PDA

View Full Version : Police want your $$



Sean
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 10:11 AM
Warning, LOTS of cops sitting on 36 westbound into Boulder. I saw 3 on my commute in. It's the end of the month, time to collect that $$. :twisted:

A bike cop radared me doing at least 15 over, but let me go. I think he was just shocked that a KLR could do 15 over on the interstate! :lol:

Devaclis
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 10:18 AM
Sheeeet, that six-fiddy can easily do 100 MPH. The thing that slows them down are the tree-hundo and fiddy pound riders. ;)

asp_125
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 10:23 AM
Prolly thought his radar was miscalibrated. :D

Sean
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 10:32 AM
Sheeeet, that six-fiddy can easily do 100 MPH. The thing that slows them down are the tree-hundo and fiddy pound riders. ;)I've had it up to 93 and I think that's as far as I'm willing to push it. Let's just say it didn't feel real stable. :bigeyes:


Prolly thought his radar was miscalibrated. :DNo doubt. I just don't think he wanted to get his fat ass back on the bike and chase me. :lol: The cop just gave me the stink eye as I rode by, making sure that I knew, that he knew, that I was speeding. Which I already knew. Still, a cool move on his part.

Foolds
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 10:33 AM
Denver has been out on the 20th street bridge clocking I-25 with as many as 11 cars by my count one morning. They were up there 3 days in a row last week and atleast one afternoon.

Watch your speeds out there

asp_125
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 10:38 AM
month end quotas :321:

Aracheon
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 11:02 AM
By that same token, I've seen at least 3 times now, Thornton cops lining the offramps of 136th at I-25 in both directions, with cops hiding in the alcoves on top of the bridge, shooting radar and calling down to the waiting officers. I always see this in the afternoons around 5:30.

Sean
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 11:08 AM
Since we are getting some other updates on different locations, I edited the title.

Good info to know guys. I'm guessing we'll see Johnny Law in full force up until Thursday.

asp_125
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 11:09 AM
Saw that last thursday on the I-70 overpass by the Buffalo Bill exit near Evergreen. Explorer running radar on the bridge, two cruisers in the truck pullout eastbound in the morning, and westbound in the afternoon. Phuckers.

cptschlongenheimer
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 11:12 AM
I wanna thank the anonymous rider that saved me from a hefty ticket on 36 last week.

I was hauling ass EB in the HOV, when a WB rider showed a head tap that warned me of the two Westminster bike cops sitting just on the other side of the hill before Federal.

They've been there a few more times in the week since too.

King Nothing
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 11:22 AM
Hammer Down. :twisted:

Devaclis
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 12:29 PM
(Yeah, breaker one-nine, this here's the Rubber Duck,
you got a copy on me Pigpen? C'mon.)
(Ah yeah, ten-four Pigpen, for sure, for sure.
By golly it's clean clear to Flagtown. C'mon.)
(Yeah, that's a big ten-four there Pigpen. Yeah, we definitely got the
front door good buddy. Mercy sakes alive, looks like we got us a convoy)

It was the dark of the moon on the sixth of June
In a Kenworth pullin logs
Cab over Pete with a reefer on
And a Jimmy haulin hogs
We's headed for bear on eye-one-oh
About a mile outta Shakeytown
I says Pigpen, this here's the Rubber Duck
And I'm about to put the hammer down

Coz we got a little convoy rockin' thru the night
Yeah we got a little convoy aint she a beautiful sight
Come on and join our convoy aint nothin' gonna get in our way
We gonna roll this truckin' convoy 'cross the USA
Convoy

(Ah, breaker,
Pigpen this here's the Duck and you wanna back off on them hogs?)
(Ah, ten-four, about five mile or so)
(Ten roger, them hogs is gettin' IN-tense up here)

By the time we got into Tulsa town we had 85 trucks in all
But they's a roadblock up on the cloverleaf
And them bears 's wall to wall
Yeah them smokeys 's thick as bugs on a bumper
They even had a bear in the air
I says Callin' all trucks, this here's the Duck
We about to go a-huntin' bear

Coz we got a great big convoy rockin' thru the night
Yeah we got a great big convoy aint she a beautiful sight
Come on and join our convoy aint nothin' gonna get in our way
We gonna roll this truckin' convoy across the USA
Convoy

(Ah, you want to give me a ten-nine on that Pigpen?)
(Ah, negatory Pigpen, you're still too close.
Yeah them hogs is startin' to close up my sinuses.
Mercy's sakes you better back off another ten)

Well we rolled up Interstate Forty-Four
Like a rocket sled on rails
We tore up all of our swindle sheets
And left 'em sittin' on the scales
By the time we hit that Shi town
Them bears was a-gettin' smart
They bought up some reinforcements
From the Illinois National Guard

There's armoured cars and tanks and jeeps
And rigs of every size
Yeah them chicken coops was full of bears
And choppers filled the skies
Well we shot the line
We went for broke
With a thousand screaming trucks
And eleven longhaired friends of Jesus
In a chartreuse microbus

(Ah, Rubber Duck, this is Sodbuster. C'mon here?)
(Yeah, ten-four Sodbuster.
Listen, ya wanna put that microbus in behind that suicide jockey?)
(Yeah he's haulin' dynamite and he needs all the help he can get)

Well we laid a strip for the Jersey shore
Prepared to cross the line
I could see the bridge was lined with bears
But I didn't have a doggone dime
I says Pigpen this here's the Rubber Duck
We just aint gonna pay no toll
So we crashed the gate doin' ninety-eight
I says Let them truckers roll, ten-four

Coz we got a mighty convoy rockin' thru the night
Yeah we got a mighty convoy aint she a beautiful sight
Come on and join our convoy aint nothin' gonna get in our way
We gonna roll this truckin' convoy across the USA
Convoy

(Ah, ten-four Pigpen. What's your twenty? OMAHA?
Well they oughta know what to do with them hogs out there, for sure.
Well mercy sakes good buddy, we gonna back on outta here,
So keep your thumbs off your glass and the bears off your ......tail.
We'll catch you on the flip-flop.
This here's the Rubber Duck on the side. We gone. bye bye.)

