8 ms·

To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

208 points by greedo 6mo ago

wisemanwillhear 6mo ago
[dead]
thatmf 6mo ago
> James Giovansanti lives and works on Staten Island. ya don't say (sincerely, ex-resident)
nslsm 6mo ago
Has he ever hit something or someone? If the answer is no, then speeding laws are too strict and must change.
- trehalose 6mo ago
  If he hasn't, then why would he refuse to say so?
  - garciasn 6mo ago
    > If he hasn't, then why would he refuse to say so? Because he doesn't need to nor should he respond to a blogger? We continually point out that no one should ever talk to the police, the same absolutely goes for the media, particularly when you're a civil servant.
- rationalist 6mo ago
  When I go faster than usual, I always slow down around other traffic. So if the law accounted for that, that would be nice. It seems silly to be pulled over if you're the only one on the road. However I can understand that slower speeds can reduce catastrophic results if a tire blows. I suppose it's akin to wearing seatbelts: As long as you're driving reasonably around other traffic and only speeding when you're by yourself, then the law primarily is there to protect the one person. Edit: is there something wrong with my comment?
  - kordlessagain 6mo ago
    I would say you are rationalizing as is the parent of your reply, whose own reply is now invisible as it's been dv into oblivion. Statistically if you speed the chances of a mishap increase. It's just a fact of observation. You are making a rationalization that statistics don't apply to you, and HN has judged you accordingly.
    - rationalist 6mo ago
      First, thank you for replying to my edit. > You are making a rationalization that statistics don't apply to you I reread my comment, and I don't see that at all. The only thing I said about me is that sometimes I drive faster than usual, which is not even an admission of exceeding the speed limit. Most of the time I set my cruise control to the speed limit, and it is surprising how many people I pass that way.
  - addled 6mo ago
    Does the person have children? If so then the law benefits more than just the driver, even if they are the only one on the road. We already have a precedent of compelling parents to pay child-support. I don’t know if I’m really advocating for a nanny state, but last month I went to the funeral of a friend that was driving without a seatbelt and was alone on the road. Now his pregnant wife has to raise their child alone. I guess what I’m trying to say is: Wear a seatbelt. You may not have any concern for your own safety, but there’s probably somebody who does.
    - rationalist 6mo ago
      I agree with wearing seatbelts. I always wear mine. In fact, I hate the feeling of not wearing it. I like to be positioned securely in one spot when driving. However, should it be illegal for someone with no dependants?
      - nemomarx 6mo ago
        At a certain narrow point, what's the use of carving out a particular class of people from a general "use seatbelts in cars" law? I suppose logically though someone with no dependents who signed some sort of waiver could be allowed, but it complicates enforcement measures quite a lot either way.
- ceejayoz 6mo ago
  > Among the questions he would not answer was: “While driving the RAM 1500, have you been involved in a collision with a car, pedestrian or cyclist?” (We can’t independently find that out because license plates are not in the city database of crashes for some reason.)
- noja 6mo ago
  Nobody knows. He was driving too fast to get his plate.
- OutOfHere 6mo ago
  I am of two minds about it. On one hand, speeding alone when done by a mature highly-attentive driver isn't really dangerous no matter the limit, because the driver has enough expertise to know what his personal limit ought to be. The residual risk is more from immature drivers, the mistakes of other cars, cyclists, and pedestrians. I have been on both sides of it. I have been the speeder who can drive very safely, and much earlier than that I have been the one to get hit by a car on a street. If the car had been going faster, or if it had been an SUV or a truck, I could have been less than lucky. I settle for a middle position, which is that the speed limit should be no less than 35 mph on most streets, with heavy mandated use of automated collision avoidance systems. Moreover, I think that all pedestrian collisions, no matter how small, must be investigated thoroughly, with a hard action taken to minimize such an incident. School zones and other low-speed zones are a complete moneygrubbing racket because we already use schoolbuses which have protections. Bicyclists must be mandated to wear light-colored high-visibility clothing, reflective gear, and a helmet, otherwise their bicycle should be confiscated.
  - iso1631 6mo ago
    > Bicyclists must be mandated to wear light-colored high-visibility clothing, reflective gear, and a helmet, otherwise their bicycle should be confiscated. The leading cause of death for car occupants is head injuries, I assume you believe that all car occupants must wear a helmet. All cars needless to say need to be bright orange Any infringement should have the car crushed.
    - OutOfHere 6mo ago
      I actually absolutely believe that all cars should be brightly colored. It doesn't have to be orange. It is an easy win. As for helmets in cars, yes, it's a particularly good idea for small cars that have a lower collision safety score. An appropriate helmet should be used that does not obstruct viewing mirrors or the blind spot. Pedestrians too can benefit from a helmet.
      - rationalist 6mo ago
- condensedcrab 6mo ago
  It's not so much whether someone has hit anyone - speeding laws exist for a good reason to protect other drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, etc. There's a good reason that school zones are 25 mph for survivability in the case of a car hitting a pedestrian (especially for small children). There's certainly issues with speeding laws and enforcement, but at the end of the day the US is so car-centric that removing someone's license for dangerous driving can severely impact their ability to get to work, etc.
