Skip to comments.
State trooper or panhandler? Drivers fooled (COP IN DISGUISE BUSTS NON-SEATBELT WEARERS)
The Seattle Times ^
| 12/6/05
| Jennifer Sullivan
Posted on 12/06/2005 12:30:15 PM PST by paulat
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-99 next last
There is a poll at the link, if you want to FReep.
1
posted on
12/06/2005 12:30:16 PM PST
by
paulat
To: paulat
2
posted on
12/06/2005 12:30:52 PM PST
by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: paulat
Hey, it beats fighting actual crime.
3
posted on
12/06/2005 12:30:56 PM PST
by
Wolfie
To: paulat
Beats stopping crime, I guess.
4
posted on
12/06/2005 12:31:22 PM PST
by
atomicpossum
(Replies should be as pedantic as possible. I love that so much.)
To: paulat
5
posted on
12/06/2005 12:32:34 PM PST
by
ncountylee
(Dead terrorists smell like victory)
To: Wolfie
Meanwhile, enforcement is worried about offending child molesters, murderers, gang members, legal gun owners.... the list goes on and on.
6
posted on
12/06/2005 12:34:10 PM PST
by
RightResponse
(What if the Left, just got up and .....)
To: paulat
** ARMED TAX COLLECTER ALERT **
7
posted on
12/06/2005 12:34:31 PM PST
by
hang 'em
(Is Devil Worship "one of the World's Great Religions"?)
To: paulat
Our wonderful soviet state's new form of taxes.
8
posted on
12/06/2005 12:34:31 PM PST
by
RetiredArmy
(I have no faith in any politician or political party any more. They all lie for their agendas.)
To: paulat
More proof that "law enforcement" is now "tax collection"
9
posted on
12/06/2005 12:34:42 PM PST
by
Zathras
To: paulat
Oh fer cryin' out loud...
Since police generally are given quite a bit of discretion in deciding what is and is not important enough to investigate and puruse -- think turn signal laws here -- why shouldn't LEOs just treat these nanny-state laws the same way and summarily ignore them?
Instead, they are enforced as if national security depended on them.
10
posted on
12/06/2005 12:34:55 PM PST
by
TChris
("Unless you act, you're going to lose your world." - Mark Steyn)
To: paulat
wow...this revenuer brought in 3000 bucks for WA in 4 hours...imagine if they had 10 troopers doing this. 60k for a days worth of work isn't too shabby.
Of course, that would be the quickest way for this cash cow..err law...to get over turned. Then again it does keep the taxes down.
11
posted on
12/06/2005 12:35:11 PM PST
by
tfecw
(It's for the children)
To: RightResponse
That would be illegal gun owners (felons).
12
posted on
12/06/2005 12:35:13 PM PST
by
RightResponse
(What if the Left, just got up and .....)
To: paulat
These are the ways that the police make themselves unpopular.
You want to support them, on the one hand.
On the other hand, they spend time and energy on this sort of crap.
13
posted on
12/06/2005 12:35:13 PM PST
by
Vicomte13
(Et alors?)
To: paulat
I live in a very small town. A few months ago I drove by the sheriff standing on the side of the road - on the line. He was leaning over looking into car windows. In fact I had to swerve to miss him. I had my seatbelt on, but there was somebody pulled over by another cop further up the road.
14
posted on
12/06/2005 12:35:15 PM PST
by
loreldan
(Lincoln, Reagan, & G. W. Bush - the cure for Democrat lunacy.)
To: paulat
Nanny state clowns.
Similarly, in leftist-run Montgomery County Maryland, the keystoners there were using night-vision goggles to spot seatbelt violations.
15
posted on
12/06/2005 12:35:49 PM PST
by
dagnabbit
(Vincente Fox's opening line at the Mexico-USA summit meeting: "Bring out the Gimp!")
To: paulat
I'd think that this sort of covert surveillance (since the officer is in "disguise") would not be legal.
16
posted on
12/06/2005 12:35:51 PM PST
by
DBrow
To: paulat
Damn I hate that... They do it around these parts once a month or so. Although they have a car on the side, and a cop hanging out of it lookin at ya as you pass, it is still a "weaselly" thing to do...IMHO...
17
posted on
12/06/2005 12:35:56 PM PST
by
sit-rep
(If you acquire, hit it again to verify...)
To: paulat
So who cares. If they do not wear their seat belts it is them who will be dead. If they do not belt up their children that is another problem.
But is they are old enough to drive they should have the right to chose safe or unsafe.
18
posted on
12/06/2005 12:36:50 PM PST
by
YOUGOTIT
To: paulat
The supporters of seat belt laws laughed when I called it a slippery slope. They said the police can't pull you over for that alone. In Michigan they do exactly that now. Looks like they're now putting money into paying undercover cops to ticket people not wearing theirs.
Seat belts, A great idea and a really bad law.
19
posted on
12/06/2005 12:37:29 PM PST
by
cripplecreek
(Never a minigun handy when you need one.)
To: sionnsar
20
posted on
12/06/2005 12:37:51 PM PST
by
paulat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-99 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson