Police Officer Gives Himself $21,000 Raise Using Stop Sign Tickets
A recent article by John Stossel examined a Michigan police officer’s penchant for giving out stop sign tickets as a means of increasing his income.
Day after day in Warren, Mich., people wait in a long line to pay traffic fines. Many are there because police say they didn’t come to a full stop at a stop sign. Often the policeman saying that is Officer David Kanapsky.
On last week’s “20/20,” you heard a motorist in court insist that she did come to a complete stop. The judge replied, as judges there often do: “I find Officer Kanapsky’s testimony to be credible. He is an unbiased witness.”
But the officer is not really unbiased. The more tickets he writes, the more overtime he gets. Last year, Kanapsky spent so much time in court he increased his pay by $21,000. Rolling through a stop sign in Michigan puts two points on your driving record. That hikes your car insurance premium. Fighting the ticket could cost even more. So to avoid the points and legal fees, most people plead guilty to a lesser offense: impeding traffic. The court sounds like an assembly line, ” … no points … $135 … “
Last year, the town made half a million dollars from such fines. Some drivers told us it “seems like a moneymaking scam.”
The city denies it, but Stossel is skeptical:
[Police Commissioner William] Dwyer denied the tickets were a moneymaking scam. He said he didn’t think it odd that Kanapsky wrote thousands of tickets. “It’s not unusual for a traffic officer to write 10 to 20 traffic violations a day, if not more.”
Please. I’m all for highway safety, but I suspect that America’s roads have too many rules, and that gives cops too much arbitrary power to harass people or profit off them. As the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao-Tse said, “The more laws that are written, the more criminals are produced”.
At the end of the article, Stossel references recent accident statistics that poke holes in the “it’s for safety” argument:
Remember the stop sign in Warren, Mich., where Kanapsky wrote many of his tickets? It’s been changed to a yield sign. One result: fewer accidents.
Police say, “[B]etween Jan. 16, 2008, and May 21, 2008, there have been no accidents reported. During that same time frame in 2007, there were four crashes reported.” Good. Let’s get rid of more signs.
And to all the cops who eagerly punish us for doing what they do, give me a break.
You can view the report from the local news station that originally broke this story below:
Additional Note: In November of last year, the city of Warren made our list of the worst speed trap cities in the United States.
Other Related Articles
- 8 Questions About Traffic Tickets That Politicians Never Answer
- Jericho, Arkansas: Pay Your Ticket Or Get Shot
- Georgia City Rakes In $1,136 In Traffic Ticket Fines Per Resident
- Why Did It Take Nearly 30 Years To Fix A Simple Speed Limit Sign?
- Avoid Speeding Tickets: The Value Of A Good Radar Detector
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.)
Yes sir re bob!
WARREN and CLINTON TOWNSHIP COPS are just awful for this kinda thing…They love to write these silly ass traffic tickets. There has to be a quota to fill or better yet, Im sure they have to write the tickets or lose their job because they are letting more and more of them go each month it seems like. So if writing tickets generates more income for the state they can afford to pay them. Logical. But it has to stop, and soon enough they will get their just deserves.
WARREN ESPECIALLY!!! *cough* *cough* Mr. Stratford
I just read this statement above:
“Remember the stop sign in Warren, Mich., where Kanapsky wrote many of his tickets? It’s been changed to a yield sign. One result: fewer accidents.
Police say, “[B]etween Jan. 16, 2008, and May 21, 2008, there have been no accidents reported. During that same time frame in 2007, there were four crashes reported.” Good. Let’s get rid of more signs.
And to all the cops who eagerly punish us for doing what they do, give me a break.”
What a joke. This site is very good at promoting things that mean nothing and try to make them into something.
Accident rates at one location during the winter months means very little. It is said that the accident rate went from 4 accidents down to 0 accidents for the same few week period in the winter season. It could mean as little as having an ice storm one winter and not the next. You have to be kidding if those kinds of statistics mean anthing.