- ImJasonH 6mo ago
  Reminds me of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqYyxvM85zU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqYyxvM85zU
- tverbeure 6mo ago
  Would you apply the same reason to drunk driving? If not, why?
  - nslsm 6mo ago
    …yes? My point is if someone can break the law 547 times and no one is affected then the law is stupid.
    - tverbeure 6mo ago
      Your point is wrong. The offender may be an exceptionally alert driver who doesn't get into an accident, unlike the average person (and statistics show that higher speed results in a higher accident rate.) You also ignore the claim made by the article that it is not known how many accidents are made by the offender, because the license plate data isn't available. Or the fact that the offender is a cop and we all know how they tend to be treated differently by other cops. Maybe you want to system where the speed limit is variable and based on some driving aptitude test. What could possibly go wrong with that.
lasky 6mo ago
No doubt police should not be above the law and we should call that out. However this article reads more like hyperbolic slander.
- john_strinlai 6mo ago
  which part is hyperbolic, and which part is slander? (remember that a statement has to be false to be slander)
  - singleshot_ 6mo ago
    It also can’t be written, or the defamation would be libel, not slander.
- tencentshill 6mo ago
  They're leveling some hefty accusations and signing their name on it. It would be monumentally stupid for J.K. Trotter, the author, to say these things without having any proof that holds up in court. If it's false, they would be sued and lose quickly. The data is pretty much all public record combined with standard journalism work.
iso1631 6mo ago
> Since 2022, traffic cameras have caught his pickup truck blasting through school zones or running red lights more than 547 times in that one borough In the UK speeding tickets get you 3 points (or more if you're really over like 50+ in a 30). Get 12 points in a 3 year period and you are banned from driving. I thought that the US had something similar for "moving violations" (rather than say parking). Is the penalty for ignoring the law seriously just a fine (i.e. if you're rich you aren't affected)?
- john_strinlai 6mo ago
  typically, tickets issued by cameras dont cause demerit points because they are unreliable at knowing who specifically is driving at the time of the ticket. they want to avoid giving you points on your license just because your kid/spouse/friend/whatever was speeding. if these tickets were issued via a cop, rather than a camera, they would be 4 points each.
- MisterTea 6mo ago
  Traffic cameras identify the owner, the person who registered the vehicle, not the driver meaning there's no license to put points on. There is no points system (At least in NY) for registration to my knowledge.
  - nateguchi 6mo ago
    In the UK, the owner is liable for identifying the driver at the time of the incident. This is how it works with e.g. rental cars. If the owner doesn't identify the driver, they get the points
    - p_ing 6mo ago
      In the US, you have the right to face your accuser. Since that's not possible with a camera, photo-based enforcement becomes a non-moving violation. You can still point the finger at someone else when you get the ticket in the mail. Or just put a bunch of question marks in reply as it is on the State to prove their case, not for you to snitch on your own bad driving habits. At least that is how it works in the state I live in.
Teever 6mo ago
The solution is pretty straight forward. Fine should be scaled to your income and have an escalating multiplier for reoffense within the same category of offense with a cool down period of a few years if they don't break the law. I've brought this up many times online and people usually reply with something like "lots of people who have no income on paper but are wealthy speed" and a recent solution that I've seen posted is to scale the fine to the value of the vehicle. Quite often fines are a pretty limp and ineffective way of modulating an individual's behaviour which is ultimately a choice by society. We can make a better choice there to induce the behaviour that we want from antisocial people.
- Tade0 6mo ago
  > escalating multiplier for reoffense within the same category of offense with a cool down period of a few years if they don't break the law. My country - Poland - implemented this part a couple of years ago. Specifically a reoffense in the same category within two years results in a higher tier fine - about twice the usual amount. Fines were also adjusted for inflation after over 20 years of being nominally the same. The rate of cars passing me doing 180km/h+, so 40km/h+ above the local 140km/h limit, fell drastically. Particularly speeding cars in poor condition (like dangling linkages etc.) vanished. Nobody wants a ticket that's worth more than the car.
  - kennywinker 6mo ago
    Jesus christ, 140kph?!? That’s fast. Max speed limit where i live is 120kph and that feels too fast for most roads.
    - keddad 6mo ago
      It's really not, especially on a highway. Makes me sad to read about more and more speed restrictions - there is nothing wrong with those in areas there cars and pedestrians cross, but seeing a highway with a 110 (or sometimes even 80) speed limit just feels stupid. Sometimes I'm happy to live in a place with relatively modest speeding fines (also, you have to speed A LOT to loose your license over it, it's a very rare occasion).
A_D_E_P_T 6mo ago
> 527 since January 2022 That's more than two a week, every week!
- hackeraccount 6mo ago
  Guy is living his best life. I must be an old man because if I _could_ speed that much I don't think I would. I have gone over the posted limit but I find it stressful - part of that is I'm looking out for cops/cameras but part is when I'm going that fast I'm generally a bit more on edge because anything that'll happen is going to happen that much faster plus everyone else on the road is going so much slower.
branon 6mo ago
They went to the guy's house, workplace? Followed him and took pictures? This article reads like a Kiwi Farms thread. Just saying. I'm not a fan of what they do, but that's what came to mind. And when people do undesirable things, documenting them for public awareness is important. But how deep is too deep when it comes to freelance investigative journalism of this type? e: critically I'm _agreeing_ that the reporting is important, and I'm not passing judgement either way here, only making a comparison and posing a question
- burkaman 6mo ago
  His workplace is a public governmental building, so that seems like standard journalistic practice. It is also normal and appropriate to visit his house to seek a comment when he didn't respond through other channels. It would have been irresponsible and unethical to not put in an effort to speak with him before publishing this article. And taking a photo of a government official in public is again very normal, and it's good that they confirmed the vehicle is actually used by the guy they're naming. For investigative journalism, if it even qualifies as that, this is pretty shallow. It's good work but it's just some public data and a couple hours of work, not a deep invasive investigation. It also is not freelance, this is a staff reporter for a decades-old publication.
  - redsocksfan45 6mo ago
    [dead]
- embedding-shape 6mo ago
  Yeah, if he wasn't a public servant, and he wasn't a police who is supposed to enforce the laws, then I'd agree with you. But he is (hopefully "was" at one point) a public servant, and supposed to enforce the law, so if he flagrantly breaks the law almost every single day, then it's in public interest to know who is he and what he does.
- john_strinlai 6mo ago
  >But how deep is too deep when it comes to freelance investigative journalism of this type? when the subject is a cop? no such thing.
newsy888 6mo ago
Universal surveillance at its most terrifying
- kennywinker 6mo ago
  What’a scary about this, specifically? Speed cameras? Logs of tickets issued?
haritha-j 6mo ago
I don't understand, doesn't NY have a points system for driving licenses? In most places you could speed at most half a dozen times before you lose your license.
- arscan 6mo ago
  It does, but according to the article it doesn’t apply to tickets issued by camera.
  - ceejayoz 6mo ago
    Well, that, and cops.
    - voxadam 6mo ago
      Cops don't give tickets to other cops.
      - ceejayoz 6mo ago
        In NYC, cops' friends are also exempt. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/16/nyregion/mathew-bianchi-nypd-traffic-tickets.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/16/nyregion/mathew-bianchi-n...
        wahern 6mo ago
        In California cops, family members of cops, and related personnel (e.g. police union officials) can get a special insignia on their license. So when they're pulled over and are asked to present their license....
        FireBeyond 6mo ago
        The FOP (Fraternal Order of Police). Also a thing in NY and NJ. Fun facts... the insignia you put on your license or on your car also has a thing like a registration tab... The FOP says its "to show your ongoing support", everyone else with a room temperature IQ knows its "to show you're 'paid up' on your protection money for the year". Oh, and some enterprising souls have created "counterfeit" FOP insignia and stickers and other regalia (or for those tabs), and sold them on eBay... only to have the weight of the police union's attorneys come down on them with cease and desists, etc. Biggest gang, etc.
tantalor 6mo ago
What is the point of this article? > Like all drivers in New York State, Giovansanti is immune to consequences as long as he pays the $50 tickets So he's allowed to do this. Why are we talking about it?
- embedding-shape 6mo ago
  Because he shouldn't be allowed to do that? Because police officers should be held to a higher standard than others? Because being immune to consequences isn't a thing anyone should be? Those are just the reasons I could think of in ten seconds, I'm sure others could come up with more.
- ceejayoz 6mo ago
  NYPD policy should probably consider repeated reckless disregard for the law to be a discipline issue.
  - toast0 6mo ago
    If he paid the fine, I don't know that it's disregard for the law. The laws says if you do this, you owe a fine. If you pay the fine, it's following the law.
    - mw1 6mo ago
      The law says if you murder someone you go to jail. Therefore, it’s following the law to murder someone as long as you take the punishment. Of course not, the punishment is actually what happens because you disregarded and didn’t follow the law.
    - kennywinker 6mo ago
      The law actually says it’s illegal to speed. It doesn’t say it’s ok to speed as long as you pay the fine.
    - woodruffw 6mo ago
      > The laws says if you do this, you owe a fine. If you pay the fine, it's following the law. You're following the part of the law that punishes you for violating the other part of the law, not the law that originally punished you. This is an important distinction.
raybb 6mo ago
That's absolutely horrifying... Relatively small increases in speed dramatically increase the stopping distance and as such the danger of driving. Especially with a huge truck like that. That's why Amsterdam (with much more food traffic) has recently reduced speed limits a lot. > At 30km/h, the stopping distance of a car is 13 metres. At 50km/h it’s more than double at 27 metres. That 20km/h reduction is the crucial difference between a pedestrian or cyclist surviving the impact of an accident – at 30km/h it’s estimated that 95 per cent of pedestrians would emerge relatively unscathed. https://www.intertraffic.com/news/road-safety/amsterdam-30-speed-limit https://www.intertraffic.com/news/road-safety/amsterdam-30-s...
- strongpigeon 6mo ago
  What you're saying is all true, but typically road design influence driving speed more than anything. Changing speed limits rarely has an impact on that (at least in the US).
  - rapnie 6mo ago
