What Do you think? Is Natalie Plummer an Idiot? Woman Arrested For Warning Drivers Of Speed Trap

by Scott77 69 Replies latest social current

• 

  Scott77

  	I have read that officers have fine quotas in some cities- bring in the traffic fines or we have to lay off officers- she was giving them grief by scaring off the speeders- the sooner they made the quota for the day, the sooner they could go to the donut shop. i use an phone app called Waze- you can report sightings of police, accidents, stalled cars, etc.
  	moshe

  Almost everyone on this thread has urged over and over again that Natalie's Plummer's action was motivated by a desire to warn off motorists about speed so that they could not fall prey to Police speed trap. I gree this could be the reason however, that is besides the point. Please, how about the other possible reason of '...catching people that had a broken tail-light...the next Ted Bundy...the gangs, drug addicts, murderers and rapists'?

  Scott77
• 

  Scott77

  bttt
• 

  Paralipomenon

  Meh, regardless of whatever pure motives you assume officers have for speed traps in general, I fail to see how you can validate arresting someone on trumped up charges for an alleged misdemenor.

  The dash cam was never made available showing her standing on the road and arresting someone for that "crime" seems severe. She was arrested because of an abuse of power from egomaniac cops. They illegally searched her backpack hoping to find something real to charge her with.

  If you agree with these actions, then I wouldn't be surprised if you would support police planting evidence to get a conviction. The police are supposed to uphold the laws of the land, this was a powertrip and nothing less.
• 

  Splash

  If you want to catch gangs, rapists, drug dealers and murderers then there are better ways than sitting by a speed camera hoping for a freak chance that one drives by too fast. That is so ridiculous i cant believe it has even been suggested.

  Police should uphold the law, not rewrite it by muscling a girl over because she legitimately objected to their sneaky scheme.

  Ego cops dont care about the law, they have a uniform and think they can do what they please. They can't.

  We need more Natalies.

  Splash.
• 

  jws

  Several comments. First off, I read the article, watched the video, and formed my opinions before reading a single post here.

  James Woods does not always post things I agree with, but this time I completely agree with him. Cops are out to make money. If it were for public safety, what she did had the same result. It slowed people down - or not. How many people take the time to read signs people on the side of the road are holding? Most people think they are begging for help and just avert their eyes and pretend not to see them.

  Slowing down motorists doesn't stop cops from pulling them over for a broken tail light. It only stops them from giving you a speeding ticket. In fact, it probably gives the cops a little more time to check out each car and see things like broken tail lights.

  Arresting her is retaliation and giving her a trumped up charge is inexcusable for a law enforcement officer if it was false. 99.99% of the time, I'll bet he never writes a ticket to anyone for stepping on the street. If he even bothers, I bet he just gives a warning. An arrest is way overboard.

  Cops and cities are corrupt. I once got a ticket for running a red light. After doing some timing of lights, the length of the yellow at this intersection was very short. Shorter than other yellow lights on slower streets, shorter than at intersections with less traffic. The shorter yellow only increases the possibility for accidents. Yet increases the potential to give out tickets. Like the red light cameras, what is the purpose, public safety or city revenue?

  Now you can argue, perhaps, that giving out tickets may provide negative reinforcement for the driver and prevent them from repeating. And more effectively than seeing her sign and slowing down might do. And I can see that.

  As for stopping people and catching other things, that to me sounds like illegal searchs. You have no probable cause to believe they might have drugs for instance so you can't stop them. But dammit if you aren't going to stop them for something so you can search them. This to me is an abuse of the system.
• 

  james_woods

  Thank you, JWS.
• 

  Scott77

  Frankly, I feel slightly irked and strongly irritated by the increasing chorus of endorsements for Natalie Plummer's action to warm motorist of police speed trap. Yet I see the merits of your counterarguments. IIts as if we are before the court of public opinion. Please, can anyone of you honorable guys and gals substantiate on allegation that the Houston Police Department and the City was facing cash shortage and therefore, the action of the two police officers may provide an explanation for setting up speed trap to bankroll the city and its department coffers? On the positive note, Iam glad that this thread has brought some of James Wood's antagonists to agreeing for the first time on Natalie Plummer's action however contentious I see it. Scott77
• 

  Scott77

  

  This post-arrest photo might have been take for media advantage to emphasize Natalie Plummer's exact location at the time of arrest. It could be that she come back after 12-hours of jail to replay the accident to the supportive media in an attempt to win public sympathy. Therefore, Iam not surprised.

  Scott77
• 

  Splash

  I can't comment on if there was a cash shortage, but a publicly funded department can always use more money, wage increases, better equipment, more staff etc. There's not a department around which would choose to have less money rather than more money.

  In the UK the speed cameras are more properly called 'Safety' cameras.

  The Police called them Safety cameras to deflect thay are catching speeders, rather focusing on the social contribution of Safety.

  This was used against them when someone did the same as Natalie and successfully argued they were public spirited by highlighting an area the police had deemed so dangerous it needed Safety measures installing. After all, if it's an unsafe road the public should be warned, right?

  Splash.
• 

  jws

  This is essentially the same thng as I do when I use the Trapster app on my iPhone. Sure, that's not going to reach as many people as a sign. I've also done the "flash your lights" thing to warn people and have slowed down when I see others signal with it.

  What about commercials on TV and on the radio that say click-it-or-ticket? That's a warning to motorists and that's sponsored by the police. Or the ones that say don't drive drunk? What if Natalie's sign just said "Slow Down" and didn't reference the speed trap?

  Quotas are illegal in Texas, but that doesn't stop police departments from finding ways around the issue. One article mentions a police department that rewards officers with points. If they work on a crime, it may take them a day or two's worth of time to work it out and they get one point for it. Speeding tickets are a point each and they can rack up quickly, maybe 30/day. So either do true police work and get 1 point or give out traffic tickets and get 30? There's no points quota per se, but at the end of the year things like those points help determine promotions. Not saying this is the case in Houston, but these commentaries seem to think there are quotas there:

  http://www.yaliberty.org/posts/relentless-police-quotas

  http://www.facebook.com/pages/End-Houston-Police-Quotas/10150130013855026

  Furthermore, if what she did was wrong, why is it not illegal? Why didn't they give her a ticket for warning people of a speed trap? Because it's not illegal.

  You asked what people think (the court of public opinion) and you got your answer.