NationStates Jolt Archive

It was the green man!

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5a6_1174077305

Do you think this is entrapment (which some of the motorists apparently claimed)

why this is just a clever plot to avoid losing gold isn't it ;)

People just don't get entrapment.

The police must incite an otherwise law-abiding citizen to break the law. Just because they trick you doesn't mean they entrapped you.

And leprechaun's are awesome.

It was the green man!

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5a6_1174077305

Do you think this is entrapment (which some of the motorists apparently claimed)

clever....

Can you imagine coming home with a ticket and having to explain to the significant other?

'Honey, I'm home!'
'How was your day?'
'I got given a speeding ticket by a leprechaun'
'...'

Just because they trick you doesn't mean they entrapped you.


Actually, I fail to see how they even 'tricked' the motorists.
And they were already breaking the law by speeding in the first place.
He was an officer with a radar gun in a leprechaun suit and sign that says"watch your speed". Cops sometimes hide behind bushes in their cars with a radar gun...

Actually, I fail to see how they even 'tricked' the motorists.
And they were already breaking the law by speeding in the first place.
He was an officer with a radar gun in a leprechaun suit and sign that says"watch your speed". Cops sometimes hide behind bushes in their cars with a radar gun...

Thats whats bothering me about it, too. The only way they could draw more attention to the officer with the radar gun is to build a giant flashing sign with an arrow pointing to him. This catches people who are not only speeding, but not fucking paying attention. That's a pretty dangerous combination, and while I speed, like, a lot, and think that some speed limits are too low-anyone paying that little attention and speed should be caught.

They just get bored with their jobs don't they?

Thats whats bothering me about it, too. The only way they could draw more attention to the officer with the radar gun is to build a giant flashing sign with an arrow pointing to him. This catches people who are not only speeding, but not fucking paying attention. That's a pretty dangerous combination, and while I speed, like, a lot, and think that some speed limits are too low-anyone paying that little attention and speed should be caught.
Too bad you can't give a ticket for stupid, huh? Although I guess that's what this is, in a sense. When I drove into Baton Rouge regularly, I noticed early on that there was a cop, more often than not, under an overpass not long after the speed limit dropped to 55 going into the city. I also noticed that everyone who was a commuter hit their brakes at about the same time, and that there was always a dumbass who would blow past. After a while, I started waving at them when I passed them on the side of the road.

They just get bored with their jobs don't they?

Dont lots of people? pretty funny and apparently effective way to do it

some of the speeds (i think that is what he was calling out) were rediculous to be ticketing, but it isn't any more entrapment than a police cruiser parked doing the same thing. Just because he's dressed out of uniform doesn't change the fact that he's an officer

The only tactic of nabbing speeders that I've ever seen or heard overturned was the FastLane/EZPass system. They are little RFID devices you put in your window so you don't have to pay at the toll booth, but instead have it automatically deducted from your debit/credit account. MA, for a short time, was using the devices to time how long it took people to get from one toll plaza to the next, and issuing tickets based on that. People threatened to stop using the FastLane system, which would have lost the state money, so they gave in.

Dont lots of people? pretty funny and apparently effective way to do it

That is true, it's good to have alittle fun with your job once in awhile.

Personally I would've done it in the nude, but I probably would've been breaking the indecent exposure laws. One can dream though....

That is true, it's good to have alittle fun with your job once in awhile.

Personally I would've done it in the nude, but I probably would've been breaking the indecent exposure laws. One can dream though....

Yeah suppose they cant break the law while enforcing it ... not without a big irony implosion

People threatened to stop using the FastLane system, which would have lost the state money, so they gave in.

Hey man, money talks. I don't use the turnpike system down here very often simply because it's inconvenient for me, so I have no incentive to use the FastPass system, but I'd like to think that even if I did, I'd still hold off, simply because while sitting in a tollbooth isn't exactly a terrific job, it is a job that pays and gets state benefits, and in a place like this, the more people making that kind of money, the better. Systems like FastPass are designed to get rid of those jobs as much as they can.

Yeah suppose they cant break the law while enforcing it ... not without a big irony implosion

You know, they should do Santa Claus around the Holidays and Jesus or the Easter Bunny around Easter.

Flip them--that'll confuse the hell out of everyone involved.

LOL! Jesus should be holding a sign saying "This is what I died and resurrected for? Thanks alot!"