    Not sure, but I think that in the Netherlands a municipality is not allowed to slap some 30kmh road signs along a roadway and call it a day. If the street does not 'communicate' that it is designed for that velocity, i.e. it is too broad, too many car lanes, then it must be adapted first to slow down traffic. There are a number of interesting design guidelines and manuals on the web, like CROW [0] for bicycle traffic, applied across the Netherlands. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CROW_Design_Manual_for_Bicycle_Traffic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CROW_Design_Manual_for_Bicycle...
    - IshKebab 6mo ago
      That's how it should work but the UK definitely doesn't do that. I don't think the US does either.
  - TulliusCicero 6mo ago
    Really you should do both. Otherwise you do end up with roads that feel like you have to go slow but nominally you're allowed to go fast (and some drivers will certainly take that opportunity).
xnx 6mo ago
I guess I'm most surprised that there are any NYC cops who don't deface their plates: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/17/nyregion/license-plate-vigilantes.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/17/nyregion/license-plate-vi...
archonis 6mo ago
Looks like they found the one cop on the force who doesn't obscure the license plate of their private vehicle.
BobBagwill 6mo ago
If you can't arrest the human, arrest the vehicle. The vehicle is obviously guilty, and is not protected by the right to confront its accusers, which are also machines. Of course, with the advent of AI-enhanced surveillance and "smart" cars, we have have to have a separate traffic court for machines. Then snowflake SJW machine-huggers will demand a machine Bill of Rights ... Nevermind. ;-)
- avidiax 6mo ago
  This would be an interesting use of civil forfeiture.
robhlt 6mo ago
The Dangerous Vehicle Abatement Program was meant to deal with drivers like this, but it was allowed to expire in 2023 after the NYC DOT failed to actually implement it. The program allowed the DOT to make drivers with more than 15 speed camera or 5 red light camera tickets in a year to take a safe driving course or have their car siezed. The DOT only took action against a small fraction of eligible offenders however. More: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2023/09/22/analysis-dangerous-vehicle-abatement-program-is-a-failure-by-all-measures https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2023/09/22/analysis-dangerous-ve...
nkrisc 6mo ago
> The expert, former cop turned criminal justice professor Michael Alcazar, said Giovansanti should face “serious discipline.” But that’s not happening — an NYPD spokesperson shrugged off the suggestion of punishment because Giovansanti’s tickets are “not related to his job or his duties in the department.” This angers me. Police officers are granted special privileges that ordinary citizens are not, and should be held to higher standards of conduct both on the job and off. In a just world, police officers would be exemplar citizens while wearing the uniform and while not. If they are not, how can we trust them to wield special privileges and authority over us?
- ToValueFunfetti 6mo ago
  The same way we can trust an overweight doctor, a depressed therapist, a housecleaner who doesn't make their bed, or me to verify code I push to corporate repos even while I vibecode apps at home for fun without paying attention. I don't understand the basis for applying this standard to cops.
  - napoleond 6mo ago
    Each of those examples varies widely, and I don't think most people would treat each of them the same way. In general when the stakes are higher and the ambiguity of outcome is less clear, secondary signals become more important. Concretely: I don't give a shit if my housecleaner doesn't make their own bed as long as they make mine; the outcome I need is easy to verify and the stakes are fairly low so the secondary signal doesn't matter very much. Conversely, I care a lot if the therapist I'm relying on to help me manage my depression is visibly unable to manage their own; the outcome I need has a slow feedback loop and the stakes are high so I'm much more likely to rely on secondary signals like "is this person able to manage their own mood successfully?"
    - ToValueFunfetti 6mo ago
      In your version of the therapist example, you don't trust them to do their job because they are failing to do their job. This is fine by me. My issue is with punishing people at their job over actions taken outside of their job, as in the example under discussion.
realo 6mo ago
TFA mentions a need for the "Stop Super Speeders Act" Reading the actual response from his police managers I think what is more needed are the "Abolish Qualified Immunity Act" and the "Cleanup Thoroughly Police Corruption Act" , in addition to the "Hire Professional And Responsible Police Officers Act".
- Georgelemental 6mo ago
  No, all you need is the "Abolish Public Sector Unions Act".
greatgib 6mo ago
The big question they didn't even scratch is doesn't he have to pay the fines in the end? I don't understand why someone would be ok to pay probably 10k to 40k of fines every year just for a dozen of mph excessive speed. I would easily guess that he does that because he is able to have the fine waived by abusing of his status!
- elzbardico 6mo ago
  I gather his fines are waived administrativelly by the PD itself.
palmotea 6mo ago
> at more than 41 mph across the island Is Staten Island like Hawaii, where everyone drives slow? Because they're talking like 41 mph is super fast, but to me it's not that fast at all (here the interstate is 70 mph, arterial city streets are 40-50 mph, and people regularly speed).
- hackeraccount 6mo ago
  If you get a camera ticket at 41 mph it's because you're driving in a zone where the limit is 30 which sounds pretty residential to me. Is that more or less dangerous then doing 76 mph on a highway? I don't know, it's the difference between hitting a pedestrian and another car so less dangerous for you but more dangerous for the other person involved.
  - palmotea 6mo ago
    Seems like they should have phrased it differently, like "...he pilots a 4,800-pound RAM 1500 truck at more than 41 mph across through residential areas..."
josefritzishere 6mo ago
It's amazing that the record only makes Giovansanti the second-most-reckless driver in the city.

