How far is too far?

[P01IC3M4N]

My question as a new officer is, was I out of line? or was this woman over-sensitive? She complained that I told her to get back to her car (not that I was rude, just that I made her go back) and that I shouldn't have asked her if she knew what "stop" meant. I guess she took offense that I challenged her intellect :rolleyes:

you're concerned about that? i'd hate to see what you think of me seeing some of my traffic stops. that lady was nothing. i have my own complaint department at the PD.

[Babysmamadrama]

Don't sweat it partner, I don't ask nicely when people jump out of there car. They are putting me and themselves in danger and who knows what there motive is.

One of the most dangerous moments is that moment when you are just getting them stopped and you are putting your car in park, calling out, taking off the seatbelt, etc. You got to be prepared to exit and be ready to deal with the threat immediately.

I would not fault you for climbing her rack for the stop and then get your blood pressure up. Hopefully your Sgt. told her tough chit and don't ever do that to one of his guys again. She created the whole situation.
Oh BTW, did you write her for the insurance? In Missouri, you don't have insurance, you can get your license suspended until you do so. So she should be thanking you.
As far as the statement, do you know what a stop sign means, it's a valid question. Some people truly don't or have forgotten. The law requires you to make a complete cessation of forward motion of your vehicle. She didn't do and wanted to argue the point. Stop signs are where I get the most arguments because people have been doing them wrong for so long, they think they are right.

[Somebody]

lol, actually, the issue was never telling her to return to her car. There was no question that I did the right thing there, even though that "offended" her as well.

The problem was whether asking her if she knew what stop meant was appropriate. I work on a University, which is essentially a very small city filled with tons of young, liberal minds. It is certainly a different world here.

[coucousis]

There was no need to belittle her by asking if she knew what stop meant. Just issue the cite and let her go.

I agree with TX... You did your job great... except you got into the conversation a bit too far. I beleive that if you make a search within the forum.. you will find a post where someone have explained the seven steps for a basic "no problem" intervention. I read it and it was just great to read it as I recognized my self in some intervention I did... Perfectly normal that you experience things like that ...

Take it with little consideration.... There will ALWAYS be someone complaining about LEO after receiving a citation.

May be someone can help me with the seven step thing and post the link?

Personnaly I now talk as less as I can with an angry driver ... On top in my first year I was not a qualified operator on radar and found my self pulling people over mostly for stop signs.... I don't think there is any other infraction(may be red lights) that will bring that much argumentation. Even my self I would question my self every time I would do surveillance at an intersection... I guess over 95% of all the cars that I see go trough are not making a complete stop. We tried a digital camera in one of our unit last year... when we would offer people to take a look at their action... none of them wanted to look at it... and once they knew we would deposit the video(DVD) as a proof in court... 99% pleaded guilty...

Keep up the good work.

[P01IC3M4N]

i love it when they *****; particularly when i stopped them for speeding. they will ***** for 10 minutes about the hurry they're in.

you should see my latest tactic. REVERSE SPEED ENFORCEMENT. i sit in the median during peak hours and stop anyone driving less than 5 mph below the limit. it's so fun telling them i stopped them for driving too slow. now that will get you some whiners.

did i mention i got the waterworks twice today?

[mcsap]

Officer safety outranks EVERYTHING. Anyone who jumps out of a car will be quickly and sternly advised to get back in their vehicle.

I do a little "roadside drivers ed" but more typically on a young driver or someone who has done something incredibly stupid ( worse than a stop sign vio).

[Samuel]

You guys remember that joke about the difference between "slowing down" and "stopping"? :D

Screw that person and all the people we catch doing the wrong things and not owning up to it! We've got way too many people here in LA that shouldn't be on the road at all - talking about AHOLES (not DUI's)!

Record, record, record! Then play it back later when the POS starts making false allegations about you to your watch commander! FUC& THEM!

[soundwave]

Somebody, I'd say that the question you asked her wasn't out of line. But, seems that you're at a university (ASU, UofA, NAU, etc.) I would suggest making the conversation in your favor as an authority figure. *Remember: I'm not an LEO. lol* If you're going to be getting flack from every yahoo who's currently taking Law 101 (or think they are) you might want to try closing up their conversation totally.

Instead of asking questions, make statements instead. For instance: When the lady got out of her car, tell her to get back in and repeat it until she does it. Tell her that she had rolled through the stop sign instead of coming to a complete stop as required by law (insert the cite of the law here if you want to ;O). Ask for the usuals, go back to your car and complete the stop normally. If you need to ask questions make them simple 'yes' or 'no' questions.

Call it an opinion from my psych classes throughout college, but if the lady didn't learn how to respect an authority figure from her parents then she's going to continue pushing her boundaries until you draw the limit for her. I've used the above method-type many times for many jobs and the best way to get control of the situation established (because it's obviously not there already) is to keep a short leash from the get-go the second she pushes it. Adults (and even children) try to push their boundaries until someone (or something) pushes back. Until they get that push back they will continue to push until <i>they</i> have control of the situation. I think it's pretty easy to figure with being an LEO, that can't happen.

Just my $0.02. Cheers! =O)

[coucousis]

There ya go.... I found it...

But the credit goes to TX.... He is the one that found this...


Originally Posted by txinvestigator1
The Texas Department of Public Safety has a standard 8 step violator contact that is designed to minimize the negative public relations and maintain an adult-adult relationship between the LEO and violator.

Adults do not react well when forced into the child role in an adult-child relationship. When a LEO conducts a traffic stop and acts overly authoritive it causes this relationship.

