Not Fair!!!

[jonanthans]

YELLING IS LAME regardless of whether or not it's in the form of a personal attack or not. I think it's clear you've been behaving poorly.

First, who is YELLING? Do you mean typing in all caps, like you did in your quote directly above? Second, my friends are also in law, and they seem to see it the other way. So, who is right? It comes down to o-p-i-n-i-o-n, which is what a forum is designed to discuss. Lastly, I have no personal problems whatsoever with either one of you. Equipment Junkie and yourself are completely entitled to your view of the subject, and I never attacked either of you. I can get along with anyone. Yet, it seemed like you were real quick to threaten to close the thread, when no wrongdoings have taken place, just a difference of opinions. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't that what this forum is for, to discuss ideas and opinions? Food for thought....

[EquipmentJunkie]

The first part of your post doesn't even make sense so I won't address it, your obviously speaking from anger and not logic here. Mu sugestion is to take a break before you say something you regret and Erik sends you to the penalty box for immature behavior.

Department policy violation = administrative discipline = fired, suspended, reduced in rank, ect.

Law Violation = state (government discipline) = punitive damages, loss of rights, incarceration, probation.

You can not be put in jail for going to work, I think your friend knows this and I don't think he told you to ask me that question. I think police officers are a little smarter than that. For the record I do not have a seat belt policy, I do not work at the same department as "your friend" and I am willing to bet the officer who gave you the citation does not work with "your friend" either. Get this through your head, I did not attack your opinion, I merely stated what the law was (which is non-negotiable) and explained the difference between the law and an administrative policy. For some reason you can not get the difference, everyone here has explained it to you more than once. Even if the officer violated policy, which you can not prove by the way, it does not negate your violation of the law. I do not, repeat do not, have an opinion on the subject...I go by the law. If the law changes I will adjust my police work accordingly. Pay your cite and buckle up. You either do not understand or refuse to understand, either way you aren't worth my time anymore. In fact my suggestion is that Erik locks it for you while you still have some dignity left.

[jonanthans]

The reason I do not listen to what you nor the administrator has to say is the officers here in my town say the opposite of what you tell me. So, who should I believe, a cop in California who knows absolutely nothing about the laws here, a board administrator who knows even less about the subject than you do, or my friends who work on the force here? I think i'll go with the obvious choice. Your problem is that someone disagrees with your view, and that obviously makes them wrong, since you must be right about the laws and regulations thousands of miles away.

The admin can lock it at any time, perhaps the reason he hasn't is that he at least has to agree with me on the fact that nothing has been done to justify it, it is all a matter of opinions. And, once you begin to misuse authority to punish individuals for opinions, you kinda lose all credibility for the Board.

[EquipmentJunkie]

And, once you begin to misuse authority to punish individuals for opinions, you kinda lose all credibility for the Board.

Has nothing to do with opinion and everything to do with your attitude my friend and my guess is with you questioning him in public like this that you won't get the result you want but good luck with that! Also if I didn't make it clear with the "" in my previous quotes, I doubt your friends are "dogging" the other officer that badly, I'm calling your bluff. Officers don't make excuses for law breakers and we certainly don't question the decision making of our brothers and sisters when we weren't there and don't have all of the facts. Answer this

"How do you know that this officers department policy is not different?" and this "How can you be absolutely certain without a reasonable doubt that the officer did not have his seat belt on prior to making the traffic stop?" My guess is you can't answer the former and I know for certain you can't answer the latter. End of story. Also if you aren't interested in what we have to say, why do you keep coming back? That's what I thought.....

[Jay-Bird]

I think it is illegal for an officer to pull someone over based on the driver appearing to not have a seat belt on. How does the officer know that there is not a legal medical exemption from having to wear it, or if the driver is also exempt from the seatbelt law for any other reason (as the officer is). It's a Constitutional issue. A cop can't make a stop for a perceived seatbelt infraction alone. There must be a moving violation. The seatbelt ticket is an add-on to the speeder, or the stop sign runner.

