TheAgitator.com
Discretion
Monday, August 10th, 2009…there doesn’t seem to be much at work in this story.
When Donald Ross’s sister passed, more than 100 people attended her funeral mass in Spokane.
The burial was scheduled for a nearby cemetery, but Ross and his family only made it a quarter of a mile when flashing lights forced them to the side of the road.
“Harold, his (my husband’s) brother, said, ‘You pulled us out of a funeral procession,’” said wife Shirley Ross.
But the deputy kept them there, writing up five citations because the driver and the passengers were not wearing a seat belts…
Those five tickets took 12 minutes to write. By the time Ross and his family members got back on the road, the burial was over.
The police department has apologized and reprimanded the officer. Just kidding!
…the sheriff’s department says [the deputy] had every right.
“We’re out here trying to prevent funerals, not disrupt them,” said Dave Reagan of Spokane County Sheriff’s Office.
Police officers don’t have rights, they have powers. And the fact that they have them doesn’t mean they always have to use them, even in those situations where the law allows them. Seems to me that making a woman miss her brother’s burial in order to write her a ticket—not for endangering others, but for not buckling her own seat belt—would be one of those times when some discretion might be in order.
Thanks to reader Judy for the tip.
Caveat – I’m against funeral processions, they can be quite ridiculous in a city with any traffic issues whatsoever, particularly since most states have laws stating you can’t go through one, etc.
That said, indeed most states, as far as I’m aware, have those laws – so it can be presumed that the sheriff in this case had to break those laws just to pull this car over. And I’ve never – EVER – seen a cop car break a traffic law.
Oh, another thing – sheriffs are generally an elected office. These folks would do well to publicize this episode next time elections roll around….
Niiiiiiiiiiiiice! Five citations in one stop… that bought him extra time to flirt with the hot waitress at Dunkin Donuts.
He was probably looking for texting scofflaws…
You got your cases reversed, Radley. It was a man who missed his sister’s funeral, not the other way around.
Since when do you have to wear a seatbelt in the back seat?
Or were there 5 people in the front seat?
Since when do you have to wear a seatbelt in the back seat?
It depends on the state. Full-car seatbelts just became law in the last few months here in Florida.
I wonder what kind of stink one would make if someone inhibited a police funeral-procession/tax-splurge in the slightest.
‘The deputy, who was a part of a special emphasis group, was only giving out tickets, not warnings.’
this looks like a pretty slick way to increase revenue- create a ‘special emphasis group’! some departments count how many times you pull people over, not how many tickets you write. so, some cops issue tons of warnings, which generate no revenue.
Typical jackassery.
Color me unsurprised.
You gotta hammer this point more, Radley:
Police have *powers*, not *rights*. Any time they overextend those powers is rightly known as abuse of power.
Of course cops don’t want to use ‘discretion’ in a situation like this: it’s nabbing low-hanging fruit. Like Marty said, 5 citations in one stop makes a big dent in that month’s quota. More time to sit in some parking lot downloading music, videos, and computer programs on someone’s unsecured wifi…
The comments section of that article is depressing as hell. The public responses run about 95% “But… it’s the law!” That, plus some sort of programming glitch which repeats every comment 3 to 12 times. Argh.
What Fluffy said …
#1, the issue is “cop did something to wield his AUTHORITAH in a situation that didn’t merit it, and caused serious personal emotional distress on a person”. The fact that it was a funeral procession is irrelevant. This article demonstrates lack of compassion and a boner for AUTHORITAH.
The situation never merits a seat belt violation citation. The law is stupid and a trampling of individual rights. So if the officer is to truly use discretion he would write ZERO seat belt tickets. That said, there is nothing about this situation which would merit a special pass in my opinion. A person who gets pulled over and stopped for 12 minutes is always inconvenienced to some degree. This is no different than “I got pulled over and missed my X”, whatever X is.
So z,
Getting pulled over and missing the start of G.I. Joe at the local multiplex is no different than getting pulled over and missing the burial of an immediate family member?
Wow.
Way to make friends there, Officer Stickuptheass.
To expound:
Cops have powers, responsibilities (see Job description, e.g.) and restrictions (see Bill Of Rights e.g.).
I’ve long been troubled by this notion of rights for the government. Could anything really be more absurd?
-bear
@ JWeidner # 13
Depends on the family member.
;P
#11, well, Radley seems to be emphasizing the compassion angle; I would say the real issue is (mentioned by Radley more in passing) that this is -again- a victimless crime issue. There should be no law regarding seat belt usage in the first place.
I can’t see why you guys are complaining. The cops are just making sure you’re safe. It’s no different than when they try to get you to quit smoking by outlawing it in most places or in the future when they make you eat better and get more exercise.
My ex-boss’s son was the cop that pulled over the NFL player in the hospital parking lot as they were on their way to his mother in law’s death bed. (Dallas)
He had to resign.
This guy is being treated as if he were a good cop.
I don’t see any difference other than that one was an NFL player.
@ Dave K # 18
“Officer Blastem had no alternative but to open fire when he saw the family of five turning into McDonalds”
;)
Well yes, the main issue is that it’s a victimless crime. The funeral procession part is simply a morally neutral part of the story that acts as a multiplier on the attention they get. The Calvo case was exactly the same. Same old terrorist swat teams that nobody cares about. Enter morally irrelevant fact “city mayor”, and suddenly the same old evil behavior becomes news. For a little while, at least.