208 points by greedo 6mo ago

wisemanwillhear 6mo ago

[dead]

thatmf 6mo ago

> James Giovansanti lives and works on Staten Island. ya don't say (sincerely, ex-resident)

nslsm 6mo ago

Has he ever hit something or someone? If the answer is no, then speeding laws are too strict and must change.

trehalose 6mo ago
If he hasn't, then why would he refuse to say so?
- garciasn 6mo ago
  > If he hasn't, then why would he refuse to say so? Because he doesn't need to nor should he respond to a blogger? We continually point out that no one should ever talk to the police, the same absolutely goes for the media, particularly when you're a civil servant.
rationalist 6mo ago
When I go faster than usual, I always slow down around other traffic. So if the law accounted for that, that would be nice. It seems silly to be pulled over if you're the only one on the road. However I can understand that slower speeds can reduce catastrophic results if a tire blows. I suppose it's akin to wearing seatbelts: As long as you're driving reasonably around other traffic and only speeding when you're by yourself, then the law primarily is there to protect the one person. Edit: is there something wrong with my comment?
- kordlessagain 6mo ago
  I would say you are rationalizing as is the parent of your reply, whose own reply is now invisible as it's been dv into oblivion. Statistically if you speed the chances of a mishap increase. It's just a fact of observation. You are making a rationalization that statistics don't apply to you, and HN has judged you accordingly.
  - rationalist 6mo ago
    First, thank you for replying to my edit. > You are making a rationalization that statistics don't apply to you I reread my comment, and I don't see that at all. The only thing I said about me is that sometimes I drive faster than usual, which is not even an admission of exceeding the speed limit. Most of the time I set my cruise control to the speed limit, and it is surprising how many people I pass that way.
- addled 6mo ago
  Does the person have children? If so then the law benefits more than just the driver, even if they are the only one on the road. We already have a precedent of compelling parents to pay child-support. I don’t know if I’m really advocating for a nanny state, but last month I went to the funeral of a friend that was driving without a seatbelt and was alone on the road. Now his pregnant wife has to raise their child alone. I guess what I’m trying to say is: Wear a seatbelt. You may not have any concern for your own safety, but there’s probably somebody who does.
  - rationalist 6mo ago
    I agree with wearing seatbelts. I always wear mine. In fact, I hate the feeling of not wearing it. I like to be positioned securely in one spot when driving. However, should it be illegal for someone with no dependants?
    - nemomarx 6mo ago
      At a certain narrow point, what's the use of carving out a particular class of people from a general "use seatbelts in cars" law? I suppose logically though someone with no dependents who signed some sort of waiver could be allowed, but it complicates enforcement measures quite a lot either way.
ceejayoz 6mo ago
> Among the questions he would not answer was: “While driving the RAM 1500, have you been involved in a collision with a car, pedestrian or cyclist?” (We can’t independently find that out because license plates are not in the city database of crashes for some reason.)
noja 6mo ago
Nobody knows. He was driving too fast to get his plate.
OutOfHere 6mo ago
I am of two minds about it. On one hand, speeding alone when done by a mature highly-attentive driver isn't really dangerous no matter the limit, because the driver has enough expertise to know what his personal limit ought to be. The residual risk is more from immature drivers, the mistakes of other cars, cyclists, and pedestrians. I have been on both sides of it. I have been the speeder who can drive very safely, and much earlier than that I have been the one to get hit by a car on a street. If the car had been going faster, or if it had been an SUV or a truck, I could have been less than lucky. I settle for a middle position, which is that the speed limit should be no less than 35 mph on most streets, with heavy mandated use of automated collision avoidance systems. Moreover, I think that all pedestrian collisions, no matter how small, must be investigated thoroughly, with a hard action taken to minimize such an incident. School zones and other low-speed zones are a complete moneygrubbing racket because we already use schoolbuses which have protections. Bicyclists must be mandated to wear light-colored high-visibility clothing, reflective gear, and a helmet, otherwise their bicycle should be confiscated.
- iso1631 6mo ago
  > Bicyclists must be mandated to wear light-colored high-visibility clothing, reflective gear, and a helmet, otherwise their bicycle should be confiscated. The leading cause of death for car occupants is head injuries, I assume you believe that all car occupants must wear a helmet. All cars needless to say need to be bright orange Any infringement should have the car crushed.
  - OutOfHere 6mo ago
    I actually absolutely believe that all cars should be brightly colored. It doesn't have to be orange. It is an easy win. As for helmets in cars, yes, it's a particularly good idea for small cars that have a lower collision safety score. An appropriate helmet should be used that does not obstruct viewing mirrors or the blind spot. Pedestrians too can benefit from a helmet.
    - rationalist 6mo ago
condensedcrab 6mo ago
It's not so much whether someone has hit anyone - speeding laws exist for a good reason to protect other drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, etc. There's a good reason that school zones are 25 mph for survivability in the case of a car hitting a pedestrian (especially for small children). There's certainly issues with speeding laws and enforcement, but at the end of the day the US is so car-centric that removing someone's license for dangerous driving can severely impact their ability to get to work, etc.
ImJasonH 6mo ago
Reminds me of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqYyxvM85zU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqYyxvM85zU
tverbeure 6mo ago
Would you apply the same reason to drunk driving? If not, why?
- nslsm 6mo ago
  …yes? My point is if someone can break the law 547 times and no one is affected then the law is stupid.
  - tverbeure 6mo ago
    Your point is wrong. The offender may be an exceptionally alert driver who doesn't get into an accident, unlike the average person (and statistics show that higher speed results in a higher accident rate.) You also ignore the claim made by the article that it is not known how many accidents are made by the offender, because the license plate data isn't available. Or the fact that the offender is a cop and we all know how they tend to be treated differently by other cops. Maybe you want to system where the speed limit is variable and based on some driving aptitude test. What could possibly go wrong with that.

