Officer stepped out in front of car on Interstate to stop it.

[Lawman85]

EVERYONE PLEASE READ:::: NONE OF THE LEO'S HERE AGREED WITH STEPPING OUT INTO TRAFFIC OF THE FAST LANE OF THE INTERSTATE::::::::::::::

I said that it is safer to flag the cars over to the shoulder instead of trying to merge into traffic, accelerate up to 100+mph and catch a violator.

 

[NipplelessHorse]

Wow, I can't imagine an officer doing that here in California, unless they had a death wish. Hell, I bet half the motorists out here wouldn't notice the cop till he was a dash patty.

 

[crew_dawg16]

I said, I don't agree with stepping onto an interstate. There is a difference between stepping onto the interstate and flagging people over from the side of the road....

:read:

I see that now lawman, I apologize.

 

[charged98cobra]

There are safer ways to stop motorists on the highway; Lawman has stated one that works well and is safer than the 1/4 mile suicide dash. Going from what you posted, I would have to say that officer is aspiring to a new career...a hood ornament...

Yeah, what about civil gross negligence? An officers duty protects him from certain types of neg, but the officer still must act under the "reasonable officers test" Who in their right mind would step out in front of a car anyway? :burn:

 

[FordSVTFan]

Yeah, what about civil gross negligence? An officers duty protects him from certain types of neg, but the officer still must act under the "reasonable officers test" Who in their right mind would step out in front of a car anyway? :burn:

Please enlighten me to the "reasonable officer's test" I am not familiar with that one!

As far as your "civil gross negligence", I guess the title alone describes that the negligence would have to be "gross". None of what is described above is negligent because it is obviously done with reasonable care and a plan, let alone "gross".

 

[Steeltwo]

At fault for the first car how?? Because it had to use it's brakes? The damage caused to the first car, if the second car hit it, is the fault of the second car for following too close. The first car was only reacting to what they saw in the road. If the second car is following so close that they can not make their own emergency manuvers, then they are following too close.....

That is not rocket science.. it's very easy to prove in court, and judges are very familiar with the law.

I mistyped what I was thinking. And agree with what you are saying.


my thoughts were more of a car having to lock up it's brakes(lets say 50-60 feet of warning space), losing control and wrapping around a tree or worse the officer.

 

[97snake]

......reasonable officer's test?? Don't go making up your own tests Cardozo

 

[1996_Snake]

WOW, im not bashing cops here but it doesnt make much sense to me. i read in another post about two guys getting beat up by three thugs while a cop watches and didnt do anything except acsess the situation and wait for back-up,Which makes sense. to some degree. but if the are not supossed to endager themselves like taht why the hell would they step out infront of a 2ton car doing anywhere from 1-160+MPH that does not make sense to me. but then again im not in that line of work :shrug:

 

[97NA_Cobra]

Maybe the reason the driver had to "lock up" his brakes was because he wasn't paying attention to the flashing lights ahead of him. If it were me in that situation and there was a cruiser on the side of the road with its lights on, I would have slowed. Therefore, if the officer, or any other person outside of the vehicle decides to step out in the lane, I will be traveling at a safe speed to avoid hitting someone. I'm sure had an accident occured, it wouldn't be hard to prove that speed was a major factor in causing the accident.

 

[03CobraDude]

If one car has to stop suddenly and the others run into the back of it... they were all following too close... they would all get citations and be found at fault.

I mean absolutely no offense at all... but, let's say a Ferrari Enzo has to slam on it's breaks as hard as possible at 70 mph, and following behind it is, lets say a Sport Trac... you and I both know that the sport trac cannot stop as quickly as an Enzo can. It's obvios, the enzo is made to stop, the Sport trac isnt. Many people do not know the potential of their cars, as a result, the sport trac thinks he's going at a safe distance, but isn't. Would he still be responsible and cited?

