09-01-2020, 03:03 PM
(09-01-2020, 02:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It cracks me up when people try to make this argument "Sure, you can prove police are crooked about SOME things, but they have to be 100% honest about everything else." When it is proven that cops are corrupt about the small things then it is not unreasonable to assume they are also corrupt about big things.
LEO's have discretion as to when they do, or do not, issue a citation. While I agree that these cards are a poor idea they still don't address the point you attempted to make, which is affects a person's criminal record. Since I correctly pointed out that traffic citations are not criminal infractions you're now changing your position. Not unexpected, but tedious.
Quote:But even if it is just for "minor infractions" we all know about the "broken window" theory of law enforcement where minnor infractions are just used as a tool to search for guns or weapons or other contraband that could lead to criminal charges, So just letting people walk on "minor infractions" allows them to escape the other criminal charges that are only discovered through the enforcement of "minor infractions".
Speaking completely hypothetically, which is what you are doing, possibly. Of course if an LEO has a reason to want to search a car you and I both know that one of those cards wouldn't stop them from doing it.
Quote:For example, in the story that Dill linked the guiy was expecting a sobriety test when his friend got pulled for running a stop sign. Thios leads me to believ that there was some probabale cause for a sobriety test. Yet none was conducted. So avoinding a traffic ticket probably led to avoiding a DUI.
It leads you to believe? I suppose that's a flowery way of saying you're guessing. As you are guessing your use of the word "probably" in the last sentence is inappropriate.