You know, they should do Santa Claus around the Holidays and Jesus or the Easter Bunny around Easter.

Flip them--that'll confuse the hell out of everyone involved.

Hey man, money talks. I don't use the turnpike system down here very often simply because it's inconvenient for me, so I have no incentive to use the FastPass system, but I'd like to think that even if I did, I'd still hold off, simply because while sitting in a tollbooth isn't exactly a terrific job, it is a job that pays and gets state benefits, and in a place like this, the more people making that kind of money, the better. Systems like FastPass are designed to get rid of those jobs as much as they can.

They would have lost literally millions if the system failed.
You make a good point I never really considered about the system...personally, I'm in favor of getting rid of tolls as CT did years ago after a massive accident, but I use fastlane because it is reasonably cheaper and I can't afford to use all of my quarters on tolls

They would have lost literally millions if the system failed.
You make a good point I never really considered about the system...personally, I'm in favor of getting rid of tolls as CT did years ago after a massive accident, but I use fastlane because it is reasonably cheaper and I can't afford to use all of my quarters on tolls

I don't mind tolls on roads in general--I certainly like having the turnpike there when I need it--but I am very much opposed to the latest plan stuck out there by the Florida DOT which would allow private companies to build toll roads as part of the Florida system and continue to collect and raise tolls for as long as they wish.

I prefer the Danish method of topless women holding up the speed limit signs.

I prefer the Danish method of topless women holding up the speed limit signs.

I demand pictures.

There's a video of it out there somewhere. I'm certainly not linking to it. :p

Telegram it to me?

I demand pictures.

There's a video of it out there somewhere. I'm certainly not linking to it. :p

Telegram it to me?

lol! It's not THAT exciting.

I just found it again on Google with a very simple search. I'm sure you could.

This unfairly tarnishes the image of leprechauns.

Not knowing what the limit on that road in the OP video clip is, I can't say for certain whether the speeds the leprechaun was radioing were not high enough to warrant a reasonable ticket. 56 in a 50 is dumb, but 56 in a 45 is reasonable to me.

Good idea, and more power to 'em.

I don't mind tolls on roads in general--I certainly like having the turnpike there when I need it--but I am very much opposed to the latest plan stuck out there by the Florida DOT which would allow private companies to build toll roads as part of the Florida system and continue to collect and raise tolls for as long as they wish.

My mom was working the ER the night of CT's massive pileup...7 people died
link (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E02E0DE1E38F931A15752C0A965948260)
Now, I grew up in emergency rooms and hospitals. I've watched victims of motorcycle accidents, attempted suicides, gun fights...you name it. Hell, I've watched surgery live. And, in all honesty, nothing has turned my stomach like the stories my mom told me about the victims coming in from this crash

So yeah, I have some pretty big problems with toll roads. Toll plazas are death traps waiting for one idiot to mess up.

Yes blatently you should not speed

BUT the reasons against speed cameras are as follows:

1)IF motorised are caught speeding by the camera, it is self defeating, it is obvioulsy not a detterent as the car continues to speed despite the presence of a camera. So a FAT lot of good it did.

2) Police DO hide in tricky little places where they impose speed limits that are poorly defined and/or difficult to adhere to specifically for the purpose of snapping motorists. If you dont believe me go drive in wales or shutup

3) European human rights commission recently ruled that a man flashed by a camera speeding MUST LEGALLY confess to who was driving his car.

I object to 3 because:

WHY should he be forced to incriminate himself? surely hes innocent until the police prove otherwise, yes we can see the car did speed but I feel the police have to get evidence who was doing this by their own means NOT by FORCE.

4) They distract road users by making them nervous and encouraging them to look at the speedometer rather than the road. If you think THAT is good then you are stupid end of story.

5) They generate income for the police, yes, lovely, but why fund an organization more interested in profiteering from the enforcement of petty laws than fighting crime?


Despite all this I cannot think of any way of encouraging people to slow down other than improve public transport, but thats another issue.

Yes blatently you should not speed

BUT the reasons against speed cameras are as follows:

1)IF motorised are caught speeding by the camera, it is self defeating, it is obvioulsy not a detterent as the car continues to speed despite the presence of a camera. So a FAT lot of good it did.

2) Police DO hide in tricky little places where they impose speed limits that are poorly defined and/or difficult to adhere to specifically for the purpose of snapping motorists. If you dont believe me go drive in wales or shutup

3) European human rights commission recently ruled that a man flashed by a camera speeding MUST LEGALLY confess to who was driving his car.

