Get your Tin Foil hats on

[jemacedo9]

In a similar vein, I look for a pair of Pennsylvania plates when I'm in PA.  For some reason that I'm unsure of, state police in Pennsylvania are issued a pair of plates for their vehicles.  All other PA plates are only single.

You're right!  It's something I've noticed but it never really clicked until reading your post...I wonder why that is?  Especially when, if my memory is correct, PA State Police cars use the PA Official Use plate, which other non-police vehicles use, and I don't think those other vehicles put a second plate on the front. Or do they?  I have to pay attention now...

[signalman]

In a similar vein, I look for a pair of Pennsylvania plates when I'm in PA.  For some reason that I'm unsure of, state police in Pennsylvania are issued a pair of plates for their vehicles.  All other PA plates are only single.

You're right!  It's something I've noticed but it never really clicked until reading your post...I wonder why that is?  Especially when, if my memory is correct, PA State Police cars use the PA Official Use plate, which other non-police vehicles use, and I don't think those other vehicles put a second plate on the front. Or do they?  I have to pay attention now...

I'm almost certain that other vehicles that have the PA Official Use plates display the front plate.  Although I admit that I'm not positive of it.

[Kacie Jane]

I never said that it "never" happens by method of police impersonation but you are acting like there are thousands of instances of it occurring annually with supposed unmarked patrol cars. 

Not quite.  He's not claiming that people are using unmarked patrol cars to commit crimes.  What he's saying is that because unmarked patrol cars exist, all a twisted civilian would have to do to pretend to be a police officer is stick flashing lights on their own car. 

And I don't have numbers; maybe it's not thousands of instances annually.  But it is a documented problem, common enough that women are taught that if they're driving alone at night, they should only pull over in well-lit areas, and perhaps call 911 and/or the dispatcher to confirm that it's an actual cop behind them.

[Max Rockatansky]

I never said that it "never" happens by method of police impersonation but you are acting like there are thousands of instances of it occurring annually with supposed unmarked patrol cars. 

Not quite.  He's not claiming that people are using unmarked patrol cars to commit crimes.  What he's saying is that because unmarked patrol cars exist, all a twisted civilian would have to do to pretend to be a police officer is stick flashing lights on their own car. 

And I don't have numbers; maybe it's not thousands of instances annually.  But it is a documented problem, common enough that women are taught that if they're driving alone at night, they should only pull over in well-lit areas, and perhaps call 911 and/or the dispatcher to confirm that it's an actual cop behind them.

I've seen the same reports you're referring too from various agencies over the years.  Basically you hit on it, identify who you are dealing with and why...always.  That's not just an example for women that also applies to men in some instances and especially teenagers.  We're talking about predators and they prey on people being naive or unquestioning. 

There have even been a lot of instances of road rage where someone will get out a car claiming to be an officer...I'm not sure why that one actually caught on but it has seemed to the last couple ears.  You should always question the credentials of anyone being law-enforcement or at least ensure they are who they claim to be.  How is that any different than someone knocking on the door and saying they are a police officer? 

There are several issues with outright banning unmarked cars.  How are detective units with undercover officers supposed to operate effectively if they have drive around in a marked vehicle?  A lot of unmarked vehicles are used to approach a building that is going to be entered, especially if the situation is potentially hostile and the element of surprise is needed.  Now I agree that in the instance of some bumpkin town using it to clip off ticket quotas as a revenue stream in speed traps is complete BS but that's something that ought to be addressed through POST.  I know in Florida the state even went as far threaten to de-incorporate a town on US 301 that was pulling crap speed enforcement tactics like that. 

[Duke87]

There are several issues with outright banning unmarked cars.  How are detective units with undercover officers supposed to operate effectively if they have drive around in a marked vehicle?

This was never proposed by the person who brought this up:

The use of unmarked cars for traffic enforcement should, of course, be banned worldwide.

