More Tickets in Hard Times

[retdetsgt]

In the March issue of "Law and Order" magazine there was an article about how a recent study showed that an increase in traffic stops causes a decrease in the crime rate. Not just in the area where there is high-visibility patrol, but an overall decrease in the crime rate itself.

I looked for a link online but I couldn't find one.

I believe that to a point. But it seems to work in smaller towns than larger cities.

The town I used to live in, east of Portland was small, had a low crime rate and the police were primarily concerned with traffic enforcement. I think that did a lot to keep crime down by making it unwelcome to the Portland thugs who wandered in.

However, because of that, the town experienced a growth surge and the police continued to use the same philosophy and it didn't work. I recall going to some town meetings and trying to tell them the police had to get start looking at other ways. They finally did, but it was about 2 years behind the curve. Consequently, the area where I used to live, which used to be a nice middle class neighborhood is now a real toilet.

The town I live in now is much the same way, the police have time to make a lot of traffic stops and the crime rate here is laughable to someone like me. However, it's growing and it's about 1/4 bigger now than what it was when I moved here 10 years ago. What they're doing now works, but I don't know for how long.

When I worked in Portland, several guys I worked around tried to use the traffic philosophy in their districts and it didn't work for them either. You just got thugs that drove more safely and with fewer vehicle violations.

[AlwaysLooking]

Haha! Great comments AlwaysLooking. This is so true. People act like they have a right to speed. I suppose it's getting ridiculous that police officers are enforcing the law? Sounds like these people need bigger fines. :D

This is one of my pet peeves: People feeling that they have a RIGHT to break a rule because at one point someone cut them some slack and made an EXCEPTION to the rule. People expecting that if they got away with breaking a rule once, then they should get away with it in the future. People expecting that if one person lets them get away with breaking a rule, everyone else should too.

This starts with kids, and sadly, in most cases it never ends. You cut them a break once, and it sets a precedent for the future.

I always tried to be really firm with my kids about rules, and made sure that my wife and I were consistent in enforcing them.

When they were about 12, the younger ones had an 8pm curfew on school nights. "No exceptions." So one night one of my daughters asked me if she could stay out til 10pm "just this one time" because of...blablabla. I agreed and told her this is just a one time exception. She stayed out, had a good time, everything's good.

Two weeks later she asked me to stay out late again, and I said "no" and she threw a fit and told me how "unfair" I was, and how she "hates" me. Well, there hasn't been an exception since. None. And there won't be.

The same with my other kids: If you believe that because I granted you one or two exceptions you have a RIGHT to a permamently extended curfew, well, you're wrong. Out of my four kids only one still enjoys the PRIVILEGE of occasional exceptions. She's the only one who hasn't thrown tantrums and banged doors because she didn't get her way. The others? Too bad, so sad.

Anyway, what I'm really trying to say is that many adults still have that same attitude of entitlement, including when it comes to traffic tickets:

"Officer Johnson only gave me a warning at 15 over. How dare Officer Smith give me a ticket at 13 over! I'll go file a complaint about him. Bastard."

If an officer cuts you a break, say thank you and slow down. Don't take it as an incentive to speed more.

I think if I was a cop, and I got a driver whining about how the officer "last time" didn't give them a ticket, I'd start citing EVERYBODY for EVERY infraction no matter how minor. An infraction is an infraction and there are fine schedules starting at 1 over for a reason.

I just get really pissed when I hear quotes like in that article from people who get their noses out of joint because they're (allegedly) not getting away with breaking the rules as often as they used to. "The cop gave me a ticket for speeding through a red light. Now our 80-year-long friendship is over."

And they are probably the same people who whine about having to pay for cops who do nothing but eat donuts all day. The cop pulled you over and even went through the trouble of writing you a ticket? That's your taxpayer money at work.

Damn it.

[Cat_Doc]

In the March issue of "Law and Order" magazine there was an article about how a recent study showed that an increase in traffic stops causes a decrease in the crime rate. Not just in the area where there is high-visibility patrol, but an overall decrease in the crime rate itself.

I looked for a link online but I couldn't find one.

Sarge,

Do you recall if the article specifically addressed traffic stops or traffic citations?

I have no doubt at all that directed patrol, omnipresence, high visibility, saturation patrol, proactive mission objective (whatever title is used), will have an impact on the criminal element. It's similar to turning on the lights and watching the roaches scurry.

We had to do that in a "projects" area after a shift rotation by a squad of ROD's had neglected the area and only answered calls for service.

But it was not the number of "citations" that addressed the issue and settled things down. It was the contacts and resultant criminal enforcement that caught their attention. Traffic stops were utilized for certain, but it was cuff and stuff that worked.

As I mentioned in another thread, I do not have a problem with traffic enforcement.

I do, however, have a problem with someone finding a fishing hole and focusing on the number of tickets issued to the detriment of attacking criminal activity in one's assigned district. The BG's watch and figure out real quick where someone is sitting static. They also notice when someone does not, for whatever reason, venture into certain areas for proactive patrol work.

Again, as mentioned by Jim; it all depends on the activity in your area. If it is sleepy, then by all means do something to earn your pay; but to ignore a neighborhood going to crap while racking up tickets on the main drag is not effective police work.

[mobrien316]

Cat Doc,

I believe the article mentioned traffic stops rather than tickets issued.

I tend to look at traffic activity as something that's always there to do. If you are doing something else, fine, go do that. If it's a choice between sitting in the break room for two hours watching ESPN or going out and doing traffic, go do traffic.

As I wrote in another thread, I issue far, far more warnigs than I do tickets. But all those traffic stops net me a good number of DUI's, drug arrests, and arrests on outstanding warrants.