And just think; traffic stops not made, and all the crimes that might have been discovered, Are Not/the crimes don't exist. So then New York can proudly brag to the World that their crime rate has actually gone down. This, due to their virtuous, forward thinking politicians, "unburdened by what has been", who bravely promoted "equity" by reimagining how law enforcement should conduct their activities. Brilliant!!!

This isn't that uncommon anymore. We had an instructor down here for a class last year from a large PD in the upper midwest, and he said they're only allowed to make stops for infractions that seriously endanger the public like reckless driving or articulable suspicion of DUI. I imagine once people figure that out the roads up there are going to like Mad Max, not to mention all the other crimes that will go undiscovered/unprosecuted.

The reality of it is that they don't want us catching bad guys these days. They'd rather the police function as social workers and secretaries for the insurance companies.

I'm sorry, hate to sound like I'm sticking up for the state, but there's MILES of difference between "New York State wants to..." and some POS politiotian grandstanding, show pandering to their gullible constituents.

quote:

Originally posted by cas:
I'm sorry, hate to sound like I'm sticking up for the state, but there's MILES of difference between "New York State wants to..." and some POS politiotian grandstanding, show pandering to their gullible constituents.

Not in New York or other Blue State Shitholes. A bad idea today is a law tomorrow.

They did that here.
No need to register your car, just run around with tags that expired 2 years ago and no insurance.
I can't remember the last time I seen someone pulled over.

quote:

Originally posted by rock185:
So then New York can proudly brag to the World that their crime rate has actually gone down.

Yeah, a major West Coast city was doing this in recent years, bragging that the crime rate has been decreasing, but only because they were basing their statistics on reported crimes; since they de-criminalized dozens of crimes, these were not considered in their data.

The irony of NY is that under Rudy Giuliani as mayor and using a "broken windows" policy of dealing with crime, NY saw an unprecedented decrease in crime, including major felonies, perhaps the last time New York City was at its peak.

I’d tell you how well that’s worked in Berkeley but you already know the answer.

Liberalism is an awful disease, and an untreatable mental illness.
Many years ago here in NYS, the untreatably mentally ill were confined in insane asylums.
In today's world, most of the insane asylums are closed and gone, and the former inmates/patients from those asylums have taken up residence in the NYS Legislature.


See my location below

Likely outcomes: much higher insurance premiums for those who obey the law, more hit and run accidents (see first point), and increased crime (staged accidents). Perhaps someone should point out to the personal injury attorneys, their business may dry up without someone to sue!

quote:

Originally posted by rock185:
And just think; traffic stops not made, and all the crimes that might have been discovered, Are Not/the crimes don't exist. So then New York can proudly brag to the World that their crime rate has actually gone down.

this

If the bad people in the U.S. are drawn to or attracted to either N.Y. or L. A. And it keeps them there.

Their plan works for me.

from the article

quote:

The proposed legislation would no longer allow officers to stop or search drivers over such issues as busted head- or taillights, expired registrations and inspections

wait, I thought they already couldn't search drivers who are pulled over for minor violations unless they get consent.

To be honest, I really don't feel like being searched if I have a burned out tail light. This shouldn't even be an option.

what am I missing?

I live next to the major interstate between Montreal and Points south. Can't count how many times the State Troopers have arrested a driver for speeding (for example) and found copious amounts of drug/cash, weapons.
Wasn't long ago a Border patrol Agent was shot and killed in a gun fight near me.

But by all means don't be wasting taxpayers' money protecting us from crime.!!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: roarindan, April 08, 2025 11:15 AM

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
from the article

quote:

The proposed legislation would no longer allow officers to stop or search drivers over such issues as busted head- or taillights, expired registrations and inspections

wait, I thought they already couldn't search drivers who are pulled over for minor violations unless they get consent.

To be honest, I really don't feel like being searched if I have a burned out tail light. This shouldn't even be an option.

what am I missing?

