4 ms·

I've talked to police a number of times without a lawyer, and it has always been fine.

mikestew 3y ago
I've wired electrical outlets without turning off the breaker, and I'm still here to type this. I would not, however, advise others to do so but rather emphasize the importance of turning off the breaker before doing electrical work. Other than "nice day, eh?" or "No, as a matter of fact I do NOT know why you pulled me over", don't talk to cops without a lawyer.
- bdcravens 3y ago
  > "No, as a matter of fact I do NOT know why you pulled me over" For bonus points, quote "99 Problems": "Do I learn like a mind reader, sir? I don't know." (that entire verse is quite educational)
- oceanplexian 3y ago
  In my experience they will phrase it as “Do you know how fast you were going?” or “Do you know what the speed limit is?”, worded in such a way that ANY answer is incriminating.
  - adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
    the least wrong answer is likely "I believe so".
  - dekhn 3y ago
    Can you explain what happens if you answer those? Does that affect the outcome? Is a cop that pulls you over for what looks like a traffic violation trying to get you to make an incriminating statement (I have no idea, I'm just asking. No agenda)? In the few situations where I was pulled over for speeding, I asked the cop to show me the reading and also whether the device was calibrated in the past few years, and they've always obliged (after answering "I know how fast I was going" and "I think the speed limit is...". If they have a calibrated device and they show me the reading, I'm not really sure how my answers to those questions affects the decision tree. What you want to do is avoid creating an unnecessary confrontation by acting adversarial.
    - adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
      answering that you know how fast you were going, combined with data suggesting you were speeding yields the conclusion that you were intentionally breaking the law.
      - dekhn 3y ago
        Yes, and? Sorry to be obtuse, but I'm just trying to understand the decision tree here. Of course if I'm speeding I know I'm breaking the law. Does denying that somehow get me out of a ticket? Look at the base rate of speeding. When I drive on 101 in the bay area in clear traffic, I'm doing around 65 (the limit)-75 in the right lane and the majority of people are passing me on the left (or tailgating me because they want me to go faster or drafting or whatever it is that causes people to drive too close behind me when I drive near the speed limit). From what I can tell, unless a cop is actively trying to be punitive, they typically don't stop a car simply because it's going up to about 15MPH over the freeway limit.
        ryandrake 3y ago
        I have personally successfully argued in front of a traffic court judge that I could not be aware of the speed limit since the sign was obscured, and it resulted in not having to pay the ticket. I am sure I would not have been successful if I admitted guilt in front of the officer who pulled me over, or participated in his various gotcha games.
        dekhn 3y ago
        Did the cop show up to your court date? Did they provide any information to the judge? Did you truly not know the speed of the road you were on, and was that because the sign was obstructed, or is that the argument you made in court? It seems like in this situation I could have honestly answered "no, I did not know the speed limit". I mean, where I said I'd know the speed limit above, if it was truly obscured, I think I would be playing it safe and judge things on what the road looked like, whether there was a school there, and the weather and other ambient conditions.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- klyrs 3y ago
  > Other than "nice day, eh?" Unless there's a cloud in the sky. Wouldn't wanna lie to an officer...
- IncreasePosts 3y ago
  So the last time I talked to a cop was last week, when one knocked on my door. My neighbor's car was stolen overnight, and the officer wanted to know if my security camera was recording and if anything was captured during a certain time frame. Are you telling me that I should have shut the door in his face, and called my lawyer?
bdcravens 3y ago
You can also drive without a seat belt several times and likely be ok. It only takes one time to be proven wrong, however, and by then, it may be too late to learn the lesson.
paxys 3y ago
It is always fine until it isn’t.
- IncreasePosts 3y ago
  By this logic - Never interact with strangers. It is always fine, until it isn't. I can't believe you would do something so dangerous as to post a message on a message board.
  - pixl97 3y ago
    I mean, most tigers aren't going to eat you, so it's pretty safe being in a cage with one. Both getting in a tigers cage and interacting with the police are things that you have many choices in moderating and making the event safer.

