Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
Talk about "wasting the officer's time" and "just man up" is entirely missing the point that the POLICE don't decide whether or not you are guilty of an offence, the COURTS do.
|
I guess I'm of the mindset that I don't need the courts to decide what in mind are petty offences; and neither do the people I consider friends. A while ago I lent a friend a power tool, and he damaged the cord. His immediate reaction was to buy me a new tool, and I told him that he only had to buy me a beer to cover the cost of the cord. We didn't need to go to court to settle the dispute.
Or my last photo radar ticket. Yeah, I was ticked off- but more so that I got caught as opposed to thinking it was "the man" out to get me. I really thought the road I was on could have handled a much higher limit, but the speed was posted and I broke the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
If more people fought against frivolous tickets such as jaywalking, then perhaps the gov't would stop relying on such tickets as a revenue source, and free more cops to attend to actual crime instead of making their quotas for the month.
|
The court system is already over loaded. And the same court that handles traffic issues also handles summary conviction offenses like drug charges, petty theft, etc. If more time is available to handle those charges, perhaps those crimes can have the time they need to ensure the appropriate sentance is given. And if those people receive the proper care the first time, maybe they won't end up being one of those people we see shooting up on the street.
I don't think anybody was saying that every person should pay every ticket. If you have any sort of defense, then feel free to fight the ticket. However if you don't think jaywalking is an offense, then the appropriate action is with the legislative branch of the gov't- not the judicial.