ticket quotas for denver cycle police

[barncobob]

i dont make this stuff up.

http://cbs4denver.com/topstories/local_story_121234857.html

[steve.foote]

Hmmmm, let's see. 16 tickets per shift, at $150 a ticket equals $2400 per officer, per day. Multiply that times five days and you get to $12,000 a week, per officer. Multiply that by 50 weeks a year and you arrive at $600,000 per officer, per year. With two dozen officers "participating," they are raking in a cool $14,400,000 a year for the city.

 

A couple of quick questions.

 

First, who here is stupid enough to believe that $14,400,000 per year is insignificant? Or that it isn't on some bean-counters radar screen?

 

The second question is if you are an officer who is producing $600,000 a year for your department, how much are they paying you? It might be time to ask for a raise.

[Blake]

Too bad other departments / cities can't follow their lead!

 

While I'd hate to be the one being pulled over (yes, I too speed), I think we as a society have gotten too big for our britches and need to be reined in! The only problem is, most people yap about it being a revenue campaign and sound off accordingly. How often do you hear about a dangerous intersection or highway that's being monitored specifically because of a rise in injury or fatal accidents? They're certainly not doing it so the revenue can go to the families of those involved. Oh wait, that must mean that it's JUST to get money for the city, NOT so we can have safer roads to travel on.....

 

As I'm sure most of you would agree, the things that we see on a daily basis are just outrageous! I think, for some, speeding is a form of false security, and that it leads to further indestructable thoughts and actions (road rage, running yellow / red lights, waiting until the last minute to change lanes / exit, etc., etc., etc.).

 

Patience people! I challenge you to analyze your driving habits and see how much time running that last red light actually saved you (it probably didn't).

 

As much as I know it's not a perfect world out there, I can still dream.

 

Just my $.02, nobody asked.....

[Lawman]

16 tickets per shift is pretty aggressive. Many years ago, when dinoaurs ruled, ticket quotas were common but in Houston where I worked nothng near that number. As years passed ticket quotas seemed to go away for the most part and what we ended up with were many officers that would not write a single ticket all month. That's not fair either..They make the same pay as the officers that do their job. Ticket quotas began to re appear under different names but were still quotas. As with most issues there is merit to both sides. I don't like the idea of ticket quotas but I don't like the idea of people getting paid for nothing either. For an officer assigned to traffic duty to work 8 hours and not observe a single traffic violation that warrants citation indicates a problem to me. Sixteen seems unreasonable though.

[GoGo Gadget]

I hate when I get the "revenue generator" comments from people. Where I work, I could write $1mil in tickets and my paycheck would not change. My equipment would not get any better. More people die in traffic from stupid driving than die as a result of drugs or guns. So for me, it is about safety.

 

Whether or not that applies to Denver, you would have to look at their budget and accident rate. Are they in a budget shortfall and the City is putting pressure on the PD to become a source of revenue? Usually not likely in big cities, but not uncommon in little towns with a small tax base. Does their motor squad have a problem with some officers just wanting to ride around all day looking cool, and not actually working? From the tone of the article, it appeared that they had some officers writing 20 a day and others writing only a few. Usually that is why a quota is implemented, to keep them doing their jobs and not screwing around all day on the City's dollar. A cop whose job it is to enforce traffic laws, and does not write several a day is scerwing off. You cannot ride 30 minutes without witnessing 5 or more violations, with at least 2 being ticket worthy.

[Paul Mihalka]

I guess a citation stop is on the average about 15 minutes (my personal experience ) so to write a ticket every 30 minutes a officer has to look for the next possible victim immediately after finishing with one. To me that generates the increased possibility that the really dangerous ones drive by while the officer is constantly busy with minor offenders. IMHO for real safety enhancement catching 8 serious offenders would do more the then writing 16 ten over tickets. It is also very tempting to stop on the side of a road that has a nice long straight, preferably down hill, with a low speed limit, and write a ticket to everybody who drives by.

[smiller]

I guess a citation stop is on the average about 15 minutes (my personal experience ) so to write a ticket every 30 minutes a officer has to look for the next possible victim immediately after finishing with one. To me that generates the increased possibility that the really dangerous ones drive by while the officer is constantly busy with minor offenders. IMHO for real safety enhancement catching 8 serious offenders would do more the then writing 16 ten over tickets. It is also very tempting to stop on the side of a road that has a nice long straight, preferably down hill, with a low speed limit, and write a ticket to everybody who drives by.

All true, and keep that crap up for a while and see what it does to the community's respect for law enforcement.

