the form of Schedule "B" annexed hereto.
308. No person shall collect refuse with a refuse collection vehicle at night within or abutting a residential district.
309. No person shall operate, cause or permit to be operated, a commercial vehicle on any public property so as to create noise of a level greater than 65 dBA.
(S.2, Bylaw No. 7634, January 8, 1985)
310. No person shall apply or engage engine retarder brakes on any truck.
(S.2, Bylaw No. 9860 (as amended), April 14, 1992)
FINES
--------
Operating Motor Vehicle under 3,600 Kilograms - 300
Noise Greater than 82 dBA
(a) where the level of noise has been exceeded
by not more than 4 dBA $ 60.00
(b) where the level of noise has been exceeded
by more than 4 dBA but not more than 8 dBA $ 85.00
(c) where the level of noise has been exceeded
by more than 8 dBA $110.00 |
|
|
| Buddyworm |
^ Horray for clarity. :dunno: What is it with the law and vagueries? Christ, even the hockey reffing manual sucks.
And it seems like every other day there's a post of a stolen car, or a car that's been broken into. And we've got police cracking down on large exhausts. Maybe the money from all these tickets will go into developping or implementing programs to deter theft from cars. But somehow I doubt it...
B-Wurm :lol: |
|
|
| bigmack000 |
| cop dotn ahve a tester can't pove it in court simpel as that!:D thank you come again ;) |
|
|
| silksheets |
quote:
Originally posted by Buddyworm
And it seems like every other day there's a post of a stolen car, or a car that's been broken into. And we've got police cracking down on large exhausts. Maybe the money from all these tickets will go into developping or implementing programs to deter theft from cars. But somehow I doubt it...
People always say that.
But can I ask you something. HOW!?
make it so that there is a cop withing 50 feet of every vehical in town?
you only need a couple minutes to steal a car or break into it.
there is no way cops could cover every car. Its easier for the owner to deter theifs. |
|
|
| snugs |
Holy shit talk about timing.
They just had a big piece on the National about the cops on Whyte Ave and how they are pretty much out of control. They showed them beating guys and the damage done by these beatings, and of course the police have already conducted their review of the incidents and found themselves completely innocent of any wrong doing. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Buddyworm |
quote:
Originally posted by silksheets
People always say that.
But can I ask you something. HOW!?
make it so that there is a cop withing 50 feet of every vehical in town?
you only need a couple minutes to steal a car or break into it.
there is no way cops could cover every car. Its easier for the owner to deter theifs.
There are programs in many cities in the US that set several bait cars all over town. These cars are made to be targets for theifs and rigged with cameras etc. After these cars started popping up theft from cars went down dramatically in those cities.
B-Wurm :lol: |
|
|
| TrevorK |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
Holy shit talk about timing.
They just had a big piece on the National about the cops on Whyte Ave and how they are pretty much out of control. They showed them beating guys and the damage done by these beatings, and of course the police have already conducted their review of the incidents and found themselves completely innocent of any wrong doing. :rolleyes:
I'm assuming this was regarding the Canada Day riots on Whyte ave?
If so - what did you expect police to do, sit there and nicely ask people to stop causing hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage? |
|
|
| mx73someday |
The cops won't crack down on petty crimes like vandalism and theft simply because it's impossible to get any money out of thieves or vandals. Thieves can't be milked for money, why do you think they are stealing? They need money for crack. If they got big fines for stealing, then they'd just steal again to pay it off.
Drivers on the other hand are set up to be milked. The cops know that if you can afford bullshit insurance, registration and gas, then you can afford to pay for their stupid fines. |
|
|
| ChromeDragon |
quote:
Originally posted by Buddyworm
There are programs in many cities in the US that set several bait cars all over town. These cars are made to be targets for theifs and rigged with cameras etc. After these cars started popping up theft from cars went down dramatically in those cities.
B-Wurm :lol:
Despite what Fox's "Dumb Crooks Caught on Tape" might tell you, not all thieves are stupid. All that these thieves had to do to avoid being caught in the bait cars was not close the door. It worked for the first 4 thieves, but after that they grew wise. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by TrevorK
I'm assuming this was regarding the Canada Day riots on Whyte ave?
If so - what did you expect police to do, sit there and nicely ask people to stop causing hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage?
