Florida Highway Patrol Ticket Quota Exposed
A recent article in the St. Petersburg Times highlighted the story of a Florida Highway Patrol trooper who has accused the department of firing him because he didn’t write enough tickets.
The Highway Patrol predictably denied having a ticket quota.
They said that the officer was fired for not meeting “performance standards.” This is a common response anytime a ticket quota is mentioned in the press.
However, since the number of citations given out by an officer are at the heart of most department’s performance standards, it’s hard to tell the difference between the two.
Here’s an excerpt from the article describing the ticket quota allegations:
Christopher Maul, who spent 12 years with the FHP, says he was fired in June for not writing enough tickets.
“The only reason I can see why I was fired was I didn’t write enough tickets,” said Maul, 38, who lives in Largo.
The FHP disputes that, saying Maul was fired for failing to meet performance standards. [...]
But the number of tickets Maul wrote was frequently cited in a lengthy June memo laying out the case for his dismissal. Maul was four months short of completing a mandatory probation after leaving briefly for the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office and returning to the FHP.
Maul received a positive review earlier in June from his immediate supervisor. Later, an FHP major told Maul he was rescinding the evaluation because it did not “accurately reflect” his performance.
Maj. Ryan Burchnell noted that Maul wrote “only 63 citations, 22 warnings and eight faulty equipment notices while working 56 traffic crashes.” And he wrote only 16 citations in December, Burchnell noted.
Maul, who said he didn’t have radar in his police car for part of that period, improved his numbers as the months wore on, from 33 in January to 53 in April. Not good enough, Burchnell concluded: “Trooper Maul’s citation-issuance has been substandard.”
A captain for the area Maul patrolled sent Burchnell an e-mail saying that Maul’s supervisors believe he has “a good work ethic.” Burchnell was not swayed and demanded a new evaluation.
The head of the union representing troopers said the FHP is using Maul to set an example for other troopers.
From the way the article describes the situation, it seems clear that the head of the troopers’ union was right:
During his probation, Maul’s immediate supervisor, Sgt. Raymond Ada, concluded that Maul was meeting or exceeding expectations.
Capt. Robert French scrawled “keep up the good work” on a February review that read: “Trooper Maul is a good trooper with a lot of experience. I do not foresee him having any difficulty in completing his probationary period.”
Burchnell disagreed and set about to change Maul’s evaluations.
In an e-mail exchange, Burchnell told Capt. Urana Harris: “I am going to hold the supervisors accountable, which means you.” He added that Maul “is not cutting it.”
Unfortunately, ticket quotas — and denials of their existence — are nothing new.
Other Related Articles
To change the picture next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com. Each picture is associated with a particular email address. (This is a third-party service not affiliated with NMA.)
I am a former Florida state trooper and deputy sheriff. I will not comment concerning the firing of the trooper, however, I will respond to a comment about the FHP. While I was employed as a state trooper I investigated numerous calls that were not related to traffic incidents. I responded to burglary calls, domestic calls, kidnapping calls, trespassing calls, shoplifting calls, assault and battery calls and the list goes on and on. Florida state troopers are state law enforcement officers with full police powers to bear arms , secure warrants , and make arrests for vioaltions of any laws and ordinances. I did not require any assistance from other agencies to conduct those investigations. The FHP would not be the first law enforcement agency one would likely notify for many criminal violations however, the authority to investigate, and arrest in non traffic related situations is allowed by law.
Randy;
Here’s the bottom line about speed and death:
Any human being traveling at 35 miles per hour who comes to an immediate, complete stop suffers sufficient negative G’s to guarantee instantaneous death.
Ergo: The only guaranteed non-fatal speed for humans is below 35 miles per hour assuming nothing in you car is sharp or pointy. The speed can be slightly higher if some “crush zone” is allowed at the time of impact. The “crush zone” will allow a marginally higher speed, but don’t count on living on the difference.
The problem with that: In a head on collision, the speed necessary to cause instantaneous death of all human occupants of the vehicles is the sum of 35 miles per hour produced by any combination of individual vehicle speeds. In other words, two vehicles traveling at 17.5 miles per hour will come together at a combined speed of 35 miles per hour and will kill all the occupants assuming no “crush zone” to absorb some of the impact force. One vehicle at 5 miles per hour in that “perfect crash” encountering another going 30 miles per hour head on – same deadly result.
Now the question is: What is the “safe speed limit” that won’t result in death in a frontal (head-on) collision. It would appear that the answer is 17.5 miles per hour assuming that limit is fairly applied to all drivers all of the time.
At that rate one could drive from New York to Los Angeles in slightly more than 23 days allowing a solid eight hours per day driving time. By the way, that G-force applies to airplanes, trains, and horses too, so don’t count on alternative means of transportation – it wouldn’t make any difference.
The only safe alternative? Perhaps the proverbial slow-boat going through the Panama Canal would be a lot faster for our hypothetical coast-to-coast trip, provided it doesn’t sink. Drowning’s bad for you too!
Any takers?
John I did a search of your quote by Max Frisson. He is only a regular person who added his comments on the article. You or I could have done the same so it means nothing. As for your 55 mph limit, I have never said that we should have a 55 mph limit here or to you. I have seen statistics that 65 mph now is as safe as 55 mph 20 years ago because of safety devices. I have not said we need a 55 mph limit but more like 65 mph or even 70 mph out on the open road with little traffic and good roads. What I am against is having 65 mph or 70 mph limits and you and others allowing and promoting others to drive over 80 with those limits or 10 to 20 mph over the limit off of the intersate.
If we take your slow speed example and change it to a high speed example. Maybe we should have a 150 mph limit and see how many people could make it to work.
Sorry if this double posts. Thank the new “faster, safer IE 8.” Ugh.
It’s a strange time to start acknowledging the credibility of an actual article, but we don’t want to discourage that. That’s where it starts to get interesting.
Randy says, “He is only a regular person who added his comments on the article. You or I could have done the same so it means nothing.”
You realize, of course, that this applies to all your posts. If Max is just a regular person and his comments don’t mean anything, where does that leave you? Unless we go on the merit of the actual information. Then anyone might say something interesting and worthy of discussion.
We get it, Randy, that you approve of following the law. That in itself doesn’t make any of us think less of you. We don’t, however, agree with your selecting speed as the only thing which can contribute to accidents while you downplay the importance of other behaviors that directly cause accidents; running into brick walls, for starters. Or, swerving into people you don’t see, for another example.