Zach929rr
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 12:46 PM
If an ex500 can do 163, then a KLR can do 15 over.

Sleev
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 12:47 PM
Broadway and Bellview(ish) there's speed trap every other day around 9 am

Ricky
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 12:49 PM
The only thing cops are good at, is generating revenue and beating people up.

The most common place I see em is on the pedestrian bridge north of 104th Ave on I25. Ridiculous.

MetaLord 9
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 12:57 PM
If an ex500 can do 163
wut?

Aracheon
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 01:04 PM
@Dana: Boxcar Willie FTW

TFOGGuys
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 01:19 PM
Yeah...because hiding in the weed with a laser is AAAAALLLLL about safety....


On a happier note, I got pulled over for 32 over by Aurora about 4 weeks ago, and managed to walk away without a nasty ticket....

TFOGGuys
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 01:20 PM
@Dana: Boxcar Willie FTW

Actually CW McCall....

eg bter
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 02:54 PM
Yah they do. Northglen wants $190 for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign.

Aphrodite
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 04:22 PM
wut?


Will got accused of doing that on his silver ex500 that is when I decided to sell mine for a slower bike.

Aphrodite
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 04:23 PM
Yah they do. Northglen wants $190 for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign.

I heard about that then they make you call for the bad news?

Survivalism
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 04:38 PM
and I hope everybody heard that Denver City Council is voting to raise the fine$ on 5-9mph over from $40 to $75...so of course that means they'll be enforcing that one soon....:(

Oh man thats horrible news.. that could end up being a real headache.

TFOGGuys
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 04:45 PM
But they won't enforce the Left Lane Law when some jackass in a septic tank pump truck is going 40 mph in the left lane and backing up traffic for miles..... :banghead:

Nick_Ninja
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 05:30 PM
also Centennial City Council as part of the police contract is requiring Arapahoe Sheriffs Dept to produce minimum 15 citations for traffic cops & 2 for beat cops per shift....and they also go for every violation ...City Council wants no leniency...the will write you if you dont sign the back of your registration

I won't be spending any $$ at any business in that municipality.

JonnyD
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 05:38 PM
Keep an eye out on 470 both N and S bound from Kipling up to I-70... Have seen a couple bikes on the side of the road there recently. They LOVE the overpass at Bowles as well, especially on weekend mornings!

Mac020
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 06:12 PM
SCHOOL'S IN! Cops everywhere!

bodhizafa
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 08:08 PM
I thought KLR's were undetectable by radar.....kinda like a stealth fighter! :D

CaneZach
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 08:10 PM
also Centennial City Council as part of the police contract is requiring Arapahoe Sheriffs Dept to produce minimum 15 citations for traffic cops & 2 for beat cops per shift....and they also go for every violation ...City Council wants no leniency...the will write you if you dont sign the back of your registration

How exactly can a CITY council dictate what a COUNTY agency does? Sense no makey.

longrider
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 08:23 PM
How exactly can a CITY council dictate what a COUNTY agency does? Sense no makey.

It sorta makes sense since when Centennial was incorporated instead of setting up a police force they contracted with Arapahoe County to provide law enforcement in the city. Now if certain deputies are assigned to function as Centennial police officers then I could maybe see a policy like that but if the sheriff just patrols it like the rest of the county then no way

mtnairlover
Mon Sep 27th, 2010, 09:37 PM
I still see an officer sitting in my neighborhood every now and then. There's a stop sign that a lot of locals like to blow right by. It comes up on a T in the road. Meh...I'm not so bothered by that as I am about the idiots in rush hour thinking they own the roads. Some people need a serious reality check.

On another note...I haven't been the best of riders either...on certain occasions.

Anyway, I did notice a beef up in the traps here and there. Southbound on die-2-5 in the mornings on the 20th st bridge. In the HOV lanes...both morning and afternoon rushes. I was thinking it was the increase in ticket amounts, too.

Just seems to me that most publicly funded institutions are hurting financially and it won't be getting better in the immediate future.

CYCLE_MONKEY
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 01:24 PM
It's only going to get worse. With local gov't's having money problems from lack of tax income and increased expendatures via unemployment from everyone being out of work, it's no wonder they're stepping up the citations in numbers and upping the fine amounts. God forbid a couple of cops and/or gov't workers would have to lose their jobs like the REST of us.....

King Nothing
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 01:28 PM
How exactly can a CITY council dictate what a COUNTY agency does? Sense no makey.Zach, you don't know what you're talking about! On the up side, I'm no longer a probie n00b! :doublefinger:

asp_125
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 01:46 PM
Yanno I think they ought to just stand on corners with a tin cup or learn to make balloon animals for money if they're that hard up for budgets. OTOH just think of the money they'd save if it weren't wasted in getting themselves into these excessive force lawsuits.

Oh, and... www.speedtrap.org (http://www.speedtrap.org)

Ricky
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 01:58 PM
and I hope everybody heard that Denver City Council is voting to raise the fine$ on 5-9mph over from $40 to $75...so of course that means they'll be enforcing that one soon....:(

It's funny because tickets are for safety violations, yet they clearly admitted the reason they are increasing the fine amount is because of budget shortfall.

Ridiculous.

dirkterrell
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 02:41 PM
It's funny because tickets are for safety violations, yet they clearly admitted the reason they are increasing the fine amount is because of budget shortfall.

Ridiculous.

Oh, they're trying but it's getting harder and harder for them to keep a straight face:


"We have proposed an increase in traffic fines that will match the average in the metro area. We've also eliminated the early payment discount on traffic fines," Hickenlooper said on Wednesday afternoon. "We weren't necessarily looking for money. We were trying to find out where is a place where if we are gonna increase a fee or a fine, we're making the city better or safer."