I object to 3 because:

WHY should he be forced to incriminate himself? surely hes innocent until the police prove otherwise, yes we can see the car did speed but I feel the police have to get evidence who was doing this by their own means NOT by FORCE.

4) They distract road users by making them nervous and encouraging them to look at the speedometer rather than the road. If you think THAT is good then you are stupid end of story.

5) They generate income for the police, yes, lovely, but why fund an organization more interested in profiteering from the enforcement of petty laws than fighting crime?


Despite all this I cannot think of any way of encouraging people to slow down other than improve public transport, but thats another issue.

Wow. So many bad arguments I don't know where to start.

I mean #4, are you serious? And #2, Wales is nothing unusual. The idea there is to, oh, I don't know go slower if you're unsure? Maybe?

You definitely have a point on #3.

#5 is popular as arguments go, but speeding is dangerous, so enforcement that DOESN'T take cops away from other crimes is fine by me.

And #1 -- uh, if I may continue speeding that day, but a sizeable fine in the mail will certainly remind me that it's a bad idea in the future.

Look, chum, if you need to speed, just come out and say it instead of trying to use insanity as a defense.

3) European human rights commission recently ruled that a man flashed by a camera speeding MUST LEGALLY confess to who was driving his car.

I object to 3 because:

WHY should he be forced to incriminate himself? surely hes innocent until the police prove otherwise, yes we can see the car did speed but I feel the police have to get evidence who was doing this by their own means NOT by FORCE.

You definitely have a point on #3.


Sorry, but he has no point at all with #3.

You do not have a right to use/drive a car. It is a privilege that you are granted by the state when you obtain your license. As such the state can, and does, impose conditions on the grant of this privilege. One of these conditions is that the owner of the vehicle has an obligation (legally) to reveal who was in control of the vehicle at any time that the state, or any of its agents, may require this information.

Additionally, there is no European constitution to have a fifth amendment.

Sorry, but he has no point at all with #3.

You do not have a right to use/drive a car. It is a privilege that you are granted by the state when you obtain your license.


why? there's no restrictions on using and/or buying most other objects excluding drugs, so why should cars be an exception?

some of the speeds (i think that is what he was calling out) were rediculous to be ticketing, but it isn't any more entrapment than a police cruiser parked doing the same thing. Just because he's dressed out of uniform doesn't change the fact that he's an officer

The only tactic of nabbing speeders that I've ever seen or heard overturned was the FastLane/EZPass system. They are little RFID devices you put in your window so you don't have to pay at the toll booth, but instead have it automatically deducted from your debit/credit account. MA, for a short time, was using the devices to time how long it took people to get from one toll plaza to the next, and issuing tickets based on that. People threatened to stop using the FastLane system, which would have lost the state money, so they gave in.I wouldn't be surprised if Illinois was doing that with the I-Pass. I can see a putz like Blago doing that.

Thats whats bothering me about it, too. The only way they could draw more attention to the officer with the radar gun is to build a giant flashing sign with an arrow pointing to him. This catches people who are not only speeding, but not fucking paying attention. That's a pretty dangerous combination, and while I speed, like, a lot, and think that some speed limits are too low-anyone paying that little attention and speed should be caught.

Don't you lose attention when you are distracted by a waving leprechaun on the side of a road?

why? there's no restrictions on using and/or buying most other objects excluding drugs, so why should cars be an exception?

It is not a restriction, it is a condition. Cars are not an exception, all forms of motorized transport have this kind of condition attached. Some forms are much more tightly controlled. There are bridges in England that only licensed pilots are allowed to guide boats under etc.

But more to the point. Why should you not have to answer for your actions with respect to owning, and perhaps allowing others to use, a potentially lethal machine?

Who else thinks the Sheriff just plain doesn't like his deputies?
Why else would he make them dress up and ridicule themselves in public as part of their work?
evil. evil man. I like him.

Who else thinks the Sheriff just plain doesn't like his deputies?
Why else would he make them dress up and ridicule themselves in public as part of their work?
evil. evil man. I like him.

I don't know, it seems like the deputies are having fun with it.

It is not a restriction, it is a condition. Cars are not an exception, all forms of motorized transport have this kind of condition attached. Some forms are much more tightly controlled. There are bridges in England that only licensed pilots are allowed to guide boats under etc.