[DiggerJim]

I could write $1mil in tickets and my paycheck would not change.

But I'd expect that if you wrote no tickets for a few months it would impact your paycheck. I've not seen an argument (backed by data) that LEOs could go ticketless with impunity.

Does their motor squad have a problem with some officers just wanting to ride around all day looking cool, and not actually working?

I find that a very interesting comment. It implies you don't believe that a police officer riding in a car (or bike) is actually working. Does that suggest that you're only working when you're writing tickets? If your ticket writing numbers don't show that you were writing tickets for 8hrs/shift will you be giving your paycheck back? Or were you doing something else while "working"...maybe sitting around in the car looking for work (of the type that involves ticket writing)? Does looking for work (ticketable violators) count but riding around deterring crime not count as work?

 

Studies have shown that police visibility has a significant effect on crime of all types. So, "just riding around all day looking cool" would have the precise effect on crime & safety you were advocating. Everyone knows that when there's a LEO riding in the pack, that everyone slows down (usually below the speed limit in fact). If you really want to slow people down, it would seem to make more sense to be out and about driving amongst them. Then you impact all the people around you instead of just the one getting the ticket. (The others may slow while they pass you and the scofflaw, but 30 seconds later they're back up to speed.)

 

Jim

[tobyzusa]

Sixteen seems unreasonable though.

 

Especially if you are one of the 16.

[keithb]

I'd say it is time to ask for a raise! Based on your numbers if the LEO earns $50K a year he is only earning 8.3% of the "business" he is writing which is less than a stellar "commission" for his efforts. Especially when they put their life on the line everyday.

[Pilgrim]

i dont make this stuff up.

http://cbs4denver.com/topstories/local_story_121234857.html

 

AND

 

Studies have shown that police visibility has a significant effect on crime of all types. So, "just riding around all day looking cool" would have the precise effect on crime & safety you were advocating. Everyone knows that when there's a LEO riding in the pack, that everyone slows down (usually below the speed limit in fact). If you really want to slow people down, it would seem to make more sense to be out and about driving amongst them.

 

Interesting (to me) side note.

 

Last March the city fathers in Yakima put a tax increase on the ballot to fund 28 new officer positions for the Yakima P.D. The P.D. is understaffed, according to state standards of officers per capita.

 

The measure went down in flames.

 

And this week the City Council passed an increase in the amount of fines for traffic offenses.

 

AND

 

As to cops' visibility: when I lived in Puerto Rico I noticed that the state police always drove marked cars, and drove with their single blue roof light going at night.

 

I asked why, and was told that they'd rather prevent than punish. And that's in a place that is always underfunded for anything it tries to do.

 

Pilgrim

[steve.foote]

I'd say it is time to ask for a raise! Based on your numbers if the LEO earns $50K a year he is only earning 8.3% of the "business" he is writing which is less than a stellar "commission" for his efforts. Especially when they put their life on the line everyday.

 

Betta-bop, betta-bing!

 

We'll watch this thread for a few more hours than I'll jump on my soapbox about fines and how they corrupt.

[SWB]

I understand the impetus of a quota. Quota's can be set for almost any job. However, quota's assume that there are predictable metrics. Does a cop actually see 16 violations per shift? Probably. But, what if he doesn't? Can quota's in a law enforcement area pressure a cop's ethics? It could, which is why quota's are generally seen by the public (and I expect a large number of LEOs) as inappropriate for law enforcement.

 

In my mind, those city managers or Police supervisors who claim that quotas are required as a supervisory tool are admitting that they are lousy supervisors. I'm not a LEO, but I've been a supervisor in a similar organization (i.e. ex-military officer). If I were a LEO shift supervisor, you'd see me on the road most of the time working with and being seen by my staff. A good police supervisor doesn't need quotas to manage his officers, in my opinion.

[Tony_K]

I watched a motor CHP brilliantly pull over one car after another. 3 in the time I was crawling along in traffic.

 

What was his reason? It was right after the first of the year only 2 different color registration stickers should be seen on driving cars (orange or green). If he saw a third one (red)

ZAP they got tagged!

Absolutely brilliant.

[Lawman]

In my mind, those city managers or Police supervisors who claim that quotas are required as a supervisory tool are admitting that they are lousy supervisors. I'm not a LEO, but I've been a supervisor in a similar organization (i.e. ex-military officer). If I were a LEO shift supervisor, you'd see me on the road most of the time working with and being seen by my staff. A good police supervisor doesn't need quotas to manage his officers, in my opinion.

 

Being a supervisor in the military is hardly comparable to being a supervisor on a large city police dept. Try supervising some lazy policemen who became policmen because they were too lazy to work a real job who have civil service protection and can only be fired for what they may do ( like shooting the pope) and not for what they don't do..It's a much tougher problem to solve than simply setting a good example and treating them like adults and expecting them to respond accordingly..Trust me...

[Dave McReynolds]

Too bad other departments / cities can't follow their lead!

 

I couldn't disagree more. To me, it is a gross oversimplification of a traffic LEO's job to reduce it to the number of tickets he writes per shift. More, it's an abdication of management's responsibility to ensure that officers are being as effective as possible in promoting public safety.

 

It's very similar to requiring exit examinations in public schools, which I believe is a gross oversimplification of the educational process, and an abdication of the public school administration's responsibility to see that teachers are educating children. It's easy to teach to an examination; it's harder to comprehensively teach a subject. Why is it that the best law schools have a lower pass rate for the bar exam than some lower ranking schools? Why aren't the top law firms lining up in the placement offices of the schools that have the highest bar pass rates? Because they would rather hire someone who actually learned something in law school other than how to pass a test.

 

By the same token, I'm sure it's hard to look at a community and decide what approach works best to promote public safety. You open yourself to criticism when you try an innovative approach that doesn't work and needs to be changed. You open yourself to more criticism and possible accusations of favoritism if you manage according to something other than a purely objective standard; if you make value judgements as to the performance of one officer vs another. So why don't we who are entrepreneurs manage our own businesses according to purely objective standards? Because it would doom our businesses to certain failure and we know it!

[Carnadero]

i dont make this stuff up.

I suspect that had this not been brought to light by the reporter, rumors of a quota system would be simply denied by the Denver PD as untrue.

[beagle]

I live in Michigan, and, except for drunks and drag racers, anyone who goes to court "wins" you get a reduced - pointless offence and court costs, which = the origional ticket amount. THis is BS, not safety oriented. Frankly, I thing quotas are fine, but lets swich the focus. How about looking for a holes who tail gate bikes, unsafe loads on trucks, and parts about to fall off cars - legit concerns. While we're at it, maybe all cops and public officials should spend some time on a bike to see the real public safety issues as we see them. Just my 2 cents

[SWB]

In my mind, those city managers or Police supervisors who claim that quotas are required as a supervisory tool are admitting that they are lousy supervisors. I'm not a LEO, but I've been a supervisor in a similar organization (i.e. ex-military officer). If I were a LEO shift supervisor, you'd see me on the road most of the time working with and being seen by my staff. A good police supervisor doesn't need quotas to manage his officers, in my opinion.

 

Being a supervisor in the military is hardly comparable to being a supervisor on a large city police dept. Try supervising some lazy policemen who became policmen because they were too lazy to work a real job who have civil service protection and can only be fired for what they may do ( like shooting the pope) and not for what they don't do..It's a much tougher problem to solve than simply setting a good example and treating them like adults and expecting them to respond accordingly..Trust me...

 

LOL.. well, that comment provoked a bit of discussion. Guess you would know more than I on that particular issue.

 

 

I'd be more concerned with the supervisor too lazy to leave his desk and get into the field. But there are different situations and different management styles, but my main point is that quota's are more of a CYA or revenue tool, not a real management tool.

[Lawman]

"not a real management tool."

 

Agreed..It's at best a very poor management tool and when used to address poor performance only addresses the symptom and not the real problem...

[Neil Jones]

As to cops' visibility: when I lived in Puerto Rico I noticed that the state police always drove marked cars, and drove with their single blue roof light going at night.

 

I asked why, and was told that they'd rather prevent than punish. And that's in a place that is always underfunded for anything it tries to do.

 

Pilgrim

 

I saw this phenomena in Mexico last year. Cops at night with low-intensity blue lights flashing as they cruise the streets. Makes a lot more sense than unmarked cars.

[bakerzdosen]

Just my 2¢.

 

I agree with the "poor management tool" statement.

 

My experience with quotas (where the results are really dependant upon other forces out of your control) is this: Sometimes you have a day that forces you to cut corners to make the quota. Others, you make the quota half-way through the day. People that didn't need the quota to begin with will be fine. Those for whom quotas are used will take the rest of the day off.

 

I personally think that quotas are a bad idea and would vote against any police department that implemented such a quota, but alas... it's not a democratic thing like... say a sheriff or judges.

[ericfoerster]

I saw this phenomena in Mexico last year. Cops at night with low-intensity blue lights flashing as they cruise the streets. Makes a lot more sense than unmarked cars.