lasky 6mo ago

No doubt police should not be above the law and we should call that out. However this article reads more like hyperbolic slander.

john_strinlai 6mo ago
which part is hyperbolic, and which part is slander? (remember that a statement has to be false to be slander)
- singleshot_ 6mo ago
  It also can’t be written, or the defamation would be libel, not slander.
tencentshill 6mo ago
They're leveling some hefty accusations and signing their name on it. It would be monumentally stupid for J.K. Trotter, the author, to say these things without having any proof that holds up in court. If it's false, they would be sued and lose quickly. The data is pretty much all public record combined with standard journalism work.

iso1631 6mo ago

> Since 2022, traffic cameras have caught his pickup truck blasting through school zones or running red lights more than 547 times in that one borough In the UK speeding tickets get you 3 points (or more if you're really over like 50+ in a 30). Get 12 points in a 3 year period and you are banned from driving. I thought that the US had something similar for "moving violations" (rather than say parking). Is the penalty for ignoring the law seriously just a fine (i.e. if you're rich you aren't affected)?

john_strinlai 6mo ago
typically, tickets issued by cameras dont cause demerit points because they are unreliable at knowing who specifically is driving at the time of the ticket. they want to avoid giving you points on your license just because your kid/spouse/friend/whatever was speeding. if these tickets were issued via a cop, rather than a camera, they would be 4 points each.
MisterTea 6mo ago
Traffic cameras identify the owner, the person who registered the vehicle, not the driver meaning there's no license to put points on. There is no points system (At least in NY) for registration to my knowledge.
- nateguchi 6mo ago
  In the UK, the owner is liable for identifying the driver at the time of the incident. This is how it works with e.g. rental cars. If the owner doesn't identify the driver, they get the points
  - p_ing 6mo ago
    In the US, you have the right to face your accuser. Since that's not possible with a camera, photo-based enforcement becomes a non-moving violation. You can still point the finger at someone else when you get the ticket in the mail. Or just put a bunch of question marks in reply as it is on the State to prove their case, not for you to snitch on your own bad driving habits. At least that is how it works in the state I live in.

Teever 6mo ago

The solution is pretty straight forward. Fine should be scaled to your income and have an escalating multiplier for reoffense within the same category of offense with a cool down period of a few years if they don't break the law. I've brought this up many times online and people usually reply with something like "lots of people who have no income on paper but are wealthy speed" and a recent solution that I've seen posted is to scale the fine to the value of the vehicle. Quite often fines are a pretty limp and ineffective way of modulating an individual's behaviour which is ultimately a choice by society. We can make a better choice there to induce the behaviour that we want from antisocial people.

Tade0 6mo ago
> escalating multiplier for reoffense within the same category of offense with a cool down period of a few years if they don't break the law. My country - Poland - implemented this part a couple of years ago. Specifically a reoffense in the same category within two years results in a higher tier fine - about twice the usual amount. Fines were also adjusted for inflation after over 20 years of being nominally the same. The rate of cars passing me doing 180km/h+, so 40km/h+ above the local 140km/h limit, fell drastically. Particularly speeding cars in poor condition (like dangling linkages etc.) vanished. Nobody wants a ticket that's worth more than the car.
- kennywinker 6mo ago
  Jesus christ, 140kph?!? That’s fast. Max speed limit where i live is 120kph and that feels too fast for most roads.
  - keddad 6mo ago
    It's really not, especially on a highway. Makes me sad to read about more and more speed restrictions - there is nothing wrong with those in areas there cars and pedestrians cross, but seeing a highway with a 110 (or sometimes even 80) speed limit just feels stupid. Sometimes I'm happy to live in a place with relatively modest speeding fines (also, you have to speed A LOT to loose your license over it, it's a very rare occasion).

