I am in a really bad situation.....

[01SVTSnake]

Yeah right

Considering Adam is a cop, and your supposed to yield to highway traffic while merging, it is the right thing to do.

 

[fearmenot]

Considering Adam is a cop, and your supposed to yield to highway traffic while merging, it is the right thing to do.

It all depends on the situation. And looking at the pic sonic got a raw deal and it was a judgement call by the officer. When it comes to judgement calls I like to think common sense would apply. Was it really necessary to issue a ticket when there was no threat to traffic? And by the officers attitude toward sonic I would say the officer let his emotions get to him and didn't use very good judgement. Oh and don't preach to me about cops. Not all of them are right.

 

[FordSVTFan]

It all depends on the situation. And looking at the pic sonic got a raw deal and it was a judgement call by the officer. When it comes to judgement calls I like to think common sense would apply. Was it really necessary to issue a ticket when there was no threat to traffic? And by the officers attitude toward sonic I would say the officer let his emotions get to him and didn't use very good judgement. Oh and don't preach to me about cops. Not all of them are right.

Yes it does depend on the situation. While no one is correct all the time, the situation the OP posted is a violation of the law. He decided to accelerate in front of a truck rather than to yield as required by law. Additionally, you are saying he got a "raw deal" and that there was "no threat to traffic." How do you know? You are making statements not based in fact. Additionally, how can you even presume to say "the officer let his emotions get to him?" Yet the 18 year old with prior traffic violations was the emotionally secure one:rollseyes

Your disdain for L.E. is clear!

 

[fearmenot]

Yes it does depend on the situation. While no one is correct all the time, the situation the OP posted is a violation of the law. He decided to accelerate in front of a truck rather than to yield as required by law. Additionally, you are saying he got a "raw deal" and that there was "no threat to traffic." How do you know? You are making statements not based in fact. Additionally, how can you even presume to say "the officer let his emotions get to him?" Yet the 18 year old with prior traffic violations was the emotionally secure one:rollseyes

Your disdain for L.E. is clear!

And how do you know that with the postion he has shown that he would have not caused an unsafe situation with traffic behind him. You are assuming also. My disdain for leos can be accurate but then again you are assuming. I never said sonic was right or wrong. I said he got a raw deal because I feel the officer used poor judgement. Now could the officer use poor judgement? Yes he can and that is a fact. Assuming is not a fact. All we know are sonic's priors and that is fact. His prior's don't make the officer's judgement automatically correct.

 

[BDF8]

Yes it does depend on the situation. While no one is correct all the time, the situation the OP posted is a violation of the law. He decided to accelerate in front of a truck rather than to yield as required by law. Additionally, you are saying he got a "raw deal" and that there was "no threat to traffic." How do you know? You are making statements not based in fact. Additionally, how can you even presume to say "the officer let his emotions get to him?" Yet the 18 year old with prior traffic violations was the emotionally secure one:rollseyes

Your disdain for L.E. is clear!

I have never seen Mr. FordSVTFan get owned, or even put in his place. I think it would be interesting to see it one time, even though im pretty sure its not gonna happen. Keep with the educated responses, im actually enjoying them :beer:

 

[FordSVTFan]

And how do you know that with the postion he has shown that he would have not caused an unsafe situation with traffic behind him. You are assuming also. My disdain for leos can be accurate but then again you are assuming. I never said sonic was right or wrong. I said he got a raw deal because I feel the officer used poor judgement. Now could the officer use poor judgement? Yes he can and that is a fact. Assuming is not a fact. All we know are sonic's priors and that is fact. His prior's don't make the officer's judgement automatically correct.

I am taking his written word without supposition.

Last month I was entering onto the interstate, and right where the 2-lane would end I had looked over and noticed that there was a truck pretty much right next to me. I threw it down a gear and sped up so he wouldn’t have to nail his brakes.

The OP didnt think it was an option that he hit his brakes, just that the either he should accelerate or have the truck hit his brakes. There is no indication nor presumption that acceleration was his only option because of some theoretical "dangerous" situation behind him.

I am not assuming anything about your disdain for L.E. it is quite obvious in your various posts on the topic. In this case, the OP did the wrong thing yet you indict the officer. Discretion is allowed on a case by case basis, yet you infer that the officer should have used some discretion and not issued a ticket, why? What was the officer's poor judgment? We know what the poor judgment of the OP was.

 

[fearmenot]

I am taking his written word without supposition.



The OP didnt think it was an option that he hit his brakes, just that the either he should accelerate or have the truck hit his brakes. There is no indication nor presumption that acceleration was his only option because of some theoretical "dangerous" situation behind him.

I am not assuming anything about your disdain for L.E. it is quite obvious in your various posts on the topic. In this case, the OP did the wrong thing yet you indict the officer. Discretion is allowed on a case by case basis, yet you infer that the officer should have used some discretion and not issued a ticket, why? What was the officer's poor judgment? We know what the poor judgment of the OP was.