 

 

I have both marked and unmarked cars. While I agree the marked cars make people "feel" safe, it is the unmarked cars that actually catch the criminals most of the time. If the bad guys see you coming with a flashing light they just don't run away. They usually hide until you pass and

go right back to work.

To be effective it takes a mixture of proactive and reactive police work to keep the peace.

Just an FYI; my unmarked guys write 3 times as many tickets too.

[tallman]

So what.

If everyone in Denver drove the speed limit for 2 weeks the whole thing would go away, right?

Or, is it possible they would find other violations to ticket?

I wonder...

[Quinn]

I've always felt that seatbelt laws and inspection stickers were started just to give LEOs an excuse for probable cause to pull over suspicious people. On Virginia back roads, having an out of state plate makes you suspicious and not having their inspection sticker in your car window gives probable cause.

[creekstone]

i dont make this stuff up.

http://cbs4denver.com/topstories/local_story_121234857.html

There's commonly a mc cop (or 2) working Pena Blvd, the long stretch to the airport. Every time I go to Denver, I marvel that the city wants the last thing visiters to remember to be a speeding ticket. Ya'll come back now, ya hear!

[motorman587]

16 tickets in 8 hour shift. A good motor officer will double that. Most motor officer enjoy traffic enforcment and should not be a problem as long as that is all they do. My unit does some much other activities as in "Battle of the Belts", childseat check points, teaching, displays at the Capital, which we do all the time.

 

Also now there are ticket prints. You swipe the driver license and hit print. More than one ticket to a driver is common now. I have doubled my seatbelt, insurance and registration tickets, with the speeding ticket. In Florida we can no stop for seatbelts alone.

[scottie_boy]

My biggest problem with the defense of speeding ticket quotas is that they say it has to do with public safety. Its wrong to use speed as a measure of safety.

I have seen cars driving less than the posted speed limit that were a menace to society because the driver was putting on makeup or turned around in their seat yelling at the kids, etc.. These are the vehicles the cops should be stopping but it's much simpler to sit beside the road with a laser gun in your hand.

Look at the German Autobahns as an example. The police could care less about speed but if they catch you driving erratically because you aren't focused on the road, they will nail you to the wall.

[radar564]

I can see where abuse of the quota system may come into play here. Like motorman, a good motor officer should not have to have a quota system. Given the right tools, like laser that does speed and distance between cars readings, automatic ticket writers (cards swipe) that officer should be able to produce 15 to twenty tickets per day. My primary function is traffic enforcement. During my eight hour day I see school zone lights flash at three different times during my shift.

Well if I write five tickets per school zone, that equals 15 tickets in half of my shift, now I have time to practice evasive maneuvers, emergency braking and other motor officer life saving skills!!!

 

For those officers who find themselves in a number crunch at the end of the month as described by the Police Commander, I have to wonder if the will go for quantity and not quality. Any one can aim a laser/radar and write tickets for five over, but why not go after the folks that are 12 and above, tailgaters, red light runners, and many other driving habits that cause motor vehicle crashes? What a concept.

I once had a commander that told me a trained monkey can abuse radar.

At the time, I wondered what he meant.

15 years later I know the answer and I bet many others out there do as well.

[PRC]

I also agree with Motor and Radar...If you think about it, 2 contacts (citations) an hour is VERY easy to do. People who drive like idiots are a dime a dozen. After 19 years on the job, I still don't get why people get on us LEO's for traffic enforcement. If you get sick, you go to the Doctor. You expect him to do his job everytime..or the plumber who comes to your home to fix a pipe...so why not the LEO doing his job???

 

Things that make ya go hummmm.....

[bakerzdosen]

See... in an ideal world, we wouldn't need LEO's. We just wouldn't. Of course, we wouldn't need Lawyers or Doctors either...

 

We obviously don't live in that world, which is good because pretty much none of us would be necessary.

 

But we live where we live and honestly, I think we have a pretty good thing going. I agree (and I personally tend to not be too hypocritical about this) with the idea that you can't get on an LEO for properly doing his job.

 

What I do disagree with are the laws that they're enforcing. Oh, I've got NO problem with a <20mph speed limit in school zones or 25mph in residential areas. Those get a big from me and I'm honestly very good about obeying them.

 

I just simply have a problem with the speed limits on many major US roads and highways. They don't really "jive" with my own personal sense of logic. Maybe I'm just too enamored with the German transportation system (yes, including the expenses and difficulties of getting a license), because THAT to me just makes sense. (For those of you who haven't spent much time in Germany, they are VERY strict about residential speed limits. I don't think I've ever seen someone exceed the 15kph limits but much in the smaller villages, so it's probably an attitude thing too.)

