Unmarked Police and Photo Enforcement

[US 41]

I think it is pretty dirty to ticket people with an unmarked cop car or with photo enforcement (speed cameras, red light cameras, etc). I have a problem with both, but I think photo enforcement is the worst of the two as they can ticket people all day and have no limit. If the speed limit is 55 and everyone is going 70 they can literally ticket thousands of people in just one day. The cameras of course don't realize that the guy going 55 is actually a moving hazard on the road. All police cars IMO should have to be marked. The only reason they are not marked is because they are just trying to collect more money from drivers on the road. I have never been pulled over or caught by a camera, but I think it is ridiculous how bad it has gotten on the road. The government is literally trying to extort money from drivers on the road. I absolutely hate the red light cameras. Anytime I'm anywhere that has them I often wonder if I will get a ticket for turning right on red. I assume not since there is no signs that say no turn on red, but I always wait until the light turns green just to be safe. If the government is going to ticket people they need to use marked police cars only. Just my thought.

[jeffandnicole]

Guaranteed not everyone is going 70 in a 55 zone.  Otherwise, no one is passing anyone else.  And while the speed difference is a concern for accidents, I can also guarantee you that most people going 55 aren't going to be rear-ended.

Unmarked cars are good because many drivers will become the world's most perfect driver when they spot a marked car.  With unmarked cars, those people will continue to drive without regard for anyone's safety.  Now, pulling someone over is always a concern because that person can't be certain the car is a cop car.  Most unmarked cars have plenty of lights, and many departments are moving to the stealth cars which barely have a visible emblem.  However, when I've seen the lights flash on those cars, you can be certain it's not some creep that decided to install literally dozens of lights all over the vehicle!

[Brandon]

Neither should be used.  A marked police car should be considered part of the uniform of the officer performing traffic duty.  There are far, far too many jackasses out there posing as police in far too many unmarked Crown Victorias and other such vehicles.

Photo enforcement is just a bad idea, period.

Also, they should get the hell out of the median.

[nexus73]

Managing traffic flow as opposed to revenue enhancement is my idea of how to patrol streets and highways.  Add in good designs to hold down the boobytrap factors that cause accidents.

Back in the mid-Seventies, the CHP said "If you pass us you get a ticket!".  That deal let them shepherd clumps of traffic during rush hour quite nicely and the road flow was smoothed out.  What an improvement that was over simply sitting by a freeway ramp ready to zoom up on an isolated speeder!

Traffic generally regulates itself.  Mark a road 70 MPH, add lots of vehicles during rush hour and no one is going to go fast.  Mark a road 55 MPH, have it be empty and straight with high visibility conditions, then someone can go 70 MPH with little adverse effect to safety.  Change from speed limits to recommended speeds where possible. 

Rick

[hbelkins]

I'd rather the cops concentrate on real crime. I'd rather have a cop parked across from a suspected drug dealer's house than driving up and down the interstate running radar.

[wxfree]

I'm not a fan of either.

If a marked police car makes people drive better, then it's doing its job.  Getting people to drive better, not collecting revenue from those who don't, should be the goal.  I've heard that in some places police cars are parked and abandoned by the side of the road (no cop, no camera, no tickets) to get people to slow down and drive better.  Using unmarked cars shows that they want people to drive badly and pay fines more than they want road safety.

I don't like cameras overall, because they give bad incentives.  I've heard some cities shorten yellow light times, which makes the intersection more dangerous.  Increased yellow light times are a way to make some intersections safer without cameras.  On the other hand, I've seen extreme disregard for red lights.  Some place on the north side of Dallas, it might have been on Northwest Highway, I saw traffic keep moving through a red light for nearly half of the red cycle.  I couldn't believe it, but everyone just waited for it to be over as if it was normal.  In such extreme cases, maybe cameras are the lesser of two evils.

Disclaimer: I have about a half-million miles and 20 years of driving experience.  I've never been in an accident or had a traffic ticket.  I did once get a speeding warning while not paying attention driving down a hill.  I make complete stops at stop signs in the middle of nowhere in places with no traffic.  I believe we have a societal obligation to obey the laws and I do so unless it's clearly unsafe to.  I'm not a scofflaw who resents getting caught or wants to get away with it.  My views are based on the belief that government should be transparent and ethical, and should be motivated by public good.

[empirestate]

I've heard that in some places police cars are parked and abandoned by the side of the road (no cop, no camera, no tickets) to get people to slow down and drive better.

I know of a small NH town that does just this. When the police department (which has only 3 or 4 members) bought a new patrol car, they requested (and got) voter approval to keep the old one in their inventory for just this purpose.


iPhone

[SP Cook]

First, of course, it is a scientific fact that speed does not kill, or even cause accients.  As the awful NMSL has been finally repealed, EVERY SL increase has resulted in reductions of traffic mortality and morbidity.  Scientifc facts.  So, of course, what we really should do is continue to raise the SLs until the $$ are not there and jurisdictions "invest" their (our) money in fighting serious crimes.

As to unmarked cars, these should be illegal everywhere in every circumstance.  The papers are full of stories of rapists and other criminals who capture their victims by posing as a traffic cop.  In  fact when you enter a state, one of the signs should proudly infom you NOT to stop for an unmarked car in any circumstances. 

As to the unconstitutional crime of photo cop (which, I am proud to say is 100% illegal in WV), science again has taught us that this device actually CAUSES accidents, at least in the yellow light scenario, because potential victims stop short and get rear ended more often. 

So, of course, both of these froms of random taxation should be illegal.  Actually so should the use of marked cars.  Until we solve problems like rape, murder, drugs, illegal aliens, robbery, kidnapping, extortion, and so on.  You know,  SERIOUS crimes.

[jeffandnicole]

While there are stories about people getting pulled over by unmarked cars, I'm not finding "the papers are full of stories" like this.  Occasionally they happen, but really, not that often.  Now, I've seen email forwards and Facebook stories about it, but many times they aren't legit. For example, there's one story where someone was supposedly followed by an 'unmarked' car with flashing lights for miles. These criminals aren't going to hang onto a victim forever...if the person doesn't stop in short order, they're going to turn off the flashing light and leave.  But people see these email/Facebook generated stories and think they are true, even though there's no actual evidence it occurred.

Even if a state - or the entire country - bans unmarked cars, that's not going to stop some criminals from attempting it.  Some victims are going to see a flashing light in their rear view mirror and pull over.  It's like many other issues: You can ban the lawful use of something, but that's not going to stop criminals from utilizing something unlawfully.  It's up to the victim to have enough understanding to just keep driving if they feel they shouldn't be pulled over.

[cpzilliacus]

Unmarked police vehicles are fine, as long as the officer or officers inside wear clearly recognizable police uniform clothing.

Speed cameras are also fine, but not for purposes of collecting a commuter tax or toll. 

Placement or installation of speed cameras should not ever be under the control of county or municipal elected officials, and before such a camera is installed, a traffic engineer (with a P.E. license) should be required to visit the location and determine if the posted speed limit is appropriate and an conduct an analysis determine if speeding is a problem - the P.E. should work for (or be contracted to) the state DOT, with the county or municipal government paying all associated costs to the state to assure that the P.E. does not submit a report that results in a "disappointed" or angry customer if a proposed speed camera is rejected.

Once the state approves a speed camera, and the state DOT (ideally someone with the title of secretary or commissioner or administrator) signs-off on its placement, then it can be installed for a fixed time period (maybe 12 or 24 months). 

Contracts with companies operating these devices must be fixed-price, and the amount paid to the contractor should never be a function of how much fine revenue is collected.

My feelings about red light cameras are about the same.  As long as there is a problem there, and the signals are timed to comply with ITE recommended practices for yellow phases and clearance intervals, I am fine with them.

[cpzilliacus]

As to unmarked cars, these should be illegal everywhere in every circumstance.  The papers are full of stories of rapists and other criminals who capture their victims by posing as a traffic cop.  In  fact when you enter a state, one of the signs should proudly infom you NOT to stop for an unmarked car in any circumstances.

Connecticut might not agree with you.  Nearly every Connecticut trooper car is unmarked.

[oscar]

As to unmarked cars, these should be illegal everywhere in every circumstance.  The papers are full of stories of rapists and other criminals who capture their victims by posing as a traffic cop.  In  fact when you enter a state, one of the signs should proudly infom you NOT to stop for an unmarked car in any circumstances.

Connecticut might not agree with you.  Nearly every Connecticut trooper car is unmarked.

Some Hawaii counties might also disagree. Hawaii County (the Big Island) used to have no county-owned patrol cars at all, relying entirely on its policemen's personal vehicles with magnetic-mount rooftop blue lights, though reportedly in recent years county-owned vehicles have been added to the patrol car fleet. Honolulu County has also relied on a mix of personally-owned and marked county-owned patrol cars.

[empirestate]

While there are stories about people getting pulled over by unmarked cars, I'm not finding "the papers are full of stories" like this.  Occasionally they happen, but really, not that often.

And even when "the papers are full of stories" about something, that doesn't always mean that reality is full of instances of it actually happening.


iPhone

[NJRoadfan]

As to unmarked cars, these should be illegal everywhere in every circumstance.  The papers are full of stories of rapists and other criminals who capture their victims by posing as a traffic cop.  In  fact when you enter a state, one of the signs should proudly inform you NOT to stop for an unmarked car in any circumstances. 

New York agreed, although the ban has since been lifted:
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/04/18/nyregion/pataki-curbs-unmarked-cars-use.html
http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S289-2009

[Purgatory On Wheels]

I've heard that in some places police cars are parked and abandoned by the side of the road (no cop, no camera, no tickets) to get people to slow down and drive better.

I remember seeing one of these parked along I-88 near Naperville, IL years ago.  It even had a mannequin in it.  It was in the same place for several days in a row.  One day someone left a large donut box on the hood.

[iBallasticwolf2]

One day someone left a large donut box on the hood.

This is the kind of humour that shows some people actually have a sense of humor.

[Roadrunner75]

Unmarked cars don't bother me that much, but photo speed enforcement really does, MD and DC.  Since red light cameras just got the boot from NJ, I hope we can keep any kind of automated enforcement permanently out.

[1995hoo]

.... I've heard that in some places police cars are parked and abandoned by the side of the road (no cop, no camera, no tickets) to get people to slow down and drive better.  Using unmarked cars shows that they want people to drive badly and pay fines more than they want road safety.

....

This is sometimes done here in Fairfax County with marked cars, usually the ubiquitous Crown Vics. I do not know whether it's throughout the county or whether it's just the Lee District office that does it, as I usually see it on my trips to and from the Metrorail stop or the grocery store. It should be readily apparent to people when a cop car is out there as a decoy because they park them in places where the cop could not easily come out and pursue you if you're speeding–usually up a curb between some trees or the like. Most people do hit the brakes when they see them, though.

Unmarked cop cars don't bother me a whole lot because I'm used to them, though I also think if the cops wish to use unmarked cars, it's incumbent on them to allow the motorist a little leeway (especially at night) to pull off the road in a place where there are other people around or (again, at night) that's well-lit or the like, basically as a hedge against impostors. Of course it's also incumbent on the motorist to explain to the cop why he didn't pull off immediately.

I'm used to DC's speed cameras but I still find them rather pointless in terms of "safety" because so many of us know where they are and we do exactly what you'd expect–sail along at whatever speed we prefer and then slow down to pass the camera. I'm kind of surprised, actually, that DC and Maryland have not adopted the insidious "average speed check" system used in work zones in England, where they set up multiple cameras and the system reads your number plate and calculates your average speed based on how long it took you to travel the known fixed distance between the cameras. My British friends all warned me about this before I drove back across the M4 from Bristol to Heathrow a few years ago because there was a somewhat lengthy work zone somewhere between Reading and the M25 junction, if I recall correctly.

I have a license-plate cover that smears the image so the camera can't read it. Problem is, it works too well: It also makes your plate illegible to other drivers. It's not on any of the cars because I got pulled over by a Virginia state trooper, although instead of giving me a ticket he handed me a socket wrench and told me to remove it while he watched. I was going to remove it anyway because we were driving to Montreal a few weeks later and I didn't think it'd be a good idea to have that thing on the car at the border! I've never bothered to put it back on the car.

[cl94]

Unmarked cars are best for duties that aren't traffic-related. Much easier to keep tabs on drug houses and criminals if there isn't a shiny cop car, especially now that cops (at least around here) are using Tauruses and Chargers, both of which are quite common civilian vehicles. I think traffic cops should be in vehicles with at least some form of marking just for safety reasons. Still a decent amount of people impersonating cops at night around here.

Red light cameras are a yes if used properly. Most of the country has a huge issue with accidents caused by rolling stops and failing to stop. When cameras are installed, compliance rates increase significantly. I remember what happened in Columbus when the cameras first went in-people actually started stopping. If anything, they're a visible deterrent. Better to have a rear-end accident than just about any other type because injuries and damage are typically minimized.

Speed cameras are a no except in extreme situations. Such a situation is school zones during arrival/dismissal hours when children may be darting into the street. I don't think they have a place on limited-access highways or anything outside of a residential neighborhood because situations may dictate going faster than the speed limit due to safety or obstruction avoidance. In New York, speed cameras cannot issue tickets outside of school zones and I hope it stays that way.

[empirestate]

To add something about unmarked police cars in general, they have a way of making perfectly legitimate police activities appear to be highly suspicious. One day I was walking through Van Cortlandt Park in the Bronx, and I saw this black sedan pull off of the street and start driving towards me down the pedestrian walkway. It was a Town Car or something like that, and looked exactly like the sort of vehicle you'd expect mobsters to be disposing a body with. Of course they were driving slowly through the park, but instead of seeming to be out of caution, it just appeared sinister and purposeless–and it didn't help that the two guys inside were dressed in dark clothes with sunglasses. It was pretty much the least legitimate-looking activity I'd ever seen in the city, and I was this close to calling the "if you see something, say something" hotline when I finally spotted something, the license plate maybe, that told me they were some kind of law enforcement. To be perfectly honest, to this day I'm not certain...