(emphasis mine)

Nothing wrong with cops having unmarked cars and plainclothes officers. But their use should be limited to the sort of undercover work you mention, they shouldn't be used for traffic enforcement where it's totally unnecessary for the cop to be disguised.

[slorydn1]

It has been my experience that if one obeys traffic laws then one need not worry about being stopped by an unmarked patrol vehicle for breaking them. Your mileage may vary, though.

[Pete from Boston]

That's just as laughable as throwing out a ticket because the meter maid was listening to an unauthorized download.

No, it's not.  The logos are intellectual property protected by law.  Their use by these officers broke the law.

That's well and good, but to me the issue is cops outright stating "We're definitely not cops," which goes a philosophical step beyond even unmarked cars. 

  I think you meant to say that people impersonate police officers and yes that is certainly true but it's not exactly a everyday thing.  .

I not only meant to say, I did say it.

"Not an everyday thing".  Oh, so since the rapes, robberies and murders are only occasional, it is no big deal then.  Got it. 

No.  Since the societal importance of preventing EVEN ONE rape is about 100 billion times more important than some jerkwater town making $200 off some unfortunate motorist driving safe and fast, the use of unmarked cars should be 100% illegal for traffic "work".  And every young lady should be told to NEVER pull of unless the car is fully marked.  Period.

What makes this feel more than a little insincere is that the concern about rape seems to be an incidental part of an ongoing harangue against traffic cops in general.

[Sam]

It has been my experience that if one obeys traffic laws then one need not worry about being stopped by an unmarked patrol vehicle for breaking them. Your mileage may vary, though.

You still need to stop if an officer wants you to, even if you believe you're obeying the law. What if you believe that unmarked car isn't really the police? The case I remember was a woman somewhere down south refusing to pull over because there had been an imposter stopping and attacking women using a car that looked like an unmarked police car. It turned out it was a police officer trying to stop her and he got physical when she finally did stop. Shortly after this made the news, the governor of New York ordered the state police not to make traffic stops in unmarked cars so there would be no confusion.

(Back on topic, they shouldn't have used Google by name.)

[Duke87]

It has been my experience that if one obeys traffic laws then one need not worry about being stopped by an unmarked patrol vehicle for breaking them. Your mileage may vary, though.

This is a straw man argument. No one is saying that they're afraid of being stopped by an unmarked cop car. What people are afraid of is being stopped by a predator pretending his vehicle is an unmarked cop car. A predator who isn't going to be running radar or looking for someone to break some rule, he's just going to try and pull over whoever looks like an attractive victim.

However, if ordinary citizens factually know that unmarked cars don't do traffic stops, then they know that plain car with a couple flashing lights behind them is definitely not a cop and they should call 911 rather than pull over because there's a predator on their tail.

[jeffandnicole]

I think that if someone sees flashing lights behind them, they're going to be nervous and stop anyway.  It's amazing what people forget that was in the news just recently...if they even knew what was in the news.

[kalvado]

It has been my experience that if one obeys traffic laws then one need not worry about being stopped by an unmarked patrol vehicle for breaking them. Your mileage may vary, though.

I can show you a topic on police officers forum, where one cop is very proud of his technique - looking for any malfunction on a car (license plate light is his pet peeve), pull over, and look for drugs or any other "apparent" problems while writing ticket. Yes, burned license plate light is a ticketable offense in some places.

[Max Rockatansky]

It has been my experience that if one obeys traffic laws then one need not worry about being stopped by an unmarked patrol vehicle for breaking them. Your mileage may vary, though.

I can show you a topic on police officers forum, where one cop is very proud of his technique - looking for any malfunction on a car (license plate light is his pet peeve), pull over, and look for drugs or any other "apparent" problems while writing ticket. Yes, burned license plate light is a ticketable offense in some places.

There is actually a name for it; that's called a "pretext stop."  Basically you find some whatever reason you can to pull over someone over and hope you can hook a bigger charge.  Usually it involves something along the lines of preying on drivers who don't know they can limit consent searches of the vehicle, that or the officer sees something in the cabin that would fall under "Plain View Doctrine."  But then again, it's really hard to get upset about someone getting busted for running drugs or worse when they were dumb enough to let the officer search the car without probable cause.

