Every police chase is a danger to innocent people’s lives. Some chases are necessary, but a broken taillight is not worth that risk.
Every police chase is a danger to innocent people’s lives. Some chases are necessary, but a broken taillight is not worth that risk.
I take serious issue with delivering tickets at home later. The fact that it’s your car is circumstantial. No way to prove you were driving.
You most likely know who was driving your car, and if it wasn’t you, you could identify who it was, but frankly, I don’t like it… Not for a traffic ticket where you’re presumed guilty and have to prove you don’t owe the state the fine… I don’t think it’s a great idea sending cops to a registered owners house in that context… Not with the current standards police are demonstrating.
Edit- don’t chase either… Minor speeding, taillight, ranva stop sign… Let it go ffs
In my country the rules are simple. It’s your car, so you’re responsible.
The owner should’ve fixed the broken taillight, not the current driver.
What country? Do you have annual inspections? That’s easily the right answer to a busted taillight question :)
In the UK, you would receive a letter with the details of the infraction. You can nominate someone else who was driving at the time but it defaults to the car’s registered owner.
And we have annual inspections (the MOT) or your insurance is invalid. You have to be taxed and insured or your car gets impounded.
Does the US not have annual inspections?
Quick edit: This is for things like speeding and other offences caught on camera. I doubt this would apply to a broken light as in the OP.
Same in Belgium and I assume most civilized countries. Either your car is stolen or it is not. If it is, you legally have to disclose that. If it is not, then “maybe I wasn’t the one driving but I’m not going to tell you ;) ;) ;)” is a bullshit excuse, and everyone knows it. You know it, the person you replied to knows it, the judge knows it.
I think there’s a whole-ass essay to be written on the Americans’ relationship to law that leads them to using the stupidest legal arguments like some kind of arcane ward… and actually succeeding.
Hot take: we make fun of sovereign citizens but “speed cameras are unenforceable if you don’t have a 4K picture of me at the wheel of what is unambiguously my car” is basically the same thought process.
In the US inspections are controlled by each state. Some have yearly, some have basically none, and everything in between like only during change of ownership.
So… Don’t chase them. And don’t serve them a ticket at home.
What’s your solution?
I think his solution is to chase. Which is what they did and the results hurt people. My best guess is the rewards are better than the risks. I dunno. I’m just guessing
Let it go…
What’s the premise of the ticket?
The premise is that a broken tail light doesn’t indicate a turn or a stop to other drivers, who should be paying attention anyway… It’s safety, public safety…
So to mitigate the risk of a collision because one of your three brake lights isn’t working, we gotta chase someone? Or in the case of going to their home, we’re gonna pay two cops an hours wage, reduce their ability to do anything else for anyone, and basically convict someone without any process whatsoever (unless they spend the time to contest it, and likely fail anyway just because cop says they did it) on circumstantial evidence?
Apply that to speeding… Apply it to rolling a stop sign… Apply it to 90%+ of the shit that gets ticketed…
The benefit to society for most traffic tickets is negligible at best. Let it go…
This is an extremely naive view. While the cops enforcing the law are almost always corrupt and do it in a corrupt way
The “benefit is negligible” is a mistake. The fact is driving around without brake lights IS a problem, driving without a seatbelt IS a problem, speeding IS a problem. That is why these laws came about in the first place. The facts and statistics are very clear about the increased accidents.
You appear to be assuming that I’m suggesting citations be done away with entirely…
I’m suggesting that a citation doesn’t warrant a pursuit.
I’ll go a little further and say that a “no pursuit” policy isn’t appropriate either (and that sounds contradictory I’m sure, but if you publish it as a policy it becomes an incentive, not good), but a pursuit over a citation is negating, in a huge manner, the safety those citations provide…
Someone fleeing the police is a ridiculously more dangerous condition than an occasional citation getting skipped… how many people flee? 1%? I doubt it’s even that… The statistical deterrence isn’t affected by that, and arguably, the citation won’t have a statistical impact on that fringe group anyway. The reduction in accidents happens in the 99% that pull over and simply pay the fines.
The facts and statistics would be, I’d guess, exponentially more clear about the increased accidents from police chases.
with the current standards police are demonstrating, im not okay with them doing anything…
i meant more, “in a perfect world” kinda sense…
with parking tickets they can’t prov who drove either, so really the car gets the ticket…
the owner has to pay it to keep registration, though…
So what would you do then? Cause obviously the coppers didn’t do very well here.