A_D_E_P_T 6mo ago

> 527 since January 2022 That's more than two a week, every week!

hackeraccount 6mo ago
Guy is living his best life. I must be an old man because if I _could_ speed that much I don't think I would. I have gone over the posted limit but I find it stressful - part of that is I'm looking out for cops/cameras but part is when I'm going that fast I'm generally a bit more on edge because anything that'll happen is going to happen that much faster plus everyone else on the road is going so much slower.

branon 6mo ago

They went to the guy's house, workplace? Followed him and took pictures? This article reads like a Kiwi Farms thread. Just saying. I'm not a fan of what they do, but that's what came to mind. And when people do undesirable things, documenting them for public awareness is important. But how deep is too deep when it comes to freelance investigative journalism of this type? e: critically I'm _agreeing_ that the reporting is important, and I'm not passing judgement either way here, only making a comparison and posing a question

burkaman 6mo ago
His workplace is a public governmental building, so that seems like standard journalistic practice. It is also normal and appropriate to visit his house to seek a comment when he didn't respond through other channels. It would have been irresponsible and unethical to not put in an effort to speak with him before publishing this article. And taking a photo of a government official in public is again very normal, and it's good that they confirmed the vehicle is actually used by the guy they're naming. For investigative journalism, if it even qualifies as that, this is pretty shallow. It's good work but it's just some public data and a couple hours of work, not a deep invasive investigation. It also is not freelance, this is a staff reporter for a decades-old publication.
- redsocksfan45 6mo ago
  [dead]
embedding-shape 6mo ago
Yeah, if he wasn't a public servant, and he wasn't a police who is supposed to enforce the laws, then I'd agree with you. But he is (hopefully "was" at one point) a public servant, and supposed to enforce the law, so if he flagrantly breaks the law almost every single day, then it's in public interest to know who is he and what he does.
john_strinlai 6mo ago
>But how deep is too deep when it comes to freelance investigative journalism of this type? when the subject is a cop? no such thing.

newsy888 6mo ago

Universal surveillance at its most terrifying

kennywinker 6mo ago
What’a scary about this, specifically? Speed cameras? Logs of tickets issued?

haritha-j 6mo ago

I don't understand, doesn't NY have a points system for driving licenses? In most places you could speed at most half a dozen times before you lose your license.

arscan 6mo ago
It does, but according to the article it doesn’t apply to tickets issued by camera.
- ceejayoz 6mo ago
  Well, that, and cops.
  - voxadam 6mo ago
    Cops don't give tickets to other cops.
    - ceejayoz 6mo ago
      In NYC, cops' friends are also exempt. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/16/nyregion/mathew-bianchi-nypd-traffic-tickets.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/16/nyregion/mathew-bianchi-n...
      - wahern 6mo ago
        In California cops, family members of cops, and related personnel (e.g. police union officials) can get a special insignia on their license. So when they're pulled over and are asked to present their license....
        FireBeyond 6mo ago
        The FOP (Fraternal Order of Police). Also a thing in NY and NJ. Fun facts... the insignia you put on your license or on your car also has a thing like a registration tab... The FOP says its "to show your ongoing support", everyone else with a room temperature IQ knows its "to show you're 'paid up' on your protection money for the year". Oh, and some enterprising souls have created "counterfeit" FOP insignia and stickers and other regalia (or for those tabs), and sold them on eBay... only to have the weight of the police union's attorneys come down on them with cease and desists, etc. Biggest gang, etc.

tantalor 6mo ago

What is the point of this article? > Like all drivers in New York State, Giovansanti is immune to consequences as long as he pays the $50 tickets So he's allowed to do this. Why are we talking about it?

embedding-shape 6mo ago
Because he shouldn't be allowed to do that? Because police officers should be held to a higher standard than others? Because being immune to consequences isn't a thing anyone should be? Those are just the reasons I could think of in ten seconds, I'm sure others could come up with more.
ceejayoz 6mo ago
NYPD policy should probably consider repeated reckless disregard for the law to be a discipline issue.
- toast0 6mo ago
  If he paid the fine, I don't know that it's disregard for the law. The laws says if you do this, you owe a fine. If you pay the fine, it's following the law.
  - mw1 6mo ago
    The law says if you murder someone you go to jail. Therefore, it’s following the law to murder someone as long as you take the punishment. Of course not, the punishment is actually what happens because you disregarded and didn’t follow the law.
  - kennywinker 6mo ago
    The law actually says it’s illegal to speed. It doesn’t say it’s ok to speed as long as you pay the fine.
  - woodruffw 6mo ago
    > The laws says if you do this, you owe a fine. If you pay the fine, it's following the law. You're following the part of the law that punishes you for violating the other part of the law, not the law that originally punished you. This is an important distinction.

raybb 6mo ago

That's absolutely horrifying... Relatively small increases in speed dramatically increase the stopping distance and as such the danger of driving. Especially with a huge truck like that. That's why Amsterdam (with much more food traffic) has recently reduced speed limits a lot. > At 30km/h, the stopping distance of a car is 13 metres. At 50km/h it’s more than double at 27 metres. That 20km/h reduction is the crucial difference between a pedestrian or cyclist surviving the impact of an accident – at 30km/h it’s estimated that 95 per cent of pedestrians would emerge relatively unscathed. https://www.intertraffic.com/news/road-safety/amsterdam-30-speed-limit https://www.intertraffic.com/news/road-safety/amsterdam-30-s...