 

 

However, I'm obviously not in the majority, and as such, changing those laws just isn't something that's going to happen any time soon. So, I deal with it. Maybe people will decide they want a change, maybe not... Until then, I can either obey the laws or suffer the consequences.

 

I'm not about shooting the messenger.

 

I'm also pretty sure that our local police department has a quota system too. But fortunately their quotas aren't nearly that high.

[scottie_boy]

I also agree with Motor and Radar...If you think about it, 2 contacts (citations) an hour is VERY easy to do. People who drive like idiots are a dime a dozen. After 19 years on the job, I still don't get why people get on us LEO's for traffic enforcement. If you get sick, you go to the Doctor. You expect him to do his job everytime..or the plumber who comes to your home to fix a pipe...so why not the LEO doing his job???

 

Things that make ya go hummmm.....

 

 

I have no problem with you pulling over people driving like idiots,as a matter of fact, please pull them over so that the roads are safer for motorcyclists.

That being said, I have seen people reading the newspaper while driving and countless other stupid things. Go after those people instead of sitting at the bottom of the hill by my house because you know vehicles tend to speed up because of good ol' gravity.

[KMG_365]

I have seen cars driving less than the posted speed limit that were a menace to society because the driver was putting on makeup or turned around in their seat yelling at the kids, etc.. These are the vehicles the cops should be stopping but it's much simpler to sit beside the road with a laser gun in your hand.

Unfortunately, for the Motors as well as us it is precisely those things that are easily enforced (and easily sustained in the courts) that GET enforced. Witness the bans on "motorcycles" as a whole in certain residential areas (like the 17-Mile Drive) simply because it's easier to enforce a ban on ALL motorcycles than have someone continually challenge (and likely win) attempts to enforce a sound ordinance violation.

[velomoto]

Yikes! Talk about a bunch of whiners...

 

I regularly drive the highways thru and around Denver and I can tell you there is no shortage of people to pull over for driving 10 or even 20 over the limit.

 

Perhaps I'm a minority around here, but I firmly believe in "owning my own sh!t". It really is a simple concept - I screw up and I pay the price. Sure, gravity does accelerate my vehicles down hill but part of being a good driver is controling my vehicle.

 

Yup, Pena' Blvd. has always been a favorite place for speed traps. The city actually raised the speed limit from when the Pena' first opened, but people still run late getting to the airport and try to make up lost time on the highway. Guess it's a real bummer to not only get the ticket, but to also miss your plane.

 

If ya don't like the concept of people getting tickets for breaking the laws, instead of whining about how unfair and useless a quota system is, either drive the speed limit or avoid areas where you think they have quota systems.

 

As for those who believe tickets are some sort of pot of gold for the city of Dever, a thorough analysis of the costs associated with each ticket would probably prove they are at best marginally profitable. My guess would be that the tickets simply help subsidize the expenses for the LEO's, clerks, judges, etc. etc.

 

We all want safer roads out there and the laws were made with safety in mind - not as an instrument to generate revenue. The sad fact is that without enforcement the laws won't get obeyed.

 

Greg

[steve.foote]

As for those who believe tickets are some sort of pot of gold for the city of Dever, a thorough analysis of the costs associated with each ticket would probably prove they are at best marginally profitable. My guess would be that the tickets simply help subsidize the expenses for the LEO's, clerks, judges, etc. etc.

 

Finally! I knew it was just a matter of time.

 

I'm out romping in the dirt right now, but I'll be back with my soap box in a couple of hours. Don't go nowhere.

[MotorinLA]

Why is everyone obsessed with speeding tickets?? Speeding is usually the bread and butter of agencies that primarily patrol highways. Speeding tickets make up a fraction of the citations I issue on a daily basis. There are a plethora of violations to pick from as a motor officer (just open any Vehicle Code if you don’t believe me…).

 

Food for thought:

Municipal police agencies receive only a fraction of the money generated by their traffic citations (in my city it is less than 10% of the fine), so the revenue argument doesn’t hold up.

 

Research has shown that the more tickets you write, the fewer traffic collisions occur. When people fear getting a ticket, they drive more carefully and follow the traffic laws more strictly. For example, if I park my car inside an intersection, everyone stops for the posted stop sign. However, if I “hide”, less than 15% of the drivers actually come to a complete stop. Most traffic collisions can be attributed to some kind of traffic violation on the part of the party at fault in the collision (they are called collisions, NOT ACCIDENTS, for that very reason). Thus, more tickets = safer roads.