....uhhhhh, no, but thanks for playing. :rolleyes:
This was a long piece about what goes on there on a nightly basis. A number of people have filed lawsuits against the cops for their overly aggressive conduct and physical assaults. The news crew spent the night there and watched a couple of people get pounded on and they spoke with some of the people who have filed the charges. None of it dealt with the Canada Day riot. |
|
|
| Buddyworm |
quote:
Originally posted by ChromeDragon
Despite what Fox's "Dumb Crooks Caught on Tape" might tell you, not all thieves are stupid. All that these thieves had to do to avoid being caught in the bait cars was not close the door. It worked for the first 4 thieves, but after that they grew wise.
Touche, but I didn't see it on fox :p It was an actual report on a local Spokan channel or something.
B-Wurm :lol: |
|
|
| SilverZ24 |
Well I drove down on whyte on saturday night and I was glad they were pulling some of these guys over.
They said they weren't pulling people over with loud exhausts unless they were driving obnoxiously. And some of those bikes and cars (especially some of the bikes) are way too loud driving down the road. |
|
|
| -=MJ=- |
here's a puzzle for you guys
bylaw 7255
sect 203
A person may be found guilty of voilating the part of the bylaw whether or not the noise level has been measured by an approved device.
sect 202
A cout may enter a conviction against a person for violating this parts of the bylaw, notwithstanding the fact that the noise of did not exceed the dBA permitted for that area.
basicly the cop can give you a ticket no matter what.
and the real kicker
the court can find you guilty even tho you did not brake the law
what kind of BS is that |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by -=MJ=-
here's a puzzle for you guys
bylaw 7255
sect 203
A person may be found guilty of voilating the part of the bylaw whether or not the noise level has been measured by an approved device.
sect 202
A cout may enter a conviction against a person for violating this parts of the bylaw, notwithstanding the fact that the noise of did not exceed the dBA permitted for that area.
basicly the cop can give you a ticket no matter what.
and the real kicker
the court can find you guilty even tho you did not brake the law
what kind of BS is that
I was trying to figure that out, those are under Part 2 - General Abatement Provisions, while the vehicle specific information is under Part 3..... but why even bother defining the requirements for a vehicle if it is completely overridden by the previous section?
Something else to consider is that people are being ticket under 61(1) of the Vehicle Equipment Reg, not the Bylaw. :dunno: |
|
|
| SuperJay |
| Anybody see the special on CBC last night about the cops on whyte? |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by SuperJay
Anybody see the special on CBC last night about the cops on whyte?
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
Holy shit talk about timing.
They just had a big piece on the National about the cops on Whyte Ave and how they are pretty much out of control. They showed them beating guys and the damage done by these beatings, and of course the police have already conducted their review of the incidents and found themselves completely innocent of any wrong doing. :rolleyes:
Yes. There was more on about it this morning too. :eek: |
|
|
| SuperJay |
| What were they saying this morning? Did you see the part where the fight started right in front of ther camera, and the cop whipped out the taser gun so fast? Before he even asked the two to stop fighting he had his taser pointed at the guys. EPS is nothing but old men and squeaky clean urban recruits who know nothing about livinvg in the city. EPS is a pathetic business venture. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by SuperJay
What were they saying this morning?
Just more of the same. Its only a matter of time until they go too far and somebody gets killed. :( |
|
|
| TheWask |
quote:
Originally posted by SuperJay
Did you see the part where the fight started right in front of ther camera, and the cop whipped out the taser gun so fast? Before he even asked the two to stop fighting he had his taser pointed at the guys.
Whats wrong with that? |
|
|
| SuperJay |
| Are you serious? I thought Tasers and any type of weapon the EPS carry, are only to be used as a last measure, rather than yankin it out for every little disturbance? "There's a Jaywalker!!! Taser him!!!!!" |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by SuperJay
Are you serious? I thought Tasers and any type of weapon the EPS carry, are only to be used as a last measure, rather than yankin it out for every little disturbance? "There's a Jaywalker!!! Taser him!!!!!"
