Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

In article >, jaybird wrote:
>
> "Brent P" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article >, jaybird wrote:
>>
>>>> How about just using lights and/or siren as appropriate BEFORE driving
>>>> in an illegal manner, as the law requires?
>>>
>>> The law does not require that and in fact makes special clarification
>>> that
>>> driving with lights and/or siren activated can sometimes be more
>>> dangerous.
>>> The activation of emergency equipment is not required and is left to the
>>> discretion of the trained police vehicle operator (at least in Texas):
>>
>> DTJ and I are in IL, not texas. In IL if they are not running lights and
>> audible signal we don't even have to yield to them. I could have just
>> lightly braked and if he hit me, it would have legally been his fault.
>> No "making use of an audible signal and visual signals" as outlined in
>> the law and the police vehicle is just normal traffic without any special
>> privilege as far as I can tell in the IL vehicle code. You're welcome to
>> search the complied statutes yourself. http://www.ilga.gov/
>
> You don't have to yeild to cops in Texas either if they don't have their
> lights or siren on; that was not the point I was trying to make. You can do
> your own research if you like, I'm just relating knowledge that I'm familar
> with. If he had hit you then you're right, he would've been at fault but he
> did quite well and got to where he was going without incident.

No he did ****ty. I was there. Had I not picked up he was a cop I would
have done something different and there would have been a crash.

Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

"N8N" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> jaybird wrote:
>> "N8N" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> >
>> > JohnH wrote:
>> >> >> Sounds like some good driving to me. They were able to get three
>> >> >> units to a felony in progress through traffic without hitting
>> >> >> anything or anyone. That's what I mean about police vehicles not
>> >> >> being ordinary traffic and why I always give them plenty of room to
>> >> >> pass or turn anytime I see one.
>> >> >
>> >> > So the cop that nearly cliped my car as he did 90mph down a 45mph
>> >> > posted arterial road was just doing good driving?
>> >>
>> >> If I'm being held up I want the cops to have the accelerator to the
>> >> floor.
>> >> Perhaps you can let them know if you dial 911 to take their time, only
>> >> drive
>> >> posted speed limits and for pete's sake stay out of the left lane and
>> >> not
>> >> get near anyone else.
>> >>
>> >> (Then again I'm probably killfiled as you disagree with some things I
>> >> say)
>> >
>> > How about just using lights and/or siren as appropriate BEFORE driving
>> > in an illegal manner, as the law requires?
>>
>> The law does not require that and in fact makes special clarification
>> that
>> driving with lights and/or siren activated can sometimes be more
>> dangerous.
>> The activation of emergency equipment is not required and is left to the
>> discretion of the trained police vehicle operator (at least in Texas):
>>
>
> ONLY in Texas. I don't believe the OP lives in Texas.

No, you guys are all incorrect once again. In (625 ILCS 5/11-205) (Yes,
Illinois!) it says practically the same thing. To paraphrase, it says:
"The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an
emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of
the law...

may:
1. Park or stand, irrespective of the provisions of
this Chapter;

2. Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign,
but only after slowing down as may be required and
necessary for safe operation;

3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as he
does not endanger life or property;

4. Disregard regulations governing direction of
movement or turning in specified directions.


This is the important part:

(d) The exceptions herein granted to an authorized emergency vehicle, other
than a police vehicle, shall apply only when the vehicle is making use of
either an audible signal when in motion or visual signals meeting the
requirements of Section 12-215 of this Act.

So, it says the same thing that Texas law does. All emergency vehicles
_except police vehicles_ are required to use a visual or audible signal when
the above exemptions apply. The OP says that they were going to a robbery
in progress, so they were perfectly legal in doing what they did.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

"Brent P" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, jaybird wrote:
>
>>>> If I'm being held up I want the cops to have the accelerator to the
>>>> floor.
>>>
>>> Perhaps he could have put his lights on? Nahh... better to close in on
>>> someone at 90mph as stealthy as possible and nearly cause a collision.
>
>> That's exactly the point. If you come up on someone by stealth, it is
>> fairly certain that they will continue to drive in the same manner when
>> you
>> pass them.
>
> I was about to change back into the right lane. The only reason I didn't
> was because I picked him up in my mirror and the headlamps were aimed up
> and looked like a crown vic. State cops in IL like to reaim their
> cruisers headlamps upwards to blind the drivers they are following.
> Because I picked up on this detail I figured he might be a cop and stayed
> put. Had I been driving the way I normally do, there would have been a
> good chance he would have moved to go around me on the right just as I
> had moved there.

Glad to hear it.

>
>> Sometimes it is easier to plan your movement being fairly
>> certain that they are a constant.
>
> Yet if a non-cop drives that way, it's reckless.

Yes, but you have to go further than that. It has to be a cop meeting the
criteria set in the applicable statute.

>
>> When you hit the lights and siren it is
>> difficult to know where that person is going to end up by the time your
>> vehicle is next to theirs. Even though everyone is required to move to
>> the
>> right, lots of people either don't, don't immediately, or try to go left
>> because it's open. That makes it very hazardous when you're closing at a
>> higher rate of speed than they are traveling.
>
> His not running lights greatly reduced safety. If he was running lights I
> would have punched the accelerator to make more room, instead I knew a
> cop was closing on me fast and didn't dare do what was safe because it
> wasn't legal.
>
> Now, your average lane blocking asshole would have seen some 'evil
> speeder' coming up from behind, not picking up on the fine details of ISP
> cruisers and probably done something to punish the 'evil speeder'.
>
> So, he runs his risks both ways, but in only one way are people required
> to yield to him.

Yes you're quite right there are risks both ways. By law, yeilding is
required one of the ways but by using common sense and sometimes leaving
things flowing the way they are, it sometimes makes it easier to anticipate
the gaps.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

jaybird wrote:
> "N8N" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > jaybird wrote:
> >> "N8N" > wrote in message
> >> oups.com...
> >> >
> >> > JohnH wrote:
> >> >> >> Sounds like some good driving to me. They were able to get three
> >> >> >> units to a felony in progress through traffic without hitting
> >> >> >> anything or anyone. That's what I mean about police vehicles not
> >> >> >> being ordinary traffic and why I always give them plenty of room to
> >> >> >> pass or turn anytime I see one.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > So the cop that nearly cliped my car as he did 90mph down a 45mph
> >> >> > posted arterial road was just doing good driving?
> >> >>
> >> >> If I'm being held up I want the cops to have the accelerator to the
> >> >> floor.
> >> >> Perhaps you can let them know if you dial 911 to take their time, only
> >> >> drive
> >> >> posted speed limits and for pete's sake stay out of the left lane and
> >> >> not
> >> >> get near anyone else.
> >> >>
> >> >> (Then again I'm probably killfiled as you disagree with some things I
> >> >> say)
> >> >
> >> > How about just using lights and/or siren as appropriate BEFORE driving
> >> > in an illegal manner, as the law requires?
> >>
> >> The law does not require that and in fact makes special clarification
> >> that
> >> driving with lights and/or siren activated can sometimes be more
> >> dangerous.
> >> The activation of emergency equipment is not required and is left to the
> >> discretion of the trained police vehicle operator (at least in Texas):
> >>
> >
> > ONLY in Texas. I don't believe the OP lives in Texas.
>
> No, you guys are all incorrect once again. In (625 ILCS 5/11-205) (Yes,
> Illinois!) it says practically the same thing. To paraphrase, it says:
> "The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an
> emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of
> the law...
>
> may:
> 1. Park or stand, irrespective of the provisions of
> this Chapter;
>
> 2. Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign,
> but only after slowing down as may be required and
> necessary for safe operation;
>
> 3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as he
> does not endanger life or property;
>
> 4. Disregard regulations governing direction of
> movement or turning in specified directions.
>
>
> This is the important part:
>
> (d) The exceptions herein granted to an authorized emergency vehicle, other
> than a police vehicle, shall apply only when the vehicle is making use of
> either an audible signal when in motion or visual signals meeting the
> requirements of Section 12-215 of this Act.
>
> So, it says the same thing that Texas law does. All emergency vehicles
> _except police vehicles_ are required to use a visual or audible signal when
> the above exemptions apply. The OP says that they were going to a robbery
> in progress, so they were perfectly legal in doing what they did.

Well, that's a new one on me. I haven't studied IL law, but in all of
the jurisdictions around here that exclusion is not present. Doesn't
stop the cops from firing down US-50 at 80+ with no lights on however.

nate

Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

In article >, jaybird wrote:
>
> "N8N" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>>
>> jaybird wrote:
>>> "N8N" > wrote in message
>>> oups.com...
>>> >
>>> > JohnH wrote:
>>> >> >> Sounds like some good driving to me. They were able to get three
>>> >> >> units to a felony in progress through traffic without hitting
>>> >> >> anything or anyone. That's what I mean about police vehicles not
>>> >> >> being ordinary traffic and why I always give them plenty of room to
>>> >> >> pass or turn anytime I see one.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > So the cop that nearly cliped my car as he did 90mph down a 45mph
>>> >> > posted arterial road was just doing good driving?
>>> >>
>>> >> If I'm being held up I want the cops to have the accelerator to the
>>> >> floor.
>>> >> Perhaps you can let them know if you dial 911 to take their time, only
>>> >> drive
>>> >> posted speed limits and for pete's sake stay out of the left lane and
>>> >> not
>>> >> get near anyone else.
>>> >>
>>> >> (Then again I'm probably killfiled as you disagree with some things I
>>> >> say)
>>> >
>>> > How about just using lights and/or siren as appropriate BEFORE driving
>>> > in an illegal manner, as the law requires?
>>>
>>> The law does not require that and in fact makes special clarification
>>> that
>>> driving with lights and/or siren activated can sometimes be more
>>> dangerous.
>>> The activation of emergency equipment is not required and is left to the
>>> discretion of the trained police vehicle operator (at least in Texas):
>>>
>>
>> ONLY in Texas. I don't believe the OP lives in Texas.
>
> No, you guys are all incorrect once again. In (625 ILCS 5/11-205) (Yes,
> Illinois!) it says practically the same thing. To paraphrase, it says:
> "The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an
> emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of
> the law...
>
> may:
> 1. Park or stand, irrespective of the provisions of
> this Chapter;
>
> 2. Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign,
> but only after slowing down as may be required and
> necessary for safe operation;
>
> 3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as he
> does not endanger life or property;
>
> 4. Disregard regulations governing direction of
> movement or turning in specified directions.
>
>
> This is the important part:
>
> (d) The exceptions herein granted to an authorized emergency vehicle, other
> than a police vehicle, shall apply only when the vehicle is making use of
> either an audible signal when in motion or visual signals meeting the
> requirements of Section 12-215 of this Act.
>
> So, it says the same thing that Texas law does. All emergency vehicles
> _except police vehicles_ are required to use a visual or audible signal when
> the above exemptions apply. The OP says that they were going to a robbery
> in progress, so they were perfectly legal in doing what they did.

I don't see the license to drive recklessly. Also with out audible signal
and lights nobody has to yield to the cop. Hmm... maybe I should get
another beater car.

Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

"Brent P" > wrote in message
. ..
> In article >, jaybird wrote:
>>
>> "Brent P" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In article >, jaybird wrote:
>>>
>>>>> How about just using lights and/or siren as appropriate BEFORE driving
>>>>> in an illegal manner, as the law requires?
>>>>
>>>> The law does not require that and in fact makes special clarification
>>>> that
>>>> driving with lights and/or siren activated can sometimes be more
>>>> dangerous.
>>>> The activation of emergency equipment is not required and is left to
>>>> the
>>>> discretion of the trained police vehicle operator (at least in Texas):
>>>
>>> DTJ and I are in IL, not texas. In IL if they are not running lights and
>>> audible signal we don't even have to yield to them. I could have just
>>> lightly braked and if he hit me, it would have legally been his fault.
>>> No "making use of an audible signal and visual signals" as outlined in
>>> the law and the police vehicle is just normal traffic without any
>>> special
>>> privilege as far as I can tell in the IL vehicle code. You're welcome to
>>> search the complied statutes yourself. http://www.ilga.gov/
>>
>> You don't have to yeild to cops in Texas either if they don't have their
>> lights or siren on; that was not the point I was trying to make. You can
>> do
>> your own research if you like, I'm just relating knowledge that I'm
>> familar
>> with. If he had hit you then you're right, he would've been at fault but
>> he
>> did quite well and got to where he was going without incident.
>
> No he did ****ty. I was there. Had I not picked up he was a cop I would
> have done something different and there would have been a crash.

Using your psychic powers again?

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

"N8N" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> jaybird wrote:
>> "N8N" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> >
>> > jaybird wrote:
>> >> "N8N" > wrote in message
>> >> oups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > JohnH wrote:
>> >> >> >> Sounds like some good driving to me. They were able to get
>> >> >> >> three
>> >> >> >> units to a felony in progress through traffic without hitting
>> >> >> >> anything or anyone. That's what I mean about police vehicles not
>> >> >> >> being ordinary traffic and why I always give them plenty of room
>> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> pass or turn anytime I see one.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > So the cop that nearly cliped my car as he did 90mph down a 45mph
>> >> >> > posted arterial road was just doing good driving?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If I'm being held up I want the cops to have the accelerator to the
>> >> >> floor.
>> >> >> Perhaps you can let them know if you dial 911 to take their time,
>> >> >> only
>> >> >> drive
>> >> >> posted speed limits and for pete's sake stay out of the left lane
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> not
>> >> >> get near anyone else.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> (Then again I'm probably killfiled as you disagree with some things
>> >> >> I
>> >> >> say)
>> >> >
>> >> > How about just using lights and/or siren as appropriate BEFORE
>> >> > driving
>> >> > in an illegal manner, as the law requires?
>> >>
>> >> The law does not require that and in fact makes special clarification
>> >> that
>> >> driving with lights and/or siren activated can sometimes be more
>> >> dangerous.
>> >> The activation of emergency equipment is not required and is left to
>> >> the
>> >> discretion of the trained police vehicle operator (at least in Texas):
>> >>
>> >
>> > ONLY in Texas. I don't believe the OP lives in Texas.
>>
>> No, you guys are all incorrect once again. In (625 ILCS 5/11-205) (Yes,
>> Illinois!) it says practically the same thing. To paraphrase, it says:
>> "The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an
>> emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator
>> of
>> the law...
>>
>> may:
>> 1. Park or stand, irrespective of the provisions of
>> this Chapter;
>>
>> 2. Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign,
>> but only after slowing down as may be required and
>> necessary for safe operation;
>>
>> 3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as he
>> does not endanger life or property;
>>
>> 4. Disregard regulations governing direction of
>> movement or turning in specified directions.
>>
>>
>> This is the important part:
>>
>> (d) The exceptions herein granted to an authorized emergency vehicle,
>> other
>> than a police vehicle, shall apply only when the vehicle is making use of
>> either an audible signal when in motion or visual signals meeting the
>> requirements of Section 12-215 of this Act.
>>
>> So, it says the same thing that Texas law does. All emergency vehicles
>> _except police vehicles_ are required to use a visual or audible signal
>> when
>> the above exemptions apply. The OP says that they were going to a
>> robbery
>> in progress, so they were perfectly legal in doing what they did.
>
> Well, that's a new one on me. I haven't studied IL law, but in all of
> the jurisdictions around here that exclusion is not present. Doesn't
> stop the cops from firing down US-50 at 80+ with no lights on however.

Just listen to me for once. I might know what I'm talking about sometimes.
:o)

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

"Brent P" > wrote in message
. ..
> In article >, jaybird wrote:
>>
>> "Brent P" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In article >, jaybird wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Brent P" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> In article >, jaybird
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds like some good driving to me. They were able to get three
>>>>>> units
>>>>>> to a
>>>>>> felony in progress through traffic without hitting anything or
>>>>>> anyone.
>>>>>> That's what I mean about police vehicles not being ordinary traffic
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> why
>>>>>> I always give them plenty of room to pass or turn anytime I see one.
>>>>>
>>>>> So the cop that nearly cliped my car as he did 90mph down a 45mph
>>>>> posted
>>>>> arterial road was just doing good driving? Hmm... if I did the same
>>>>> thing, myself having good reflexs and timing would have been cited for
>>>>> speeding more than 40 over, which is legally very bad in IL, reckless
>>>>> driving, tailgating, and probably anything else the cop could have
>>>>> come
>>>>> up with. But the standard for cop driving is 'didn't hit anyone'.
>>>>> Cute.
>>>>
>>>> You're welcome. It's called "due care".
>>>
>>> Yep. Due care for a cop is called reckless driving for everyone else.
>>
>> If it meets the statutes, you are correct. Personal vehicles are not
>> emergency vehicles (with the exception of some volunteer firefighters if
>> they operate within the emergency vehicle rules).
>
> Last I heard the emergency rules didn't allow endangering others.

Nope, they don't. Read the "due care" section.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

In article >, jaybird wrote:

> Glad to hear it.

Not surprising, you'd like to see me killed by a cop crashing into me
more than likely.

>>> Sometimes it is easier to plan your movement being fairly
>>> certain that they are a constant.

>> Yet if a non-cop drives that way, it's reckless.

> Yes, but you have to go further than that. It has to be a cop meeting the
> criteria set in the applicable statute.

You've just made the cops above the law, what's one more going to be?

>>> When you hit the lights and siren it is
>>> difficult to know where that person is going to end up by the time your
>>> vehicle is next to theirs. Even though everyone is required to move to
>>> the
>>> right, lots of people either don't, don't immediately, or try to go left
>>> because it's open. That makes it very hazardous when you're closing at a
>>> higher rate of speed than they are traveling.

>> His not running lights greatly reduced safety. If he was running lights I
>> would have punched the accelerator to make more room, instead I knew a
>> cop was closing on me fast and didn't dare do what was safe because it
>> wasn't legal.
>>
>> Now, your average lane blocking asshole would have seen some 'evil
>> speeder' coming up from behind, not picking up on the fine details of ISP
>> cruisers and probably done something to punish the 'evil speeder'.
>>
>> So, he runs his risks both ways, but in only one way are people required
>> to yield to him.

> Yes you're quite right there are risks both ways. By law, yeilding is
> required one of the ways but by using common sense and sometimes leaving
> things flowing the way they are, it sometimes makes it easier to anticipate
> the gaps.

And if I had not properly identified him as a cop from tell-tale signs
few people know (I learned that one r.a.d and confirmed it with
observation of cop and non-cop crown vics and caprices, and former cop
car taxis) there would have been a crash. If I knew he was a cop in hurry
instead of one trying to trick me into speeding up, I could have made the
situation safe by accelerating. But see that's another nasty habbit of
cops, riding bumpers and coming up on people fast to get them to speed up
because that's the natural reaction and then ticketing them for it.

Even moe stupid cop tricks
 

In article >, jaybird wrote:

>> No he did ****ty. I was there. Had I not picked up he was a cop I would
>> have done something different and there would have been a crash.
>
> Using your psychic powers again?

Why don't you read my posts again where I describe how I picked up it was
likely a police cruiser closing on me.