I was a Police Officer for ten years. I was taught, like most municipal officers, that a LEO must always be in control of any incident. Anytime I was dealing with the public I must be in control. If I asked for a violator's DL, then by-golly I was the boss and they were just going to hand it over with no need for me to offer an explanation.

I often stopped someone and demanded to have the DL and insurance handed over, and when they asked why they were stopped I would tell them AFTER I my orders were complied with. After all, I was in charge.

I rode with a DPS trooper when the new Mustangs came out in the '80's. DPS studied the public reaction and perception of LEO and the effect of traffic stops. For most people, a traffic stop is the ONLY interaction they will have with LE. It is important to realize that these people are, for the most part, adult violators and there is no need to treat them like children or be officious.

The DPS contact goes like this;

1. Greeting. Good morning, good afternoon, etc.

2. Identify yourself. "I am officer Friendly with the Your Town Police Department" In most areas of Texas there are several LE agencies. The ID insures the violator knows who you are and who you represent. it also is the beginning of a process of treating the person as an adult.

3. Advise the person why they were stopped without making it a "you vs them" issue. "You have been stopped for speeding, 70 in a 55." There is no need to hide the reason for the stop, or play a silly guessing game with them by asking them if they know why. The violator should be treated with respect as an adult. Also do not say "I stopped you for speeding". This is NOT about you the officer (parent) catching the violator (child) doing something wrong. It is about their (adult) behavior.

4. Gather the DL and Insurance and whatever else you need.

5. Tell the violator you will return, then move to your position of safety yo write the cite or warning, and run records.

6. Tell the person what action is going to be taken. "Sir, you will be receiveing a citation/warning for speeding." Not not use phrases such as "I am going to cite you" or I am going to give you a ticket". Again, it is not about you punishing them. The courts job is punishment.

7. Take the action. Issue the citation or warning. Explain what the person needs to do. "Sir, please sign next to the x. Signing is not a plea of guilt, it is simply your promise to appear in the JP court within 10 days. The address and phone number will be on the back of your copy. Do you have any questions about what you need to do?"

8. Departure. This is critical. Do not tell the person to have a nice day. Simply thank them for their cooperation, if appropriate, or close by stating "drive safely". This will often solicite a "thank you" from the violator you just issued several tickets to. Then leave. Don't hang around and hash it out.


I know several of the LEO's here will disagree with this. I saw it work, and when I adopted it my traffic stops went much smoother and stress free.

I will also tell you that DPS teaches, and I also tried to follow this logic. I decided before I exited my unit whether to issue a citation or warning. It was not my job to enforce attitudes, nor was that allowed by statute or my departments rules or operations manuals. When you allow it to become personal, you fail to be professional.

**Please note that this is only for your standard traffic stop. All officer safety procedures should be followed, and if the stop turns to anything more than a traffic violation then proper safety, tactical and investigative procedures must be followed. If your sixth sense or whatever you call it makes you feel hinky, do what you gotta do***

Yep, I actually added a step in your quote, number 4, as some officers could not figure out to do that without a specific step for it.

Below is some additional theory:

The 7-step violator contact was created to ease the tension during traffic stops and improve the community relations between LE and the public. It is based on the concept of the ego states of humans.

Adults have three ego states, Parent, Adult and Child. At any given moment each individual in a social aggregation will exhibit one of these ego states. Adults usually are fine when in the role of Parent or Adult, but conflict arises when we are in the child state.

Conflict can be lessened when you, the LEO, do not assume the parent ego in a traffic stop, and treat the violator as a child. If you take the role of adult, rather than parent, it more readily allows the violator to maintain the adult ego state; thereby, offering the best chance of reduced or no conflict.

Imagine the typical reaction of a violator driving along and seeing the red lights in the rear view mirror. He immediately assumes the child ego state with thoughts like, “I don’t know why the speed limit is so low here, my speed is safe”, or “why can’t the cop go find a real criminal rather than bother me!” Then the police officer walks up and demands to see the violator’s license and insurance (or registration depending on your state). Before he will tell you what you did wrong, you must produce the DL and such. What ego state has the officer assumed in this scenario? Now we have a parent-child relationship, full of potential conflict.

The only way to resolve conflict is to speak to the person in an adult-adult mode. This works to diffuse conflict by not allowing the person to get on the defensive and letting them keep their self-respect and save face. Do not make judgment statements regarding the violator’s behavior that caused the stop.

You also want to refrain from statements that make the contact about you vs. them, such as, “The reason I stopped you”. The stop is NOT about what YOU are doing to THEM, but rather the violators conduct. A better phrase would be, “You were stopped for speeding”. “The radar indicated you at 77 in a 65 zone”, etc.

I also believe it IS NOT YOUR JOB TO ENFORCE ATTITUDES. I have read plenty of law and a lot of department manuals. I have never seen where your discretion was allowed over the attitude of the violator. Under most situations, you should have the decision made to write or warn made before you exit your police car. I have warned assholes and written sweet people. Some here will disagree, but IMO, enforcing attitudes is officious and unnecessary to a professional.

I fully stand by this!!!!! :D

[richjorg]

We've got way too many people here in LA that shouldn't be on the road at all

Amen, brother! The traffic cops in the Valley must write an obscene number of tickets. I wish the LAPD wasn't so understaffed, they don't have time to deal with a lot of the traffic issues.

[Somebody]

Excellent, thanks for the post. It is easy to lose sight occasionally when someone throws the attitude out.