fearmenot said: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 said:Yeah right
01SVTSnake said:Considering Adam is a cop, and your supposed to yield to highway traffic while merging, it is the right thing to do.
fearmenot said: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 said: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!
FordSVTFan said: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 said: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.
Sonic 4.6 said: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.
FordSVTFan said: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.
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".fearmenot said: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.
This is purely your opinion based on hearsay. No facts exist here either.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
fearmenot said: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.
fearmenot said: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.
FordSVTFan said: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..
fearmenot said: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.
fearmenot said:You are assuming the OPs guilt from his prior tickets.
fearmenot said: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.
fearmenot said:That in itself is a start of poor or lack thereof judgement on the officers part.
fearmenot said: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 said: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.
FordSVTFan said:Because that would have been the correct thing to do.:shrug: