  Genesyxx Member Username: Genesyxx Post Number: 694 Registered: 02-2004 |
Story 1: Watch Your Ass on 696 "You’ll want to watch your speed and keep the aggressive driving in check on I-696 this week as police crack down on bad driving. Local police departments, the Michigan State Police and the Oakland County Sheriff’s Department are involved in the effort to get drivers to calm down on the Oakland County portion of I-696 from Farmington Hills to Madison Heights. The crackdown will last through late this week. Police are targeting “mostly speeding, unsafe lane changes, things like that,” Farmington Hills Police Lt. Craig Hurt said this morning. “It’s the type of driving we would like to discourage.” Hurt said police from his city and from Southfield, Lathrup Village, Oak Park, Huntington Woods, Royal Oak, Pleasant Ridge, Hazel Park and Madison Heights are taking part. The crackdown was spurred by drivers' complaints about others speeding, following too closely, changing lanes improperly and not using turn signals." Any reason why they would TELL speeders where cops will be? I would think you'd catch more people if you just went about your business and not announcing it through every media outlet. Just a theory. Story 2: Spartan Foods Expands "Spartan Stores Inc. said it agreed to purchase 20 retail grocery stores, two fuel centers and three convenience stores from G&R Felpausch Co. Financial terms of the deal, which is expected to close by the end of the 2008 fiscal year’s first quarter, weren’t disclosed. However, the purchase could increase Spartan Stores’ annual retail segment sales by about $200 million. Felpausch is a privately-held retail grocery operator in Hastings. The company is also a distribution customer of Spartan Stores. Grand Rapids-based Spartan Stores is the nation’s 10th-largest grocery distributor, with warehouse facilities in Grand Rapids and Plymouth." Story 3: No one goes to Hooters for Wings "There are new developments Monday in the fight between Hooters restaurants and the city of Troy. A representative from the restaurant chain said now is the time for Troy's city council to accept its offer to close its John R. Road location in exchange for a liquor license transfer to the new location. Troy's city council will meet Monday at 7:30 p.m. The new location is at Big Beaver and Rochester roads, the representative said. The city council has delayed a vote on the proposal, and an attorney for Hooters said if no agreement is reached the city can count on a lengthy court battle." Story 4: MDOT tearing up some more "The Michigan Department of Transportation has announced it will close northbound Interstate 75 between the Lodge Freeway and I-375 from 9 p.m. tonight until 5 a.m. Tuesday. The freeway will also be closed for the same time period on Tuesday night until Wednesday morning. The closure is part of a $3.7 million project to repair the Woodward Avenue Bridge over I-75 in downtown Detroit. The closures will allow crews to prepare for demolishing the bridge, which will take place from 5 a.m. March 24 until 5 a.m. March 26. At that time, both north and southbound I-75 will be closed between the Lodge and I-375. The entire project is expected to be completed by June." Woodward @ 75 to be demolished? It's already looking like a maze around here, now this too? That's all I got... later YESmembers | ||
56packman Member Username: 56packman Post Number: 1136 Registered: 12-2005 |
this isn't what I thought this thread was about.......... | ||
Toog05 Member Username: Toog05 Post Number: 122 Registered: 03-2006 |
lol | ||
Defendbrooklyn Member Username: Defendbrooklyn Post Number: 49 Registered: 11-2005 |
696 is insane... | ||
Susanarosa Member Username: Susanarosa Post Number: 1410 Registered: 11-2003 |
Most misleading thread title ever. | ||
Ptero Member Username: Ptero Post Number: 105 Registered: 12-2005 |
useless without pics. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 432 Registered: 07-2006 |
quote: Because the goal in something like this is not to 'catch' as many people as possible, it is to get as many people as they can to drive safer. If people are aware that there are more cops out, they are more likely to slow down. Years ago I was driving down a freeway well over the limit, but keeping with traffic. Instead of pulling me over, a state trooper pulled beside me and waved to me to slow down, then went up alongside every other car doing the same. He got 20 or more cars to slow down, instead of the one he would have gotten to do so by pulling one over. It's far more effective to say 'here i am' to everyone than to pull over just one. | ||
Japes Member Username: Japes Post Number: 6 Registered: 02-2007 |