Source (http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=153088&catid=339)

The article lists a link to a Word doc that shows the changes. Unfortunately, the number of speeding tickets for each speed interval aren't given, just in aggregate but you don't have to try to hard to believe that the number of potential tickets in the 5-9 mph over is huge, so that's why they are going after it.

Dirk

Ricky
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 02:48 PM
So increasing a fine makes the city safer? That's somewhat opinionated. I don't base my speed on how much the fine will be. I base it on how many points I still have left. Tickets are tickets, and they're expensive. But the cost of them does not slow me down or make me ride safer. It just makes me more aware of cops and their tactics. It also gives them my middle fucking finger when they are running a speed trap.

And really, if it DID increase safety, then the fine revenue could go down (fewer speeders), therefore making the increase somewhat moot.

TinkerinWstuff
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 02:50 PM
The article lists a link to a Word doc that shows the changes. Unfortunately, the number of speeding tickets for each speed interval aren't given, just in aggregate but you don't have to try to hard to believe that the number of potential tickets in the 5-9 mph over is huge, so that's why they are going after it.

Dirk

I saw a report on the television news, probably local FOX network, where they had the breakdown by overage. It showed that tickets had doubled in the 0-10 range while staying the same over the previous year for two additional brackets above that.

Will try to find more detail....

TinkerinWstuff
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 02:56 PM
I saw a report on the television news, probably local FOX network, where they had the breakdown by overage. It showed that tickets had doubled in the 0-10 range while staying the same over the previous year for two additional brackets above that.

Will try to find more detail....

So my memory wasn't spot on. The detail was for CSP and "not available" for Denver.

http://www.kdvr.com/news/kdvr-tickets-budget-033110,0,7919402.story


But latest figures from CSP show that for the first three months of 2008 versus 2009, 574 more tickets were written for going 5-to-9 miles-an-hour over the limit. And 506 more tickets were written during the same period for 10 to 19 miles-an-hour over. Overall, there's been an increase of 1,614 tickets written in the first three months year-to-year.

If you watch the video, I'd just like to add that I think Hedrick is a putz and FOX killed their morning news broadcast.

Ricky
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 02:58 PM
I bet that's because more and more people see the stupidity in speed limit logic. 5-9 over isn't a big deal to most people... unless you're an illegal mexican.

CaneZach
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 03:06 PM
I bet that's because more and more people see the stupidity in speed limit logic. 5-9 over isn't a big deal to most people... unless you're an illegal mexican.

Or it's possible the officer writing the ticket chose to write the violator for 5-9 over when they were really going 10-19 over.

TinkerinWstuff
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 03:17 PM
or what's really happening, is you now get gifted a ticket where you used to get a warning or the cop didn't bother pulling you over.

If you watch the video from the article I linked, you can see that as a %, the tickets written for 10-15mph over was nearly the same. For 15+, it's almost the same to the exact ticket, but 5-9 had nearly doubled.

Aphrodite
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 03:18 PM
Also there is the photo "0" point vans sitting around that just send a bill to your plate address. :no:

Sean
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 03:22 PM
Personally, I feel that the emphasis should be put on inattentive driving rather than speeding. A person doing the speed limit while talking on a cell phone is way more dangerous and erratic than a perfectly attentive driver, not preoccupied by something, doing 10 over. Tickets for left lane drivers not passing (which is already a law), use of electronic device while driving (which should be a law) and severe causes for causing an accident due to lack of attention (more than a couple hundred dollars for killing, or almost killing a person). That's there cash cow, that's 50% of the drivers out there. Go after it!

Nick_Ninja
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 03:34 PM
itsa catch .22
I need the money to pave my street so if you dont spend we have to go collect:devil2:

Thank God, I don't even live in that swill hole. :doublefinger:

Paving your street isn't on my list.

Ricky
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 03:36 PM
Or it's possible the officer writing the ticket chose to write the violator for 5-9 over when they were really going 10-19 over.

And why is it that that would change? Why would officers start giving more people breaks, than in the past?

Nick_Ninja
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 03:56 PM
Yeah its ridiculous..like most cities....
try speeding on Arapahoe Rd..speed limit 55mph, with normal traffic 30..
the only time its nice is Sunday morning & then your right in the middle of the setup....BAM!!
took me 2 times to learn my lesson..& I was on the way to get Dognuts for the fam...no break from LEO full price ticket in the parking lot of the doughnut shop:violin:
centennial:no:

The bottom line is the citizenry of the municipality can kick out the bastards that control the city council and/or dictate the police policy. It just takes some pressure @ the polls.

Ricky
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 04:02 PM
The bottom line is the citizenry of the municipality can kick out the bastards that control the city council and/or dictate the police policy. It just takes some pressure @ the polls.

I'm surprised that nobody has ever gone on a state/city employee shooting spree, because of this very reason. Why wait to vote, when you can take action now!

TinkerinWstuff
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 04:03 PM
I'm surprised that nobody has ever gone on a state/city employee shooting spree, because of this very reason. Why wait to vote, when you can take action now!

how many watchlists are you on right now? :wtf:

Ricky
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 04:06 PM
how many watchlists are you on right now? :wtf:

You're an idiot. STFU

Nick_Ninja
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 04:11 PM
Turnin postal isn't an option.

TinkerinWstuff
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 04:16 PM
You're an idiot. STFU

a little sensitive I see. maybe it wasn't just a joke

CaneZach
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 06:31 PM
And why is it that that would change? Why would officers start giving more people breaks, than in the past?

Those stats were all from the CSP, correct? The CSP has no ticket quota, so any increase in citations is due to an increase in the actual violation of speeding, be it 5-9 over, 10-19 over, etc. I know several officer who have written a 5-9 over ticket instead of a 10-19 over ticket, especially if the violator has a good attitude.

