It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: VoidHawk
We can drive around all we want looking for "bad guys" but the fact remains we cannot take action unless a crime occurs.
As for the money stream -
Yes there is one there - The flaw is in blaming law enforcement and accusing them of generating funds. The statutes were designed by the legislature and penalties are set by the same (jail time / fines / community service etc.
There are a lot of states, mine included, that prohibits a Police Department from receiving funds from officer actions and placing those funds back into the Police agency. Other laws restrict the flow back to police departments anywhere from 1% to 40% of their budget.
The sheriffs department in my state can write all the citations they want however they receive only a few dollars (like 1 to 2 dollars) of the fine going back to the Sheriffs department. To clear up possible confusion on this part -
A sheriffs Office is its own entity.
A municipal agency is a part of the city itself.
Hence the goofy contradiction in that area.
Anyways - llong story short people want to blame law enforcement for being a revenue stream when in fact Law Enforcement has nothing to do with that area at all.
How can I support that statement? The final determination on whether a person is charged or the case is dismissed is up to the prosecuting Attorney.
I think the argument about revenue stream is valid but only if its applied to the judicial and not the executive. As an example The Prosecuting attorney gets 10 cases. The PA reviews those cases to determine if there is enough evidence to support the charge. Of those cases that do they look to see how solid the investigation is.
Since most PA's are elected positions one can argue that they selectively prosecute cases based on what is winnable and what is not. To bring it home the PA essentially can guarantee a revenue stream as a side effect of selective prosecution.
I have no issues holding people accountable. What I do have issues with is when law enforcement is blamed for something we cannot control.
originally posted by: thisguyrighthere
a reply to: VoidHawk
Like Xcathdra said, the police are only reactive not proactive therefor they can't realistically go around looking for bad guys.
Of course if they wanted to kick your door in for any reason whatsoever they can always claim an anonymous tip or wrong address or make a 911 cell call from your front yard, etc...
I'm reminded of the wise words of Chief Wiggum: "The law is powerless to help you, not punish you."