By your logic, it seems that we should obey any law simply because it is the law. So by that reasoning, you would have us obey a 20 mph speed limit even if the road is designed for 80. Would you also obey a law that said you had to change jobs against your will? How about a law that said you couldn’t marry the person you wanted to marry because of the color of their skin? Would you obey a law that said you had to report for your own extermination? You see, there are a lot of situations where simply obeying a law because it is the law ends in absurdity. All that this site is trying to do is help people who disagree with the law change it. If you could at least imagine wanting to change a law that said the speed limit on all roads, regardless of their design and conditions, should be 20 mph then you can relate to what this site is about. And a little common ground never hurt anyone.
Some other news of interest from NHTSA:
“Driver inattention is the LEADING FACTOR in most crashes and near-crashes, according to a landmark research report released today by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI).
Nearly 80 percent of crashes and 65 percent of near-crashes involved some form of driver inattention within three seconds before the event. Primary causes of driver inattention are distracting activities, such as cell phone use, and drowsiness.
“This important research illustrates the potentially dire consequences that can occur while driving distracted or drowsy. It’s crucial that drivers always be alert when on the road,” said Jacqueline Glassman, acting administrator of NHTSA. Her remarks were made during a news conference today at VTTI in Blacksburg, VA.
The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study tracked the behavior of the drivers of 100 vehicles equipped with video and sensor devices for more than one year. During that time, the vehicles were driven nearly 2,000,000 miles, yielding 42,300 hours of data. The 241 drivers of the vehicles were involved in 82 crashes, 761 near crashes, and 8,295 critical incidents.
“The huge database developed through this breakthrough study is enormously valuable in helping us to understand—and prevent—motor vehicle crashes,” said Dr. Tom Dingus, director of VTTI.”
In another study:
To address concerns regarding the need to RESTORE CREDIBILITY to speed limits, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) jointly undertook tests of “rational speed limits,” which have been established by a formal engineering review that starts with the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic, but could be set as low as the 50th percentile, depending on roadway geometry, land use, access, etc. The objective of these tests was to determine whether speed limits so set, when combined with well-publicized and targeted enforcement, result in greater compliance, more uniform speeds, and improved safety. This report presents results of the demonstration and evaluation of rational speed limits on a 7.5 mile segment of U.S. Route 49 in Gulfport, Mississippi. Following data collection and engineering analyses, the speed limits on various portions of the demonstration road in Gulfport were variously raised from 5 to 15 mph. The increases in limits were accompanied by public information and education and a stricter enforcement of the raised limits. Data on speeds, crashes, citations and enforcement hours were collected in both Gulfport and a comparison community, prior to, and quarterly during the one-year demonstration period.
Comparing the number of crashes during the one-year demonstration period to
just the year prior to the demonstration, both the average number of speed-related crashes per month and average number of crashes of all types per month
DECREASED. The average number of speed-related crashes per month actually
declined slightly in the demonstration year from the previous year.
Although a small proportion of drivers continued to violate the rational limits by 10 mph or more after the rational limits were implemented, the number of such speed violations was reduced by three quarters. Thus, RATIONAL LIMITS resulted in better compliance with the law.
Overall, one effect of raising speed limits was to reduce the number of violators. Prior to the speed limit adjustments, approximately 55 to 90% of vehicles exceeded the speed limits on US 49. After the speed limits were increased, the proportions exceeding the new speed limits were substantially lower, but still in the range of 25 to 50%. At site 2, where the speed limit was raised from 35 mph to 40 mph, 69% of vehicles exceeded the speed limit during the predemonstration, but speeding was reduced to a range of 25 to 45% during the demonstration year. At site 3, more than 90% of vehicles exceeded the speed limit prior to the increase, but after it was raised by 10 mph, only about 40 to 50% exceeded the limit. At site 6, where the speed limit was raised 15 mph, 85% exceeded the speed limit during the predemonstration period but just 30% sped during the demonstration. Site 10 was raised by 5 mph to 50 mph, and the
incidence of violations dropped from about 60% to the range of 25 to 35%. At site 13, on the more open road north of the interchange with I-10, the speed limit was raised to 60 mph, but the incidence of speeding dropped only 10 to 15 percentage points, from the predemonstration level of 55% to the range of 40 to 45% after the speed limit was raised.
Randy might think we’re all about violating the law, but these statistics from NHTSA itself prove that rational limits, in other words, better laws, will increase compliance. That’s really all any of us is after, right? This information also demonstrates how those of us who do currently violate the irrational limits succeed in having such sterling driving records. We’re awake. We are more alert than other drivers and therefore safer.
John your example proves my point exactly. After rasing the limit people still violated the law by 30 to 50%. You say that is a huge improvement? This site is 90% aout breaking the law with 10 percent geared to making a law change. If you do not see that then you are not reading anything here. How many posts have you read that state that it is fine driving well over the limit and nothing is stated about what the limit is? I have seen where enforcement did work but you do not do it on a 7 mile stretch but needs to be done at the state level Sure you do not want 55 mph out in the middle of Nevada like some say but that is not the current speed anywhere except around major cities where there shiould be lower speeds with all the traffic and changing lanes. Are you a person that says there should be no limits and no enforcement?
I would say that if you increased the limits to 200 mph you would have 100% compliance of the law. That does not mean it is the right thing to do.
If speed limits keep incraseing and police do not enforce the ones that are there then more deaths will happen.
Researchers tracking fatalities attributed 12,545 deaths and 36,582 injuries in fatal crashes to higher speed limits implemented during the 1995-2005 study period.
http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/healthday/2009/07/16/deaths-injuries-increase-with-higher-speed-limits.html
Math is hard.
3.2 percent increase with more than 3.2% more drivers on the road. Do the math.
John of NM
Bad Science produces skewed results
The UIC study focuses on highway safety and traffic fatalities due to post-NMSL speed limits. Let’s look at some government statistics, which exist in great abundance. Specifically visit the National Highway Traffic System Administration and the Federal Highway Administration.