Nah, they use their nightsticks to deal with the jaywalkers. :blink: |
|
|
| po9rs4ch4e |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
Nah, they use their nightsticks to deal with the jaywalkers. :blink:
LOL
tasers are a non-lethal sort of DEFENCE, was the cop in harm.. no, was someone else, not really. When the fight gets out of hand it should be broken up and both guys handed a ticket. They're going to be using these tasers far too much for my comfort. I believe smith or was it klein, has some "meeting" to discuss and justify the new weapon. these are non-lethal against healthy ppl.. what about obese ppl or those with heart conditions? I smell a lawsuit comin! |
|
|
| TheWask |
quote:
Originally posted by SuperJay
Are you serious? I thought Tasers and any type of weapon the EPS carry, are only to be used as a last measure, rather than yankin it out for every little disturbance? "There's a Jaywalker!!! Taser him!!!!!"
Was the taser used?? Did the fight stop after he pulled it out?
HUGE difference between pulling out a weapon and using that weapon.
quote:
Originally posted by po9rs4ch4e
tasers are a non-lethal sort of DEFENCE, was the cop in harm.. no, was someone else, not really. When the fight gets out of hand it should be broken up and both guys handed a ticket.
Yes someone was in harm,The people fighting. What do you mean when the fight gets out of hand? Should the cop stand there and watch till one of them gets knocked out and hits his head and dies. Cops are dammed if they do and dammed if they don't. There is no pleasing people no matter what. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by TheWask
Yes someone was in harm,The people fighting. What do you mean when the fight gets out of hand? Should the cop stand there and watch till one of them gets knocked out and hits his head and dies. Cops are dammed if they do and dammed if they don't. There is no pleasing people no matter what.
LOL, its all about appropriate use of force.
For Example,
TheWask (TW) is walking down Whyte on a Friday evening (hey, it could happen) when a drunk stumbles out of one of the clubs and bumps into TW. The drunk says acura's suck and then gets pissed off at TW, grabs him and tries to start a fight. At this point an EPS officer runs up, pulls out his taser, and tasers TW. TW falls down, hits his head on the curb and spends the rest of his life watching the teletubbies, drooling, and mumbling about how 3rd gear vtech owns all. :(
Now if the officer had taken a second and properly assessed the situation he would not have used the taser, or even unholstered it. What we are talking about is the police using some initial judgement in these actions instead of defaulting to force and aggression by default. You don't need to knock jaywalkers unconscious.... well unless they say something naughty about your mother. :) |
|
|
| po9rs4ch4e |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
rest of his life watching the teletubbies, drooling, and mumbling about how 3rd gear vtech owns all. :(
BWHAHAHA.. |
|
|
| bigmack000 |
quote:
Originally posted by po9rs4ch4e
BWHAHAHA..
waht your 2 cents on DSM :D |
|
|
| curtis_rak |
quote:
Originally posted by po9rs4ch4e
LOL
tasers are a non-lethal sort of DEFENCE, was the cop in harm.. no,
A taser is a control device, not just a "defense" device.
But, back to the topic at hand.
No matter how much you guys bitch about the police having a crackdown on noise ect. on Whyte Ave; the laws are there for a reason. Everytime there is an increase in those types of tickets everyone whines and says the same thing. "Why dont they chase down the real bad guys.." That is a bullshit response because you are breaking the law with tinted windows and noise just the same as someone who smashes the glass in a bus shelter. Granted they are different offences, but laws are laws and they were made for a reason at some point or another. In this case, these types of things become a public safety issue.
For example, in the last couple of years, there have been a few people seriously injured (and a lot more with minor injuries) from being hit by cars on Whyte Ave. Just imagine what that statistic might be if there was the same police presence on Whyte as there is on a regular street in Edmonton. I bet it would be 5 times that amount. Things like tint and stereos/mufflers not only distract pedestrians, but distract drivers as well. Without these crackdowns the traffic on Whyte would be an absolute gongshow, and the crowds of people that walk (and drive) in that area would be at risk every single day.
Case and pont: Jasper Ave about 8-10 years ago. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by curtis_rak
A taser is a control device, not just a "defense" device.
But, back to the topic at hand.
No matter how much you guys bitch about the police having a crackdown on noise ect. on Whyte Ave; the laws are there for a reason. Everytime there is an increase in those types of tickets everyone whines and says the same thing. "Why dont they chase down the real bad guys.." That is a bullshit response because you are breaking the law with tinted windows and noise just the same as someone who smashes the glass in a bus shelter. Granted they are different offences, but laws are laws and they were made for a reason at some point or another. In this case, these types of things become a public safety issue.