See, you are assuming the OP used poor judgement. The poor judgement can go either way here. In this case The OP might have thought accelerating, considering the postion he is in from the pic, was his only option and from the pic to me it was his only option.

Yeah I have been hard on various post on officers but it doesn't mean any disdain against them. There are always two sides to the story not just the officers side. And sometimes officers prey on the ignorance of drivers. And in the case it worked cause the OP has no idea what to do. That is why I say he got a raw deal.

 

[swoosh_stang]

Based on the picture posted by the op, neither the op nor the truck were on the freeway, they were required to merge together, then to merge onto the freeway. Without having pictures of the signs at this particular interchange, you cannot tell which lane (the op's or the truck's) had the right-of-way.

There are many occurences in designs of this type (which are most common in the central portion of the country, NE, KS, OK, TX) where if the traffic loading is heavier on the op's lane than the truck's lane, a yield sign would be placed on the trucks lane. I have seen this and have in fact designed a couple of interchanges this way.

There are only three people that know the actual situation here, the op, the truck driver and the cop.

Should the op have gotten a ticket, yeah probably, should the cop have let him off, maybe, but the op was speeding.

I do know a few highway patrolmen, and most I've talked to say they don't even look twice if the violators are under limit+15mph. Maybe the guy thought it looked more dangerous than the op did.

Regardless, you were speeding, and I wish you good luck in getting your ticket taken care of.

 

[19COBRA93]

I said he got a raw deal because I feel the officer used poor judgement. Now could the officer use poor judgement? Yes he can and that is a fact. Assuming is not a fact. All we know are sonic's priors and that is fact. His prior's don't make the officer's judgement automatically correct.

You're talking about several different things here. 1) You "feel the officer used poor judgement", this is not a fact in the case. 2) Yes, the officer "could" use poor judgement, this is a fact only because he is capable of it, but no facts have been presented showing he "did".

And by the officers attitude toward sonic I would say the officer let his emotions get to him and didn't use very good judgement

This is purely your opinion based on hearsay. No facts exist here either.

The law states, that merging traffic yields (slows) to existing traffic. Pretty cut and dry.

 

[NOXCUSES]

He couldnt have clocked him, because they werent even on the same road. They radar is not pointing across the freaking highway

 

[FordSVTFan]

See, you are assuming the OP used poor judgement. The poor judgement can go either way here. In this case The OP might have thought accelerating, considering the postion he is in from the pic, was his only option and from the pic to me it was his only option.

I am not assuming such. He was stopped and issued a citation based on his purposeful actions. Taking everything as a whole, his statements combined with prior history and the citation yields a valid conclusion of poor judgment. While your statement about the officer is based on nothing but supposition and your own disdain for L.E..

 

[rrpederson]

priors?

And how do you know that with the postion he has shown that he would have not caused an unsafe situation with traffic behind him. You are assuming also. My disdain for leos can be accurate but then again you are assuming. I never said sonic was right or wrong. I said he got a raw deal because I feel the officer used poor judgement. Now could the officer use poor judgement? Yes he can and that is a fact. Assuming is not a fact. All we know are sonic's priors and that is fact. His prior's don't make the officer's judgement automatically correct.

the officer that issued the citation to OP did not have any idea of the OP's prior violations when making the decision to initiate the traffic stop. the officer was in a position to observe the violation and acted accordingly. emotion has nothing to do with it. emotion did not make him decide to initiate the traffic stop, it was the fact that he just observed a traffic violation. now i dont know the officer personally, but he probably came off with an attitude because its gets the point across when people do something dangerous, to illustrate that the OP should not have done that. fordsvtfan, please correct me if i am wrong.

 

[LostRacer]

IMO the op used poor judgement and got caught on it. It was mentioned we didn't know the traffic situation in order for him to brake. That shouldn't be a factor considering the knowledge of the merging lanes coming up. He should have already been prepared to slow down just in case. He did not have the right of way and in speeding past to get a head of the truck he was travelling at an unsafe speed for merging. (another poor judgement call)I think he got lucky he only got a speeding ticket.

No one is perfect. We all make mistakes. Just own up to it and move on. You got caught for 1 violation instead of 2 or possibly 3.

 

[fearmenot]

I am not assuming such. He was stopped and issued a citation based on his purposeful actions. Taking everything as a whole, his statements combined with prior history and the citation yields a valid conclusion of poor judgment. While your statement about the officer is based on nothing but supposition and your own disdain for L.E..

Now see this is where I have the problem. You state my supposition of the officer but you say you are not of the OP. You are assuming the OPs guilt from his prior tickets. This is well where I will start my disdain just for the reason that the officer showed poor attitude when he pulled the OP over. That in itself is a start of poor or lack thereof judgement on the officers part. And since we do not know the whole scenerio like you said don't you think the officer could have used better judgement. I am sorry I don't buy in the theory of the officer is always right. Especially in judgement calls. The officer pulling this OP over was weak at best.

 

[FordSVTFan]

Now see this is where I have the problem. You state my supposition of the officer but you say you are not of the OP.

I am basing my statement on facts, including the OP's prior history, his drawing and description and the citation issued. You are making your statement based on nothing more than the OP stating his biased opinion of the officer's intentions or emotional status.

It is more likely the OP was emotional, as he was receiving the citation. While the officer was performing a normal daily routine of his job.

You are assuming the OPs guilt from his prior tickets.

I am inferring his guilt based on his diagram, discussion and his prior bad acts, that is called the totality of the circumstances.

This is well where I will start my disdain just for the reason that the officer showed poor attitude when he pulled the OP over.

You still have offered no actual objective evidence of the officer's poor attitude, other than the statement of the OP, which is biased. You have nothing else, while I referenced various bases for my conclusion.

That in itself is a start of poor or lack thereof judgement on the officers part.

That shows no such thing. You cant quote the biased statement of a person receiving a ticket without any other objective evidence and claim it so.

And since we do not know the whole scenerio like you said don't you think the officer could have used better judgement. I am sorry I don't buy in the theory of the officer is always right. Especially in judgement calls. The officer pulling this OP over was weak at best.

This traffic stop was "weak at best?" You have got to be kidding me. An officer witnessing a dangerous traffic violation first hand is "weak at best?" Is this based on your detailed knowledge of L.E. procedure or this department's protocol? You absolutely take the cake with this statement. I will stop trying to confuse you with actual facts.

 

[fearmenot]

I am basing my statement on facts, including the OP's prior history, his drawing and description and the citation issued. You are making your statement based on nothing more than the OP stating his biased opinion of the officer's intentions or emotional status.

It is more likely the OP was emotional, as he was receiving the citation. While the officer was performing a normal daily routine of his job.




I am inferring his guilt based on his diagram, discussion and his prior bad acts, that is called the totality of the circumstances.



You still have offered no actual objective evidence of the officer's poor attitude, other than the statement of the OP, which is biased. You have nothing else, while I referenced various bases for my conclusion.



That shows no such thing. You cant quote the biased statement of a person receiving a ticket without any other objective evidence and claim it so.



This traffic stop was "weak at best?" You have got to be kidding me. An officer witnessing a dangerous traffic violation first hand is "weak at best?" Is this based on your detailed knowledge of L.E. procedure or this department's protocol? You absolutely take the cake with this statement. I will stop trying to confuse you with actual facts.

What you just quoted was all circumstantial. The only thing that is factual is a ticket from an officer who made a weak judgement call. What I see is that the OP pulled ahead to merge in a 55 mph zone. Him going 66 was prudent and not excessive. Who had the right of way looks to me like the OP. Just because he wasn't fully ahead doesn't mean he had to yield. If anything the truck should have yielded and didn't. Where you got dangerous from I have no clue. It looked like a situation where the OP accelerated to avoid any trouble. Now to any of you who thinks going 66 in 55 is dangerous than come down to AZ and switch all the cameras on our freeways off for they are set for 10 over. Evidently they don't think 10 over is excessive. I see that a ticket should of never been issued. Speed isn't dangerous only the driver who doesn't respect it. The OP ended up succumbing to his own past is the only reason this thread came about and that does not make him wrong here.

 

[jimljr145]

My interpretation of this is that based on the diagram, and the fact that Sonic initially paid his ticket, only to fight it when realizing his penalty would be a suspended license, is that he knew he was in the wrong. Also, the way I see the diagram, the Trooper was on the highway, while the truck was on a ramp to merge onto this same highway, with Sonic trying to merge from a different ramp onto the trucks ramp, to merge onto this highway. The truck was already on the ramp Sonic was trying to enter, and as such, he is supposed to yield to this truck. He did state he was pretty much side by side. It seems to me that from the trooper's vantage point, he could see the hour plus clean-up of the tragic motor vehicle crash that may have occurred if either driver over-reacted to Sonic's actions. Writing a ticket to make you realize your poor judgement is a lot better than making notification to your, or this truck drivers, family. And to rebut another statement, radar units can and do work across the freakin' highway. When one is issued a summons' they have every right to plead not guilty and fight it in court. In this case that did not happen. I'm not sure why so much time has been dedicated to this topic anyway.

 

[LostRacer]

Excessive or not, can you sit there and say 66 in 55 is not speeding? That apparently is the fact in this thread. Along with him NOT yielding to the right of way to the truck that had it.

 

[stangkid]

Because that would have been the correct thing to do.:shrug:

+1

 

[stangkid]

You broke the law now its time to man up and face your punishment.