The NHTSA has established the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS); there you’ll find the following data:
U.S. Highway Fatalities per 100 Million Vehicle Miles Traveled
2008: 1.27
2007: 1.36
2006: 1.42
2005: 1.46
2004: 1.44
2003: 1.48
2002: 1.51
2001: 1.51
2000: 1.53
1999: 1.55
1998: 1.58
1997: 1.64
1996: 1.69
1995: 1.73
1994: 1.73
The fatality rate has steadily dropped over this period to reach its lowest total in 2008. As another benchmark, the national highway deaths per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 1980 was 3.35. In other words, traffic fatalities have dropped by 62% in less than 30 years. Technological advances in vehicle safety, as well as other factors such as highway improvements, over the years play a large role in the reduction of highway deaths.
But back to the 55 mph speed limit proponents. Here is a quote from the Federal Highway Administration on their Speed Management page:
Speeding is a safety concern on all roads, regardless of their speed limits. Much of the public concern about speeding has been focused on high-speed Interstates. The Interstate System, however, actually has the best safety record of all roads and the lowest fatality rate of all road classes. Almost 50 percent of speeding-related fatalities occur on lower speed collector and local roads, which carry only 27.9 percent of the total vehicle miles traveled in the United States. Collector roads usually have legal speed limits of 55 mi/h or less. Speed limits on local roads are often 35 mi/h or lower.
Lowering the current speed limits on the nation’s interstate system to reduce fatalities is unrealistic, not only because the government data and analysis don’t support that conclusion, but who among us expects the driving public to slow down to 55 mph when they know they can drive safely and appropriately at much higher speeds on the nation’s highways?
Max Frisson of TX
Need we say more?
John G. of FL
John G so you know how the statistics were figured in the report? How were they calculated showing the higher deaths caused by greater speeds? Your miles driven fatality statistics are flawed because they do not show what increased highway safety devices and also increase vehicle safety. You are like many that take a number without having any clue what it means. If thousands more die because of higher limits and greater speeds that will never show in your statistics because in your statistics do not show anything into what goes in those numbers. You are still trying to get out of the fact that you probably caused deaths by treating everyone like adults as you say. Adults like Fahrenfreude that does not know how to drive. Did you read his explanation? He said he was not tailgating. If he was within 160 feet of the person ahead of him he was tailgating. If he could not go ahead or behind the vehicle beside him then his idea of tailgating is a couple of feet from the vehicle in front of him. He is one that you call an adult that blames others for his poor driving. You want people like that to make their own decision how they should drive and at what speed?
I have seen reports of vastly increased death rates when states like MO and Iowa and other midwest states went to higher limits a few years ago. The death rate increase was well ahead of any increase in miles driven.
If you would look at something other than US miles driven charts you would get the real facts. Miles driven are only rough estimates also. They do not have a clue how many miles I drive or you drive or the fact that I have multiple vehicles.
Randy got me sidetracked.
My response to this article was that I was not surprised that the FHP has a ticket quota system (which is supposed to be considered improper by police departments and has even been illegal in some places.)
The Florida Highway Patrol is a unique traffic control agency. They differ from most State Police and Highway Patrols in that they are charged to only enforce traffic ordinances with the single exception of drug violations resulting from traffic enforcement. They do not do murder investigations, family trouble calls, breaking and enterings, etc.,
FHP is also supposed to restrict its’ activities to the Interstate system and the Florida highway network. However, they consistently place their “State” units at the “Duck Ponds” on local (not State) roads and spend a great deal of time writing violations for profit . . . not enforcement . . . purposes. Those places are called “Duck Ponds” because any motorist (including police officers) who are not familiar with the trap will be in violation without knowing it, every time they drive through.
It is for this reason that Marion County, and several other places in Florida, are known as the worst speed traps in the Nation (as has been noted by this motorists organization.) Even worse than the old Cobb County, GA speedtraps that prompted the governor of Georgia to place warning billboards on roads entering the county in the 1960s and 1970s.
In Marion County the FHP works with the local Traffic Courts to fleece as many citizens as possible. Pleading “not guilty” there only guarantees the maximum $600.00 fine will be assessed instead of the fine that the violation would otherwise have cost.
It’s about time they got some press for their practices. The local Florida papers have been notoriously timid about pointing out police abuses. After all, the reporters have to drive to work, but when the practices are a blatent as this article reports they do occasionally develop the cajones necessary to take on the State Cops. Thank God.
Ok John G./ Give us the specifics on what they are doing for speed traps. It is very easy to complain about something but without giving out specifics you sound like an idiot. Speed trap speed trap duck pond duck pond. Give us what they are doing and let us decide if we agree with you. All I have heard on this site is all about speed traps. To me there are few cases that I would call a speed trap when others here would . Most here say it is a speed trap if you do not see the officer a mile ahead so they have time to slow down.
Being a police officer as you said you were, are you also incapable of driving the speed limit?
Okay, Yak. I call BS.
Why would you ask John to provide something you never provide? You only make up whatever statistics suit you. And you don’t even do that very well since they often make the opposite point from what you intended.
The Yak says, “It is very easy to complain about something but without giving out specifics you sound like an idiot.”
Umm, that’s pretty much what you do on this site, isn’t it? You complain about facts that you can’t change and don’t like, you never offer anything coherent or verifiable in return and pretty much sound like an idiot all the time. I mean, as far as your role as mascot/court jester/village idiot goes, I suppose that’s appropriate, but to expect us to take you seriously? No, that’s not really ever going to happen.
Randy, you’re obviously a bully, or at least you’d like to be. Why don’t you just go down to the bar, start a fight and get it out of your system? Unless of course, you’re a coward as well: one of those punks who happened to grow a bit early, and started pushing other kids around and stealing their lunch money. Then, after those other guys grew and caught up with you, you had to resort to pushing around girls and little kids. Then, somebody (perhaps a victim’s older brother) busted you up good and ‘cured’ you of that. Now you just cruise the net, picking fights to get your aggression out of your system. You can get professional help and meds to help your condition. You CAN lead a fulfilling life. You just need to want to get better. We support you! We’re all rooting for you! Good luck!
Fahrenfreude this is the last I am even acknowledging you . You are an idiot that can not drive and do not have common sense. You are not worth responding to any more. Good riddance.
Randy-
There you go again. How do you know that Farenfreude can’t drive? That test isn’t given on paper, and if you had ever given him a driving test in person he’d know who you are and he would surely have killed you by now, and the rest of us wouldn’t have to read your illiterate ramblings.
I’d like to say I won’t ever respond to your rants again, but like any annoying insect you occasionally become annoying enough to need swatting.
John G I know that Fahrenfreude can not drive because he admitted he was driving in someone else’s blind area for more than 5 minutes and also tailgating. If you as a former policeman say that is a proper way to drive then I know you were not a true policeman. There are no written tests needed when he admitted he did not know how to drive.
LOL Yak! You are hilarious.
The Yak says, “he admitted he was driving in someone else’s blind area for more than 5 minutes and also tailgating.”
This just goes to show how dense the Yak actually is. I was in the person’s blind spot because the two cows around me were both breaking the law. It’s not against the law to drive in someone’s blind spot as long as you can get yourself out of trouble should it arise, which I easily did, through superior, not inferior driving skills.
Also, if I had been tailgating I would not have been in the person’s blind spot. I would have been in front of her. Can’t have it both ways, Yak. But, when you don’t care about truth, reason or anything but your own bullying, stupid ego, then you don’t mind making things up, as the Yak always does. Of course, if he didn’t, we wouldn’t be able to make fun of his absurd, illogical posts. All in all, I think it’s better this way.
John says, “but like any annoying insect you occasionally become annoying enough to need swatting.”
Amen to that. And there’s a certain satisfaction in doing so. So, please, Yak, continue to entertain us.
The Yak says, “Fahrenfreude this is the last I am even acknowledging you.”
Oh, come on Yak, don’t be a bad sport. You don’t need to give up so soon! Let’s have some more fun.
Anyway, I can’t really believe you’re going to let me completely expose your absurdity and destroy your pathetic excuse for thinking without some kind of angry, venomous response.
You know i don’t condne speeding more than 10mph in residential or other local roads. But Highways are different. they are made for speed. I’m looking at some studies done by the NHTSA and only 15% randy, that’s 15% of fatal crashes that involve speeding are people with 0.00 BAC that means that it’s not speeding that’s the problem it’s alcohol. 85% were people with a bac of .01 or greater. 40% with .08 or greater. Speeding is not the problem, it’s speeding while drinking that’s the problem.
Not to mention only 12% that’s 12% randy of speeding related fatalities were on interstate highways. So let me say this again before randy starts misquoting me. I do not condone or agree with speeding on local non-highway roads. Interstate highways need fastr speed limits. Here’s my link too: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/810998.PDF
Your from out west randy, there are a lot fewer people to enforce. But when your in a huge metropolitan area such as myself you can’t stop everyone. the people who are do 70 in a 55 are the safe drivers. As you will have no problem finding someone doing 80, 85 or even 90. Why waste your resources on something everyone is doing when you can catch someone else who is breaking the law more severely. there is only so many police officers on duty at one time. It’s easier to police when you only have say 100 to 1,000 people to enforce rather than 1,000,000 people. So you can waste your time to pull people over for 5mph over out west if you want, but over here in the east you would be the ass hole blocking traffic and almost causing collisions. It’s safer to go with the flow of traffic.
DUI is indeed a cause of accidents but lest we overlook something equally important recent studies show that talking on a cell phone (including hands free cell phones) causes just as many accidents as drunk drivers. Even worse, texting while driving is several times worse than either drunk drivers or talking on a cell phone.
If we’re really serious about preventing accidents (including fatal accidents) we will get just as aggressive about enforcing laws against both texting and talking on cell phones as we currently are on drunks.
Anything less is not scientific but, instead, political.
I agree John. talking on the phone and even worse texting is as bad as drunk driving. So maybe we should use the same laws that are used with drunk driving and apply them to cell phone use, which you just suggested. Which brings me to the texting while driving law in MD. If the MD legislatures were truly for safety they would have included talking on the cell as well (But we all know the MD legislatures use their cells while driving, so why outlaw something you yourself does). But since you don’t know if some one is dialing a number (legal) or if they are texting (illegal) you can’t apply the law. It’s unprovable unless the officer is looking over your shoulder.
I agree that texting and drinking and driving and cell phones are a major problem. If you combine that with speeding you triple or more the death rate. So if someone is doing those things they should not, does speeding even get reported and unless there are hundreds of feet of skid marks or something else to go by how can a lot of the accidents be blamed on speeding when there is often no evidence of it or hard to tell how much it was to be blamed? I would much rather have someone that is drinking or texting driving 30 mph rather than 45 or 50 like John would have allowed. The chances of someone that is doing those bad driving habbits is much more likely to hurt themselves or others if they are speeding.
As for the highways being ok to drive whatever speed you like because it is safer than other areas, you think thousands of deaths are ok then because that is how many you claim to be on highways. If everyone was following the speed limit thus having very little passing needed or changing lanes there would be almost no accidents. I recommend driving somewhere that the speed is followed and see how safe it is and how great the traffic flows. Until either of you do that you will not have a clue what you are talking about. I have seen the opposite where everyone is driving at different speeds and it is not pretty and not safe at all.
Randy, you are so full of crap!
“If you combine that with speeding you triple or more the death rate. So if someone is doing those things they should not does speeding even get reported? I would much rather have someone that is drinking…” etc, etc.
You’re into your made-up statistics again. The fact that you want it to be true does not make it so.
You said you were never a police professional so shut your trap. I don’t want you telling a brain surgeon how to do his job either because you are equally unqualified to do that as well.
You are also a liar. You stated ” I would much rather have someone that is drinking or texting driving 30 mph rather than 45 or 50 like John would have allowed.” If you carefully read my comments you will not find any such inferrence. Now you’re not only making stuff up, you’re attributing it to me! You are clearly mentally handicapped (and no, that doesn’t allow you to park in handicap spaces.
Your fixation with writing tickets for all violations above 1 mph over the limit stinks of someone way to into “Discipline.” Tell us, do you like your (wife, girl friend, boy friend – whatever) to wear leather and carry a big whip while you’re having sexual relations?
Why don’t you go find something else you are unqualified to talk about and blog about that until someone traces you back and wrings your scrawney neck.
Randy there are more fatalities driving at or below the speed limit then there are while speeding. Speeding is not the causation of an accident.
If you want to get rid of traffic fatalities i have a simple solution. Let’s outlaw driving cars. cars are now illegal anyone possessing a car or even worse driving a car will get 20 years in jail mandatory minimum. This law will safe thousands of lives a year.
Also I propose to outlaw all fast food as the fatty content and calories are too unhealthy and contribute to thousands of deaths a year as well as making people fat and driving up the cost of medical. This legislation will cause people to be healthier and skinnier.
I also propose that shooting a gun will be illegal as bullets can strike someone and kill them. Possesion will still be legal because of out great second amendment, but anyone caught shooting a gun will get 20 years mandatory minimum. This law will save thousands of lives as no one will be allowed to shoot a gun.
Do you see how ridiculous your arguments are randy.
You know i too have been on roads where the traffic has flowed quite nicely. They were in the southern states such as Tennessee and North Carolina on the interstate highways. Funny story the speed limit was 70mph and everyone was doing between 70 and 75 miles per hour. it was a great experience. Unfortunately roads in my state are not set for 70 mph. so everyone is speeding at 70 mph. Not to mention the traffic isn’t nearly as bad in North Carolina.
Get out of that brainwashing that speed kills. Speeding in bad weather conditions kill. speeding while drinking kills, speeding while talking on the cell phone kills, speeding as a sharp turn ahead kills, speeding in congested areas kills, speeding while being inexperienced or sleepy kills. Speeding is only a contributing factor. not the only factor. How about speeding and not wearing a seat belt.
I can not help that you two are stupid. Try something for me. Drive an old car into a cement wall at 10 mph. Then driving the car into a cement wall at 30 mph and tell me there is no difference. Another test is to drive 65 mph and swerve around something or stop before you get to it and do the same thing at 80 mph. You guys do not have a clue what affect increased speeds do on driving.
John, having a job does not mean that you are good at it and you definitely were not good at yours. I have more degrees and common sense than you ever will and also way over a million miles driven.
Also John I am not fixated with giving out tickets. Like I have said you do not have to give out any more tickets. All you do is set a speed on state highways and you can have a news announcement saying people are no longer allowed to drive whatever they feel like and you will find that you will not have to write many tickets. It is the fault of people like you that make your own mind what speed is to be enforced and people do not have any idea how they should drive. You and your fellow workers sent mixed signals about how fast someone should drive. There should be no mentality like Randalls saying you should always drive a certain speed over the limit like 15 mph or 20 mph over the limit on the highway. The speed limit should be set and followed. If the limit is increased Randall would still have to do his 10 mph over the limit because he is better than other drivers and above the law. Randall was the one that says the 10mph over the limit in school zones is fine and you should only have to keep your speed within 20 mph over the limit.
Randall you say that there are so many people where you drive it is impossible to stop them all. That may be true but not because there are too many people to stop but too dangerous to stop them. Instead of creating a danger of stopping them police have the tow truck phone number ready and the coroner.
Oh, dear. It seems our mascot has gotten a bit full of himself again. What did we tell you? “Yakkity yak, don’t talk back!” It just embarrasses you.
The Yak says, “Try something for me. Drive an old car into a cement wall at 10 mph. Then driving the car into a cement wall at 30 mph and tell me there is no difference. Another test is to drive 65 mph and swerve around something or stop before you get to it and do the same thing at 80 mph. You guys do not have a clue what affect increased speeds do on driving.”
It just keeps getting better and better! Of course we understand the effect that driving into a wall has! It’s called a crash! You’ve just proven our point for us! Driving your car into a wall is a more direct cause of the crash than speeding. You can’t deny this, Yak. Not even you could deny this.
Oh, and in case you missed it, getting all your degrees: when you use “affect” as a noun, it means a feeling or emotion. You seem to have meant “effect.” Just so you know. Perhaps you should call the college and ask for your money back for that degree.
“and also way over a million miles driven.”
Oh, and just FYI, this logical fallacy (that’s a mistake in thinking to you, Yak) is called an “Argument Ad Verecundiam.” It means that you have no expertise or training by which to form an expert opinion. You might cite this statistic of “a million miles driven” (though I’m sure no one believes you) when relating your personal experience, to say that this gives you expertise that a trained professional doesn’t have is, well, just what we’d expect from our mascot. A notch below stupid.
“you can have a news announcement saying people are no longer allowed to drive whatever they feel like and you will find that you will not have to write many tickets.”
Haaahhh! What you’ll have is the most hilarious commercial ever!!!! It will go viral on the net and the entire world will laugh as idiots like Randy make fools of themselves on ‘world TV.’
We’re sorry to say that our Yak translation program has broken down and we were unable to find any coherent thought in the following sentence.
“Instead of creating a danger of stopping them police have the tow truck phone number ready and the coroner.”
John G. we agree to disagree. You say you give out a ton of warnings but never give tickets for less than 15 over the first time. I do not know if you have a database of everyone that has recieved warnings in your state or not but if you have to give out a ton of warnings you were not doing your job. I have seen where enforcement in the past has kept almost all people within 5 mph of the limit and did not have to give any more or just a few more than you probably did. You set the speed of the people on your roads they do not. Prestently it is more like under 10 mph over the limit where I live. If you let them go and do not give very many tickets out then you get a ton of people you have to give warnings to.
One question. Do you believe that driving 70 mp in a 55 mph zone or 80 mph on a highway designed for 65 mph is very safe to drive and no increased risk? I do not think it is. I have seen the numbers and have witnessed where the increased speed caused accidents and death. I have also seen where speeders were killed in a 30 mph zone and not because they were driving at that speed but much more. You do not care about the number of people that die just so you are not one of the highest compared to other states.
I have learned a few things from personal experience and from others. Most peope drive at about what the speed limit is. The speed limit is not what is on signs but what you allow them to drive if it is 10 mph over the limit or 20 mph over the limit. People also get used to driving at a particular speed. If they have driven at 75 mph on the highway for many hours and turn onto a road that is a 45 mph zone or a 55 mph zone they have a hard time slowing down even though the road was not designed for higher than the limit. If there is no one to slow them down or chance of it they will drive faster than a safe speed on that road.
Randy;
You are guilty of trying to prove a point with fictional anecdotal allegories. An example of that is when you say:
“I have learned a few things from personal experience and from others. Most peope drive at about what the speed limit is. The speed limit is not what is on signs but what you allow them to drive. . .”
In short, you are making up your own statistics and truths. You can believe what you want to believe but repeating it over and over again does not make it true.