 

P.S. warning don’t work! (More research…)

 

Why is it that minimum work performance levels are expected and accepted in the private sector, but when it is applied to traffic enforcement officers it is automatically labeled “Quotas”?

 

Note: We are called traffic enforcement officers, so no "I shouldn't be out arresting any REAL criminals"... Motor officers are TRAFFIC OFFICERS, thus, if I stop you, there will be a ticket coming in the very near future.

 

My angry $.02.

[David]

Why is it that minimum work performance levels are expected and accepted in the private sector, but when it is applied to traffic enforcement officers it is automatically labeled “Quotas”?

 

Because if you could show us that writing speeding tickets for 10-20 over was the best investment you could make in promoting traffic safety, we'd quit whining.

[Redbrick]

Quote:

Why is it that minimum work performance levels are expected and accepted in the private sector, but when it is applied to traffic enforcement officers it is automatically labeled “Quotas”?

Quote:

 

Good point...If warnings were almost always given behavior would not be altered....Nobody likes getting a ticket but fear of punishment is the prime deterent to bad behavior, no doubt about it...

 

Phil.........Redbrick

[DiggerJim]

Research has shown that the more tickets you write, the fewer traffic collisions occur.

Could you point me to that study? I can't find reference to one like that but would love to read the research.

When people fear getting a ticket, they drive more carefully and follow the traffic laws more strictly. For example, if I park my car inside an intersection, everyone stops for the posted stop sign. However, if I “hide”, less than 15% of the drivers actually come to a complete stop.

I think that argues for visibility not hiding then. If you're visible at the intersection everyone stops. If you're hiding, then most of your time is spent either hiding (and not having any effect on the stopping rate) or through the intersection somewhere that you end up after engaging the perpetrator and getting the stop -- i.e. not in the intersection. If you are able to stop the guy within sight of the intersection then you'll have the effect of visibility on all those other drivers. If not, you'll have the effect of the ticket on just the one who gets it and those who pass you (but who don't know why you tagged the guy) -- but not those who chose a different direction at the intersection.

 

Which affects more people, causing more complete stops & thus more safety?

 

Jim

[steve.foote]

Alright, I’m recharged. Flogging the DRZ for hours in sugar-sand tends to wear one out. Fun, but tiring.

 

[Dragging out soap box, standing on top]

 

Government is responsible for providing services to citizens as prescribed by law. These government entities are paid for by the taxpayers, again as prescribed by law. The popularly elected legislature sets these laws, the popularly elected executives carry them out, and the judiciary judges them if there is a dispute. Pretty basic stuff.

 

Monetary fines corrupt government. The problem with fines is the profit motive. Profit motivation belongs in the private sector, not the public sector. Yet, somehow, police departments across our country have become “profit centers” for government. This is wrong.

 

Before I go farther, let me be clear about one thing, and I’m going to cut-and-paste this paragraph to anyone who comments that I’m not sympathetic to most of you LEO’s out there. I know some of you, and many of my own local officer’s well, and have the utmost respect for the difficult job you guys do. Without an organized police force, our society would become the Wild West and all order would quickly break down. It is the preservation of your honor and integrity which I am most concerned about and why I continue to beat this drum every time this topic is brought up.

 

When police officers are turned into profit centers, THEY are the ones who suffer, not the bean counters back at city hall. Only city hall benefits from this additional revenue. They may share some of the bounty with the police department which generated it, which is even more sinister, but more than likely, they simply use it for something else. The point is, it is money that should not be there in the first place. It is confiscated property, not revenue raised lawfully through taxation.

 

Obviously, we simply cannot ignore the enforcement of laws like speed limits. There needs to be some form of penalty for disobeying a law. So, what kind of penalty would act as a deterrent for most people while preserving the integrity of our law enforcement community? I think most would agree that the points system on their license is the most motivating penalty of all. It causes the violator to be penalized (the objective) while generating nothing of benefit to anyone else, which removes the possibility of impropriety due to a profit motive. It is the act of penalizing without creating financial gain, for anyone else, which is important here.

 

As a side note, fines have different meanings to different people. Imagine two drivers who were pulled over at exactly the same time, by the same officer, at the same location, for speeding 12mph over the posted speed limit, but a day apart. All of the circumstances are the same and each driver is fined $150. Sounds fair, doesn’t it? Does it still sound fair if the first driver was a top-shelf stock broker and the second driver was a single mother of four, working two jobs? Is the $150 fine the same penalty for each driver? Penalties, such as point’s reduction, community service, imprisonment, etc., have a more universal effect.

