Slashdot Mirror
Police Objecting to Tickets From Red-Light Cameras
caffiend666 writes "According to a Dallas Morning News article, any 'Dallas police officer in a marked squad car who is captured on the city's cameras running a red light will have to pay the $75 fine if the incident doesn't comply with state law ... Many police officers are angry about the proposed policy. The prevailing belief among officers has been that they can run red lights as they see fit.' Is this a case for or against governments relying on un-biased automated systems? Or, should anyone be able to control who is recorded on camera and who is held accountable?"
I think that cops SHOULD be held accountable for running a red light if they're on patrol, or just driving back to the precinct. The upholders of the law should be held to the law as well.
That said, there are numerous acceptable reasons for a cop to run a red light. A few I can think of off the top of my head...
-An officer is on his way to stop or going to the scene of a 911 call.
-A suspect car runs a red light as well, and in order to continue, pursuit, the cop must also run the red light.
At this point, technology is still in earlier stages, but...
-You could make a filter with police car license plates, and forward them to the appropriate precinct.
-If not possible, human verification and forwarding.
Police, fire trucks, and ambulances are all legal to run red lights under the condition that they run their lights and/or siren to indicate their intent. In fact, I've seen officers on many occasions run their lights JUST to proceed through an intersection, then turn them off.
The executive is not above the law, but certain accomodations are reasonably made.
Minnesota's highest court recently struck down the use of these cameras, as practiced in the Twin Cities, because the ticket automatically charged the owner of the car, without concern for whether they were actually driving or not when the picture was taken.
Red Light Cameras
Trying to use sarcasm in text-based forums does not work.
Police, fire trucks, and ambulances are all legal to run red lights under the condition that they run their lights and/or siren to indicate their intent.
At least here in Massachusetts, this is true only if they are responding to an emergency and they are on duty. If they do it for any other reason, it's illegal. Link
In my city (Minneapolis), all of the traffic lights have sensors on them that warn other motorists when emergency vehicles are approaching. These sensors are wired to the lights and sirens of the vehicle, so that they get priority when approaching intersections. How hard is it to tie these sensors to the red-light cameras so that they're disabled while the emergency vehicle has to go through the intersection?
On the other hand, if the cop didn't have his lights and sirens on when he ran the red light, he should be held accountable just like any other citizen. There was no emergency, therefore he had no right to break the rules.
We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
My bicyles
I worked at two police departments.
Officers are supposed to obey all traffic laws. Code 1 and code 2 responses require obeying the laws. Only code 3 calls (lights and siren) allow them to break these laws.
Cops frequently break these rules. Sometimes it's about expedience, sometimes it's about laziness.
Most cops have informal "code 2 high" which means not using lights or siren and breaking traffic laws as safely as possible. Sometimes they will just use a quick squirt of the lights to get through an intersection.
Bottom line: if the regulations specify obeying the law then they damn well ought to. They are setting a horrible example. When the regulations allow it they should of course feel free to go all out.
Sure. Here are some NHTSA data. A total number of 300 fatal crashes from 1991-2002 killed 275 occupants of other vehicles. Since we're discounting the "one dude in the ambulance," I won't factor in the 82 ambulance occupants killed in those 300 fatal crashes over a 11 year period into my figure. 275 fatalities over 11 years is certainly less than the tens to hundreds of thousands saved by ambulances each year.
This message printed on 100% post-consumer recycled electrons.
Yes they ought to follow the law, My cousin was broadsided when an officer ran a red light, with no sirens and no lights, just had a stupid moment, ran the light and broadsided her car. broker her pelvis in 4 places, an emergency c-section, and still walks with a limp to this day. Is it to much to ask that they follow the laws like everyone else when not in an emergency?
An armed society is a polite Society
You misunderstand the GP, who is not wrong. A distinction must be made between a de jure double standard, that is, a law which makes a distinction between police and non-police, and a de facto double standard, that is, a society in which the police do not follow the written law.
The GP referred to a de facto double standard, which I agree, and I think you will too, we must not have. You refer to a de jure double standard, and say we must have one. I agree with this also, and strongly suspect that the GP does also, particularly based on the GP's language about amending the law when there is compelling evidence that police exemptions are in the public interest. He says (as I understand it) that where there is need for a double standard, it must be a de jure double standard, and not a de facto double standard.
SIGSEGV caught, terminating
wait... not that kind of sig.
S.O.P. and laws vary from place to place, but around here a police car or ambulance approaches the red light carefully, with siren, flashing red lights, and traffic signal control strobe running. The driver does not enter the intersection against a red light unless all other traffic has yielded to them. If that means they need to slow down or stop, they brake!. Even though the law requires all other traffic to yield to emergency vehicles with flashing lights, their driver is as much responsible for avoiding a collision as the other driver who failed to yield. Failure to yield to emergency vehicles happens often, watch the morons zip past the next time you pull to the side for a car with flashing red lights. As the bumper sticker says, they need to "Hang up and drive!"
From the article: "I think what they're worrying about is what if it's 2 o'clock in the morning, you're headed to a call but it's not an emergency call," Cpl. Bristo said. "If I roll right through that light, I might save myself a minute or two. With some calls, that minute or two can make a lot of difference."
I believe that just about sums it up.
The law states for emergency or public safety officials is that some traffic laws can be broken but with (and it stresses) "do regard" to others.