It is obvious you have a dog in this fight but won’t admit it. You are too dogmatic to simply be an individual with a point of view that happens to be at variance with the truth. My guess is that you are a supervisor at a department that survives and pays its’ salaries by writing flakey tickets.
Writing C.S. tickets does not encourage compliance with speed laws. It does encourage hatred of the police in general.
When cooperation is what is needed your style makes enemies unnecessarily.
Sometimes tickets must be issued. Particularly serious violations require them. Warnings for minor violations afford “learning experiences” that are remembered long after a ticket is forgotten.
Your kind of department, the “write ‘em all even if they’re only 5 mph over”, is anathema to all good police departments.
“Speed Traps” differ from highway robbery only insofar as the thieves are in uniform and paid by the state.
Police officers like you are uniformly detested by all good cops.
And, as one of the many good cops, I invite you to -
Go To Hell!
John G now I have the right to call you an idiot. They were giving 5 mph over the limit tickets in all the Midwest states in the late 70s and early 80s. I did get a warning for 3 mph over the limit and it was a written warning. Believe it or not there were few speeders in the area at the time either. That is the time when the CBs came out and many places out west they used them for speeding but we did not have the speeding like other states did. The only hatred towards the police is when some let you go 20 mph over the limit with a warning and others giving tickets for 10 mph over. When there was a statewide policy people knew how not to get tickets so why get mad at the police when you do not get a ticket?
With all the new safety features on vehicles and better safety devices on highways why so many deaths now? The reason is that you tell them to go for it.
I am not a policeman but I am far better at judging people and the affect that true enforcement did in the past than you do. I have never driven in lower Michigan but from what I hear your state policy is to let em go. If you have a city giving tickets for 10 mph in town then people complain because they have had people like you in charge of nothing.
You and others say there are speed traps all over but unless police stop you on a big down hill there is very little you can call a trap. You sound like the worst policeman I have ever heard. Maybe you are the guy that needed to be liked and spent most of your time at dunkun donuts.
I also drove up to Wisconsin over the winter and where they used to go very fast outside of Madison everyone was basically driving the speed limit. People knew that they could no longer drive 20 mph over the limit. I did see one car stopped on my trip though. It was a car that was flying by everyone else. A mile up the road I saw him pulled over. Funny there were thousands of cars on the road and I only saw one person getting a ticket and the traffic was flowing more smoothly than I have ever seen before.
Randy:
You should really read “for content” before posting. It would save everyone a lot of time and you would be better informed.
I said that on first contact I never wrote a ticket for less than 15 mph over the limit. Writing a ticket is not the only way to enforce the traffic code. I issued verbal warnings to everyone doing 10 or more mph over the limit and frequently stopped people who where going slightly more than 5 mph over the limit. There is absolutely no good purpose served by stopping people for driving five or less miles per hour over the limit because that is close to the margin of error on spedometers that are not certified for police work.
I stated that treating motorists as adults on the first offense is more effective than simply issuing tickets as if all motorists were recruits in military boot camp and police officers were the DIs. That would be childish and unprofessional, smacking of “speedtrap” policies. Even in the military once a recruit has finished boot camp and goes onto regular duty the chicken s— stuff is no longer employed by their superiors. Should civilian authorities be any less professional?
I did write people for less than 15 mph over on the second and subsequent offenses.
Your insulting mannerisms have made you no friends. Comments to the effect that police officers who treat motorists as adults, and not as DIs treat recruits in boot camp, is a policy that has “killed or injured many” is both uninformed and, frankly, stupid.
Go crawl back under your rock.
John G. my statement stands that you and your friends allow the hazardous driving that we have. ON.LY tickets for 15 mph over the limit says to eveyone that the actual speed limit is 15 mph faster than what is posted. Sounds to me that you are making the law not enforcing it. You do disprove Fahrenfreude in that speeding tickets are not given for 3 mph over the limit.
Your enfrocement technique I am sure has killed or injured many. You say that Michigan is one of the safest states. Why are there thousands that die on the road then? It is because a 65 mph limit is actually 80.
If in fact you would give more tickets then the speed limit would mean something. You have to give out a lot of warnings if you do not say that they should in fact be driving slower but you are saying do whaterver you want and make a suggestion to slow down when they are 15 mph over the limit
Wow, Randy. You sure impressed John. Good going with the gentlemanly manners. Why don’t you just go crawl back under your YAK and get back to milking. If you don’t milk them, it makes them cross.
And, I’m sorry to burst your bubble, rain on your parade and in all other ways destroy your argument, but John saying he never wrote tickets for small amounts over the limit and that there is no good reason for it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Let’s think for a moment: John doesn’t approve of the FHP policies; ergo, it’s possible he might not agree with ticketing people for a few miles over. Nothing he said disproves what I said. Like a gentleman, like an honorable man, he’s making statements he can back up, or that are from his personal experience. He doesn’t have your case of diarrhea-mouth.
To wit, Randy says, “Your enfrocement technique”
LOL! What could this word be? Enfrocement. Hmm. Enfrossment. No, that doesn’t seem right. How about with a hard C, like Enfrocment. Enfrockment. Well, since a frock can be an article of women’s clothing, does that mean that Randy has made a freudian slip and given away his cross-dressing habits? It’s OK, Randy. It’s a free country. We, the nurturing and sympathetic members of the NMA forums, support your decision.
Randy says, “ON.LY” On, ly. On a lie? Freudian slip alert!
Randy says, “whaterver.” LOL!!! Like, hey Erv, whatERVer. Ha!
Thanks again, Randy, for the delightful post. I feel kind of guilty about this situation though. Most comics this funny are paid for it, and you’re sitting here entertaining us for free.
Hey, I just thought of something: if you were our mascot, they we wouldn’t really have to pay you for your services. Oh, I’m a genius.
Randy the Yak. Official mascot/court jester/village idiot of the NMA forums.
Yeah, I like the sound of that. “Hey, Yakkity-yak! Don’t talk back!”
AAAHHHH! LOL!!!!!!!
Fahrenfreude you are not worth anyone correcting their typos.
Randy the Yak says: “Blah, blah, blahbitty blah. Yak, yak, yakitty yak. Moo, mooooo. Grunt. Gruuunt! Snort, blah, snort-moo grunt!”
Ahhh! LOL!!!
This is awesome. We should have gotten a mascot a long time ago.
But wait! Our animal translation specialist has just come online. He has interacted with this species of yak before and can offer a translation. The entire online community waits with anticipation! What will it say?
