Why is it when the police are heading tosetup roadblocks for seatbelt checks they are not wearing seatbelts?
467252
yeah, I'm waiting for one to give me a ticket for it when he don't have one on. I carry my little cam corder for purposes like that
998947
The government seems to think that they have to protect everyone from themselves. Personally, I disagree with that philosophy. But nevertheless it is a fact. There are times when I do not wear my seat belt, especially when I am looking for birds. And if the government does not like it then they can try to catch me. \n\nBut think about this.  If the government were really concerned about people's safety, they would ban semis from the nation's hiways.  They account for a much larger proportion of deaths and injuries than their numbers.  They also account for 90% of the destruction of the hiways but pay for only 10% of the cost of the hiways. \n\nNice to have a powerful lobby.  We have the best government money can buy.
536362
For the most part, no they are not. They don't have arrest powers and they can't enforce traffic laws.\n\nSome jails, however, have sheriff deputies, which outside of the jail do have these powers.\n\nCorrections officers babysit prisoners, hand out their medicine and count silverware. No it isn't a safe job and yes it is an important job, but they are not police officers.
506738
THis question will have several answers provided however, as a general rule this practice falls into about 3 primary reasons.\n1.) Changes to the vehicle motor and/or gear setting will generally be felt by a person touching the car and is a indicator to the officer to either move away from the vehicle or be aware of the change to prevent being struck by the vehicle in reverse or otherwise.\n\n2.) If an officer is following proper training in approaching the rear of a vehicle at that proximity then often they are or should be pulling up or pushing down on the trunk as they approach. THis is to serve two purposes, keep anybody hiding inside locked inside (pushing down) or making the interior of the trunk and its occupants/contents visible for officer safety reasons (pulling up)\n\n3.) Yes the placement of a hand on the trunk or body of the vehicle is often a evidentiary thought of experienced officers to attempt to leave evidence through finger/palm prints in case a violent act occurs against the officer using the motor vehicle in some capacity. It would allow for a better indentification of the vehicle if recovered away from the scene at a later time.\n\nlastly, the reality is that it is often just a force of habit for some officers to be in contact with the nearest object that could be used for cover in case of a need to take such cover, in this case the vehicle is often the cover most readily available (although tactically and safety wise not usually the best).
898741
They need more probable cause than a nervous look. Proving a civil rights violation can be very difficult unless you can document the cop's action.
724896
Probably go round looking for Muppet's like you. Arr you poor bugger you get a ticket lol.\n\nBut if you want an honest answer other than above. If there cars were taken they wouldn't get to emergency calls on time. \n\nAs for take-aways the public would suffer because police have there own canteens. \n\nSick leave is there to be taken when needed un like your self taking a few days off for a sniffle unless your most likely on the dole or just got out of a cell. They probably have time off for more serious injuries or illnesses.
1106130
it's a classic game of tests\nthye test the constitutional limits to see who pushes back, in many\ncases most people do not know there legal rights, and the police know that, it's foolish to think that the goverment will behave accordingly, we as the people must keep a constant vigil on our rights so that they do not erode over time. As Ben Franklin once put it... those who do not defend liberty, do not deserve it.
493303
Darn good question, I have lately become concerned that this whole country is just getting to a point where there is no more self responsibility.  The govt told me to wear a seatbelt, therefore if I still got hurt cuz I was drunk driving, clearly it is the govt's fault.\n\nI am sorry I am not going to be much help, because I don't know where that line should be drawn...\nI think I read someone's answer the other day that said when our freedom infringes on another's - that's when they should definitely step in.  But then some people also need extra help to keep from killing themselves.\n\nI look forward to someone having the right answer.
1073718
Pursuit driving is a double edged sword on one hand their are public safety issues. But on the other hand you have the issue that if you allow people who are committing crimes to drive off it will not be long before no one is stopping for the police. As far as using police helicopters they are wonderful tools if your department is big enough to afford one. The bottom line is if you pursue you are putting the public at risk BUT if you don't pursue and allow criminals to drive off haven't you  just put the public at risk also? Some food for thought it is not the officer that initiates the pursuit. The officer initiates a traffic stop the criminal by choosing to run initiates the pursuit.
942073
They travel with only one or two security detail, and in a busy place in public they can not be everywhere watching everything. \n\nHe may have been checking the kitchen, perhaps going to the restroom, perhaps watching people comming in.\n\npickpockets and snatch theives are good and fast, they are trained to do it without being seen.
857907
Sometime police wait until the registration information comes back from the dispatcher (we don't have computers in our cars here and have to get the dispatcher to check). Sometimes the computer is very slow and it takes a while.  The police officer may have been waiting for a safe well lit area to stop you in or may have suspected you of drunk driving and was observing your driving to see how you were doing.  He could also have been waiting for backup to get closer.  We usually don't stop vehicle unless we notify the dispatcher first, if there is lots of officers on the radio, you have to wait for airtime.  Lots of reason for not stopping you immediately.  If the officer did not lose sight of your vehicle you are out of luck.  Take it to court and see what happens.
1150391
Cause they need their heads checked.
700333
Maybe they're afraid of being arrested for breaking mere temporal laws...
631304
Like a security guard? It's to make sure everyone is safe and no one is breaking the law. People can get wild at these places and they are there to make sure no one gets hurt.
1016333
That is just a motto to get departments more money.  If they really did protect and serve, they wouldn't give so many tickets for very minor offences, making angry drivers a real danger to traffic.
499104
you're right, wearing your seatbelt should be your decision.\ni was in a car wreck a few years ago, where the car rolled on it's top.  the cops told me that if i was wearing my seatbelt, i would have been killed.  i didn't have a scratch or bruise on me, because i wasn't wearing my seatbelt.  then the cop wrote me a ticket---for not wearing my seatbelt.
197117
If there is probable cause.  They have to see something in the vehicle, in plain sight to do so.  Same goes for a vehicle search, without permission from the person driving. Again, this hinges on if they see something in plain sight.  Otherwise, it falls into illegal search and seizure.. which is against the constitution.