I've wired electrical outlets without turning off the breaker, and I'm still here to type this. I would not, however, advise others to do so but rather emphasize the importance of turning off the breaker before doing electrical work. Other than "nice day, eh?" or "No, as a matter of fact I do NOT know why you pulled me over", don't talk to cops without a lawyer.

bdcravens 3y ago
> "No, as a matter of fact I do NOT know why you pulled me over" For bonus points, quote "99 Problems": "Do I learn like a mind reader, sir? I don't know." (that entire verse is quite educational)
oceanplexian 3y ago
In my experience they will phrase it as “Do you know how fast you were going?” or “Do you know what the speed limit is?”, worded in such a way that ANY answer is incriminating.
- adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
  the least wrong answer is likely "I believe so".
- dekhn 3y ago
  Can you explain what happens if you answer those? Does that affect the outcome? Is a cop that pulls you over for what looks like a traffic violation trying to get you to make an incriminating statement (I have no idea, I'm just asking. No agenda)? In the few situations where I was pulled over for speeding, I asked the cop to show me the reading and also whether the device was calibrated in the past few years, and they've always obliged (after answering "I know how fast I was going" and "I think the speed limit is...". If they have a calibrated device and they show me the reading, I'm not really sure how my answers to those questions affects the decision tree. What you want to do is avoid creating an unnecessary confrontation by acting adversarial.
  - adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
    answering that you know how fast you were going, combined with data suggesting you were speeding yields the conclusion that you were intentionally breaking the law.
    - dekhn 3y ago
      Yes, and? Sorry to be obtuse, but I'm just trying to understand the decision tree here. Of course if I'm speeding I know I'm breaking the law. Does denying that somehow get me out of a ticket? Look at the base rate of speeding. When I drive on 101 in the bay area in clear traffic, I'm doing around 65 (the limit)-75 in the right lane and the majority of people are passing me on the left (or tailgating me because they want me to go faster or drafting or whatever it is that causes people to drive too close behind me when I drive near the speed limit). From what I can tell, unless a cop is actively trying to be punitive, they typically don't stop a car simply because it's going up to about 15MPH over the freeway limit.
      - ryandrake 3y ago
        I have personally successfully argued in front of a traffic court judge that I could not be aware of the speed limit since the sign was obscured, and it resulted in not having to pay the ticket. I am sure I would not have been successful if I admitted guilt in front of the officer who pulled me over, or participated in his various gotcha games.
        dekhn 3y ago
        Did the cop show up to your court date? Did they provide any information to the judge? Did you truly not know the speed of the road you were on, and was that because the sign was obstructed, or is that the argument you made in court? It seems like in this situation I could have honestly answered "no, I did not know the speed limit". I mean, where I said I'd know the speed limit above, if it was truly obscured, I think I would be playing it safe and judge things on what the road looked like, whether there was a school there, and the weather and other ambient conditions.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
klyrs 3y ago
> Other than "nice day, eh?" Unless there's a cloud in the sky. Wouldn't wanna lie to an officer...
IncreasePosts 3y ago
So the last time I talked to a cop was last week, when one knocked on my door. My neighbor's car was stolen overnight, and the officer wanted to know if my security camera was recording and if anything was captured during a certain time frame. Are you telling me that I should have shut the door in his face, and called my lawyer?

bdcravens 3y ago

You can also drive without a seat belt several times and likely be ok. It only takes one time to be proven wrong, however, and by then, it may be too late to learn the lesson.

paxys 3y ago

It is always fine until it isn’t.

IncreasePosts 3y ago
By this logic - Never interact with strangers. It is always fine, until it isn't. I can't believe you would do something so dangerous as to post a message on a message board.
- pixl97 3y ago
  I mean, most tigers aren't going to eat you, so it's pretty safe being in a cage with one. Both getting in a tigers cage and interacting with the police are things that you have many choices in moderating and making the event safer.