“Fahrenfreude you are not worth anyone correcting their typos.”
Incredible! Stinging repartee from the yak! Fahrenfreude, what is your response to this crushing blow?
“As if. As if I could care. As if he could even correct his ‘typos.’”
Oh, there you have it, folks. Another punishing retort. But wait, Fahrenfreude, why are we talking to the yak to begin with?
“Good question. Not really sure. We mostly just keep him around for entertainment.”
And what fine entertainment it is, folks. :)
Fahrenfreude;
You asked what I think of speed limits in general and, specifically, the 85 percentile rule. For the non-professionals let me describe the 85 percentile rule: It is the speed at which 85% of the traffic will travel on a given road where there is no speed limit obvious to the drivers. It has been a tried and true method of establishing speed limits by all traffic planners. The reasoning is that 85% of drivers will drive at a prudent and proper speed without any prompting whatsoever, and that the remaining 15% will driver at speeds either higher or lower than is appropriate given the road and the conditions at the time. It is the only really good means of establishing the safe speed limit for any given road except where unusual situations exist (ie. school zones, unusual curves, hidden driveways, etc.)
It is also the rule violated by municipalities that are using speedtraps for revenue enhancement. In those cases the limits are set well below what an actual 85 percentile study would indicate as the proper speed for a road. The reasoning is that, even with a lower posted speed limit, 85% of drivers will continue to drive at a reasonable and prudent speed without regard to the limit. The result is, of course, many tickets will be written and much money will be made by the municipality.
As far as speed limits in general are concerned: They are essential, because they establish proper and prudent speeds for all streets and roads. It is important to have an enforcement tool so that unsafe drivers (those operating at speeds not consistant with the 85 percentile rule – whether too fast or (and pay attention to this) too slow – can be singled out for attention and can be issued a violation if necessary. I always got better compliance with verbal warnings as drivers seemed to appreciate being treated as adults and responded as such. Tickets, for me, were always the last resort. I never issued one for less than 15 mph over on the first first contact. Anyone going 14 or less mph over got a verbal warning the first time I encountered them. I issued a ton of warnings though, so no one ever questioned my methods.
Keep in mind that, in such a situation (when limits are posted too low for the road) a hazardous situation is created when most of the traffic is traveling at a reasonable and prudent speed while others are attempting to observe a speed limit that is simply too slow. The conflict is obvious to anyone with half a brain.
You, Fahrenfreude, also asked about my experience with quotas set by my department. Thankfully my department did not set enforcement quotas so there was no conflict. For a while they posted a single page in the “Squad Room” listing the number of tickets issued by each deputy with the highest issuing deputy at the top of the list, but if it was meant to encourage more tickets it failed. Everyone simply ignored it.
By the way, Randy was completely wrong with his statistics. Michigan has always been one of the safer states from the standpoint of miles driven versus accidents. I don’t know what his motives are, but I suspect he has a particular reason for trying to mischaracterize my statements. I suspect that he may be either a supervisor in a department that has it’s budget established by the amount of money that comes in as the result of violations written, or that he is one of those few C.S. cops that can always be found polluting all good police departments throughout the country.
Thank you, John. That was most informative!
I hope everyone else is paying attention, because it’s good for enthusiastic drivers, such as those who visit this site, to see that we shouldn’t let a few bad eggs encountered in traffic stops spoil our opinions of law enforcement officers. In the end, we’re all on the same page: hoping to keep everybody safe and keep the rules fair and rational. It sounds like if a guy got pulled over by you, then he really did need the warning. What a civilized way to go about it.
And don’t let Randy bother you. He’s not really smart enough to have motives or to mischaracterize anything. He just comes on here to pick fights. Kind of “bull in a china shop” in an almost endearing way. Quite amusing, actually.
John G. from what I have heard about Michigan you and your group did not do anything either. From what I heard there was no speed control. How many deaths did you cause from your lack of doing your job? There are more deaths I am sure where you were in charge from drunken driving and speeding than all the other crimes in the state.
“A traffic accident occurs in Michigan every 85 seconds.
Someone is injured in one of those crashes every five
minutes. Tragically, a person is killed in one of those
accidents every eight hours.”
“Annually, from 1987 to 1996, an average of 1,427 people were killed and more than 143,000 injured in some 394,000 traffic accidents in Michigan.”
Ah, come on, Randy. Quit bothering us with your made-up statistics. You accuse us of lying, but isn’t that because that’s all you do, just tell lies?
And even if your fabricated statistics were anywhere close, where’s the data to say that all those accidents aren’t caused by passive-aggressive drivers like you, just out there causing trouble and running into people? There’s nothing there that indicates speed was involved at all. No police enforcement in the world can prevent people from being inattentive and dangerous.
Also, Randy, you should really read what other people write before you pull your diarrhea posts. He said he was with a Sheriff’s dept. and not the state police. If anyone is responsible for the conditions in the whole state it would be them, not the group John was with. Anyone with an IQ above 40 or so could realize this which unfortunately puts yours pretty low, Randy. But then, in whatever yak-herding, no-legal-system, repressive fascist excuse for a country you are writing from that IQ of 32 can get you by.
As a law enforcement officer, John is infinitely more qualified to comment on this situation than you are, Randy, and has done more than YOU could ever imagine to make his community and our nation a safer place to live. You can argue with me all you want, and I confess I enjoy it a great deal, but John is out of your league and to insult and disparage him is beyond dishonorable. Of course, you haven’t shown in your posts that you would know what honor is so I suppose we can expect you to continue to behave as usual.
Having said that, I kind of hope to see you continue your embarrassing antics. If you suddenly became a gentleman I’d probably have to stop visiting this forum because it wouldn’t be any fun anymore. Thanks again for the great entertainment! I’m beginning to wonder if you’ll ever write a post that doesn’t have some hilarious oversight, language issue or screw-up for me to mock. I should probably start an office pool. I could probably make a ton of money!
Oh, and I’m still curious. Did it really take you the entire month of March to make your 900 mile trip? Or did you do it in something like three weeks? Probably pretty hard to exceed PSL on a yak.
Fahrenfreude all I can say is that you are ignorant and do not know how to drive. Ask John G. if you were the correct one driving in the left lane for over 5 minutes in someone’s blind spot! It is the idiots like you that cause the accidents. You feel that if you can apply a few more ounces of pressure on the gas pedel you think you are a far better driver. It is far from the truth by your own statements.
