November 11, 200916 yr By bench mark, do you mean quota? I've always been told that police officers do not have a quota. It depends on where you live. Every city and chief is a little different.
November 11, 200916 yr I understand the benefits of having a ticket reduced; however, I was asking as to why a police officer would do it. Is it strictly to be a nice guy (or gal)? That's how I took it.
November 11, 200916 yr It depends on where you live. Every city and chief is a little different. Do officers keep track of their warnings to ticket ratio? I've heard something along these lines but it's foggy. I can't quite remember what I was told but it was something to do with the ticket to warning ratio has to be 2:1 or something. I honestly don't remember I could sound like an idiot right now :confused:
November 11, 200916 yr It depends on where you live. Every city and chief is a little different. I could be wrong, and maybe Guru can help us out, but it's my understanding that cities, or the agency writing the ticket, receives no revenue the ticket generates. That would seem to elminate any motiviation for having a quota. Again, I could be wrong. Court costs (and how high they've become) really get my goat. Taxpayers (our) money already funds the court system. Charging almost $150 to otherwise law abiding citizens who happened to speed seems indulgent for what usually amounts to little more than someone entering a few things into a computer. :idunno:
November 11, 200916 yr Officers drop it down for various reason and being a "nice" guy or gal is one of them. I think it makes it harder for the violator to challenge in court if they were actually going 20 over but only cited for 5 over. Also, I think individual cities get a very small amount of money back from the state on each ticket but not near enough to justify writing a bunch. The narrative should include the actual speed of the violator and the method used to record the speed because that is evidence. I will add the cost of a ticket is a joke these days. If you want to stop bad driving the state needs to put points on each license and then suspend at 12 points. However, that rarely happens and in my opinion (again my opinion) the high costs are nothing but money makers. In other words, I think the state has it wrong, it has become about the money more than safe driving.
November 11, 200916 yr I've had 2 speeding tickets 1 in the narrative stated my actual speed. The other one the officer cut me zero break on.
November 11, 200916 yr Just heard a story from a relative who recently got a speeding ticket for going 5 over. They were going 40 in a 35. The speeding ticket is only $5; however, court costs are $143. I couldn't help but laugh. Was he caught in Ft Thomas.....:sssh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
November 11, 200916 yr How do you know they weren't going much faster than the posted limit and the police officer marked it down to just five over? Many officers do just that and then the story turns this direction. I have heard it a thousand times. You need to get the ticket and read the narrative and maybe you will find your relative is full of it. Your such a cop!! :D:D:D Nice knowing ya'll! :walk::walk::walk:
November 11, 200916 yr Was he caught in Ft Thomas.....:sssh::laugh::laugh::laugh: Despite the rep that the FTPD of old had, its not nearly as bad these days!
November 11, 200916 yr Author Officers drop it down for various reason and being a "nice" guy or gal is one of them. I think it makes it harder for the violator to challenge in court if they were actually going 20 over but only cited for 5 over. Also, I think individual cities get a very small amount of money back from the state on each ticket but not near enough to justify writing a bunch. The narrative should include the actual speed of the violator and the method used to record the speed because that is evidence. I will add the cost of a ticket is a joke these days. If you want to stop bad driving the state needs to put points on each license and then suspend at 12 points. However, that rarely happens and in my opinion (again my opinion) the high costs are nothing but money makers. In other words, I think the state has it wrong, it has become about the money more than safe driving. :thumb: Thanks, and I agree. There's no doubt (in my mind at least) that the costs are there for revenue purposes. FWIW, in the instance I was told about, the officer did not drop down the speed. They were actually cited for going 40 in a 35.
November 11, 200916 yr That could fall within the margin of error for radar guns. The cop should be flogged for writing that one imo. It's my understanding that the margin of error on the guns is 1 mph. It could very well be within the margin of error for your speedometer though.
November 11, 200916 yr A friend of mine has a problem with a trooper.... Has been wrote 4 tickets this year, And all four have been 72 in a 55, Before you say the cop may have cut him a break, He once dated the KSP current Girlfriend....And the ex wife. Just sayin..
November 12, 200916 yr A friend of mine has a problem with a trooper.... Has been wrote 4 tickets this year, And all four have been 72 in a 55, Before you say the cop may have cut him a break, He once dated the KSP current Girlfriend....And the ex wife. Just sayin.. I could see current girlfriend, but if he dated the ex wife, he might feel sorry for him... :lol:
November 12, 200916 yr Despite the rep that the FTPD of old had, its not nearly as bad these days! You have obviously not seen the woman cop that is working the North End of town. She is not making any friends......:lol::lol::lol:
November 12, 200916 yr I had a North Carolina State Trooper tell me and about 600 more Marines in a safety stand-down about traffic safety that any ticket under 7mph would be thrown out because the margin of error for the radar equipment and your speedometer...
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.