Traffic Cams Not Always About Safety
- Thread starter FDWxMan
- Start date
Maybe his date was the officer's daughter or little sister. Your roommate is lucky he didn't use his night stick on him.
That could be the case but the damage had already been done. He was on his way home and she wanted to go home immediately afterwards so he missed out on any chance he had.
Possibly and an officer may issue a citation. Doesn't mean a judge will agree and not dismiss the citation if the person fights the ticket.
I agree 100%. I wasn't arguing against the use of turn signals I was just clarifying that they aren't required by Iowa law most of the time.
yes, it would affect individual dept budgets, and if anything hold every citizen to the same stupid arse laws.
I agree. People who don't use turn signals are either lazy or self-centered or both, and are a menace to society in general.
Why should police be knowingly issuing citations that are not justified by law?
And before you say it, what excuse is there for officers patrolling traffic to not understand/correctly interpret the law?
Why are *some* police officers driving their vehicle in the same manner in which they pull over and cite civilian motorists?
Not if you make the employee pay for it on their own. If a city employee were to get pulled over by a real physical cop, the cop doesn't write the city a ticket, the cops writes the driver a ticket. The City should start tracking the usage dates and times of each of their vehicles, that way employees can be held accountable and be forced to pay the fine out of their own pocket.
DART Bus drivers have to pay the fine. They aren't registered owners of the bus. Seems like city employees could easily be held responsible the same way.
No. The City would still have to pay the fine, even though they are paying themselves. In turn, they would require the employee to more or less reimburse them for the fine. Same thing if you're child would be driving a car registered to you, and your child got caught. You would be required to pay, but you could make your child reimburse you.
If you pay the fine and your child reimburses you isn't the child the only one out money because of the fine?
An employer can put any requirement/restriction on driving company vehicles they want to. And that could easily be 'you reimburse us every time you screw up with a camera, or you can't drive one.'
Doesn't have to be in the "law"...just company/city policy.
I don't get what you are trying to argue here? That is exactly what I'm trying to say. Coincidentally, if the City pays the fine and the employee reimburses them, the employee is the only one out of money because of the fine.