CaneZach
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 06:34 PM
put your video cam in the cops face and see if they still use that tool we give em called discretion.....or if they write you up by the book:bow:

FTW

Let's change up the scenario for a second. Try putting your video camera into ANYONE'S face and see what they do. I guarantee you most people will not like having a video camera "put in their face".

Just to clarify, I am NOT in support of any city/county/state using the police as revenue generation, especially under the guise of "safety". Coffers are a little low? Don't hike the fines in an effort to fill them then tell the officers they MUST write X-number of citations. There are far more important things the police need to be concerned with.

TinkerinWstuff
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 08:14 PM
Those stats were all from the CSP, correct? The CSP has no ticket quota, so any increase in citations is due to an increase in the actual violation of speeding, be it 5-9 over, 10-19 over, etc. I know several officer who have written a 5-9 over ticket instead of a 10-19 over ticket, especially if the violator has a good attitude.

With all due respect - I just find it hard to believe that some cultural shift happened that changed driving habits to the point where double the number of people were speeding during the same time the following year.

dirkterrell
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 08:57 PM
The bottom line is the citizenry of the municipality can kick out the bastards that control the city council and/or dictate the police policy. It just takes some pressure @ the polls.

:yes: That's the answer right there.

Dirk

CaneZach
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 10:02 PM
With all due respect - I just find it hard to believe that some cultural shift happened that changed driving habits to the point where double the number of people were speeding during the same time the following year.

Maybe. Maybe not. Since those numbers were strictly CSP-related, a 547 citation increase translates to roughly a whopping ONE additional citation per Trooper during the time frame noted. Since it's also 547 citations across the entire State, it's not even a tremendous increase. If those numbers came from a municipality, or even just one CSP Troop, like Troop 2B in Colorado Springs, I would say something is out of the ordinary. But a single additional citation per Trooper throughout the State over the period of time mentioned? Not anything that would make you raise an eyebrows.

TinkerinWstuff
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 10:08 PM
Obviously we won't come together on this. 1 more citation per trooper might not sound like a lot. But looking at the statistic of nearly 1/3rd more tickets for the same time period, I have to ask, "what changed?"

Other law enforcement agencies across the country have come right out and admitted to the media that ticketing is up to raise revenue.

One example: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,490629,00.html which supports your "one additional ticket" statement.


"We need to increase enforcement in areas that create revenue … write 'ONE TAG A DAY,'" Coye told officers in a memo obtained by the Boston Herald.


We can agree that policy is set at the voter's booth.

http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac47/tinkerinWstuff/Misc/tickets-1.jpg

brennahm
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 10:20 PM
I guess I'm still confused as to why people think that it's somehow an evil government campaign to have it's citizen's pay fines for breaking the law...

You break the law, you pay a fine. You don't like paying fines? Don't break the law.

I don't like it either, but I also understand that every time I speed I'm tempting fate. People need to grow up...

/rant

Nick_Ninja
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 10:27 PM
<snip>
I don't like it either, but <snip> every time I speed I'm tempting fate. <snip>

That right there doesn't make any sense at all. :dunno:

dirkterrell
Tue Sep 28th, 2010, 11:26 PM
I guess I'm still confused as to why people think that it's somehow an evil government campaign to have it's citizen's pay fines for breaking the law...


It's not a matter of being evil, it's a matter of how to best use the limited resources of government, in this case law enforcement, to serve the public interest. Some of us believe that having several city police cruisers sitting on I25 tagging people for going 5 mph over is much less important to public safety than having those officers patrolling neighborhoods and responding to calls for help from the public. Speaking for myself, I find it incredibly insulting when politicians make the opposite claim.

If it truly were about public safety, the penalty for speeding would be harsh application of points for violations. I guarantee you that speeding could be greatly reduced if that's what the politicians were really trying to do. But it isn't. They don't want speeding to stop. It's about generating revenue and I'd rather have law enforcement officers focusing on real crime rather than generating revenue. I'll bet that most LEOs would agree.

Dirk

Sean
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 07:19 AM
I think this has become a new topic.

Just an FYI: I haven't seen them setting up shop the past two mornings. I thought it might be a regular thing, turns out I was wrong. Just didn't want anyone to get nailed for tempting fate. :up:

TinkerinWstuff
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 07:54 AM
well said Dirk.

cptschlongenheimer
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 11:19 AM
It's not a matter of being evil, it's a matter of how to best use the limited resources of government, in this case law enforcement, to serve the public interest. Some of us believe that having several city police cruisers sitting on I25 tagging people for going 5 mph over is much less important to public safety than having those officers patrolling neighborhoods and responding to calls for help from the public.

Not just public safety...
Property crime prevention too.
I would love to have more LEO presence in my neighborhood to reduce the rampant 'tagging', the illegal dumping & the stealing. Instead of setting up speed traps, how about a graffiti trap?

Jim_Vess
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 12:43 PM
Obviously we won't come together on this. 1 more citation per trooper might not sound like a lot. But looking at the statistic of nearly 1/3rd more tickets for the same time period, I have to ask, "what changed?"

Other law enforcement agencies across the country have come right out and admitted to the media that ticketing is up to raise revenue.

One example: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,490629,00.html which supports your "one additional ticket" statement.


We can agree that policy is set at the voter's booth.

http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac47/tinkerinWstuff/Misc/tickets-1.jpg

Numbers are just numbers. They don't mean anything by themselves.

"What changed?" - try the total population of the state. To get something meaningful these numbers need to be divided by the total population of the state for the given year. I'd be willing to bet the percentage of tickets issued based on the population is almost the same year to year.

TinkerinWstuff
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 12:58 PM
Numbers are just numbers. They don't mean anything by themselves.

"What changed?" - try the total population of the state. To get something meaningful these numbers need to be divided by the total population of the state for the given year. I'd be willing to bet the percentage of tickets issued based on the population is almost the same year to year.

How much would you like to bet or would you like to try again. When you are talking about numbers that large, "almost the same year to year" is quite a debatable figure.

Population change 2008-2009 was roughly 100,000.

http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=uspopulation&met=population&idim=state:08000&dl=en&hl=en&q=colorado+population

That means tickets issued in 2008 were .5309% of population and increased to .5540% of population in 2009. Doesn't sound like a huge number. But I bet if you're one of the nearly 10% unemployed right now and ended up as part of the "crackdown", you're not happy.

MetaLord 9
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 01:00 PM
Replace the "population" number with the number of Registered Colorado Drivers to get a more relevant number

TinkerinWstuff
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 01:03 PM
^^smart thinking

makes me curious

CYCLE_MONKEY
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 01:03 PM
well said Dirk.
As always. Dirk for POTUS!:applause:

MetaLord 9
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 01:06 PM
I'd also be curious to see how many "first time" offenders got tickets versus repeat offenders. I'd say that a "first time" offender would be someone who hasn't had a moving violation in the past 3 or 5 years, whichever one it is that a ticket's points drop off of your license. It would be interesting to see how much more likely a "repeat" offender is to A. offend again and B. receive a ticket for being a repeat.

MetaLord 9
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 01:13 PM
If it truly were about public safety, the penalty for speeding would be harsh application of points for violations. I guarantee you that speeding could be greatly reduced if that's what the politicians were really trying to do. But it isn't. They don't want speeding to stop. It's about generating revenue and I'd rather have law enforcement officers focusing on real crime rather than generating revenue. I'll bet that most LEOs would agree.

Dirk
To add to this argument, draw the timeline out and assume that increasing fines drops moving violations to almost zero. Without this revenue piece in place, what would you say the odds of seeing an incredible tax hike would be? Does anyone think that there is even the remotest of chances that politicians would credit the police for their keeping the roads safe and then walk away from the now missing revenue without an attempt to recoup this loss in another manner?

TinkerinWstuff
Wed Sep 29th, 2010, 01:24 PM
Replace the "population" number with the number of Registered Colorado Drivers to get a more relevant number

Difficult to find current data. As of 2003, there were 2,975,337 registered drivers ( http://www.statemaster.com/graph/trn_lic_dri_tot_num-transportation-licensed-drivers-total-number) when the population was 4,548,339 (same population source linked above).

So at that time, 65.4% of the population were registered drivers. Assuming the same=

% of tickets issued based on registered drivers in 2008 = .0812

% of tickets issued based on registered drivers in 2008 = .0847

In numbers that might be easier to relate to; I extrapolate that the number of drivers in the state probably increased by 55,781.

Registered drivers increased by about 2% while tickets issued based 2008-'09 increased by nearly 5%

calculations:
extrapolated drivers 2008 based on assumed 65.4% of population divided by the same for 2009 = .9830

Tickets issued 2008 divided by 2009 = .9420 (data from KDVR)

neh
Thu Sep 30th, 2010, 09:50 PM
Denver has been out on the 20th street bridge clocking I-25 with as many as 11 cars by my count one morning. They were up there 3 days in a row last week and atleast one afternoon.

Watch your speeds out there

NB I-25 one afternoon this week.

$155 ticket for following too close, and he only asked for my driver license, no proof of ins or registration. I can send in the money and only be assessed 2 points. Do they reduce the fine if I show up and take the plea?

FZRguy
Thu Sep 30th, 2010, 10:11 PM
In most cases, yes. I had a $150 4pt ticket in Jeffco a while back and got out of there with 2pts and $73. Always go to the court date.

FZRguy
Thu Sep 30th, 2010, 10:21 PM
And yes, it's absolutely about revenue generation. Felt like I was in a casino at the cashier area.

Aphrodite
Thu Sep 30th, 2010, 10:28 PM
Only thing I wonder about is........what were they doing before the money crunch???

CaneZach
Fri Oct 1st, 2010, 08:26 AM
Only thing I wonder about is........what were they doing before the money crunch???

Eating dougnuts, drinking coffee, beating people for no good reason. You know, the usual cop stuff.

CaneZach
Fri Oct 1st, 2010, 08:43 AM
Difficult to find current data. As of 2003, there were 2,975,337 registered drivers ( http://www.statemaster.com/graph/trn_lic_dri_tot_num-transportation-licensed-drivers-total-number) when the population was 4,548,339 (same population source linked above).

So at that time, 65.4% of the population were registered drivers. Assuming the same=

% of tickets issued based on registered drivers in 2008 = .0812

% of tickets issued based on registered drivers in 2008 = .0847

In numbers that might be easier to relate to; I extrapolate that the number of drivers in the state probably increased by 55,781.

Registered drivers increased by about 2% while tickets issued based 2008-'09 increased by nearly 5%

calculations:
extrapolated drivers 2008 based on assumed 65.4% of population divided by the same for 2009 = .9830

Tickets issued 2008 divided by 2009 = .9420 (data from KDVR)

How is .0035 percentage points "nearly 5%"? Also, don't forget to add an additional 250,000 to your driver totals to account for unlicensed drivers in this State who also receive citations.

Let's take a look at the numbers, using the 2003 figures as a baseline:

In 2003, the population was 4,548,339. Licensed drivers 2,975,337, or .65415 (65.4% is close enough)

Fast forward to 2008, when the population was 5,010,395. Licensed drivers, assuming 65.4%, total 3,276,798, to which we add 250,000 to account for unlicensed drivers, which brings the total up to 3,526,798 drivers. In 2008, the CSP issued 26,224 tickts for speeding between 1 MPH to 24 MPH over. That means .0074 of the total drivers in Colorado received a citation for speeding.