 

[Lawman85]

I mean absolutely no offense at all... but, let's say a Ferrari Enzo has to slam on it's breaks as hard as possible at 70 mph, and following behind it is, lets say a Sport Trac... you and I both know that the sport trac cannot stop as quickly as an Enzo can. It's obvios, the enzo is made to stop, the Sport trac isnt. Many people do not know the potential of their cars, as a result, the sport trac thinks he's going at a safe distance, but isn't. Would he still be responsible and cited?

Yes

What's the alternative? Cite the Enzo for "stopping in too short of a distance"?

 

[Juiced-03]

I honestly don't pay attention to the shoulder when I am on a freeway. Assuming that I am going faster than the speed limit, I probably would not even understand what the officer was trying to relay to me (slow down? watch out ahead? pull over?).

I see it on the streets once in a great while with city police, but never on a freeway (I have never seen CHP do this).

 

[NinoAvila]

I said that it is safer to flag the cars over to the shoulder instead of trying to merge into traffic, accelerate up to 100+mph and catch a violator.

Isn't that why you guys have radios? Maybe I'm not understanding. Why wouldn't officers just radio ahead? (short-staffed? something about the one clocking the offender having to be the actual one arresting? I don't know)

I just can't see how an officer outside his cruiser on a highway with vehicles traveling at highway speeds is something that departments condone. There seem to be better methods. I'm trying to see the rational, but any way *I* slice it, an officer's life is worth more than whatever stands to be gained by flagging people down/stepping onto the interstate.

-N

 

[svtfan100111]

Who is going to be paying for the damages?

 

[piss&vinegar]

I would never stand on the side of the road to motion anyone over. That is alot of trust to have in people and their vehicles to do that. I would have someone laser people from the overpass then have some LEOs up a few miles to pull people over.

 

[OhOneSnake]

Call me a sceptic, but I don't think the reason for this technique is safety. I think its because more citations can be issued in a short period of time, rather than the traditional way taking 10-15 minutes per car.

 

[03CobraDude]

Yes

What's the alternative? Cite the Enzo for "stopping in too short of a distance"?

Citing the Enzo for "stopping in too short of a distance" would be kind of funny.

 

[OhOneSnake]

Just slightly off-topic: You wouldn't find a way to cite someone who, during fairly heavy but moving interstate traffic, slammed his brakes to the floor for no reason, causing a 4-5 car pile-up?

Someone in need of a new rear bumper would only have to drive on I95 to get it done.

 

[Labinnac]

This post really makes me miss living in Nashville. I lived in Antioch and then La Vergne for about 3 years and remember the state guys doing that. I've seen it on I65 and I24 a bunch of times and it always made me happy.

You'd br cruising down the highway at a conservative 7 to 8 mph over the limit and see a cruiser off on the side of the road WAAAAAAY the hell off in the distance. They always had their lights on and were always on a section of straightaway with no curves or anything. I'd always slow down and move over to the lane away from them out of courtesy. (I had to change a flat tire along the side of I40 outside of Memphis once so I know how scary that can be.) The first time I saw it I figured it was a regular traffic stop until I got closer and saw the guy pointing to specific cars and then gesturing to the side fo the road. At first I thought "WTF!" but then as I thought about it as I drove away it made me smile.

They only catch the stupid people this way! The intelligent respectful people who are paying attention don't get tickets from things like that. That's friggin brilliant! I loved seeing them do that because I HATE stupid people and Nashville was just packed with them. Those things are like a citation assembly line because they always have a line of cars pulled over.

I always wondered if it was more efficient to stop people this way by being out in the open rather than hiding and pouncing on unsuspecting people. Given the obvious number of idiots on the road I would think it would be a more practical method.

 

[OhOneSnake]

They may only catch the stupid people in your state, but in Maryland they hide their cars and stand behind trees in the median, then step out into the road with their orange vests and flag you down. No visible cruisers, no flashing lights. They also have you pull into the grass, off of the shoulder so your car (and the 4-5 others they have) aren't as visible to the next guy.