FYI - The reason is that if they don't tell you about it -- you get the ticket thrown out in court. Speed Traps and Enforcement traps are illegal in Michigan and in most states. Now if you tell people that you’re going to be out there, and they get a ticket it wasn't a trap as a reasonable effort was made to inform people. Even in states where they have sobriety check points, they are usually published in the paper/TV/online. They don’t do it because they want you to slow down, or from the goodness of their heart. Haven't you noticed when they do the seatbelt checks they have huge signs telling you about it? It is so the tickets don't get tossed in court. Same thing here. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 433 Registered: 07-2006 |
I hate to do this, but what's your source that speed traps are illegal in michigan, for that matter, 'most states'? While I can't vouch for the accuracy of this source, it appears the only limit is in where the money from fines for violations of state code will go, not on speed traps themselves. http://speedtrap.org/stetlaws. htm#Michigan%20Law | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 263 Registered: 10-2003 |
What exactly are you calling a "speed trap" A cop on 696 is not hiding. There's nowhere to hide. He's either on the shoulder an entrance ramp, or just patrolling down the road. Cops sit in meridians all the time looking for speeders. It's a perfectly valid ticket if you get it. | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 631 Registered: 12-2006 |
Well, it'll be fun getting across 75 for Tigers games this year. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 8589 Registered: 12-2003 |
Ha-ha, like the Royal Joke officer tucked behind an overpass near 10 Mile on Southbound I-75 at 2:30 a.m. with his laser mounted on a tripod calling in speeders with his radio to a gaggle of like-minded revenuers down the road?! NO place to hide, indeed. Overpasses ABOVE the freeway are great, as long as you have a friend you can call on an entrance ramp to rush onto the roadway and nail the perp. I would like to have Citizen Rights on rooting out tailgaters...my latest trick is to aim my camera at them out of my sunroof. I force the flash ON, even during the day. I would take time to witness in court against these abuser bullies. It has only induced road rage ONCE, in the few dozen or so times I've had to rely on it. I am a FAR right-lane speed-limit zero-stress cruiser (reformed speeder), and despise those who think the left lane is for anything other than passing, especially if the bandits are driving less than the flow of traffic. I-696 can be plowed under back to farmland, as far as I'm concerned...since it seems to attract type-a assholes. WAY more than any freeway south of M-59, and worse than pretty much every Interstate I've driven save for that loop around Atlanta. | ||
Japes Member Username: Japes Post Number: 7 Registered: 02-2007 |
While I did use the term speed trap – this really isn’t a speed trap per say, the statute based on the local state constitution will vary slightly from state to state. This as a whole is more of an enforcement zone/trap which falls under the violation your fourth amendment right – by looking at Sitz vs. Michigan State Police, United States v. Martinez-Fuerte and Brown v. Texas. So to make a very long post short, by the police/city telling you that a speed zone, safety enforcement zone, or seat belt check point is ahead they haven’t put you though a unreasonable search or seizure as the police made an effort to let it be known that they would be in that area. This is the reason you see "Photo Radar, and Red Light Camera Signs" in states that allow them. Basically they are violating your Constructional rights by not telling you this information. Sorry my first post wasn't more clear. | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 905 Registered: 11-2003 |
Japes wrote, "...if you tell people that you’re going to be out there...a reasonable effort was made to inform people." Um, that's what speed limit signs are for. They're a reasonable effort to tell you the law. If you choose to ignore them and get pulled over, that's nothing but your own fault. Enforcing the law is not "violating your Constitutional rights." | ||
Tigers2005 Member Username: Tigers2005 Post Number: 110 Registered: 02-2005 |
Those cops on 696 only cause more problems. When I was commuting to LTU, I saw several rear-end collisions on 696 because someone sees them late and slams on their brakes. People are going to speed, regardless of whether there are police out there. And I feel bad for any officer that has to get out of his car on the shoulder of that freeway. He is in more danger than anybody driving on the road. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 436 Registered: 07-2006 |
