You know, when I was a kid, I put quarters in a bubble gum machine and never got a badge, but some people get lucky.

bubbles,

You write "Cops will routinely prowl for burglars or cruise the park after 11pm (when they should be the ONLY vehicle in the park) without headlights."

I hear cruising the park is number one on VPD top ten.

Jones...You're putting words in my mouth I never uttered. NOWHERE have I ever said that a cop can't chase a bad guy. What I DID say was: "Sure they can catch'em. Just turn on the overhead lights. Now, how could that be a problem?" THAT is what I wrote. It's in the post. You can look it up. You probably saw it; it was right above the criticism doesn't equal hatred line.

The siren is probably a good idea, too. Using those devices on the police car, he is free to chase at whatever speed he finds necessary. If you're chasing a bad guy, it probably isn't necessary to avoid tipping him off that you're in pursuit. He KNOWS that. The lights and siren DO, however, give other drivers on the road some warning that there is a reason for them to be extra careful -- something's happening and they need to pull over and stop before somebody runs over them. It's called common sense. And, if because you're using the lights a bad guy does get away, you won't be criticized as much as if you injured or killed an innnocent driver and his passengers. You won't be fired like the guy on 59 was for driving without any lights.

Most citizens really want to support their local police -- I know that I'd like to. The problem is that there are an awful lot of us who simply don't trust that what you're doing is for our benefit. We see most uniformed patrol officers as little more than -- wait for it, here it comes -- revenue generation officials of the city government. But, I DON'T hate you.

tnt88,

So apparently you are related to the couple in the Hwy 59 incident. so I understand you have a bias.

but that incident is again something different than what is being discussed here.

The problem in the 59 incident was that the cop did not have his HEADLIGHTS on. not that he didn't have his overheads on (Overheads being the flashing red and blues)

Cops routinely respond to most calls without their overheads on. only the most serious calls warrant them. Many times they are attempting to avoid alerting the criminal that they are coming in order to CATCH the crook.

Cops can also drive without headlights on under certain circumstances and as conditions allow them to do so safely. The incident on 59 DOES NOT allow for him to have done so safely and he should have had his headlights on and thats why he was fired.

An example of driving without headlights safely is like when in the middle of the night with no traffic he slowly cruises through a houseing subdivision watching for potential burglars. If a Car was to turn onto the street, he would turn on his headlights. but otherwise he would keep the off to avoid alerting any burglar of his presence. Cops will routinely prowl for burglars or cruise the park after 11pm (when they should be the ONLY vehicle in the park) without headlights.

out on 59, the officer SHOULD have had his headlights on and that was a contributing factor to the crash. THAT is why he was fired.

Not having the rotating/flashing red and blue overheads on in responding to calls is another matter entirely.

the plain fact is, most everyone on this thread with the exception of John123 and myself are known copshaters. You can deny it all you want but all one has to do is look at your postings on every topic that touches on law enforcement to see you never have anything but negativity to say about cops. PERIOD

and as I stated. critisism itself does not equate to hatred. A constant, mean spirited, and undeserving, critisism does smack of hatred for cops.

and to zorro's "Is that how you talk to citizens?"

I am a citizen.

bubbles,

Wacky weed? Is that supposed to be a insult? Is that how you talk to citizens?

Wayward,

"BTW...criticism DOESN'T equal hatred"

No it doesnt. But constant and often unfair critisism even when there is nothing to critisize DOES equal hatred.

and Maybe YOU would pull over when a cop hits his lights, but a criminal won't. and since Speeding is absolute in your eyes, the cop cannot "chase after him" because then the cop would be speeding too and thats wrong in your eyes.

tnt88,
I already explained that the highway 59 incident is another thing intirely and that cop was wrong. It has nothing to do with the overgeneralized statements of cops speeding that this topic is addressing.

zorro,
get off the wacky weed. your comments make no sense.