 

Think of it this way, when our kids misbehave, we punish them by spanking or grounding them. Not by taking their lunch money and buying a new air freshener for the car.

[scottie_boy]

I am a firm believer in personal responsibliity and I don't have a problem with getting a ticket if I was speeding. My point was that if the LEOs are truly concerned about safety, the idiot driving eratically because he's dialing his cel phone and eating a burrito while driving is more of a safety risk than the person who went a few mph over because he was going down a hill.

[harleyjohn45]

Research has shown that the more tickets you write, the fewer traffic collisions occur.

Could you point me to that study? I can't find reference to one like that but would love to read the research.

When people fear getting a ticket, they drive more carefully and follow the traffic laws more strictly. For example, if I park my car inside an intersection, everyone stops for the posted stop sign. However, if I “hide”, less than 15% of the drivers actually come to a complete stop.

I think that argues for visibility not hiding then. If you're visible at the intersection everyone stops. If you're hiding, then most of your time is spent either hiding (and not having any effect on the stopping rate) or through the intersection somewhere that you end up after engaging the perpetrator and getting the stop -- i.e. not in the intersection. If you are able to stop the guy within sight of the intersection then you'll have the effect of visibility on all those other drivers. If not, you'll have the effect of the ticket on just the one who gets it and those who pass you (but who don't know why you tagged the guy) -- but not those who chose a different direction at the intersection.

 

Which affects more people, causing more complete stops & thus more safety?

 

Jim

 

you are missing the point, ITS THE MONEY. the judge is a brother in law, all the clerks are nieces and nephews. the you have the lawyers and bail bondsmen. you have a feeding frenzy here. i don't think my safety is ever the issue. quit paying them and see how long you are protected. my 2c

[harleyjohn45]

velo:

 

a tax is a fine for doing something right

& a fine is a tax for doing something wrong

[BailyD]

I understand the point of the Traffic Officers. It's hard to explain to someone who doesn't deal with the impact of careless drivers. I know John (FLA motorman) is also part of his department's fatal accident investigation division.

 

I've made mention of this on several different forums: It's a fine line between being anger about a ticket (any ticket) and a catastrophic life changing event for the victim or the at-fault driver. Rarely does anyone go out driving with the intention of killing someone, but when you operate your vehicle in a manner likely to cause injury or death (NOT by your standard or perception of your driving abilities) then it leaps forward from the speeding, stop sign/light, chatting on cell phone, failing to maintain lanes ticket to a whole surreal incident.

 

Traffic Officer see the results of these incidents and yes speeding does contribute. I'm not going to cite studies, just my 15 years and observations. Last week I had a 24 yo drive off the road at 70/40 mph zone. He was killed instantly. NO seatbelt, HIGH speed. He hit a FIRE HYDRANT. Never should have killed him. His speed and lack of belt contributed to a rollover that tragically ended his life.

 

I write summons for all the families who use their 20/20 hindsight to urge me on. I hope no one ever has to change their opinion because a Traffic Officer knocks on their door with horrific news. Money never enters my mind, it's always about safety and I bet the other traffic guys feel the same way.

 

On a side note regarding endless supplies: Marked police car (me) traveling on 4 lane road, 2 in each direction. Driver passes my marked car, on right at 15 over the speed limit? His reply? I saw your car, but I wasn't speeding!! Explain it to the Judge.

[BailyD]

I also have a constant reminder in my town. 34 new roadside memorials erected in the past 3 years. It's hard not to notice them and think about the people you get to know during the investigations.

 

such losses,

[MotorinLA]

RightSpin wrote:

Hmmmm, let's see. 16 tickets per shift, at $150 a ticket equals $2400 per officer, per day. Multiply that times five days and you get to $12,000 a week, per officer. Multiply that by 50 weeks a year and you arrive at $600,000 per officer, per year. With two dozen officers "participating," they are raking in a cool $14,400,000 a year for the city.

 

A couple of quick questions.

 

First, who here is stupid enough to believe that $14,400,000 per year is insignificant? Or that it isn't on some bean-counters radar screen?

 

The second question is if you are an officer who is producing $600,000 a year for your department, how much are they paying you? It might be time to ask for a raise.

 

Interesting in theory…

 

Again I question the source of the information you are providing. I believe the politically correct term for your calculations is “Fuzzy math.”

 

Non-fuzzy math:

Each officer = $600,000 /yr in fines. Revenue collected by city – 10% (most of it goes to the state in California) = $60,000. Salary of traffic officer including benefits/retirement/insurance approx. $80,000 (way below the cost for our city, much closer to $100,000), equipment (you know, those nice BMW motorcycles) = approx. $6,000 ($30,000 sticker price, plus tires/etc. – 5 yr service life), printed ticket books $200, overtime for court $5000.