In 2009, the population climbed to 5,109,700, or just under a 2% increase from the previous year. Licensed drivers account for, we assume, 65.4%, or 3,341,743. Add 250k and we get 3,591,743. In 2009, the CSP issued 27,838 tickets for speeding, which means .0077 of the motoring public received a citation.

Overall, less than 1% of the motorists in Colorado will receive a citation, and that doesn't account for out-of-state drivers who got a ticket, since we're just assuming Colorado drivers only. Between 2008 and 2009, that number jumped a whopping THREE-HUNDREDTHS of one percent. I would hardly call it some sort of ticket-writing explosion.

Aphrodite
Fri Oct 1st, 2010, 09:22 AM
I got pulled over last night because they didn't see my temp tag, so he conveniently got to check all my paperwork in the process, I was clean, so off I went losing 5 minutes, I was shaken' just knowing he was going to write me up for something :-(

That's just wrong fearing the police, regardless of the statistic or their causes. :bow:

TinkerinWstuff
Fri Oct 1st, 2010, 09:44 AM
an increase BY 5%, not TO 5%.

Add the increase in issued tickets along with the increase in $$/ticket.

Highway robbery

Reyven
Fri Oct 1st, 2010, 09:53 AM
I'd also be curious to see how many "first time" offenders got tickets versus repeat offenders. I'd say that a "first time" offender would be someone who hasn't had a moving violation in the past 3 or 5 years, whichever one it is that a ticket's points drop off of your license. It would be interesting to see how much more likely a "repeat" offender is to A. offend again and B. receive a ticket for being a repeat.


Got my first ticket ever in June. Got pulled over about 2 weeks ago the bike riding with a friend. We both got stopped, I got another ticket and he got a warning. His record is clean. IDK if my june ticket was a deciding factor or not, but it was the only difference between the two of us.

CaneZach
Fri Oct 1st, 2010, 10:03 AM
an increase BY 5%, not TO 5%.

Add the increase in issued tickets along with the increase in $$/ticket.

Highway robbery

Even with an increase in citations, the total number of people who drive in Colorado who received a speeding ticket is less than ONE PERCENT. Calling it "highway robbery" is pure hyperbole.

Here's a novel idea: Familiarize yourself with Colorado Revised Statute, pay attention to what you're doing and your chances of getting a ticket are slim and none. Let's think of driving as a game. The law will be the rules of the game and the police are the refs/umpires. If you play by the rules, the referee won't throw the flag.

For all this talk of quotas and "speed traps", which I wholeheartedly disagree with (quotas and speed traps, not the discussion of), I think people tend to forget if you're doing the speed limit, you don't get pulled over! It's hard for a "speed trap" (by the way, what you're seeing is speed enforcement, not a true speed trap, which I'll explain later) to be effective if PEOPLE AREN'T SPEEDING! Everyone who has ridden with me knows I have a pretty heavy hand on my throttle, but if I get stopped and they issue a citation, I realize it's MY fault I got the ticket. I'm not blaming the cop for stopping me when I gave him a reason to in the first place. No, I wouldn't enjoy getting a ticket, but if I did I only have ONE person to blame and it isn't the officer.

For the record, a speed trap is a sharp decrease in the speed limit, say dropping the speed from 55 to 30 with no stepdown speed zones (55 to 45 to 35 to 30) and an officer enforcing the new speed before you've had a chance to slow down. Yes, technically you're supposed to be at 30 the moment you pass the sign, but most officers give you a slow down zone. Speed traps are notorious in certain states, but not so much here in Colorado. What you're seeing is the same speed limit for miles and officers enforcing that speed limit.

Also, I completely agree with Dirk. For certain counties and cities, this has nothing to do with safety. This is all about using the police or sheriff's department as a revenue generating agency when they should allow the police to patrol. Let the cops go out and patrol their cities, not demand they write a certain number of tickets a day.

csmith
Fri Oct 1st, 2010, 07:47 PM
There aren't just mythological creatures coming from the sky, making these rules then disappearing into the sunset. They're elected politicians. Period. Don't like them and their laws? Quit picking them. That being said, to complain about the actions police officers take as it pertains to speed enforcement is rediculous. These are people no different than anyone else doing a job. As CaneZach said, if you don't want a ticket don't speed. It's that simple.

Ghettodsm
Fri Oct 1st, 2010, 11:29 PM
There aren't just mythological creatures coming from the sky, making these rules then disappearing into the sunset. They're elected politicians. Period. Don't like them and their laws? Quit picking them. That being said, to complain about the actions police officers take as it pertains to speed enforcement is rediculous. These are people no different than anyone else doing a job. As CaneZach said, if you don't want a ticket don't speed. It's that simple.

yep, i noticed my friends kept getting tickets while I didn't, reason being I STOPPED SPEEDING/DRIVING LIKE AN IDIOT. There is a time and place for everything. If you don't like it, get a radar detector be super paranoid like me and only speed on the track where you are legal and not endangering anyone and your lives!

Sarge
Fri Oct 1st, 2010, 11:46 PM
There aren't just mythological creatures coming from the sky, making these rules then disappearing into the sunset. They're elected politicians. Period. Don't like them and their laws? Quit picking them. That being said, to complain about the actions police officers take as it pertains to speed enforcement is rediculous. These are people no different than anyone else doing a job. As CaneZach said, if you don't want a ticket don't speed. It's that simple.


It's understandable, don't speed, don't get a ticket. That's fine, the problem is the discrimination. Everybody speeds. But just read up a few posts and you see "I got stopped because the cop 'couldn't see my temp tag.'" It's stuff like that that people are complaining about.

Aphrodite
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 01:14 AM
Yup and it wasn't one of those tinted windows either just decided it wasn't "visible" enough for him at that moment. But he did let me go with no warnings or tickets, so go figure.

Bueller
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 07:51 AM
. They're elected politicians. Period. Don't like them and their laws? Quit picking them.