So yeah, I'd say unmarked vehicles are best saved for when the situation calls for not calling attention to oneself. If you're going to pull over a motorist, or wander aimlessly through a crowded urban park, it's probably better to do it in a marked car.

[cpzilliacus]

I have a license-plate cover that smears the image so the camera can't read it. Problem is, it works too well: It also makes your plate illegible to other drivers. It's not on any of the cars because I got pulled over by a Virginia state trooper, although instead of giving me a ticket he handed me a socket wrench and told me to remove it while he watched. I was going to remove it anyway because we were driving to Montreal a few weeks later and I didn't think it'd be a good idea to have that thing on the car at the border! I've never bothered to put it back on the car.

I believe any type of plate cover is illegal in Maryland as well (may be related to all-electronic toll roads like Md. 200 and the I-95 ETLs) and their practice is similar to that of Virginia troopers - remove it or get a summons.

[cl94]

I have a license-plate cover that smears the image so the camera can't read it. Problem is, it works too well: It also makes your plate illegible to other drivers. It's not on any of the cars because I got pulled over by a Virginia state trooper, although instead of giving me a ticket he handed me a socket wrench and told me to remove it while he watched. I was going to remove it anyway because we were driving to Montreal a few weeks later and I didn't think it'd be a good idea to have that thing on the car at the border! I've never bothered to put it back on the car.

I believe any type of plate cover is illegal in Maryland as well (may be related to all-electronic toll roads like Md. 200 and the I-95 ETLs) and their practice is similar to that of Virginia troopers - remove it or get a summons.

They're illegal in most states. In most of New York, they won't pull you over for that alone, but they'll tack it onto other things or use it as an excuse to pull you over if you appear to be doing something dangerous or suspicious.

[jeffandnicole]

I have a license-plate cover that smears the image so the camera can't read it. Problem is, it works too well: It also makes your plate illegible to other drivers. It's not on any of the cars because I got pulled over by a Virginia state trooper, although instead of giving me a ticket he handed me a socket wrench and told me to remove it while he watched. I was going to remove it anyway because we were driving to Montreal a few weeks later and I didn't think it'd be a good idea to have that thing on the car at the border! I've never bothered to put it back on the car.

I believe any type of plate cover is illegal in Maryland as well (may be related to all-electronic toll roads like Md. 200 and the I-95 ETLs) and their practice is similar to that of Virginia troopers - remove it or get a summons.

They're illegal in most states. In most of New York, they won't pull you over for that alone, but they'll tack it onto other things or use it as an excuse to pull you over if you appear to be doing something dangerous or suspicious.

For the most part license plate covers have been always been illegal...at least for the past several decades, well before any sort of electronic anything was in general use.

[MikeTheActuary]

Connecticut might not agree with you.  Nearly every Connecticut trooper car is unmarked.

Unmarked Connecticut State Police vehicles have recognizable license plate numbers, at least. 

One criterion I'd impose on the acceptability of unmarked vehicle speed traps and photo speed enforcement is that the speed limits being enforced be those imposed/justified by engineering studies, rather than by statute or local whim.  If you have a road that is safe to drive at 75, but the speed limit is 65, 55, 45, etc. due to state or local whim, photo enforcement and stealthy speed traps both feel like entrapment to me.

[1995hoo]

I have a license-plate cover that smears the image so the camera can't read it. Problem is, it works too well: It also makes your plate illegible to other drivers. It's not on any of the cars because I got pulled over by a Virginia state trooper, although instead of giving me a ticket he handed me a socket wrench and told me to remove it while he watched. I was going to remove it anyway because we were driving to Montreal a few weeks later and I didn't think it'd be a good idea to have that thing on the car at the border! I've never bothered to put it back on the car.

I believe any type of plate cover is illegal in Maryland as well (may be related to all-electronic toll roads like Md. 200 and the I-95 ETLs) and their practice is similar to that of Virginia troopers - remove it or get a summons.

They're illegal in most states. In most of New York, they won't pull you over for that alone, but they'll tack it onto other things or use it as an excuse to pull you over if you appear to be doing something dangerous or suspicious.

In Virginia, the rule is that any plate cover that changes the plate's appearance is prohibited. So you could have a clear plastic one and not necessarily run afoul of the rule. I know the rule, of course, but I played dumb and it paid off. I've seen all sorts of dark tinted plate covers and I wonder how many tickets those people get.