 

Example total: Revenue $60,000, cost $91,200.

 

Hey, no wonder all those cities are getting fat…

 

 

David wrote:

Why is it that minimum work performance levels are expected and accepted in the private sector, but when it is applied to traffic enforcement officers it is automatically labeled “Quotas”?

 

Because if you could show us that writing speeding tickets for 10-20 over was the best investment you could make in promoting traffic safety, we'd quit whining.

 

What? Haven’t you heard? Speed kills! (It is really a wonder I’m still alive…)

 

Jim wrote:

When people fear getting a ticket, they drive more carefully and follow the traffic laws more strictly. For example, if I park my car inside an intersection, everyone stops for the posted stop sign. However, if I “hide”, less than 15% of the drivers actually come to a complete stop.

I think that argues for visibility not hiding then. If you're visible at the intersection everyone stops. If you're hiding, then most of your time is spent either hiding (and not having any effect on the stopping rate) or through the intersection somewhere that you end up after engaging the perpetrator and getting the stop -- i.e. not in the intersection. If you are able to stop the guy within sight of the intersection then you'll have the effect of visibility on all those other drivers. If not, you'll have the effect of the ticket on just the one who gets it and those who pass you (but who don't know why you tagged the guy) -- but not those who chose a different direction at the intersection.

 

Which affects more people, causing more complete stops & thus more safety?

 

Jim

 

The problem is that you can’t put a manned police car at every stop sign in the nation 24/7. However, when they leave with a ticket, for the next 18 months they’ll slow down through that particular intersection and hopefully lots of other intersections.

[KMG_365]

Speeding is usually the bread and butter of agencies that primarily patrol highways.

 

[ . . . ]

 

Food for thought:

Municipal police agencies receive only a fraction of the money generated by their traffic citations (in my city it is less than 10% of the fine), so the revenue argument doesn’t hold up.

 

For the answer here, I submit Right Spin's thumbnail sketch of revenue:

 

Hmmmm, let's see. 16 tickets per shift, at $150 a ticket equals $2400 per officer, per day. Multiply that times five days and you get to $12,000 a week, per officer. Multiply that by 50 weeks a year and you arrive at $600,000 per officer, per year. With two dozen officers "participating," they are raking in a cool $14,400,000 a year for the city.

Even IF they only get 10% (which is likely very conservative in smaller jurisdictions) can you really claim that 1.4 million dollars wouldn't prick up the interest of anyone who's ever constructed a budget? . . . even for large municipalities?

 

In some of the smaller towns out here in the west (not necessarily in California, think Ely, Nevada ) traffic enforcement revenue widens and paves the streets and keeps the streetlights on. Not sayin' it's right or wrong . . . .

[Mike O]

...First, who here is stupid enough to believe that $14,400,000 per year is insignificant?

No...first, who here is stupid enough to believe you can ride a motorcycle 50 weeks out of the year in Denver?

 

After mounting your soapbox you made the following statements:

- Yet, somehow, police departments across our country have become “profit centers” for government.

- When police officers are turned into profit centers,...

- ...They may share some of the bounty with the police department...

Care to share the data supporting your claims this is occurring in Denver? Or is this speculation on your part?

 

As far as I'm concerned, I'd like to see them DOUBLE the number of citations issued, and double the number of traffic officers. I drove through Denver today and where I saw a traffic officer, folks were driving a whole lot safer. Suits me just fine. As for using 'quotas', if Denver Supervisors deem it a suitable measurement of a traffic officer's job, why does ANYONE else care? I'm betting most folks alarmed by quotas are MORE concerned they might be the recipient of one of these tickets. If you're not breaking the law what do YOU care if there are quotas or not (just like I'll bet LEO's don't care what YOUR job's quota is either).

 

Mike O

[steve.foote]

Nice try MotorinLA, but no donut.

 

While your disection of my numbers seems to make sense, you forgot to inject the contribution to your departments budget by the, um-hm, taxpayers. Taxpayers who, by law, are supposed to be paying the whole share of your budget anyway.

 

Dude, you're missing the point here. You can still enforce the law without fines. You can accomplish your mission, to protect and to serve, without fines. Fines accomplish little more than redistributing wealth. Penalties, without financially rewarding the penalizer, is the key.

[velomoto]

velo:

a tax is a fine for doing something right

& a fine is a tax for doing something wrong