[kalvado]

There is actually a name for it; that's called a "pretext stop."  Basically you find some whatever reason you can to pull over someone over and hope you can hook a bigger charge.  Usually it involves something along the lines of preying on drivers who don't know they can limit consent searches of the vehicle, that or the officer sees something in the cabin that would fall under "Plain View Doctrine."  But then again, it's really hard to get upset about someone getting busted for running drugs or worse when they were dumb enough to let the officer search the car without probable cause.

Problem is that even if you have done nothing wrong, you're left with a ticket to pay for a really minor issue. And town is quite happy to get extra $100 fine.
"nothing to hide - nothing to fear" is a nice concept, but it doesn't work in real life.

[Max Rockatansky]

There is actually a name for it; that's called a "pretext stop."  Basically you find some whatever reason you can to pull over someone over and hope you can hook a bigger charge.  Usually it involves something along the lines of preying on drivers who don't know they can limit consent searches of the vehicle, that or the officer sees something in the cabin that would fall under "Plain View Doctrine."  But then again, it's really hard to get upset about someone getting busted for running drugs or worse when they were dumb enough to let the officer search the car without probable cause.

Problem is that even if you have done nothing wrong, you're left with a ticket to pay for a really minor issue. And town is quite happy to get extra $100 fine.
"nothing to hide - nothing to fear" is a nice concept, but it doesn't work in real life.

Basically look at any traffic manual in all 50 states.  It IS literally impossible to go more than a couple miles without violating some sort of traffic law.  Most statute books usually are two thirds traffic laws and citations with literally just one third filling up the rest...seems inordinate to me..but not a lot of people are willing to petition legislatures to eliminate stupid laws.  If you drive long enough you'll get a ticket for something sooner or later. 

[Duke87]

I can show you a topic on police officers forum, where one cop is very proud of his technique - looking for any malfunction on a car (license plate light is his pet peeve), pull over, and look for drugs or any other "apparent" problems while writing ticket. Yes, burned license plate light is a ticketable offense in some places.

See that's the sort of thing where if it's worth pulling someone over for, but writing a ticket for it is a dick move. If the little light above the rear license plate burns out, the owner could reasonably drive the car around for months and never notice because they'd need to get out of the car with the lights still on for it to become apparent - something most drivers do not normally do. A cop pulling them over for it may well be the first they are made aware of the issue. In which case a helpful cop will point it out to them as a courtesy rather than use it as an opportunity for revenue enhancement.

[Max Rockatansky]

I can show you a topic on police officers forum, where one cop is very proud of his technique - looking for any malfunction on a car (license plate light is his pet peeve), pull over, and look for drugs or any other "apparent" problems while writing ticket. Yes, burned license plate light is a ticketable offense in some places.

See that's the sort of thing where if it's worth pulling someone over for, but writing a ticket for it is a dick move. If the little light above the rear license plate burns out, the owner could reasonably drive the car around for months and never notice because they'd need to get out of the car with the lights still on for it to become apparent - something most drivers do not normally do. A cop pulling them over for it may well be the first they are made aware of the issue. In which case a helpful cop will point it out to them as a courtesy rather than use it as an opportunity for revenue enhancement.

A couple years back when I was moving to California I was pulled over in Texas on I-20 about two hours west of Fort Worth at 5:45 AM in the morning for following a truck too close at 73 MPH and 500 feet...apparently supposed to be 700 feet.  Anyways the officer gave me the riot act about why I was out there with an out of state tag so early in the morning, my simple response was that I was unaware that 6 AM was a strange time to be out on the road moving across the country not to mention that I was stopping by Carlsbad Caverns for the day and wanted to get there early.  Basically all he could see in the car was just my dog wagging his tail and my wife trying to stay asleep in the passenger seat.  Total pretext stop if I ever saw one but I was actually surprised he didn't give me ticket.  Basically he told me I could sit in the front seat of the cruiser not to wake my wife up and gave me a warning slip.  Way I figure it, highway patrol had something they were out looking for but at the very least I was treated with the same courtesy that gave the officer.