But more to the point. Why should you not have to answer for your actions with respect to owning, and perhaps allowing others to use, a potentially lethal machine?

Indeed. Take guns, for instance. If someone is killed by a gun, and that gun is found to be your gun, the police have every right to ask who has access to said gun the day of said murder.

As well, it's not that owning the car is the privilege, it's driving on state funded roads that is. You can buy a car, and drive it around your property all you like. Want to take it out on the road? Abide by the fucking rules. It's not that hard.

A bit of a tangent, but does anyone else think that when you get your license renewed you should have to take a god damn road test? Seriously, I have seen so many terrible drivers in my area, that I honestly don't think it would be a bad idea at all. Don't pass the test, don't get a damn license. Easy as that.

I honestly swear that if I get cut off by another old lady who can barely see over her dashboard driving 10 fucking miles in a 30(Has happened more than once to me), have a fucking redneck in a massive truck almost drive me off the road because I'm not going to go fucking 70 in a 55 just so he can as well(Has happened to me before), be cut off on the Interstate by some douche in a mustang that his mommy or daddy bought him while going nearly seventy miles an hour(Has happened to me before), or having my ass ridden by some moron who thinks that it is safe to drive less than five feet behind me while driving down the highway(Has happened to me), I am honestly going to shoot everyone on the Interstate I see, and go down in a blaze of glory.

So basically, I think it would be a good idea for everyone to get a road test every five years. I fail to see how this could be a bad idea. It wouldn't even need to be extensive. Just make sure the idiot can drive.

Way to distract drivers from the road.. :rolleyes:

4) They distract road users by making them nervous and encouraging them to look at the speedometer rather than the road. If you think THAT is good then you are stupid end of story.

I mean #4, are you serious?

If you think this is a bad point then you either don't drive or you don't have speed cameras where you are.

When you go past a camera, of course you look at your speedometer, because you don't want to be caught over the limit. For those few moments, it becomes your sole focus. For most people, 17 children could walk in front of them at that point and they wouldn't notice.

The problem is a thousand times worse with these new average speed cameras. It is literally impossible to drive at a precise speed for mile after mile without almost staring at your speedometer. Yes, you might be going more slowly, but it'll be slowly right into the back of the lorry in front.

If you think this is a bad point then you either don't drive or you don't have speed cameras where you are.

When you go past a camera, of course you look at your speedometer, because you don't want to be caught over the limit. For those few moments, it becomes your sole focus. For most people, 17 children could walk in front of them at that point and they wouldn't notice.

The problem is a thousand times worse with these new average speed cameras. It is literally impossible to drive at a precise speed for mile after mile without almost staring at your speedometer. Yes, you might be going more slowly, but it'll be slowly right into the back of the lorry in front.

It is not nearly impossible to drive at a constant speed without looking at a speedometer. It takes experience, concentration and an absence of overt distraction (a really kick-ass song on the CD player can make me speed, but I know that, so I concentrate a bit harder). Modern drivers can be doing anything else but driving -- eating, calling or texting(!) on a cell phone, applying makeup -- hell, blowing each other. The task is not the issue, it's the person attempting the task.

If it takes you longer than half a second to see your speed on the speedometer, then you need to get glasses, practice, or not drive. Your assertions that this "feat" is impossible is worrying because it suggests that more and more people may be treating the physical act of driving (and all of its related skills) as something too trivial to be learned properly. I wouldn't normally care about someone's skills in any other context, but if you're driving on the same road I am, I certainly do care.

We have red-light cameras, but as yet no speed cameras in the greater Puget Sound area. Then again, as someone who drives the speed limit, I won't have to worry when they're installed.

Way to distract drivers from the road.. :rolleyes:

Oh, please. If they'd have noticed the leprechaun, they'd have sussed the radar gun, too. Besides, how can you distract someone using a cell phone at 60mph with a mere leprechaun?

Sorry, but he has no point at all with #3.

You do not have a right to use/drive a car. It is a privilege that you are granted by the state when you obtain your license. As such the state can, and does, impose conditions on the grant of this privilege. One of these conditions is that the owner of the vehicle has an obligation (legally) to reveal who was in control of the vehicle at any time that the state, or any of its agents, may require this information.

Additionally, there is no European constitution to have a fifth amendment.

Excellent point. Validation of point #3 retracted. Apologies.