I am sorry but this is a ridiculous statement, you are going to elect your local representation on their stand on traffic enforcement? Pressure from their constituency would be the only way to deal with this but that would take a lot more work and perseverance than sitting here bitching about it on the internet.

CaneZach
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 08:54 AM
It's understandable, don't speed, don't get a ticket. That's fine, the problem is the discrimination. Everybody speeds. But just read up a few posts and you see "I got stopped because the cop 'couldn't see my temp tag.'" It's stuff like that that people are complaining about.

How is that "discrimination"? :wtf: If the officer can't see your temp tag, you're going to get stopped! This is why I said, "Get a copy of Colorado Revised Statutes and know the law." There are about 300 traffic laws in the State of Colorado and the average motorist knows about 5 of them. Then when they break one of the other 295 they don't know about, nor do they care to know, they think the officer is making up a law or it's "discrimination".

SOCAL4LIFE!!
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 08:57 AM
How is that "discrimination"? :wtf: If the officer can't see your temp tag, you're going to get stopped! This is why I said, "Get a copy of Colorado Revised Statutes and know the law." There are about 300 traffic laws in the State of Colorado and the average motorist knows about 5 of them. Then when they break one of the other 295 they don't know about, nor do they care to know, they think the officer is making up a law or it's "discrimination".

You got a link to these? I would be interesed in knowing them. I will look them up if you dont. But its always easier to ask first and then look later. :)

CaneZach
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 09:12 AM
You got a link to these? I would be interesed in knowing them. I will look them up if you dont. But its always easier to ask first and then look later. :)

Ask and you shall receive...

http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp=

Title 42 is all about traffic.

Aphrodite
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 10:20 AM
How is that "discrimination"? :wtf: If the officer can't see your temp tag, you're going to get stopped! This is why I said, "Get a copy of Colorado Revised Statutes and know the law." There are about 300 traffic laws in the State of Colorado and the average motorist knows about 5 of them. Then when they break one of the other 295 they don't know about, nor do they care to know, they think the officer is making up a law or it's "discrimination".

In my case it was dead in the middle of an un-tinted window he just missed it.

D Berns R6
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 12:15 PM
In my case it was dead in the middle of an un-tinted window he just missed it.

Doesn't matter how clear you think it's visible, it has to be visible at 100 ft. and if it's not then you will get stopped...BTW if it really was the dead middle of the back window (i think that's a little exaggeration though) it would be another violation (obstructing your view). Either violation will get you stopped.

Bueller
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 12:25 PM
BTW if it really was the dead middle of the back window (i think that's a little exaggeration though) it would be another violation (obstructing your view). Either violation will get you stopped.

So I can't drive anything that I can't see out my rear view mirror? Seriously?:doublefinger:

You stop someone for that and you are one of the dip shit cops people can't stand.

D Berns R6
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 12:42 PM
So I can't drive anything that I can't see out my rear view mirror? Seriously?:doublefinger:

You stop someone for that and you are one of the dip shit cops people can't stand.

Nope, and just letting it be known that it is a petty violation not something that a cop makes up.

D Berns R6
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 12:49 PM
On another note, you would be surprised what kind of people, drugs, and weapons are taken off the street (recently) for a license plate lamp out.

TFOGGuys
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 12:56 PM
Doesn't matter how clear you think it's visible, it has to be visible at 100 ft. and if it's not then you will get stopped...BTW if it really was the dead middle of the back window (i think that's a little exaggeration though) it would be another violation (obstructing your view). Either violation will get you stopped.

No violation in having a rear window obstructed. You don't ever have to HAVE a rear window, as long as you have a right side rear view mirror. MOST commercial vehicles do not have a rear window (think box truck).

Aphrodite
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 01:10 PM
Doesn't matter how clear you think it's visible, it has to be visible at 100 ft. and if it's not then you will get stopped...BTW if it really was the dead middle of the back window (i think that's a little exaggeration though) it would be another violation (obstructing your view). Either violation will get you stopped.

It is a 3 gen Firebird so the slant of the window I felt it necessary to put it truly realistically in the middle.....

Actually rear view obstruction is avoided having both outside mirrors and it is visible at 200 feet. Officer admitted he missed the tag. Point being he could have just been a prick and found any number of other violation and wrote that or could have wrote other stuff but my insurance is current and my license is current so he felt I did nothing to deem it necessary

back on point...
Main subject is secondary in my case, thinking, is the fact I was shaken by being pulled over when I shouldn't be in fear of the police dept. Especially when I am doing what I am supposed to be doing i.e. doing nothing illegal speeding or otherwise. I shouldn't have to be an attorney or have to hire an attorney to understand every little law that has been slipped in to affect just because of a money crunch.

D Berns R6
Sat Oct 2nd, 2010, 01:23 PM
No violation in having a rear window obstructed. You don't ever have to HAVE a rear window, as long as you have a right side rear view mirror. MOST commercial vehicles do not have a rear window (think box truck).

You are correct on vehicles/trucks that are not equipped with a rear window, rear side windows or when such windows are treated with a material or component that obstructs the rear view. This goes for towing, and cargo loads as well.



It is a 3 gen Firebird so the slant of the window I felt it necessary to put it truly realistically in the middle.....

Actually rear view obstruction is avoided having both outside mirrors and it is visible at 200 feet. Officer admitted he missed the tag. Point being he could have just been a prick and found any number of other violation and wrote that or could have wrote other stuff but my insurance is current and my license is current so he felt I did nothing to deem it necessary


Yes, when what I stated above is present and you can see at least 200ft behind you. Good, as he should...

csmith
Sun Oct 3rd, 2010, 03:00 PM
I am sorry but this is a ridiculous statement, you are going to elect your local representation on their stand on traffic enforcement? Pressure from their constituency would be the only way to deal with this but that would take a lot more work and perseverance than sitting here bitching about it on the internet.

I wasn't so much going the route of questioning new candidates on what they feel about traffic enforcement as much as just not reelecting people that act in ways you don't agree with. I concede you're not going to know much about these issues as it pertains to those that don't have much previous political experience (i.e. most city/county political candidates), but once you see how they intend to do these things it's pretty straight forward in not allowing them to stick around.

I agree with the pressure from the constituency part, but you have to get people to give a damn about making changes before those changes can be made.

CYCLE_MONKEY
Sun Oct 3rd, 2010, 03:04 PM
Eating dougnuts, drinking coffee, beating people for no good reason. You know, the usual cop stuff.
They get up early to BEAT the crowds!;)

csmith
Sun Oct 3rd, 2010, 03:10 PM
It's understandable, don't speed, don't get a ticket. That's fine, the problem is the discrimination. Everybody speeds. But just read up a few posts and you see "I got stopped because the cop 'couldn't see my temp tag.'" It's stuff like that that people are complaining about.

I see your point and understand, but as she says he did let her go with nothing. Police officers are just as fallible as anyone else, hence he admitted he made a mistake.

CYCLE_MONKEY
Sun Oct 3rd, 2010, 03:12 PM
Hey Cane, I agree with you. Here's a novel idea though, how about realistic speed limits and MANDATORY enhanced driver training (including knowing how to look for motorcycles)? We can raise the limits to a safe level, and people will be MORE safe because the driving tests will be a LOT tougher and the use of cell phones will be banned with huge fines for that or other "inattentive" driving habits. With today's cars, we should be able to go faster in almost every scenario (except residential, school, and hospital zones). Oh wait, that would make too much sense....;)

CaneZach
Sun Oct 3rd, 2010, 06:22 PM
Hey Cane, I agree with you. Here's a novel idea though, how about realistic speed limits and MANDATORY enhanced driver training (including knowing how to look for motorcycles)? We can raise the limits to a safe level, and people will be MORE safe because the driving tests will be a LOT tougher and the use of cell phones will be banned with huge fines for that or other "inattentive" driving habits. With today's cars, we should be able to go faster in almost every scenario (except residential, school, and hospital zones). Oh wait, that would make too much sense....;)

Frank, to be honest with you, if they made the sped limit on the interstate "reasonable and prudent", or whatever Montana had, I'd be just fine with that. The problem in Colorado is we have too many assclowns who think the left lane is their personal lane, so they cruise from Pueblo to Fort Collins in the left lane and never move. Obviously slow traffic down through cities, where vehicular traffic tends to pick up.

I would also LOVE to see people receive more driver's training. There are too many people on the road who have ZERO idea what they're doing and inevitably screw it up for everyone else. These are typically the fucktards who cause a crash because they did something stupid, then say, "Oh... I didn't know I couldn't make a right turn from the far left lane.." or something equally asinine. With the stupidity level in this State, I'm really surprised more people don't get themselves killed everyday.

Bashed
Sun Oct 10th, 2010, 08:21 AM
I personally think that I am a safer rider/driver going 20 over the limit than most of the drivers Zach is refering to, due to my awarness. Speed, in my opinion, does not equal being unsafe. Inattention to surroundings and conditions probably causes more accidents than speeders, but that is my guess, not fact. I play the game Zach refered to earlier, sometimes I win, sometimes not.

Sarge
Sun Oct 10th, 2010, 11:41 AM
I personally think that I am a safer rider/driver going 20 over the limit than most of the drivers Zach is refering to, due to my awarness. Speed, in my opinion, does not equal being unsafe. Inattention to surroundings and conditions probably causes more accidents than speeders, but that is my guess, not fact. I play the game Zach refered to earlier, sometimes I win, sometimes not.

I have to agree with you, at least most of the time here. Speed isn't unsafe, it's just that if something happens at speed the outcome is usually worse. The problem is though, that most people can't handle the speed, and it does become a real problem, especially when people are travelling at very different speeds. For example, if some bozo comes around a corner at 75 Mph in a 65 Mph zone, and some other bozo is texting on his phone, trying to take a picture of an accident or something at 25 mph, the first bozo may as well have rear-ended him at 50 mph from a standstill, because he didn't have the experience to realize that you might want to slow down around blind curves, because people are idiots.

Aphrodite
Sun Oct 10th, 2010, 11:44 AM
Speed, much like on a bike is not the problem, it how to handle that speed and when NOT to speed, and when to slow way down.

csmith
Sun Oct 10th, 2010, 02:43 PM
I personally think that I am a safer rider/driver going 20 over the limit than most of the drivers Zach is refering to, due to my awarness. Speed, in my opinion, does not equal being unsafe. Inattention to surroundings and conditions probably causes more accidents than speeders, but that is my guess, not fact. I play the game Zach refered to earlier, sometimes I win, sometimes not.


I have to agree with you, at least most of the time here. Speed isn't unsafe, it's just that if something happens at speed the outcome is usually worse. The problem is though, that most people can't handle the speed, and it does become a real problem, especially when people are travelling at very different speeds. For example, if some bozo comes around a corner at 75 Mph in a 65 Mph zone, and some other bozo is texting on his phone, trying to take a picture of an accident or something at 25 mph, the first bozo may as well have rear-ended him at 50 mph from a standstill, because he didn't have the experience to realize that you might want to slow down around blind curves, because people are idiots.

You guys also have a higher level of training than most. This is only my assumption, but I'd think trackdays/racing/dirt riding (Sgt, I'm only guessing you're a part of one of those scenes) all give you a leg up as far as composure at elevated speed mixed with adverse situations. Paraphrasing what CaneZach and (I think) Bueller said, If the general populace had advanced and/or recurring training there'd probably be a little more pride taken in the ability to drive.

I doubt Mayhem does track days. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Sjld5yy3Q