[immts007]

jonathans, do you always base your behavior on the behavior of others? Let's leave the officers personal shortcomings real or imagineed out of it.

It makes no difference what he did. None. You breaking the law and being caught for it is what's at issue. You are coming off as very immature here. Seriously. You broke the law. An officer who's job is to enforce the law cited you for it. You deserved the citation. If he broke the law or policy or whatever has no bearing on whether or not you should have been given a ticket. Take responsiblity for your own actions and worry about yourself. As I said before, if you are that concerned about the officers behavior, file a complaint. It's your right.

And I'm sorry, just because you have friends who are in law enforcement who've 'got your back' doesn't really change anything. They could be wrong. Why don't you go down to the precinct headquarters and ask the police chief about it?

[immts007]

I think it is illegal for an officer to pull someone over based on the driver appearing to not have a seat belt on. How does the officer know that there is not a legal medical exemption from having to wear it, or if the driver is also exempt from the seatbelt law for any other reason (as the officer is). It's a Constitutional issue. A cop can't make a stop for a perceived seatbelt infraction alone. There must be a moving violation. The seatbelt ticket is an add-on to the speeder, or the stop sign runner.

The laws differ from state to state, and this has already been discussed. And you can google Louisanna law about it. Louisanna officers can pull people over for not using seatbelts as the primary offense.

[Jay-Bird]

Correct. My bad. I should've said "should be illegal..." - turns out it's a federally mandated state law. (see link below)

I just found the Louisiana law ( http://www.la-legal.com/modules/arti...icle.php?c5/15 ).

[EquipmentJunkie]

Yes as I have said before we are not called law-makers, we are law enforcers and alas as much I would like to I do not have the benefit of choosing which to enforce. There is an appropriate medium to change laws, the middle of a traffic stop is not one of them..in fact it will probably earn you a citation a whole lot quicker, I think this attitude might have played a reason as to why the OP received a cite rather than a warning if his attitude in this discussion reflects that of his with the officers in real life.

[iacas]

Also, please do not try to use me as an example of racist, you obviously feel like that, doesnt mean that I have to.

"Missing the point" seems to be your thing. Nobody called you a racist.

then you attack me and my opinion.

From what I can see, nobody here has attacked you.

You see a difference between department policy and law, well one of my police buddies wants to ask you "whats the difference?"

If you seriously have to ask that question, there's no reason whatsoever to continue this discussion.

Policy != law. It's really very simple and has been explained to you a few times now.

First, who is YELLING? Do you mean typing in all caps, like you did in your quote directly above?

Missing the point yet again. You said you're not behaving immaturely, and I pointed out that YOU'RE THE ONE YELLING. If the reasons why I chose to type in all caps escapes you... then... yeah.

It comes down to o-p-i-n-i-o-n, which is what a forum is designed to discuss.

Your police friends must not be terribly bright if they think that policy = law. Policy and law are two very, very different things.

It's got nothing to do with opinion.

Yet, it seemed like you were real quick to threaten to close the thread, when no wrongdoings have taken place, just a difference of opinions. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't that what this forum is for, to discuss ideas and opinions? Food for thought....

That isn't food for thought, dude. It's not even a crumb.

The thread was going to be closed - and now will be closed - because you got your answers. You refuse to accept them. Policy != law. That's all that needed to be said. Any more than that is just pointless. Heck, anything beyond about the sixth post in this thread was pretty much pointless. What happened to you was both fair and legal. The only illegal behavior was your own.

So, who should I believe, a cop in California who knows absolutely nothing about the laws here, a board administrator who knows even less about the subject than you do, or my friends who work on the force here?

We've given you that their

policy may be to require seatbelts. However, that's not the law .

And, once you begin to misuse authority to punish individuals for opinions, you kinda lose all credibility for the Board.

It has nothing to do with opinions. You lack an opinion in this case because any opinion you have is based on faulty facts. Policy != law.

And since I've repeated myself about ten times now, I'm done, and this thread is done.