Ask A Cop!!! Post Your Questions Here!

[TJcop]

Adurso: I hope that wasn't a true story....I know we like to have our fun, but that could have gotten real bad, real quick!

 

[adurso]

Adurso: I hope that wasn't a true story....I know we like to have our fun, but that could have gotten real bad, real quick!

Quite true. Remember these things happened long long ago, you said you are 31 and have 9 years on the job, I was on the job around the time you were born....times have changed drastically in the past 30 years. When I started Garner vs Tenn was long down the road, deadly force was used routinely. Everyone hoped for a pursuit, because it was fun driving 100-130 after a bad guy, today pursuits are inherently dangerous, as a boss I often found myself in the position of calling them off, I am retired now and teach full time, I tell the kids war stories that are funny, but vastly different from the way things are today as a way of illustrating how times have changed. You should have heard the things my father and grandfathers did.....Society has evolved, for the better, I believe, as related to law enforcement. Citizens expect to be treated in a certain way, they want to know "why", todays officers should tell them. When I taught in our academy, I told the recruits their most powerful weapon was their mouth, talking to people generally solves the problem, listening actively goes a long way as well.

 

[Ann Marie]

Try it, let me know what happened, this could be fun.......dang, I hate the jail food though.

I flip off my husband enough, why not try it on other people. J/K, not about flipping of my hubby though.

I don't look good in orange. Red yes, orange no.

 

[Knight1989]

Once again, this thread has gone crazy! Knight, when do you work??? Unless you're at a desk all day....geesh!
Ok, time to answer some of your questions:

Giving me the finger: While I can't get you for the birdy...I'll find another reason!

Swearing at the po-po: Just part of the job. Again, not a wise choice...see how far it gets you.

Lol, I actually am at a desk most of the day now. Right now I'm teaching tactics at a regional military advanced warfare center for police. We dont have a class on the ground right now so I'm at the computer working on lesson plans and things like that. So lots of time to play on the internet. Give me a week and I'll be teaching people how to kick in doors for 14 hours a day and wont be online at all.

 

[Dive-aholic]

Can you settle a debate? In Ohio is it legal for 18+ year old to ride in the bed of a pickup truck as long as they are inside the bed--not sitting on the sides where they will fall out. I can't find this information online.
Ber :lilbunny:

I'm sure it's legal in Ohio, though I can't guarantee that. I do know that in Arizona it is quite common for people to ride in the bed of a truck. It is legal. And it's usually kids! It's something that's crossed the border from Mexico. It's always done down there. For some reason the AZ legislature hasn't seen it as worth addressing.

I remember a death that occurred when I was a cop when a teenager fell out of the bed of his friend's truck. They were screwing around one night and the driver made a quick turn. His friend tumbled out. I think he was "bed surfing". Nothing to cite the driver with. I did suggest going with "unsecured load" although that was only a civil driving offense.

 

[Goose75]

Thanks for the input Papps. I have a few thoughts from your post.

It's not up to me to decide if a law is constitutional. (This is why we elect judges.) There are laws I don’t' agree with, but it's not my place to decide which laws I'm going to enforce. (It would be like a checker at Wal*mart saying "I like this guy, I won't charge him for his groceries.")

I've always thought it was interesting that we hold a soldier accountable to the Geneva convention regardless of his orders but we change our tune when it comes to our own enforcement of law and the constitution. Not that an officer can do anything about that but it's an interesting thought.

You would be surprised how many people I catch with a radar detector. For one I use a laser. It emits a narrow beam of light. By the time your laser detector goes off I have your speed. Having a detector is legal in Washington, but almost always guarantees a ticket.

I used to have one and I was only stopped a couple of times I forgot to turn it on. Never received a ticket though, it was the first thing to be stuffed away as soon as I saw the lights. I figure I had a ticket coming if the detector was seen. I know I'd write one if I saw it. Now I'm older and not in a rush anymore so I retired it.

Window tinting is not only an officer safety issue, but also a driver safety issue. If you pull up to a four-way stop and can’t see the other driver, how do you know if he/she looks at you?