From the Michigan Sheriffs web site:
The Sheriff is an elected officer responsible for the planning, administration and direction of the Sheriff’s office. The Sheriff oversees all departmental operations including the road patrol,
traffic enforcement and investigation
From an example in Michigan:
A Moraga teenager was killed early Tuesday when her car hit a utility
pole in a crash so violent the vehicle was split in half and power was
lost to surrounding neighborhoods.
The victim has been identified as 17-year-old XXXXXXX, according to
the Contra Costa Sheriff’s Office.
Moraga police Chief Mark Ruppenthal said it will be weeks before
investigators determine what caused Rehm to crash her late-model Toyota
sedan into a pole on Rheem Boulevard and Fernwood Drive at 2:20 a.m.
The only certainty is that excessive speed played a factor in the
accident, Ruppenthal said.
The speed limit is 35 mph on Rheem Boulevard, where XXXXX was traveling
eastbound. Ruppenthal said her car first hit a curb and a residential
mailbox. Pieces of the mailbox flew over a fence, through a stucco wall
and a backyard window of a house around the block.
The car then hit the utility pole, causing a 15- to 22-minute power
outage to 3,500 customers in Lafayette and Moraga, according to PG&E. A
resident on St. Marys Road in Lafayette reported being awoken by a bang,
followed by flashing lights and hissing electrical wires.
Randy says, “From the Michigan Sheriffs web site:
The Sheriff is an elected officer responsible for the planning, administration and direction of the Sheriff’s office. The Sheriff oversees all departmental operations including the road patrol, traffic enforcement and investigation.”
Right, and your point would be? Well, nothing, which is why you just posted the information, hoping it would somehow magically have an impact. I think the term that comes to mind is, “grasping at straws.”
You certainly have quite an imagination, Randy. Your fabricated story was really something. Perhaps you could be an author with an imagination like that. But you really do need to learn to spell.
Randy says, “Ask John G. if you were the correct one driving in the left lane for over 5 minutes in someone’s blind spot!”
Just remember that I was the only one abiding by the law; the road cows were breaking it. And, through my virtuosity at the wheel, I easily saved the situation from becoming worse. It’s just like the speeding Randy. I can do it because I have faster reaction times. If I were boxed in, without options, I wouldn’t have stayed in that position, but as it was, there was no danger at all. That’s the definition of a good driver, that he can be in less-than-ideal circumstances and still come out perfectly fine. That’s true driving skill. If you only have the ability to avoid crashes in textbook situations you’ll certainly crash at some point because you have an incomplete skill set.
Randy says, “It is the idiots like you that cause the accidents.”
Kind of hard to say, considering I have a perfect record.
Randy says, “It is far from the truth by your own statements.”
Let’s see, what were my statements? Perhaps, “I have a perfect driving record?”
You are indeed amusing, Randy. And let’s assume for a moment that your post had some connection to reality. Let’s examine it to see if it makes the point that you think it makes.
“excessive speed played a factor in the accident.” Hmm. Okay, speed was a factor. But did it CAUSE the accident, or was that due to something else?”
“it will be weeks before investigators determine what caused her to crash her late-model Toyota.”
Hmm. They don’t know what caused the accident. Cause? Unknown. Hey, Officer Ruppenthal, what caused the accident? Answer: “We don’t know.”
Why did you post this again, Randy?
LOL!!!!!!!
See you tomorrow. :)
Fahrenfreude you are an idiot and dumber than a pile of rocks. Speed may or not have been the cause of the accident but speed was what killed the girl. If she was driving the speed limit from what the article said she would have had a 99.9% chance of living through the accident but an idiot like you could not comprehend that.
Talking about your driving, the lady that almost hit you because you were in her blind area for way too long and also tailgating because if you were within 2 seconds of the lady in front of you then you were tailgating idiot and from what you described you were well within 2 seconds. It does not matter if the lady that almost hit you initiated the accident but the major contributing factor was that you were there in the first place and in my opinion and anyone that has had any type of drivers training would say that it was more your fault than hers.
Stay off the highway before you hurt someone.
“It does not matter if the lady that almost hit you initiated the accident but the major contributing factor was that you were there in the first place”
Just throwing around phrases like “major contributing factor” may make you sound intelligent as they are rattling around in your head, but it doesn’t change facts. Are you really saying that if somebody shot you, that your standing in front of their gun would have been the major contributing factor, and not their pulling the trigger?
LOL!!!!!
“Stay off the highway before you hurt someone”
Kind of hard to say to someone with my perfect driving record. Just sayin’
No idiot Fahrenfreude what I am saying is if you stand in front of the targets at a gun range there is a very good chance you will get shot.
Keep making your poor driving decisions and you will not have a perfect drving record. You can only be lucky so many times.
This certainly comes as no surprise to anyone who lives in Florida.
The Florida Highway Patrol is not a police department in the normal sense of the word. It does not perform the functions of a police agency (crime investigation, family disturbances, etc.) as it performs only traffic patrol and accident investigation duties with the exception of drug law enforcement when such activities result directly from some other type of traffic enforcement activity. In short, although it claims to be involved exclusively in “traffic safety” issues, it’s main function is revenue inhancement for the State of Florida and the counties in which it operates. Any real police officer knows that warnings carry as much, if not more, weight than tickets do.
As a former full time Deputy Sheriff from a large Michigan County I can honestly characterize the FHP as strictly a “Dukes of Hazzard” parody of a real police department.
Then it sounds like it is time to phase out the Florida Highway Patrol.
That’s quite interesting, John. I would be curious to hear your thoughts on speed limits in general. Specifically, what do you think of the 85th percentile business? And could you share any personal experiences concerning speed enforcement? Were you frustrated by mandates and quotas from your superiors?
From your comments about FHP, it’s clear you were proud of your work in MI, doing actual police work. Are you still in law enforcement? If not, it’s a pity. I’d sleep better at night knowing guys like you are watching over us. Thanks for your service and your professionalism.
If there are no speeders then i would say his firing was wrong. If there are people driving 15 mph over the limit and he writes few tickets then he should have been fired. There should be quotas if there are drivers driving excessively. If he wants to spend his time at Dunkun Donuts then he can do it on his own time.