They can't. First, police have to have reasonable suspicion of a crime or infraction in to conduct a traffic stop. "Reasonable suspicion" is a pretty low standard, but they at least have to be able to articulate that to justify stopping a vehicle in the first place. Most traffic stops are conducted on probable cause, a higher standard, because the officer actually witnessed the driver commit a violation of the motor vehicle code.

Once a vehicle is stopped, police can only conduct a warrantless search of that vehicle without the driver's consent only if they have probable cause that there is evidence of a crime in the vehicle. This is allowed due to the exigency created by the vehicle being mobile and capable of removing the evidence from the scene, and the lower expectation of privacy in a vehicle as compared to a home (Carroll v US 1925).

It seems like this would be a simple thing to counter, but criminals are stupid and often leave stuff lying out in plain view in their cars for cops to see on traffic stops. In states where it's still illegal, the odor of marijuana also qualifies under "plain view". It's also part of the legal basis for exterior K9 sniffs.

The traffic laws that officers enforce and can stop cars for vary somewhat from state to state, but vehicle searches fall under the 4th amendment and the case law comes from USSC, so that applies nationwide. What NY state (and other liberal jurisdictions) are trying to do is reduce the reasons that officers can stop cars. This will reduce police contacts, and as a result also the number of searches and arrests. They don't seem to have a plan for how they're going to enforce the traffic laws that they're no longer going to allow police to make stops to enforce.

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
Isn't this the state trying to tax everyone to death? Now they want to eliminate a revenue stream?

This really surprises me. I would have been less surprised if the law was to not issue tickets to minorities and illegals but double the fines on people making over $100K a year, triple if over $250/year.

Exactly!

quote:

This really surprises me. I would have been less surprised if the law was to not issue tickets to minorities and illegals but double the fines on people making over $100K a year, triple if over $250/year.

California (surprise, not!) is rolling out something like this in (again, no surprise) San Francisco. It is not clear to me from the wording whether this is supposed to go statewide and is just debuting in SF, nor how a driver's income is determined. My guess is that they would check income tax records. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...into-effect-n2655121

quote:

In a move raising eyebrows across California, the state has rolled out "equity" speed cameras in San Francisco, where speeding fines now vary based on a driver's income. Under this new system, low-income drivers may only pay as little as $5 for a traffic violation, while wealthier individuals could face penalties as high as $500. Critics see it as another example of government overreach and misguided policies that penalize those who work hard and pay their fair share. Rather than addressing the root causes of speeding and unsafe driving, this system punishes drivers based on their financial status, creating more division and resentment in the process.

In TN, you don't have to pay camera-only tickets. It specifically says so in the notice. (Don't ask me how I know this.) They don't count against your license, can't be sent to collection, nor can your credit be dinged. Why bother?

I know in my area ( northern AZ) our ops do tons of traffic stops that result in large drug busts usually off the alert of a K9 dog.

It is crazy the amounts of drugs involved sometimes thousands of pills pounds or kills of meth heroin etc.

Criminals are stupid. And nabbing them when they are stopped for excess window tint, expired reg etc. is a great service to the community.

Of course NY wants to stop it.

Years back, when i was working nights, i drove up the road to pick up something to eat around midnightish. Pulling out onto the road, the yield sign thst I rolled through was apparently a stop sign. I pulled out, made a u-turn and got lite up like the 4th of July.

The cop told me why he pulled me over and asked where i was going. Once i told him I had picked up lunch and was heading back to work he sent me on my way, no ticket, didn’t even run my license, although im sure he had already run my plate.

I think he was stopping every one he could legally stop, probably looking for drunks, and once he figured out that I wasn’t one, he sent me on my way with a verbal reminder that all the exits onto the main road were stop signs. I still feel that he was policing the right way (even if he had written me a ticket). I think the reason he didn’t write me a ticket was because he didn’t want to take the time away from stopping the next car, sort of trying to interact with the most potential drivers he could to find the drunks or other "high profile" violations.