3 ms·

Honestly that sounds like excellent policing to me. If we issue everyone with a ticket for the smallest infraction we end up alienating the public. I'm a law-a

by jen729w 11y ago

Honestly that sounds like excellent policing to me. If we issue everyone with a ticket for the smallest infraction we end up alienating the public. I'm a law-abiding citizen; I want to help the police. If I'm pulled over for something fairly innocent - say, not quite leaving enough room for a cyclist - and I'm given a $150 fine, no questions asked, what that does not do is make me respect cyclists more. It makes me disrespect the police, the law, it angers me, it makes me far less likely to help the police in the (immediate) future. If the officer explains the law to me and I take what he says on board, that's a better outcome for everyone. It's better for me (no ticket), it's better for cyclists (I'll leave more room), and it's better for the police (excellent public relations). I speak as a daily cyclist, as someone who called my local police literally an hour ago to report a weirdly parked car, and as an ex-Englishman, now resident of Melbourne, Australia. We tend to get on with our police here; their street skills tend to be a bit "softer". I think that's fabulous.

jessriedel 11y ago
The grandparents wasn't questioning whether it makes sense to give warnings, he was questioning whether we really want officers on the street making gut-level decision about how sorry they think the driver was.
- loco5niner 11y ago
  I certainly want the police officers I interact with to be capable of and practiced in the art of correctly making a gut-level decision. I would argue that the problem in the US is in choosing who we give that authority to.
  - jessriedel 11y ago
    I certainly agree that some people are better decision makers than others, and there's plenty to say about who we want to be employed as officers, but frankly I don't think I want any officers deciding whether to give out $100 tickets based on how blase someone puts a pamphlet on their passenger seat. Maybe if it was in a small culturally homogeneous town you could hope to makes a good read there, but otherwise I think there's just too much miscommunication.
    - rubyfan 11y ago
      Yeah that's kind of where I was going with that. It would be most ideal if the law was applied evenly and not arbitrarily. I am all for protecting cyclists and pedestrians, however more laws enabling arrest and arbitrary execution of statue seems less desirable to me. A clear line delineating between a cycling lane and vehicle lane would perhaps be a more effective safety method than employing a person to dispatch donated pamphlets using donated detection equipment. It seems like the line between a lobbying party and the execution of the law is blurred. In this case, its relatively innocuous however this kind of ambiguity of the intent of the law and the blurred line of its application is probably common.

by jen729w 11y ago

jessriedel 11y ago

The grandparents wasn't questioning whether it makes sense to give warnings, he was questioning whether we really want officers on the street making gut-level decision about how sorry they think the driver was.

loco5niner 11y ago
I certainly want the police officers I interact with to be capable of and practiced in the art of correctly making a gut-level decision. I would argue that the problem in the US is in choosing who we give that authority to.
- jessriedel 11y ago
  I certainly agree that some people are better decision makers than others, and there's plenty to say about who we want to be employed as officers, but frankly I don't think I want any officers deciding whether to give out $100 tickets based on how blase someone puts a pamphlet on their passenger seat. Maybe if it was in a small culturally homogeneous town you could hope to makes a good read there, but otherwise I think there's just too much miscommunication.
  - rubyfan 11y ago
    Yeah that's kind of where I was going with that. It would be most ideal if the law was applied evenly and not arbitrarily. I am all for protecting cyclists and pedestrians, however more laws enabling arrest and arbitrary execution of statue seems less desirable to me. A clear line delineating between a cycling lane and vehicle lane would perhaps be a more effective safety method than employing a person to dispatch donated pamphlets using donated detection equipment. It seems like the line between a lobbying party and the execution of the law is blurred. In this case, its relatively innocuous however this kind of ambiguity of the intent of the law and the blurred line of its application is probably common.