[kalvado]

See that's the sort of thing where if it's worth pulling someone over for, but writing a ticket for it is a dick move. If the little light above the rear license plate burns out, the owner could reasonably drive the car around for months and never notice because they'd need to get out of the car with the lights still on for it to become apparent - something most drivers do not normally do. A cop pulling them over for it may well be the first they are made aware of the issue. In which case a helpful cop will point it out to them as a courtesy rather than use it as an opportunity for revenue enhancement.

ACLU rightly objects the pretext stops practice.. So, in order to keep things clean and show no pre-text tickets have to be given equally to everyone to avoid lawsuits.
And, although that is often denied or called different names, they have a quota to fill...

[Max Rockatansky]

See that's the sort of thing where if it's worth pulling someone over for, but writing a ticket for it is a dick move. If the little light above the rear license plate burns out, the owner could reasonably drive the car around for months and never notice because they'd need to get out of the car with the lights still on for it to become apparent - something most drivers do not normally do. A cop pulling them over for it may well be the first they are made aware of the issue. In which case a helpful cop will point it out to them as a courtesy rather than use it as an opportunity for revenue enhancement.

ACLU rightly objects the pretext stops practice.. So, in order to keep things clean and show no pre-text tickets have to be given equally to everyone to avoid lawsuits.
And, although that is often denied or called different names, they have a quota to fill...

See if you operate things on absolutes there is going to be a counter effect.  There is a substantial different between a shady officer and a shady quota based department to a good officers who know something is up to departments that don't operate on quotas.  Basically the reaction in modern times is to flip out when one really bad officer does something terrible like hit a suspect or shoot them in the back like they did in Goose Creek.  There are even tons of examples of towns ending up in the news for operating speed traps.  Basically any cop that operates like that ought to not be fired but prosecuted but towns like that ought to be heavily busted down by whatever state that they are in.  The tricky thing is that everyone thinks that there is a one-way solution to everything in policing while often it isn't as clear cut as that.  Now if you're pretext stopping someone because of the color their skin...yeah you got a problem that need to be stopped.  But if you're pretext stopping someone when you have prior intelligence that a drug ring is passing coke through town today, there is a huge difference.

[J N Winkler]

See that's the sort of thing where if it's worth pulling someone over for, but writing a ticket for it is a dick move. If the little light above the rear license plate burns out, the owner could reasonably drive the car around for months and never notice because they'd need to get out of the car with the lights still on for it to become apparent - something most drivers do not normally do. A cop pulling them over for it may well be the first they are made aware of the issue. In which case a helpful cop will point it out to them as a courtesy rather than use it as an opportunity for revenue enhancement.

In Wichita, the policy of the police department is to issue "fix-it" tickets for equipment violations that are forgiven when the ticketed individual supplies proof that the equipment fault has been corrected.

I can see the police cracking down harder on bulb faults (1) in states where safety inspections are mandatory (especially in states where owners have an incentive to self-inspect to avoid paying twice, once for a failed inspection and again for a clean inspection after the fault found during the first inspection has been corrected), or (2) for higher-spec cars with nighttime courtesy illumination where the bulb fault that gives occasion for the stop (e.g., a license plate bulb but not a brake lamp bulb) is readily evident to a driver who gets out of the car after parking it at night.

In general, as a white person, I don't worry about being pulled over for traffic law violations unless they fit into a sustained pattern of outlaw driving.  E.g., I often speed up to 85 or 90 in a 75 to complete overtakes quickly before allowing the car to coast down until the cruise control picks back up at 75, and don't worry; on the other hand, if I set the cruise control at 85 and kept running at that speed for mile after mile, I would expect to be pulled over.