You’re only replying that way because you’ve never been unjustly accused of something you didn’t do. The officers in Warren, MI are trying to up their pay, and they have done worse things than writing unnecessary speeding tickets! If you’ve never been a victim of it, what would you know about it?
africkin american you say that everyone should be driving 80+ mph to make it safer so that everyone is driving the same speed. That is not going to happen. So if you are going to have many trucks and many cars driving 10 to 20 mph slower than that it would only make sense for the “fast drivers” to slow down to a more consistent speed. You blame the slow drivers for problems but it is the 80 mph to 85 mph default driver that causes as much and sometimes more problems. Weaving through traffic as you say. Also you say that the slow drivers need to keep right. There are 100s of thousands of interstate miles that have only 2 lanes. There will be 60 mph to 65 mph cars and trucks on the road along with cars and trucks driving 70 mph. Where does that leave vehicles that are driving 80 mph to 85 mph? I will tell you if you do not know. Weaving through traffic and tailgating.
2,842 soles; that would mean 1,421 people
assuming each person has two shoes, right?
From a guy with 18 years of big city and OTR driving — and whose default highway speed is 80-85:
1) what speed is “safe” is depends on the driver and the conditions. I know the State can ill tolerate individual differences among people, but the fact is some folks simply are capable of driving faster than others. Everybody is not a newly-minted 16-year-old driver or an 80-year-old great gramma, or a distracted soccer mom with four kids in the back of the van. Road conditions vary depending on weather, etc., and it’s best that each individual driver exercise the judgment to deal with those conditions as they arise. Not to slap on everybody unrealistic speed limits made more for 16-year-olds or 80-year-olds than for the majority of the population.
2) “Speed kills” only if you collide with something.
You’re not likely to collide with something when you’re on open road in good conditions — or even in heavy traffic, as long as it’s of uniform speed. If everyone’s going 80, you can’t hit each other.
You’re a lot more likely to collide with somebody driving more slowly.
It’s far safer to have at least one lane where everybody’s at high speed, than forcing faster drivers to weave through several lanes of vehicles all going a hodgepodge of speeds.
Every driver knows how cool it feels when traffic is flowing at the same speed. It’s almost a mystical oneness with the other vehicles.
Then you see it coming up ahead. One idiot is sitting in the fast lane doing 60 and another’s in the middle lane doing the same. They could easily be over in the right lane, but simply don’t have the consideration to do so. It spoils everything. Suddenly, you either have to slam on the brakes or do some fancy ducking and weaving — and *that’s* where accidents happen.
Smooth unimpeded traffic flow, at whatever speed, is not only safe but is the most logical and efficient way to use a roadway — rather than having a mile-long clump of traffic here, then a mile of open (i.e., wasted) road, then another clump and so on. Roads are often likened to arteries. When this sort of thing happens in your literal arteries, you’re gonna be treated to a “grabber” real quick.
The answer to this is bringing back — and enforcing — the concept of fast and slow lanes. My dad, who never had an accident in his life, taught me on my first long-distance trip at the age of 17. How hard would it be to have signage designating one (or more) lanes as 65 mph, and another as 75+? Or simply more of what we already have: “Slower Traffic Keep Right” and “Left Lane For Passing Only”?
Just as in any other sector of life, it’s foolish to tell people how fast they can or can’t move. Let the slow be slow. Let those who can, go faster. I have concluded that the national speed limit policy, whatever the pretexts under which it was instituted, is kept in place simply as a handy way to instill fear, self-limiting behavior and conformity to arbitrary dictates on the roadways and off. It is those of us who are more individualistic who *are* more likely to speed. So the law covertly targets individuals and free-thinkers and marks us for punishment. That’s why I recently suggested over on another blog that if people want to overthrow tyrannical government, they should start with disregarding ridiculous and petty laws — such as many traffic regulations — whenever the deem it possible and wise to do so.
[...] it wasn’t until someone drew my attention to this link that I understood the full extent of what this whole racket is about. Yes, it’s about money. [...]
A little off-topic, but I have on more than one occasion been blown off by 911. In fact I’m to the point now that unless it’s a medical emergency, I won’t bother.
The most recent occurrence a few months ago, I’m in my house watching TV when I notice the police chopper overhead and a bunch of flashing lights outside. Then the unmistakable sound of someone hopping the fence and tripping over my AC unit.
I called 911 to report that the person the police are chasing is in my yard. I offered to lock my dogs inside and let the officers into the yard.
The 911 dispatcher would have none of that; she asked me to go outside to get a description of the person!
I just let the dogs out and the guy hopped back over the fence.
You’re so right! It’s awful! Some guy was following me one day, and I called the police. The operator told me the guy was a security guard from the mall! How would she know who he was? I hadn’t even described him to her, and she asked me what color I was! What does that have to do with some scuzzball trying to harass me? It was on Easter Sunday last year! I should have sued them, but….
The person who told you to go “F” yourself should be FIRED.
Every 911 call should be answered to the best of the department’s ability. We are almost always required to answer them all. I understand some departments are busy, but a real and confirmed call MUST be answered.
I’ve seen this kind of attitude before in some agencies. Unless these people are weeded out they will continue to dilute the image of the majority of law enforcement.
Randy writes: {Adam it seems to me if you are afraid of the cops you must be breaking the law. I am sure you do not care if every store is robbed daily in the US or you have total drunks on the road every day.}
What a crock of shit. We know that we cannot depend on LEOs to provide protection. In harsher terms, our personal security is up to us. I no longer trust the police and they have given lots of reasons for me not to trust them. Cops do not prevent stores from being robbed but only complete reports after they are robbed. Similarly, cops don’t and cannot keep drunks off the road and have focused their anti-drunk-driving on PR campaigns and collecting lots of money. Now, no doubt, many cops are sincerely motivated by a desire to reduce drunk driving but the system is a failure.
I no longer labor under the delusion that the cops are there to help me. This was brought home very dramatically on 4/29/1992, when the hotel that I was managing was threatened with fire-bombing (back-to-back-to back calls). 911 told us to go F’ ourselves; they were busy. So, we did it ourselves; we protected the building, the guests and the employees; no injuries, one small fire put out immediately. Only when LAPD learned that we had some CBS network executives in house (2 days later) did they send somebody out. Yep, it’s all about the protection.
No, I’m only afraid that the cops are out of control and it’s time for the citizens to reel them in.
“Enforcing man-made laws creates injustice and insecurity as people whom have not caused any harm”…………………………………
What other kinds of laws are there and who created them??
As for not harming anyone, you must be kidding? You truly believe the stop sign/ red light ticket should be reserved ONLY for the person who injures, kills or just damages someone else’s property? Let’s think about obeying the man made law that stated when you fail to stop at the red light you get a ticket because when you take chances like that you take on the responsibility not just for yourself, but someone who is doing what there suppose to do.
Nemo,
“Hey traffic cop, Do a better job? Wow its real hard to do what you do?”……………………..
Are you referring to me? If you are, you have no idea what I do or how difficult my job is.
High School Dropout………………………….
Once AGAIN, nice stereotype. I think I’ll go back to beauty school.
Adam,
however, crime prevention is due to the private sector: locks, alarm systems, and the like.This is what prevents crimes from taking place……………………………….
Locks and alarms? Criminals are afraid of being caught and prosecuted not the size of your deadbolt or decibels of your alarms. Your argument doesn’t hold water. Locks and alarms mean nothing IF there is no one to respond. They break the lock, ignore the alarm.
The police aren’t so hot at prosecuting crime either………………………..
This is an unsupported opinion.
but for people who commit crimes like slowing down at three-way stops…………………………..
Motor vehicle offenses are NOT crimes. That aside, everything is fine, until the guy who slows down, instead of stopping slams into your family member. At that point you’ll want his head!
when it comes right down to it on the particulars, we can’t stand the police. We keep a constant lookout for them when we drive. We dread being pulled over. We know in our hearts that they are out to get us, and represent more of a threat than a security for our freedoms…………………………………….
Did you read this statement out loud to yourself before you typed it? I’m not being wise, it sounds very paranoid. I drive all the time and do not worry about the police NOR do I get stopped giving me the chance to “flash” my badge. It’s not that hard! If I had to guess I believe there are hundreds of thousands of people who’ve never been stopped. What they all have in common is that they stay within the boundaries of acceptable driving habits.
In the end many posters here need to differentiate between traffic cops and patrol cops. More than likely it’s the traffic cops you don’t like. As in EVERY profession there are good and bad people. Everyone knows the guy/gal at the office you don’t like. Police work is no different. The bad apples aside, the traffic aspect of police work is an important function. I’ve met many people who are glad to see the “idiot” driver get pulled over. There can’t be a free for all on the roadways allowing everyone to do as they please. Drivers are going to get tickets, some good, some bad. No one expects everyone to follow all of the laws exactly, BUT the people who don’t want ANYONE telling them how they can operate their vehicles on SHARED roadways are going to have to come to the realization you’re never going to change or abolish the traffic codes.
Adam it seems to me if you are afraid of the cops you must be breaking the law. I am sure you do not care if every store is robbed daily in the US or you have total drunks on the road every day.
The case of Officer Kanapsky raises fundamental questions not only about federal labor law but also about the role of the police in any community. Do they really stop crime? Sure, they arrive after a crime has been committed; they take fingerprints (those only seem to work in the movies) and file reports. In real life, however, crime prevention is due to the private sector: locks, alarm systems, and the like.This is what prevents crimes from taking place.
The police aren’t so hot at prosecuting crime either, but for people who commit crimes like slowing down at three-way stops. Yet we are all somehow under the illusion that the police are the reason we are safe. It is the core mythology of our civic religion.
If you do believe that they do more good than harm, consider the unseen costs. What kind of private alternatives are being crowded out by the very presence of the police?
It is also deeply troubling that most people believe there aren’t too many police but too few. How many are too many? What if one in three people were a cop? One in two? Maybe we should have two cops for every one civilian. How safe we would be! Really, there is an ethos in this country that you can never have too many cops on the street, and the idea of hiring more nearly always garners public support.
And yet, when it comes right down to it on the particulars, we can’t stand the police. We keep a constant lookout for them when we drive. We dread being pulled over. We know in our hearts that they are out to get us, and represent more of a threat than a security for our freedoms.
In the end, we need to realize that the police are like all other government employees: self-interested, living off tax dollars, parasitical on our liberties. The case of Officer Kanapsky shows precisely how and why.
We got Nazis down here in Tampa as well
[Name removed] is a HCSO jackass ticket writing machine!
Judging by his behavior, he would rather write a ticket than actually help someone … helping someone doesn’t bring in the bucks and it apparently doesn’t thrill his dead soul either …
that’s ok, what goes around … comes around.
Believe that! Karma never fails.
Who knows how many times I have seen a stranded motorist on the side of the road, yet watched a COP just pass on by, because they are too lazy to get out and help someone.
The problem is most COPS are HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS and have little intelligence and a huge chip on their shoulders and are pissed off at the world, like we owe them some kind of respect because they are a cop.
Who is the criminal? Not the guy peddeling small quantities of pot! It’s the COP that pulls him over and takes him to jail, but only reports half the pot, because him and his COP buddies smoked the rest!!!
This cop is nothing but a filthy, greedy, slob who abuses his power and hides behind a “badge”. Cops are the last people to help anyone these days. Greedy bastard…I’m so glad I left the oppression of that state. Not that the “police state” does not exist elsewhere. Time to reign in these creeps.
Here in NM we are learning how to do traffic tickets and zoning, pro se. Some people who have won at the state supreme court are teaching others how to follow the rules and win. They have gotten rid of some judges here.
Over $86k a year, that obviously buys a LOT of doughnuts…
Many of you have noted what the entire problem is in your posts, without even realizing it.
Once upon a time we had peace officers in this country. Their job was to ensure that people and property were safe and that everyone worked to get along.
Today we have Law Enforcement Officers. The job of an LEO is to enforce the law, period. An LEO is always looking for someone breaking a law, any law, no matter how ridiculous or whether enforcing that law contributes to the peace and safety of society.
LEOs use their authority as a weapon, and if that weapon isn’t enough they will use actual weapons. Tanks, automatic rifles, sniper rifles, tear gas, shotguns, and on and on.
Since there are so many laws on the books today it is fairly certain that everyone is a law breaker so the LEO can find some excuse to target anyone they desire for any reason.
The purpose of all of this is to create a police state in which all live in fear and submit to the authority of the government.
It seems this is what many desire, especially those that work within government. It is doubtful that we will ever return to a sane and peaceful society again without a complete collapse of the system as it exists.