What this means is that if a police officer moved through an intersection after stopping at the red light with caution and a truck slammed in to him at 200mph he would not be liable since he showed "do regard".
If you cautiously proceed through and two others slam into each other after you pass because the drivers were staring at your pretty lights instead then you still showed "do regard"
If the officer flew through the intersection with out stopping at a high rate of speed. Lights or not this shows that he did not proceed with "do regard" and is held liable.
Then again that is the law as I understand it from the emergency safety service in the state of Connecticut.
> SELECT * FROM brain_cells WHERE synaptic_rate > 0
0 row returned
In one city using photo-radar in the early 90s, all photos of police speeding were sent to the traffic sergeant.
If the officer wasn't on a legitimate, logged call at the moment, they got quite an ass chewing and a black mark in their personnel file.
I think you meant "due regard".
This sig has not been evaluated by the FDA. It is not designed to diagnose, treat, prevent, or cure any disease.
Oh yes it is their job to second-guess dispatch. I'm a firefighter and dispatch gets it wrong ALL THE TIME.
T 41-6-14
For example: Two months ago our department was paged out for a roof collapse. Supposedly ice build-up on the roof had caused it to cave in over the master bedroom. When we got there the roof was completely intact. The real reason we were paged out? The homeowner was afraid a big chunk of ice was going to fall off the roof and break a basement window.
During a real emergency it can get even worse because the people who called 911 (dispatch) are panicking and freaking out.
As for cops running red lights... I'm all for it. I've run them plenty of times in the fire truck. Under Utah law, it's allowed, as long as you don't further endanger the public.
http://www.code-co.com/utah/code/04/41-06_p1.htm#
(2) The operator of an authorized emergency vehicle may:
(a) park or stand, irrespective of the provisions of this chapter;
(b) proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, but only after slowing down as may be necessary for safe operation;
(c) exceed the maximum speed limits; or
(d) disregard regulations governing direction of movement or turning in specified directions.
As a cop and a volunteer EMT/fire fighter, I have some insight on this. Anyone running lights and sirens is exempt from stopping at red lights though they are entirely responsible as they are considered offensive drivers when doing so. That means their insurance pays no matter what if they hit you. In most states, fire trucks and ambulances are limited to an arbitrary limit above the speed limit, so say speed limit + 10 mph. Cops are not restricted to this limit due to the need for even faster arrival, the maneuverability of their vehicles, and the amount of training they receive (roughly 10 times that of an ambulance or fire truck driver, most departments average around 100 hours behind the wheel in high-speed situations)
Some other points:
-When most people think an ambulance or fire truck is going very fast, its not. It's all perception. I have had people call 911 and report I was speeding in a fire truck and when I was radioed I was only doing 5 mph over. I know this because the tanker I was driving isn't capable of getting up to speed that fast carrying 5,000 gallons of water. It also doesn't need to be the first vehicle on scene and thus is the last to pull out of the station. The lights and siren make it seem faster as well as public perception from movies where they are always speeding.
-As a cop, a siren is not required just because your lights are on. This is a code 2 (lights only) versus a code 3 (lights and siren response). When running code 2, you are more restricted from speeding and could be taking a greater risk depending on the situation. It means, I need to get there quicker the normal but I'm not going so fast that I can't comply with most traffic laws.
-Cops do not run lights and sirens for a reason on occasion. Sirens can be heard for over 3 miles and thus will alert criminals that they are close by. For that reason, they are not used on domestic disturbance responses (people tend to run or kill and then run) or when tracking a suspect (they know where to avoid you).
-Cops not getting tickets because of brotherhood is crap. While the cop may not get a ticket, they generally get very severe internal reprimands. Equate this to you taking a stapler from work. Should you be punished by your employer or charged with theft. I have seen cops demoted and take a $10k a year pay cut for getting into an accident because someone ran a red light and hit them while they were going through a green but their lights just happened to be on.
-A poster pointed out that cops don't always signal. This is probably true, have you ever tried to talk on a radio, usually to both a dispatcher and other units, type a plate into a mobile terminal, and drive at the same time? A cop must do this all at the same time even while on normal patrol. At some point, a cop is going to have to make a decision whether he can safely execute a maneuver without signaling or he is going to be task saturated.
-When a cop is tailgating, he is not enticing you to do wrong. He is pacing you. This is an approved method of speed determination in all states as radar is ineffective in the same direction you are traveling and within +/- 15 mph of your speed. Cop cars have certified calibration of their speedometers. They maintain an exact distance, usually 5 feet from your bumper and look down. This may seem inaccurate but it has been upheld many times and is virtually the only option. Most courts require you maintain this over some distance. Keep driving the speed limit and when he has an accurate speed he will pass.
-Cop cars are already equipped with GPS and radio systems that report speed and location back to the dispatcher. Their actions are enforced just not in the same way as yours.
-Red light cameras suck. I am sure the point the cops hate is who is liable for fighting this. Are the cops liable for searching logs and proving they were on a call? This could add a lot to the 4-5 hours of paperwork a normal cop does in a 12 hour shift. That's less time on the road and more mandatory overtime for the other cops to cover.
The correct procedure in this instance is to mail the traffic court and ask for a hearing, call the Department of Transportation and ask for a copy of the report for the malfunctioning traffic signal, send it to the DA with an explanation, and hope that he drops the charge.
If he doesn't, show up for court and show the report to the judge. There are no guarantees, but that should take care of the matter.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock