speedometer vs. GPS

[hancoveguy]

Just a reminder...my professional estimation of your speed is more than enough to hold you to a ticket. If I point my radar/lidar at you and nothing shows up, and I "estimate" that you were traveling in excess of a posted speed limit, that is good enough to ticket you. Tried and true, this is established precedent in Ohio and has been adopted by many other states including Massachusetts (not sure about NH but they are usually ahead of us when it comes to pro-police law)

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index....l_estimat.html

With this in mind...I don't hate speeders enough to need this. Just an interesting factoid.

Good luck, btw, the good guys always win...eventually!
HCG

Probably be another very long thread as to which one of us is wearing the white hat...lol

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

If you paint any vehicle in front of me with lasar or radar you can't hide. My RD is one of, if not the best, on the market. Very sensitive. I sniff out the Maine State Police with ease and they go to great lengths to hide on bridge overpasses, on entrance ramps, etc.

As with any radar or lasar, if you are the only car on the road then you're vulnerable to getting a ticket if you're speeding. Also, if I was to get pulled over my detector would be out of site from your view and mine also has VG-2 immunity

Some of us are serious tech geeks

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

Just a reminder...my professional estimation of your speed is more than enough to hold you to a ticket. If I point my radar/lidar at you and nothing shows up, and I "estimate" that you were traveling in excess of a posted speed limit, that is good enough to ticket you. Tried and true, this is established precedent in Ohio and has been adopted by many other states including Massachusetts (not sure about NH but they are usually ahead of us when it comes to pro-police law)

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index....l_estimat.html

With this in mind...I don't hate speeders enough to need this. Just an interesting factoid.

Good luck, btw, the good guys always win...eventually!
HCG

hancoveguy, I have to ask if you don't think that's a tad frightening? I can see an officer pulling over a car going excessively fast like 50-60 MPH in a 25 MPH zone or 90-100 MPH. And I would call that reckless driving or some other applicable offense. If you want to tell me that on a highway you can visually estimate my vehicle to be going 76 vs 65 MPH or something like that with repeatable accuracy then I will call you out on that. The whole point of the radar/lasar equipment is to provide an objective measurement. In my case, unless I am the only car on the road and you are using radar/lasar, I've detected you from several thousand feet out and have already slowed.

I am shocked that the court did not just toss the case if the guy was not certified using radar. I also believe this is an overzealous enforcement and the state makes sure they don't lose these cases or they risk losing all that revenue. And, that decision was not unamimous. I'd like to see a US supreme court ruling on this case.

If you think this is good for society for judges to give carte blanc discretion to an officer to guess a vehicle speed to issue a speeding ticket then I give you no credibility. Luckily this is probably rare and if an officer used this more than once I think it would raise flags about why he's not using the state supplied equipment. There are checks and balances.

Just goes to show the speed limits are not about safety but revenue. Makes me smile even more knowing the stuff I have in my truck. Gives power back to the people

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

Just a reminder...my professional estimation of your speed is more than enough to hold you to a ticket. If I point my radar/lidar at you and nothing shows up, and I "estimate" that you were traveling in excess of a posted speed limit, that is good enough to ticket you. Tried and true, this is established precedent in Ohio and has been adopted by many other states including Massachusetts (not sure about NH but they are usually ahead of us when it comes to pro-police law)

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index....l_estimat.html

With this in mind...I don't hate speeders enough to need this. Just an interesting factoid.

Good luck, btw, the good guys always win...eventually!
HCG

Probably be another very long thread as to which one of us is wearing the white hat...lol

What gets me is that the police officer estimated by eye that the SUV was going 73 mph and that radar gun read 82 or 83. Wouldn’t that tell the Supreme court as well as the lower courts that there is a discrepancy about how close the officer can estimate speed? Granted he wasn’t certified to use radar but it should have been enough IMHO to throw the case out. If he can’t estimate within 10 mph then this case went way too far in the courts.

[hancoveguy]

The case alludes to this being valid only if the officer is trained and certified in estimation. This is a substantial instructional block in every academy that I know of in Mass. This estimation principle, if you will, is mostly used in an unforseeable scenerio. You will not find officers setting up on a stationary traffic enforcement assignement armed only with their estimation skills. The prime example of how this is used-

You are on patrol in your cruiser. You are stopped, waiting to pull out from a sidestreet or strip mall or something like that. Your dashmounted radar is facing straight forward and straight back (perpendicular to the traffic flow) so it is useless on short (immediate) notice. You have no handheld with you. Now, you have travelled this road hourly for most of your adult life and you know and are comfortable with what the traffic flow looks like at any given hour. Just then, from around a distant corner, you see a smaller car headed towards you. Based on all your experience and training (nevermind as a police officer, just as an alert motorist) you know beyond all reasonable doubt in your mind that this vehicle is travelling well in excess of the posted speed limit of X. This vehicle is travelling so fast that you believe it could eventually become a hazard to other motorists but not so fast that it is out of control.

What do you do?
A. Nothing, because you didnt get it on radar or laser and you clearly do not have enough to stop the vehicle on any foolish reckless driving violaions (which there is no such thing btw)
B. Unlawfully stop the vehicle and only verbally chastise the operator
C. "estimate" the vehicle's speed based on your inherent knowledge of the road and the traffic flow and cite the individual accordingly, knowing that even though you don't have 100% assurance of your estimation's accuracy but in the name of the public good, you are bound to "act" in some way.
D. shoot the person and go get coffee and donuts

This is truly not meant to provoke an argument but rather to illustrate the necessity of the law/policy. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but this is reasonable in mine.

Disclaimer- As many of you know from my previous posts, I am not a big speed enforcement guy (or state revenue agent as it were) as this practice would make me a hypocrite, but there are some times when you just need to trust the system.
BTW- Lawn psycho, you are off track if you think the liberal courts in Mass give two flying hoots about revenue when it comes to tickets, appeals, or anything else within their judicial scope. I have seen sooooo many fines just eliminated for no good reason. They truly do not factor governmental revenue into justice. They are far more likely to find on behalf of the violator just to spite the police.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

The case alludes to this being valid only if the officer is trained and certified in estimation. This is a substantial instructional block in every academy that I know of in Mass. This estimation principle, if you will, is mostly used in an unforseeable scenerio. You will not find officers setting up on a stationary traffic enforcement assignement armed only with their estimation skills. The prime example of how this is used-

You are on patrol in your cruiser. You are stopped, waiting to pull out from a sidestreet or strip mall or something like that. Your dashmounted radar is facing straight forward and straight back (perpendicular to the traffic flow) so it is useless on short (immediate) notice. You have no handheld with you. Now, you have travelled this road hourly for most of your adult life and you know and are comfortable with what the traffic flow looks like at any given hour. Just then, from around a distant corner, you see a smaller car headed towards you. Based on all your experience and training (nevermind as a police officer, just as an alert motorist) you know beyond all reasonable doubt in your mind that this vehicle is travelling well in excess of the posted speed limit of X. This vehicle is travelling so fast that you believe it could eventually become a hazard to other motorists but not so fast that it is out of control.

What do you do?
A. Nothing, because you didnt get it on radar or laser and you clearly do not have enough to stop the vehicle on any foolish reckless driving violaions (which there is no such thing btw)
B. Unlawfully stop the vehicle and only verbally chastise the operator
C. "estimate" the vehicle's speed based on your inherent knowledge of the road and the traffic flow and cite the individual accordingly, knowing that even though you don't have 100% assurance of your estimation's accuracy but in the name of the public good, you are bound to "act" in some way.
D. shoot the person and go get coffee and donuts

This is truly not meant to provoke an argument but rather to illustrate the necessity of the law/policy. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but this is reasonable in mine.

Disclaimer- As many of you know from my previous posts, I am not a big speed enforcement guy (or state revenue agent as it were) as this practice would make me a hypocrite, but there are some times when you just need to trust the system.
BTW- Lawn psycho, you are off track if you think the liberal courts in Mass give two flying hoots about revenue when it comes to tickets, appeals, or anything else within their judicial scope. I have seen sooooo many fines just eliminated for no good reason. They truly do not factor governmental revenue into justice. They are far more likely to find on behalf of the violator just to spite the police.

I would get him for the following which is in Ohio’s Chapter 4511,Trafficlaws-Operation of Motor Vehicles, Subsection 4511.20:

"4511.20 Operation in willful or wanton disregard of the safety of persons or property.
(A) No person shall operate a vehicle, trackless trolley, or streetcar on any street or highway in willful or wanton disregard of the safety of persons or property.
(B) Except as otherwise provided in this division, whoever violates this section is guilty of a minor misdemeanor. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to one predicate motor vehicle or traffic offense, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of two or more predicate motor vehicle or traffic offenses, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree.
Effective Date: 01-01-2004"

[hancoveguy]

Thats excellent but what is your basis for "willful or wanton disregard" if you can't "estimate" that what they are doing is willfully and wontonly disregarding public safety etc....Is there an objective "brightline" standard for willful and wanton? And if so, without estimating that they are speeding, how do you satisfy the criteria?

Also, you cited a criminal statute not a traffic infraction. Just so I understand this... its not okay to issue a speeding ticket (non criminal infraction) based on estimation only but you can summons someone into court or arrest, (both will give someone a criminal record) based on an estimation?

I am clearly not following your logic, make me understand plz.

HCG

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

Thats excellent but what is your basis for "willful or wanton disregard" if you can't "estimate" that what they are doing is willfully and wontonly disregarding public safety etc....Is there an objective "brightline" standard for willful and wanton? And if so, without estimating that they are speeding, how do you satisfy the criteria?

Also, you cited a criminal statute not a traffic infraction. Just so I understand this... its not okay to issue a speeding ticket (non criminal infraction) based on estimation only but you can summons someone into court or arrest, (both will give someone a criminal record) based on an estimation?

I am clearly not following your logic, make me understand plz.

HCG

You asked: “What do you do?”

So I looked up the Traffic laws for the Operation of Motor Vehicles in Ohio and found that section. I guess I was wrong.

I just think that estimating speed by eye shouldn’t hold up in court. If you can’t use a radar gun because you aren’t certified then you shouldn’t be out on patrol for that reason. Stop the vehicle and give him a warning and then get yourself certified to use a radar gun.

[hancoveguy]

Rusty, I am really not trying to argue with you and I apologize if my previous post looked sarcastic or disrespectful. Was not my intention. Some people just don't understand that without the estimation rule,( and a few other discretionary allowances of L/E) you would have no legal grounds to stop the vehicle and even warn him. I agree with you 100% about an officer's lack of certification. If you cant maintain certification, stay home. But the scenario I gave you is real and I assure you it happens all the time. Just to expand a bit more on it. Lets say you estimate and when you pull the car over the person...was drunk or just robbed a bank or just smacked his wife around or just committed any crime. Without the estimation rule, you have no grounds to stop the vehicle. If you stop it anyway, anything you discover ie drunk, car full of money from bank robbery, bloody knuckles from domestic A&B etc... all of this is 100% inadmissable in court. In other words, because the evidence was obtained without probable cause for the stop, the evidence is lawfully excluded from trial (wong sun- fruit of poisonous tree doctrine).

Its a balancing test-
The rights of persons to be secure from illegal search and siezure (4th amd)
vs
The rights of the police to make reasonable attempts to ensure the safety of the motoring public.

Worst case- someone is unlawfully (but not maliciously) given a non criminal traffic fine
Best case- complete motoring anarchy is prevented (slight hyperbole)


Respectfully
HCG

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

Worst case- someone is unlawfully (but not maliciously) given a non criminal traffic fine
Best case- complete motoring anarchy is prevented (slight hyperbole)

HCG, the issue with how you losely throw around a traffic citation is you discount the days of background checks and the internet.

Get a secret/top secret security clearance for the Fed Gov and EVERY ticket and hangnail you ever had needs to be revealed. Those tickets also have an impact on your insurance rates.

I was run over by an SUV while riding my bike. During the disposition my driving record, the # of hairs on my head, you name it was put on the table for the drivers insurance company to see.

Speeding ticket fines are nothing. That's why people speed. Make the punishment or fine harsh/high enough and it would be nearly eradicated. But, just like DUI, it's an industry that generates money.

Also, giving cops a loose leash to stop for any reason isn't reasonale either. When I was in the Navy and 19 yo my best friend and I spent 2 weeks in Florida. While driving home as we passed into GA, I was doing exactly the speed limit. Getting a ticket while in the Navy nuclear power program with a submarine designation could get you adminstratively dropped from the program on personal conduct grounds. I was driving a Ford Taurus and it was 2 or 3 AM. Out of nowhere a state trooper pulled us over . Apparently 2 white males in a basic 4-door sedan doing the speed limit in the middle of the night on I-95 fit the drug running profile. When he stopped us, he asked where we were going. I told him VA. He then asked us to step out of the car and had us put our hands on the hood while he was radioing in my license. I also handed him my military ID which didn't seem to impress him. During that time he asked if he could search my car and I made the mistake of asking "why" instead of "go ahead". My friend then had the wits to ask why he stopped us. He said my license plate light was out. We go to the back of the car and it was on

About 45 minutes on the side of the road and having a drug dog search the car we were let go.

I have a jaded view of how police conduct business so I'm not cutting you even 0.0000001% slack. My rights and the constitution mean something to me and your post above seems like you're willing to bend them. Of course being a cop, I'm not surprised.

[Ryan]

Relevant on a few levels....

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41621788

[lawn psycho]

I like the cops face at the end of the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTJwx...layer_embedded

[hancoveguy]

Okay, it appears one of us is a bit too bitter from way back. My involvement in this post was on a novelty level, maybe I could shed some light on the way some things are done from a perfectly legal law enforcement stand point. I believe I even used the word "playfully." You apparently are a bit more emotionally involved in this issue than I care to devote the energy required to defend my position. I guarantee you my respect and knowledge of "our" constitution is at least equal to yours if not better (several pedigrees to back this up). You clearly dislike the police in general and are hiding behind "your" constitutional rights to justify this vitriol.

For your benefit, I will refrain from any further comments, posts or threads that may purport to force my overzealous, "big brother," unconstitutionality on the forum's readers. I will limit my posts to regaling the readers with stories of when I was in the service and my rights were violated and offer short stories involving me being the perpetual victim.

My apologies to anyone else I may have offended,
HCG

[ishoot308]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

Okay, it appears one of us is a bit too bitter from way back. My involvement in this post was on a novelty level, maybe I could shed some light on the way some things are done from a perfectly legal law enforcement stand point. I believe I even used the word "playfully." You apparently are a bit more emotionally involved in this issue than I care to devote the energy required to defend my position. I guarantee you my respect and knowledge of "our" constitution is at least equal to yours if not better (several pedigrees to back this up). You clearly dislike the police in general and are hiding behind "your" constitutional rights to justify this vitriol.

For your benefit, I will refrain from any further comments, posts or threads that may purport to force my overzealous, "big brother," unconstitutionality on the forum's readers. I will limit my posts to regaling the readers with stories of when I was in the service and my rights were violated and offer short stories involving me being the perpetual victim.

My apologies to anyone else I may have offended,
HCG

Hancoveguy;

I for one find your posts most informative, honest and respectful. I truly hope you will continue to post as you have and not change your ways because of one or two disagreeing posts.

Be proud of how you serve the community! I thank you for it!

Respectfully;

Dan

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

Okay, it appears one of us is a bit too bitter from way back. My involvement in this post was on a novelty level, maybe I could shed some light on the way some things are done from a perfectly legal law enforcement stand point. I believe I even used the word "playfully." You apparently are a bit more emotionally involved in this issue than I care to devote the energy required to defend my position. I guarantee you my respect and knowledge of "our" constitution is at least equal to yours if not better (several pedigrees to back this up). You clearly dislike the police in general and are hiding behind "your" constitutional rights to justify this vitriol.

For your benefit, I will refrain from any further comments, posts or threads that may purport to force my overzealous, "big brother," unconstitutionality on the forum's readers. I will limit my posts to regaling the readers with stories of when I was in the service and my rights were violated and offer short stories involving me being the perpetual victim.

My apologies to anyone else I may have offended,
HCG

Hancoveguy,

I think you have done an outstanding job with all of your comments concerning this threads topic. I asked you questions and IMHO you gave me honest and well thought out answers.

Thank you for your service to our great country and also for being a member of law enforcement who do such a great job to protect our communities.

If I have said something that offended you in anyway then I apologize.

Rusty

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

Okay, it appears one of us is a bit too bitter from way back. My involvement in this post was on a novelty level, maybe I could shed some light on the way some things are done from a perfectly legal law enforcement stand point. I believe I even used the word "playfully." You apparently are a bit more emotionally involved in this issue than I care to devote the energy required to defend my position. I guarantee you my respect and knowledge of "our" constitution is at least equal to yours if not better (several pedigrees to back this up). You clearly dislike the police in general and are hiding behind "your" constitutional rights to justify this vitriol.

For your benefit, I will refrain from any further comments, posts or threads that may purport to force my overzealous, "big brother," unconstitutionality on the forum's readers. I will limit my posts to regaling the readers with stories of when I was in the service and my rights were violated and offer short stories involving me being the perpetual victim.

My apologies to anyone else I may have offended,
HCG

HCG, I just so happen to have a relative how owns a seacoast business that is frequented by a large number of Seacoast PDs. I know more than a handful on a personal level. I don't dislike the police in general but know some officiers who I don't believe should be allowed to wear badges. I'm sure you know some of them. At least based on your previous posts I didn't think you fit that category until I saw the what appears to be an acceptance of 'blurring' reasons to stop someone and I understand the tough position cops are placed in when it seems the crooks have the upper-hand.

I've told this story to other officers over the years and nearly everyone of them comes up with a justification for it and many like yourself tend to use an "end justifies the means argument."

It happened to me and I'm sure it's happened again to someone else. That's unfortunate as it was a humilating/scary experience for a 19 yo old impressionable kid which I was at the time.

[BroadHopper]

Talked to someone at Garmin about the radar - garmin discrepency. They say both devices should be dead on. They are willing to be expert testimony on the validity of the GPS. If the courts don't believe the accuracy of the GPS, that would put the GPS system in a nutshell.

If I had unplug the Garmin right after the stop, they may be able to hack the memory and show the court my accurate speed. next time I know better. The date and time will be stamped.

I still say the officer had a bad day and made my day.

Twice in my life, I was picked up for DUI and had my day in court. I am profound hard of hearing and my speech is not good. I have bad equilibrium and I can not walk a straight line. I was giving the breathalyzer and I pass. Yet, the officers insist I was onto something and arrested me. Both times I was found guilty in, what my lawyer says, 'kangaroo court'. Yet both officers failed to appear in appeals court. So the convictions were thrown out. I lost my license for 30 days even though I was innocent. Is that justice? Since then, I hate to be driving around at night.

Next time I get caught speeding, I'm saving my GPS memory.

[hancoveguy]

Thank you Skip, Rusty and Dan (Ishoot), for the kind words. I really enjoy this forum and will continue to post (thank you for the priviledge). I did attempt to agree to disagree but I stooped and took the bait. Shame on me, lol.

I am renewed and refreshed and can't wait til ice out...
Bring on the boating season!!!


HCG

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

Thank you Skip, Rusty and Dan (Ishoot), for the kind words. I really enjoy this forum and will continue to post (thank you for the priviledge). I did attempt to agree to disagree but I stooped and took the bait. Shame on me, lol.

I am renewed and refreshed and can't wait til ice out...
Bring on the boating season!!!


HCG

Took the bait? I guess someone else typed those words for you that giving tickets and pulling people over for virtually any reason based on officer discretion is OK. Funny how the brotherhood and Skip was so quick to defend you. I stand 100% behind what I've posted and if you think you are taking some kind of high road, your posts above shows your character as an officer IMO.. The only "bait" appears to be the one's you pull over when you are on your next power trip.

[ishoot308]

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

Took the bait? I guess someone else typed those words for you that giving tickets and pulling people over for virtually any reason based on officer discretion is OK. Funny how the brotherhood and Skip was so quick to defend you. I stand 100% behind what I've posted and if you think you are taking some kind of high road, your posts above shows your character as an officer IMO.. The only "bait" appears to be the one's you pull over when you are on your next power trip.

L.P.

I guess I'll take the bait this time...By your term "brotherhood" are you alluding to the fact I am somehow involved with law enforcement?? If so, let me state for the record that I am not. I do not know nor have I ever met Hancoveguy. I merely stated that I have enjoyed his posts in the past and respect what he does for a living. You may not and that is your opinion.

Dan

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by ishoot308

L.P.

I guess I'll take the bait this time...By your term "brotherhood" are you alluding to the fact I am somehow involved with law enforcement?? If so, let me state for the record that I am not. I do not know nor have I ever met Hancoveguy. I merely stated that I have enjoyed his posts in the past and respect what he does for a living. You may not and that is your opinion.

Dan

I was referring to skip......

[Gavia immer]

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

I know more than a handful on a personal level. I don't dislike the police in general but know some officiers who I don't believe should be allowed to wear badges.

Would those include any of officers in the NH Marine Patrol?

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by Gavia immer

Would those include any of officers in the NH Marine Patrol?

I don't know any NHMP officers nor have I ever been stopped, etc so that would be no. NHMP is probably a different scenario as many of them are seasonal and serve a slightly different clientele (boaters) where parking 149 ft from shore in a NRZ is reason to turn on the lights and politely asking people to move. The para-military type officers probably aren't satisfied with that type of duty

[hancoveguy]

Originally Posted by lawn psycho

I like the cops face at the end of the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTJwx...layer_embedded

BTW, I truly hope you realize that this video is fiction produced by your radar detector company for the sole purpose of selling their products.

[lawn psycho]

Originally Posted by hancoveguy

BTW, I truly hope you realize that this video is fiction produced by your radar detector company for the sole purpose of selling their products.

Do ya think?