Bubblehead, I hate to bust your bubble, because you are so much more intelligent than the rest, but consider this, one of your family members getting "T" boned while pulling onto the roadway that just appeared clear a half second ago was in fact not because the police officer traveling at a high rate of speed did not warn them with his overheads. I don't have lights and sirens on my vehicle, but if I speed I get ticketed because I am endangering others lives.If there is just cause for speeding they should warn others.Just because they can doesn't mean they should.

Rogue just bubbles to the surface when a slight is perceived.

Scheesh! The cop turns on the overhead lights and then chases the bad guy down. As for the "yeah right" comment; I don't know about you, but if a cop turns on the lights behind ME, I pull over and stop. Those who don't, get chased. The lights are to protect those who aren't involved in the chase and would like to avoid it.

Turn on the overhead lights and they will stop....yeah right

Jones..."If speeding is an absolute as cop-haters on here insist, a cop would never be able to catch other speeders because he would never be able to catch up to them"

Sure they can catch'em. Just turn on the overhead lights. Now, how could that be a problem?

BTW...criticism DOESN'T equal hatred.

zorro,
you once accused another poster of being disingenuous. I find that hilarious as you are the master of disingenuity on these forums. You cannot make a post without it.

Can Cops speed?
Not as a matter of course, not when they are just "patroling around", or going to get their doughnuts.

But cops are by law allowed to speed when responding to calls that warrant a timely response. Not all such calls warrant Code three lights and sirens however. This results in a public MISPERCEPTION of cops speeding when not on a call "because they didn't have their lights and sirens on."

They don't have to!

The Highway 59 incident a few months back that several have brought up is an entirely different set of circumstances. The Cop in that case was acting against sound judgement and departmental policy.

Just as you can be cited for speeding in the rain or fog even though you are driving under the posted speed limit. The Posted limit is under IDEAL conditions. Factors such as traffic, and weather can alter those conditions so that the posted speed is not a safe speed and you can be cited.

Cops can speed on the way to calls but must use good judgement as to how much and when they can do so.

If speeding is an absolute as cop-haters on here insist, a cop would never be able to catch other speeders because he would never be able to catch up to them.

OH, and tnt88,

I have heard of people keeping all sorts of pets to include pet rocks. Yet I never heard of someone keeping peas as pets.

I guess you could say malapropisms is one of my "Pet PEEVES"

Zorro..."Bottom line, is it legal for cops to speed on their way to get donuts?"

Well, who's gonna write'em a ticket? But, then it depends on whether they do something else stupid and get caught. Remember a few months back, a cop running without ANY lights ran over a couple and demolished both the patrol car and the couple's car. He got fired. It also wasn't his first dance with stupid in a city police car either.

Bottom line, is it legal for cops to speed on their way to get donuts?

Sec. 545.365. SPEED LIMIT EXCEPTION FOR EMERGENCIES; MUNICIPAL REGULATION.

(a) The regulation of the speed of a vehicle under this subchapter does not apply to:
(1) an authorized emergency vehicle responding to a call;
(2) a police patrol; or
(3) a physician or ambulance responding to an emergency call.

(b) A municipality by ordinance may regulate the speed of:
(1) an ambulance;
(2) an emergency medical services vehicle; or
(3) an authorized vehicle operated by a blood or tissue bank.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

I was driving once and came up to that intersection between Victoria College and that Valero station across the street. Soon as I got there, a police car with no lights on zipped right through it and I had to slam on my brakes so hard my car fishtailed and I spun 180 degrees. My light was green, his was red. He must have been going about 80, too. I caught my breath and saw he stopped as well for two seconds, waved at me through the window, then turned his lights on and kept going. He nearly killed me. I wasn't too happy with VPD that night, either.

Breaking the speed limit without lights and sirens on is one of my pet peas. They are endangering everyone when traveling 20+ mph over the speed limit with no lights on. This caused an accident recently on Hwy 59 and Beck rd. I did hear that the on board camera was activated when the lights were on, maybe they don't want to film the bad driving? If it is a 911, turn you lights on.

They don't have to follow them. They have a badge and a gun. Don't criticize the protected class.