I ride a motorcycle and don't look too long at the other driver. I'm looking at the wheels. Are they moving? Are they turned towards me? I'd rather they don't look at me for more than a few seconds. Most of the people who have almost run me over were looking at me eye to eye. I find they steer towards what they look at. I traded in my bright colored motorcycle for a black/silver one and it dramatically reduced the staring and poor lane discipline. I also wear skulls and other “scary” things to keep some of those who stare to quick darting glances. That just left the ones who change lanes on the freeway without looking or signaling. I pulled the mufflers off after a series of those and that is reduced as well. With the changes I only have to dodge 5-10% of the time. Before it was 40-50% of the time. Now if I can just convince people not to throw things out their window or put things in the back of the truck that fly out. Even a plastic grocery sack can be deadly if it hits me in the face. Luckily I’ve dodged or caught them all so far.

My state has a tint restriction but I think they should remove it. The heat here can be a real problem. For work I've measured temps up to 180F in the summer in the back of the trucks. El Paso gets even hotter.

 

[papps953]

Many years ago a group of us were working with the aircraft. We stopped a guy for speed and cited him. He was extremely upset. About 30 minutes later he drove by the other direction. He honked his horn (ticketable offense) and stuck his arm out the window, giving us the middle finger (another ticketable offense).

What were the violations?.......

The horn can only be used to warn or alert pedestrians. Secondly, when he stuck his arm out the window he inadvertantly signaled for a right turn. I don't think he went to court.

Bill B.

 

[H2Andy]

I've always thought it was interesting that we hold a soldier accountable to the Geneva convention regardless of his orders but we change our tune when it comes to our own enforcement of law and the constitution.

i can see a regime change where all the policemen of the previous regime
are brought to trial for "just following orders."

which is one of the reasons most law enforcers in the world have a vested
interest that the system they enforce stays in power.

in the US, i see a different issue. it's one of personal morality. should an
officer enforce a law they do not consider right?

but in terms of enforcing, short of carrying out an illegal or improper order
(shoot that detainee) or willfully breaking the law (killing someone for
money), officers really have no liability for enforcing the law which they
dont make in the first place.

in fact, keep in mind that the Constitution is there to tell the Government
(i.e. the officers) what they CAN NOT do to a private citizen (for example,
an illegal search or seizure). so in fact it is the police that are burdened
by the Constitution and not the other way around. in other words, every
day the police is asked to obey the Constitution, and if they fail, there
are consequences.

finally, be aware that under the Constitution, the police neither make law nor
determine whether a law is unconstitutional. it is their duty to enforce the law
as it is given to them until a court tells them otherwise.

 

[RonDawg]

but in terms of enforcing, short of carrying out an illegal or improper order(shoot that detainee) or willfully breaking the law (killing someone for
money), officers really have no liability for enforcing the law which they dont make in the first place.

And we shouldn't Andy. You cross a very dangerous line when an officer decides which laws he/she will enforce, and which won't be enforced. If you start acting as appellate court judge, what's to stop you from becoming the jury too, and ultimately the executioner?

It is impossible for me to predict what will be constitutional today and unconstitutional tomorrrow. All I can do is keep up with the changes as best as I can.

I don't always agree with the rulings of appellate courts. Trust me, working under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit Court, the most reversed appellate court in the country, I have to work under conditions where even the people making the rules can't make up their mind.

 

[RonDawg]

I've always thought it was interesting that we hold a soldier accountable to the Geneva convention regardless of his orders but we change our tune when it comes to our own enforcement of law and the constitution. Not that an officer can do anything about that but it's an interesting thought.

There are some things that apply universally across the board to all police officers when it comes to the treatment of persons. Basically, that I will treat all persons with equal fairness, and that I will only use that amount of force necessary to overcome a person's resistance to the job I need to do.

As I mentioned to Andy, it shouldn't be our job to determine what laws should be enforced, nor do you want your police officers making that kind of judgment call.