For example, in the last couple of years, there have been a few people seriously injured (and a lot more with minor injuries) from being hit by cars on Whyte Ave. Just imagine what that statistic might be if there was the same police presence on Whyte as there is on a regular street in Edmonton. I bet it would be 5 times that amount. Things like tint and stereos/mufflers not only distract pedestrians, but distract drivers as well. Without these crackdowns the traffic on Whyte would be an absolute gongshow, and the crowds of people that walk (and drive) in that area would be at risk every single day.
Case and pont: Jasper Ave about 8-10 years ago.
...so whenever an officer feels that he is losing control of a situation he is justified in using a taser? Nothing like giving the incompetent officers an easy out eh, I can see the training summary now... "Can't do your job, can't deal with the public, just use your taser, that'll shut em up!" :p
I for one have no problem with the laws, if they are enforced appropriately and the charges are backed up with more than just an untrained officer's personal opinion. The problem arises when you have a bunch of officers out there handing out tens of thousands of dollars worth of tickets for violations that they have no training in identifying (I'm talking about noise here, not tint, or tip size) and no method of measuring.
I suppose the best we can hope for is that the businesses on Whyte suffer some loses due to thie "crackdown" and tell the cops to bugger off. :) |
|
|
| -=MJ=- |
FACT: people go to whyte ave at night to sow off their cars and systems.
its a fact and people will always do it.
i say crack down on people in neighbourhoods that race and blast stero's at 3 am down back alleys and residential roads. if there is any place for it it woould be whyte ave. slow road, not many people LIVING in the vacinity and huge cop presence already. |
|
|
| curtis_rak |
quote:
Originally posted by -=MJ=-
FACT: people go to whyte ave at night to sow off their cars and systems.
its a fact and people will always do it.
i say crack down on people in neighbourhoods that race and blast stero's at 3 am down back alleys and residential roads. if there is any place for it it woould be whyte ave. slow road, not many people LIVING in the vacinity and huge cop presence already.
FACT: Jasper Ave was a prime example of this. People used to go to Jasper Ave, park their cars, play their music, show-off ect. until there was a huge crackdown on stunting, noise and all of the rest. When people start to complain and get hurt, the police tackle the root of the problem; in this case, the drivers.
snugs,
The word 'control' in police terminology isnt the same as yours. OC spray, a baton, a taser and a firearm (as well as physical manipulation) are all 'control' devices. Using these devices does not mean that the officer is incompetent, the word control means to take control of a person who is unwilling to respond to verbal instruction and may (or IS) causing harm to the officer of someone else. They a specific type of control device for different types of situations. Officers simply don't just "whip out the taser" everyday because they cant do their job. For an EPS member, using a taser is almost like using their firearm. Its pretty serious.
You have to understand that, for the most part, people today don't have respect for police officers. So when people become violent towards officers, things like tasers, batons, and OC spray are a wonderful substitute for the alternative... |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by curtis_rak
FACT: Jasper Ave was a prime example of this. People used to go to Jasper Ave, park their cars, play their music, show-off ect. until there was a huge crackdown on stunting, noise and all of the rest. When people start to complain and get hurt, the police tackle the root of the problem; in this case, the drivers.
snugs,
The word 'control' in police terminology isnt the same as yours. OC spray, a baton, a taser and a firearm (as well as physical manipulation) are all 'control' devices. Using these devices does not mean that the officer is incompetent, the word control means to take control of a person who is unwilling to respond to verbal instruction and may (or IS) causing harm to the officer of someone else. They a specific type of control device for different types of situations. Officers simply don't just "whip out the taser" everyday because they cant do their job. For an EPS member, using a taser is almost like using their firearm. Its pretty serious.
You have to understand that, for the most part, people today don't have respect for police officers. So when people become violent towards officers, things like tasers, batons, and OC spray are a wonderful substitute for the alternative...
FACT: (:p)
As a result of the crackdown on Jasper the large bulk of the business that was brought to the area by the people showing their cars, and those going to see the cars was lost, and it has not returned. In fact some of the restaurants in that area have now made arrangements with local car clubs for them to have their weekly/monthly meetings in their parking lots so they can get more business.