Of course, even though both those cases got more attention than usual due to the irrelevant details, that doesn’t help much when the vast majority of people think government extortion and dog shooting is morally righteous to begin with.
I think that we would be willing to give the police alot more discretion if so many of them didn’t act like robots who cannot think for themselves.
You know, the comments make me laugh. I would bet for every one of those “It’s the law!” types, those are probably the exact people who will whine and complain like no tomorrow when its they who get hassled in some unreasonable manner.
I’m suprised he didn’t stop the hearse. I’m sure he could have given them a ticket since the corpse probably wasn’t wearing a seatbelt either.
Any law that is designed to protect you for youself should not exist.
The above should read “Any law that is designed to protect you from yourself, should not exist.” Looks like i have a case of the mondays.
I asked my wife what she would have done if this had happened during our son’s funeral procession. In the face of existence, a retention holster would have been the only thing stopping another call to the funeral home. I wouldn’t have reacted any differently than if i would have had a chance to go after the 3 cars that broke into the procession, honking and flying the bird, pissed off that we were driving slow and not stopping at red lights and stop signs. You never know when you might bump into somebody wondering why to even bother waking up in the morning. But its just a feeling, nothing closure and time will keep from passing. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust.
But in happy news, i live in a state that doesn’t require motorcycle helmets (although we need eye protection if a windscreen isn’t present). 2 weekends ago i was riding my bicycle on the bike path and received a local violation for riding without a helmet. He nearly said, “son, its just my job, and i hope you understand.” Well, calling it your job, old hoss, sure don’t make it right. And if you want me to i’ll say a prayer, for your soul tonight. (Never owned a bicycle helmet, but i feel naked on a motorcycle or snowboarding and skiing or horseback riding without one. And i’m a seat belt stalin on top of that, even if i hate that it is a primary enforcement law and think it should be up to the driver’s discretion, or deferred to the passenger in the case of an indifferent operator.)
#26, wow, you can ride a m/c without a helmet, but not a motorcycle. WOW, contradiction city. (Let’s not get into low speed crashes being worse on taller bicycles than on a cruiser, yes I know that.)
As far as “seat belt stalin[ism]” goes, I require anyone in my car front or back to have belt on. Even if I was indifferent to a passenger’s safety (generally not the case) or even wanting to be respectful of their right not to be protected (leaving out whether I can get a ticket for that as the vehicle operator), there’s the simple matter of trying to keep everything possible in the passenger compartment secured. A human being flying around the cockpit isn’t exactly what I have in mind should the worst occur….
#27 “asstard” – somehow I’ve missed that one, unless you just coined it. I’m using it….
#29 First seen in the webcomic Casey and Andy over at http://www.galactanet.com/comic/index.php
Combination of ‘asshole’ and ‘retard’, but you probably already figured that out.
Someone needs to remind the pigs that their duty is “to serve and protect”. And the “to protect” part is for crime, and assholes, not from ourselves.
How many people are killed in funeral processions asshole? Most of the ones I have seen have police escorts in the first place. When I was a kid I rode in several limos to the graveyard and I never wore a seatbelt. How long till the first tasing during an interrment?
OT but unheard of swift justice: http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090810/NEWS01/90810042/1001/NEWS
“‘We’re out here trying to prevent funerals, not disrupt them,’ said Dave Reagan of Spokane County Sheriff’s Office.”
That’s a goddamned lie. They’re out there scraping the populace for revenue because they’re broke and have to steal everything that they’ve got an angle on.
Rotten leeching motherfuckers.
Although I don’t see it as much anymore, it used to be that most funeral processions I saw got a police escourt. Like Tim C, I also don’t like processions, but if they’re going to have them an escourt makes more sense than pulling them over to issue citations.
I’ve always though seat belt laws were wrong and their stated reason is flawed.Your much safer in a car without a belt on than on a motorcycle,or playing football for that matter.I wear mine out of choice.
When I came across this story, I couldn’t help but think that along with a seatbelt ticket, there would be an ‘assault on an officer’ charge and could only hope the ticket-giving SOB was my EX husband!
@ 9 Highway. More likely using an unsecured connection to surf kiddie porn sites to pull the traffic through the router of someone he will later bust. For downloading kiddie porn.
37??!!
Seat belt laws are not about your safety. They are about training you to be compliant to the orders of the “authorities”. THEY use this kindof BS to train the people to be sheeple.
Tiocfaidh ar la!
I understand that Washington State has a “click it or ticket” on seatbelts for all passengers and cell phone use is also banned. On the seatbelts, there is generally strict enforcement because
it generates so much revenueit is a life safety thing. You cannot be trusted to make that decision yourself.I am against funeral processions, but I am for cops and sheriff deputies showing a little discretion. A warning would have been sufficient.
I don’t understand why people are against funeral processions. Reasoning? Just curious.
Police officers don’t have rights, they have powers.
This statement really struck me. Why do we as a society continue to accept the lumbering and sure transfer of power from the individual to the state all in the name of safety or social progress? Why do we accept behavior by our agents that we would never consider personally attempting to impose on our neighbors?