Is this Legal/Ethical?

[Scout Tactical]

It's not the job of police to pick and choose how and when they enforce the law.

Yes it is. It's called discretion and it is what means that the cop acted within the law, but unethically as he was being an arse and causing harm.
I know others are getting into you for this but it really ticked me off.

You're doing a pretty crappy job of being a knight templar, considering it's essentially in your job description to follow your methodology, faith, and law blindly and without question. =P

That said, discretion shouldn't really exist, when you think about it. It's up to the courts to have discretion, not the police. Remember the old saying: "I don't make the laws, I just enforce them"? There's a similar equivalent for the judiciary that should be "I don't judge the laws, I just enforce them." It's up for the judge and jury to have discretion.

 

[midget_roxx]

Must be more to the story than, got caught by cop when at house for being over curfew. 2 year suspension for being past 12 is just stupid. Did he have his full licence, did he need to have someone with a full licence sitting next to him in the car?

If you get caught here without your licence and your not qualified to drive you get a 6month suspension. Just seems odd

 

[Jonluw]

I'm gonna say that the cop was in the right for doing this. Your neighbor should have planned better and thought of coming home before said curfew.

A bit off topic perhaps, but is it really that bad for you americans to wait until you're 18? It works perfectly well here in Norway.

Firstly, not every country is the same, genius, and secondly, if he now can't drive until 18, it's a pretty simple conclusion that HE'S GOING TO BE WORSE WHEN HE'S 18 THAN HE WOULD BE. In short, the cop's a dick (and may have just created another bad driver), and tell your neighbour to get it appealed.

That's a ridiculous argument. "Since he has to wait until he's 18 to drive, he'll be a bad driver when he's 18. If you had let him drive since he was 16, he would have been a decent driver at 18".
Yeah, he would probably be a decent driver at 18. Doesn't change the fact that he would still be a crappy driver at 16.
Yes, he's going to be a worse driver at 18 than he would be, had he started driving at 16. Still, he would work up the skills in time, just as he would if he started driving at 16. And I'm willing to bet that a fresh driver, aged 16, is a lot more dangerous than a fresh driver, aged 18.

Edit: And please try not to be so rude. You create an uncomfortable and undesirable environment.

 

[Mistermixmaster]

I'm gonna say that the cop was in the right for doing this. Your neighbor should have planned better and thought of coming home before said curfew.

A bit off topic perhaps, but is it really that bad for you americans to wait until you're 18? It works perfectly well here in Norway.

Firstly, not every country is the same, genius, and secondly, if he now can't drive until 18, it's a pretty simple conclusion that HE'S GOING TO BE WORSE WHEN HE'S 18 THAN HE WOULD BE. In short, the cop's a dick (and may have just created another bad driver), and tell your neighbour to get it appealed.

Jeez, what's with the harshness (and insult)? I know every country isn't the same, so excuse me for asking about something out of genuine curiosity D: I mean, it is only two years, I can see it beeing a bit sour, but really, two years go by fast.

 

[Jadak]

A bit stupid in the sense that tax money should be going towards paying cops to do something more useful with the time than tailing kids home and issuing trivial curfew violations punishments, but from a legal/ethical standpoint, rules are rules. If you don't want to be punished, don't break them.

 

[kitsunefather]

It seems like you're more concerned with the severity of the punishment, but I outlined in one of my earlier responses that this is due to punishment inflation as a result of these exact offenses. Either way, this is a question of the ethics/legality of issuing a ticket in this manner, not the punishment (which I agree is too harsh, hence my distaste for inflation).

The reason his lights didn't come on at 12:01, or likely at all is twofold. First, to stop unnecessary disruption of the peace and traffic (it's night time, remember?), and second, to confirm the person was underage. It would be pretty embarrassing to pull someone over for a curfew violation and realize they're thirty, wouldn't it? It's much less disruptive to simply follow the violator to their destination, then check things out.

I hope I don't have to tell out how annoying police lights can be coming in the window in a residential area. People need to sleep, much like I should be right now.

Guilty, I am concerned with the severity of the punishment. And to say he was just following him home.. how does he know where he lives? If he's not sure that the driver is underage, why is he devoting what could be much more than 3 minutes to follow him, without flicking the lights on?

And I get it might bother people, but this officer doesn't strike me as the empathic type if he's walking up to a kid in his driveway to suspend his license for two years after tailing him home. Now, if this is a small town, and the officer knows the kid/car, and is just knows where they're going, maybe the "being considerate" angle works, but without that information, it seems an overly draconian enforcement. (Yes, I know, but the severity of the punishment is endemic with my problem with this story)

Let me say, to be clear: What the cop did was legal and ethical. There is no moral argument to it, he did his job, within the discretion provided to him by his superiors. My only issue is with the severity of the punishment, given the circumstances.

 

[Kevonovitch]

So my neighbor, who is 16, a new driver was driving home on a Friday night. He arrived in his driveway at 12:03 to find that a cop had tailed him all the way back to his house. As the curfew was midnight he was technically violating it, so the cops suspended his license until he turned 18. thats just under 2 years for 3 minutes past curfew. So i was wondering, are cops allowed to do this. And if they are, do you agree with it. Explain.






*Also, i would like to note that this isnt a hypothetical, it happened next door to me, i mean the house DIRECTLY next to mine.

in canada, well BC atleast, trolling cops=50-50 in the wrong. but in that kind of situation, where if they are just past the line, and they went streight home, the cops are not allowed to ding you for it, you are allowed lee-way of a few minutes, by the law, if for w/e reason your just barely able to make it to your place. they edited it within the last few years for pretty much any place of residence your going to be spending the night. now if they were like 12:05+ yeah, trolling asshole cops can ding you for it :/ but only 3min? yeah thats like the border for fudging time, especially if they question you/ticket you, you can take it to court, and by law, that cop has to show up, or that ticket is invalid, and you don't have to pay for anything, and if you win, on the occation, the cop has to pay the fine as punishment for being a douche, and not doing his goddamn job. although, they don't like that to be known it has happened before, and will again.

(ps, i hate cops >_>, but i didn't write this because of that, just saying, out here, shit like that woulden't fly.)

 

[El Poncho]

A curfew? I didn't think developed countries actually had them...

 

[fix-the-spade]

*Also, i would like to note that this isnt a hypothetical, it happened next door to me, i mean the house DIRECTLY next to mine.

He can and should appeal.

The policemen in question were clearly being vindictive, while the letter of the law may be on their side I doubt if stood up to such a case would get as far as court.

PS, curfew?! What country/state is this?

 

[YouBecame]

there is a 5 mph give on speed limits, so it is not exactly like going 3 minutes over the speed limit.

just to clear up a common misconception, the "5 mph window" (at least in most places) is not actually a law, but rather a matter of practicality. basically, since it takes an officer so damn long to write a ticket, a ticket for a violation of <5 mph simply isn't worth his time, when he can easily wait 30 seconds to bag someone for a 10 mph violation. in every locality i am aware of, you CAN be ticketed for a violation of even 1 mph over the limit, but it doesn't happen much because the fine is too low to be worth the officer's/the judge's/the city's time.

I'm under the impression that this window is actually true, but it accounts for inaccuracies of your speedometer. The legal limit is whatever the road sign says. The office & speed cameras give the benefit of the doubt when a small margin over the limit to account for your speedometer.

WTF is this curfew?

They don't have that in England. That's beyond ridiculous. Setting a curfew for drivers just because of their age. And a 2 year ban for 3 minutes over it is exceedingly harsh. I don't think anyone could justify that to me.

Personally. I'd be so pissed off, I'd likely follow the cop to his house and curl out a steamer on his doorstep.

There was an article on the BBC explaining that such measures are being considered in the UK. Annoyed me because I was still learning to drive at the time and felt that the restrictions were too arbitrary: Why would a 20 year old inherently be better at driving than a 19 year old, assuming they had been driving for the same amount of time? (Hey, I learnt to at 22 >_>)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11376809

 

[FoxVI]

I find it strange that no one has mentioned quotas. I know that police officers have a quota they have to fill every 2 or 3 months, witch is usually the reason we get things like this. Also op, do you live in a suburb or a city? because if it's a suburb, he may have recognized the car, witch is another reason why he might have tailed him.

 

[Jonesy911]

The cop was in the wrong because the cop is a cop and cops are retarded

 

[Sethzard]

When there is a law it needs to be obeyed no-matter how stupid it is.

Ethically, well, ethics are a no-go area as ethics are a personal thing.

 

[TilMorrow]

Well he was in the wrong as it was three minutes after midnight but seriously three minutes? and he loses his license till he is eighteen? Did that Police Officer really have nothing better or more important to do than follow around a 16 year old? Wait... Can't your neighbor sue the guy for stalking him in particular? Though it does beg the question where he was driving home from.

 

[FallenJellyDoughnut]

Talking in lines like this

Isn't helping anyone

And frankly it's stupid

Also, are you the guy who wrote RoboCop's standard procedure?

How constructive.

Perhaps you best read the rules again. I think you will find a section regarding valid contribution to a thread.

Alright Sgt. Friday, I'll take that as a "yes"

 

[Sonicron]

No question. The law is the law.

Still, a bit weird to see what cops do instead of dealing with 'real' crime.

 

[C95J]

Harsh? Yes. Legal? Yes.

Maybe your neighbour should have planned his night better, of course it could have been something reasonable that stopped him from getting home on time. It is very harsh, and if I was him then I would go to court to try and get my license back or at the very least get the suspension lowered to a more fitting time.

This cop was obviously just a dick, and was angry at the time. Or maybe he just likes doing stupid things like that. I guess the law is the law but this is sort of overkill isn't it.

 

[TWRule]

Okay, first off, there are a lot of misunderstandings of what constitutes the ethical in this thread. It's a common misconception that ethics and morality are one and the same.

Ethics = Having to do with freedom and responsibility in the choices and actions we make, especially when said choices potentially affect others.

Morality = Any value system used to distinguish good from bad. (relative to society, individual)

Now, I have a feeling there is more to the situation than we can know from what information is provided but:

If the law indeed allows the police officer to make the call he did, then it is not illegal. Whether it SHOULD be the law is irrelevant to this discussion.

Since the police officer chose that course of action and followed through with it (and most likely filed a report, etc - all the legal proceedings needed to take responsibility for his own actions), then there is nothing unethical about his actions. If anything, the neighbor might be in the ethically questionable situation if he tried to get out of the punishment, since he knew that the possibility of this happening existed when he did what he did (though he is of course just fine contesting it in court if he wants).

Is it moral? Well, that depends. In the police officer's eyes, probably. In society's eyes: maybe not. If democratic society finds that law unfair, they should contest it to put the law more in line with their moral values. However, regardless, there is no legal nor ethical violation in this case based on the information presented. Any problems with it are purely moral/social, and the police officer cannot be held accountable in that way for legal purposes.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I'd suggest the cop had quotas to meet, in which case it's not entirely him to blame ,it's the stupidity of making police try to hit targets when there's no way of knowing if crime will happen in a certain week.

I know traffic wardens are a private business in the UK and are employed to hit quotas, and it means they'll stand by your car, with ticket already written, the second you're past your parking time, they'll slap the ticket on your screen, no arguments, no excuses.

Trouble is, it's not about punishing the criminals as much as it is about making revenue from drivers. Sure, you should leave your parking space a few minutes before your time expires, but before the wardens were driven by either bonuses or the threat of losing their jobs, some of them would be far more likely to let things slide over a few minutes.

In so many things in this world, it's rarely the guy at the bottom of the food chain to blame, he's following orders passed down by a bunch of dicks who don't live in the real world.

 

[Scobie]

DELETED