I know what "control" means in terms of law enforcement and I stand by what I said. You give a rookie officer an easy, low risk (to himself) method for "controlling" an individual (like a taser or pepper spray) and he will never develop any of the mediation skills that you see in older more experienced and more respected cops. It creates a pattern of behavior and as soon as he is faced with a little loss of control, or resistance he will default to force when words would suffice.
I've experienced this in person during a traffic stop this summer. The young constable gave me a ticket for a loud exhaust, and when I told him that my car was nowhere near as loud as the Harleys that were running around he became very angry, took a physically aggressive posture and reached for his weapon.
http://forums.780tuners.com/showthr...;threadid=18281 |
|
|
| curtis_rak |
This can go back and forth all day long.
If the story about the officer you had problems with is indeed true, did you make a complaint about it? or did you just opt to complain on the internet about the problem?
One thing that I would suggest to those of you who constantly whine about police officers and the law is to go on a ride-along. Your local community league can submit the forms for you, or you can go to your district's main station and fill out the forms yourself.
Until you see first hand what they have to deal with on a daily basis you cant really pass judgement on them. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by curtis_rak
Until you see first hand what they have to deal with on a daily basis you cant really pass judgement on them.
quote:
Originally posted by curtis_rak
That is a bullshit response
;) |
|
|
| curtis_rak |
...Judgement on your reponse, not you.
Big difference. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by curtis_rak
...Judgement on your reponse, not you.
Big difference.
Ah, now you've gone and gotten me all confused. :blink:
I only had one coffee today. :tear:
...are you trying to say that if I saw what they go through on a daily basis I would understand and support them randomly yelling and losing their temper at motorists during traffic stops? :dunno:
Although it would be pretty damn funny if a bunch of us car guys went down to the strathcona station and requested to go on ride alongs all at the same time. :bthumbup: |
|
|
| scooby_dooby |
the problem i have is not with them gicing tickets for offenses like tint & exhaust, my problem if the PRIORITY they make these sorts of offences.
curtis, the point you made about a crime being a crime is completely valid, but the facts is they are treating these crimes as MORE important, when they are essentially victimless crimes. Seeing as no-one is getting hurt or ripped off by these sorts of offenses I think they be a much much lower proirity then they are now. Even speeding is much more important to crack down on than tint or mufflers, it puts LIVES in danger.
I would absolutely love to see the numbers on how many of the total traffic tickets handed out were for "Enlarged Exhausts Outlets" or "Tint", I would bet it's a huge percentage, a completely unjustified percentage. |
|
|
| curtis_rak |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
...are you trying to say that if I saw what they go through on a daily basis I would understand and support them randomly yelling and losing their temper at motorists during traffic stops? :dunno:
Of couse you wouldn't and neither would I. What it might do is stop people from painting all police officers with the same brush. Sure, one persons actions may leave a bad taste in your mouth, but, such is life.
quote:
...
Although it would be pretty damn funny if a bunch of us car guys went down to the strathcona station and requested to go on ride alongs all at the same time. :bthumbup:
My suggestion would be to go to HQ, then go from there. |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by curtis_rak
Of couse you wouldn't and neither would I. What it might do is stop people from painting all police officers with the same brush. Sure, one persons actions may leave a bad taste in your mouth, but, such is life.]
Personally I do not paint all police with the same brush, but I'm not going to pretend that there isn't an issue with the general conduct of certain sub-groups within the police. I've met a couple of really great EPS officers who are a credit to the force (bump for the guys at Ottewell), but I've also met a couple of real assholes.
The real difference between them was age and experience. The older or more experienced officers (some younger guys are experienced too) were comfortable with their chosen line of work and did not feel the need to forcefully demonstrate their authority. They look you in the eye and speak honestly and plainly.
The younger, inexperienced guys still seem ignorant of their badge. It appears that they feel they must exert their authority at every chance and this is leading to some of the problems we are discussing on here. They will not look you in the eye and when questioned they become flustered and upset because they feel they are losing control of the situation.... and we know what happens when they do not have control.
quote:
Originally posted by curtis_rak
My suggestion would be to go to HQ, then go from there.
If I do that, can you guarantee that I won't accidentally fall down an elevator shaft? :blink: |
|
|
|