strongpigeon 6mo ago
What you're saying is all true, but typically road design influence driving speed more than anything. Changing speed limits rarely has an impact on that (at least in the US).
- rapnie 6mo ago
  Not sure, but I think that in the Netherlands a municipality is not allowed to slap some 30kmh road signs along a roadway and call it a day. If the street does not 'communicate' that it is designed for that velocity, i.e. it is too broad, too many car lanes, then it must be adapted first to slow down traffic. There are a number of interesting design guidelines and manuals on the web, like CROW [0] for bicycle traffic, applied across the Netherlands. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CROW_Design_Manual_for_Bicycle_Traffic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CROW_Design_Manual_for_Bicycle...
  - IshKebab 6mo ago
    That's how it should work but the UK definitely doesn't do that. I don't think the US does either.
- TulliusCicero 6mo ago
  Really you should do both. Otherwise you do end up with roads that feel like you have to go slow but nominally you're allowed to go fast (and some drivers will certainly take that opportunity).

xnx 6mo ago

I guess I'm most surprised that there are any NYC cops who don't deface their plates: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/17/nyregion/license-plate-vigilantes.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/17/nyregion/license-plate-vi...

archonis 6mo ago

Looks like they found the one cop on the force who doesn't obscure the license plate of their private vehicle.

BobBagwill 6mo ago

If you can't arrest the human, arrest the vehicle. The vehicle is obviously guilty, and is not protected by the right to confront its accusers, which are also machines. Of course, with the advent of AI-enhanced surveillance and "smart" cars, we have have to have a separate traffic court for machines. Then snowflake SJW machine-huggers will demand a machine Bill of Rights ... Nevermind. ;-)

avidiax 6mo ago
This would be an interesting use of civil forfeiture.

robhlt 6mo ago

The Dangerous Vehicle Abatement Program was meant to deal with drivers like this, but it was allowed to expire in 2023 after the NYC DOT failed to actually implement it. The program allowed the DOT to make drivers with more than 15 speed camera or 5 red light camera tickets in a year to take a safe driving course or have their car siezed. The DOT only took action against a small fraction of eligible offenders however. More: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2023/09/22/analysis-dangerous-vehicle-abatement-program-is-a-failure-by-all-measures https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2023/09/22/analysis-dangerous-ve...

nkrisc 6mo ago

> The expert, former cop turned criminal justice professor Michael Alcazar, said Giovansanti should face “serious discipline.” But that’s not happening — an NYPD spokesperson shrugged off the suggestion of punishment because Giovansanti’s tickets are “not related to his job or his duties in the department.” This angers me. Police officers are granted special privileges that ordinary citizens are not, and should be held to higher standards of conduct both on the job and off. In a just world, police officers would be exemplar citizens while wearing the uniform and while not. If they are not, how can we trust them to wield special privileges and authority over us?

ToValueFunfetti 6mo ago
The same way we can trust an overweight doctor, a depressed therapist, a housecleaner who doesn't make their bed, or me to verify code I push to corporate repos even while I vibecode apps at home for fun without paying attention. I don't understand the basis for applying this standard to cops.
- napoleond 6mo ago
  Each of those examples varies widely, and I don't think most people would treat each of them the same way. In general when the stakes are higher and the ambiguity of outcome is less clear, secondary signals become more important. Concretely: I don't give a shit if my housecleaner doesn't make their own bed as long as they make mine; the outcome I need is easy to verify and the stakes are fairly low so the secondary signal doesn't matter very much. Conversely, I care a lot if the therapist I'm relying on to help me manage my depression is visibly unable to manage their own; the outcome I need has a slow feedback loop and the stakes are high so I'm much more likely to rely on secondary signals like "is this person able to manage their own mood successfully?"
  - ToValueFunfetti 6mo ago
    In your version of the therapist example, you don't trust them to do their job because they are failing to do their job. This is fine by me. My issue is with punishing people at their job over actions taken outside of their job, as in the example under discussion.

realo 6mo ago

TFA mentions a need for the "Stop Super Speeders Act" Reading the actual response from his police managers I think what is more needed are the "Abolish Qualified Immunity Act" and the "Cleanup Thoroughly Police Corruption Act" , in addition to the "Hire Professional And Responsible Police Officers Act".

Georgelemental 6mo ago
No, all you need is the "Abolish Public Sector Unions Act".

greatgib 6mo ago

The big question they didn't even scratch is doesn't he have to pay the fines in the end? I don't understand why someone would be ok to pay probably 10k to 40k of fines every year just for a dozen of mph excessive speed. I would easily guess that he does that because he is able to have the fine waived by abusing of his status!

elzbardico 6mo ago
I gather his fines are waived administrativelly by the PD itself.

palmotea 6mo ago

> at more than 41 mph across the island Is Staten Island like Hawaii, where everyone drives slow? Because they're talking like 41 mph is super fast, but to me it's not that fast at all (here the interstate is 70 mph, arterial city streets are 40-50 mph, and people regularly speed).

hackeraccount 6mo ago
If you get a camera ticket at 41 mph it's because you're driving in a zone where the limit is 30 which sounds pretty residential to me. Is that more or less dangerous then doing 76 mph on a highway? I don't know, it's the difference between hitting a pedestrian and another car so less dangerous for you but more dangerous for the other person involved.
- palmotea 6mo ago
  Seems like they should have phrased it differently, like "...he pilots a 4,800-pound RAM 1500 truck at more than 41 mph across through residential areas..."

josefritzishere 6mo ago

It's amazing that the record only makes Giovansanti the second-most-reckless driver in the city.