Is this Legal/Ethical?

jpoon

New member
Mar 26, 2009
1,995
0
0
The cop is obviously a total douchebag (not that I would assume anything different as all cops are asshats). The cop is in the wrong.
 

firedfns13

New member
Jun 4, 2009
1,177
0
0
Skorpyo said:
Why would you WANT him to be driving? He's 16!

You're lucky he didn't get tailed and then drive right through your goddamn house in the confusion.
I know a girl that thought the gas pedal was break and went through her friends garage.
 

yamitami

New member
Oct 1, 2009
169
0
0
Here is the thing: if the law is in the books then the cops have to follow it. It would be unethical for a cop to not follow the law even if they consider the law unfair. The people you need to be talking to/about is the lawmakers, not the people who enforce it.
 

WeOwnTheSky

New member
Nov 6, 2010
111
0
0
I don't really think this is a question of ethics. He was past his curfew, so the cops had to be pricks about him being over by three minutes. Regardless, your neighbour should have been more responsible. And yea, the cops are allowed to do that.
 

TheLaofKazi

New member
Mar 20, 2010
840
0
0
Father Time said:
Not to mention that if he doesn't drive for 2 years he's going to be a worse driver at 18 then he was at 16.
Yeah, not driving for two years will probably make your skills quite rusty.

Although one of my friends mentioned that he can probably still drive with a permit with a parent in the car with him. But that doesn't really make the punishment any less ridiculous and a clear abuse of power on behalf of the cop. He (my friend) also brought up a good point on what is actually taught to cops: If there is no doubt or controversy regarding a law, follow and enforce the law. If there is something sketchy, like this situation, being 3 minutes over, follow and enforce the spirit of the law. Obviously, this law was made to try to prevent younger people staying out of trouble late at night. The 16 year old wasn't out causing trouble, he was on his way home, and I think the cop should have used some basic logic and lawful discretion to enforce what the law was intended to prevent.

I must say, I'm pretty disappointed to see so many people blindly siding with the law at the cost of basic reasoning and good policing. The guy made one 3-minute mistake and didn't harm anybody, 2 years is in no way an appropriate punishment. A warning would have sufficed.
 

BENZOOKA

This is the most wittiest title
Oct 26, 2009
3,920
0
0
16-year-old kids driving? A curfew enforced by law.
I don't understand either one.

I bet the kid broke another law and lied to OP. Three minutes, yeah right...
 

TheLaofKazi

New member
Mar 20, 2010
840
0
0
benzooka said:
16-year-old kids driving? A curfew enforced by law.
I don't understand either one.

I bet the kid broke another law and lied to OP. Three minutes, yeah right...
Where I live, we have a very similar policy. You can start driving at age 16, there is a legally enforced curfew at midnight for anyone under 18, except in cases where you are going to and from work.

Sure, there is always doubt that such a situation actually occurred. But even if it's proven that this never happened later, that won't change the fact that the cop in such a fictional scenario was wrong, and that many people, assuming this did actually happen, sided with the cop, despite how unreasonable he was.
 

Shroomhell

New member
Apr 4, 2010
81
0
0
Frozen Donkey Wheel2 said:
Ahlycks said:
Pirate Kitty said:
Cop was in the right.

Neighbor was in the wrong.
/thread

so, umm, why do you question it? He should have just left earlier. You need to be prepared for this stuff when you have such a responsibility.
Yeah, no. This is like handing out a ticket for going 3 miles over the speed limit. It's just a dick move on the cop's part. The simple fact is that sometimes common sense is a good substitute for the law.
true. 3 miles is within acceptable parameters for speed. I have never met anyone who said otherwise. Three minutes is withing acceptable parameters for curfew. The law served it's purpose in getting the kid home at a reasonable hour, so the kid did nothing wrong. What the cop did however was quite unethical.
 
May 5, 2010
4,831
0
0
Shroomhell said:
Frozen Donkey Wheel2 said:
Ahlycks said:
Pirate Kitty said:
Cop was in the right.

Neighbor was in the wrong.
/thread

so, umm, why do you question it? He should have just left earlier. You need to be prepared for this stuff when you have such a responsibility.
Yeah, no. This is like handing out a ticket for going 3 miles over the speed limit. It's just a dick move on the cop's part. The simple fact is that sometimes common sense is a good substitute for the law.
true. 3 miles is within acceptable parameters for speed. I have never met anyone who said otherwise. Three minutes is withing acceptable parameters for curfew. The law served it's purpose in getting the kid home at a reasonable hour, so the kid did nothing wrong. What the cop did however was quite unethical.
THANK you. All these crazy people saying "The law is there for a reason, the kid should have left sooner" and crap like that....I was starting to think I was the only sane one left.
 

FinalGamer

New member
Mar 8, 2009
966
0
0
That is incredibly nitpicky and pointless to arrest someone for being out of curfew for three minutes even though he as a driver never endangered anyone and did all the right things as a driver.

I dunno, this cop sounds Lawful Neutral to be so PAINFULLY adherent to the law without any consideration.
 

CountTom

New member
Oct 28, 2009
10
0
0
One thing is for certain, if your neighbor challenged (in traffic court, or w/e the hell it is called) the officers decision, your neighbor would win hands down, and the cop would most certainly get some kind of reprimand for his actions.

The reason why the cop was violating the law:

1) You can't "tail" someone to "pre-meditatively" pull them over for a violation they haven't (and ultimately have not) committed. In fact, the action described in the OP is stalking and it is very criminal. Your neighbor should've gotten the officer's name and badge number before speaking with the officer and before the officer tried to give him any kind of trouble, your neighbor should've called the police. Sounds stupid, but what if this was someone posing as a police officer? Especially at that time at night? You should get their name and badge num. and call the cops and have them come down. This will either: 1) humiliate the officer into letting you go and leaving, or 2) cause another officer to come on the spot and at the very least tell him how much of a dickhead the first officer is being and then hopefully they will leave. Another thing, if another township cop comes and says the same thing the first officer said, then call the state police, because what they're doing is harrassment and it is ILLEGAL.

2) You can't pull someone over who is driving home in effect to not violate the law. There is no sense in pulling someone over for breaking a "curfew" when the very thing that depends on whether or not they can adhere to the curfew is driving in the car and to their own house.

3) (And this is the big one) The "3 minutes" claim by the officer. And who the hell's watch are we getting this from? Nobody's watch is perfect, the kid's car clock could've even said he was in the clear and it was well before midnight. Is this kid just supposed to subject himself to the officer's opinion of what time it is? The answer is no. You cannot slap someone with a violation like this one if they "potentially" had no idea they were in violation of the curfew because their clock said they were ok. Just because it's "near" midnight the cop can say whatever he pleases just to slap someone with a violation and a fine just so they can make money for their township, and that is most certainly illegal. By upholding the officer's decision the court would be allowing all officers to go around slapping people with curfew violations who are in fact not committing said violations and that is illegal.
 

Kenjitsuka

New member
Sep 10, 2009
3,051
0
0
You Americans...
Here you are not allowed to drive untill you are 18 and we have no crazy curfews either.

Still, that cop was being quite unfair.
 

spartan1077

New member
Aug 24, 2010
3,222
0
0
Pirate Kitty said:
Cop was in the right.

Neighbor was in the wrong.
Ninjaed on first post.

The cops have every right to make sure that people are not out past curfew.
 

wickes666

New member
Jun 26, 2010
66
0
0
cops wrong, he cant tail you for that, you have be driving badly for that. the whole curfew law is a passive law, as in,only counts if you really get caught messing up at the same time
 

BehattedWanderer

Fell off the Alligator.
Jun 24, 2009
5,237
0
0
It's legal, but not ethical. The cop was following on a technical, should have been out doing something else. And the man was en route home, so he was following the law. Where is there a curfew, anyway?
 

Rachel317

New member
Nov 15, 2009
442
0
0
The cop was technically in the right, and your mate in the wrong...but the cop must be a REAL jobs-worth to hound him for 3 minutes. Most people use common sense when involved in these things. Obviously, this cop was in a bad mood, or is actually just an asshole to be so pedantic.