Japes, first, thanks for the sources. I don't mind using the term speed trap, we all know what we are referring to here, even if it does not actually fit the specific definition, which i suppose could vary from place to place. Sitz v MSP involved sobriety checks in which random vehicles are pulled over without probable cause, which has been argued is a violation of the 4th amendment. Certain restrictions were put in place by the Supreme Court to prevent abuse of such checks, including prior notification. Police conducting a 'speed trap' like this, however, do not pull over innocent civilians, but only those who have been witnessed breaking a law - that's probable cause, and that makes it permissible to detain the driver, with or without notification of such an enforcement zone. Similarly, neither can a mugger claim a 4th amendment violation because they weren't notified the police would be in the area, should one come across the crime in progress. Obviously, individual states can put whatever restrictions they wish on how their law enforcement agencies catch speeders, however, i haven't seen anything that limits it in Michigan, either in theory or in practice. In any case, Sitz v MSP does not appear to apply in this situation in any way, since this does not interfere with law-abiding drivers in the way a sobriety check would. As for the Photo Radar signs, that is just a concession to privacy concerns regarding putting cameras on corners, not a limitation on normal police activity. Technology reached a point that the laws on the books didn't foresee, and the signs were the compromise to appease those afraid of a surveillance society. A police officer, even in an unmarked car, can still legally do the same work as that camera, with no notification whatsoever, and I doubt even those against the cameras could argue with that. (I don't care for them myself.) | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 8603 Registered: 12-2003 |
It IS a trap when the previously allowed misbehavior is suddenly and usually selectively enforced. I don't care, since for 99% of my mileage I'm in the right-hand lane at the speed limit. I DO care because of how MOST guilty idiots over-react whenever they simply see a cop pulling someone ELSE over on a multi-lane freeway...jamming on their brakes or slowing down well below the limit. And I'm NOT talking about those who slow down and/or change lanes to accomodate the stupid new law...they should be forced to slow down greatly, but NOT change lanes, that leads to much havoc on most roads. I would like to see a permanent laser speed detection device on emergency vehicles aimed at that first lane, with a speed indicator on the vehicle...like those active signs in high-priority areas. Then, coupled to the existing camera on the front of the vehicle, they can ticket idiots who do NOT slow down in that lane later when reviewing the videos. Wouldn't bee too hard to do, except of course for the extra money and all. Detroit just took delivery of a few hundred new high-tech traffic control cars...I saw one of 'em at work near the CAY on my way to visit Hart Plaza. Had some speeding minivan pulled over! Yay DPD, make that money! | ||
Japes Member Username: Japes Post Number: 8 Registered: 02-2007 |
United States v. Martinez-Fuerte probably of the 3 cases is the most relevant thought they all end up back at Brown vs Texas which is where you have to past the test. United States v. Martinez-Fuerte involves check points for immigration that even though you've done nothing wrong, the site of a police officer asking you questions or indirectly targeting you can be a traumatic experience for even law abiding people. So during these target enforcements you are very likely to have your speed checked even though you are not speeding or doing anything wrong which could be shown as a violation of the fourth amendment -- as you weren't doing anything wrong. The Police that are doing it are not concerned that they get a few tickets tossed in court or all of them for that matter (though some would be unhappy with the loss of revenue). What they are concerned about is stopping someone, that has a warrant, or is doing something illegal and they get it tossed under the fourth amendment. That's why they tell you when they do these, take pictures of you, or walk next to your car to see if you have your seat-belt on. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 8619 Registered: 12-2003 |
Police-state-atcha! Nah, too much. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 565 Registered: 01-2005 |
Gannon: If you spend 99% of your drive-time in the right hand lane of I-75 going the speed limit you're taking your life in your hands. I tried that once to placate my wife and in 26 miles I passed one car and everyone else in that lane passed me, gave me the finger or tail-gated to make their point. Never again. | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 266 Registered: 10-2003 |
I don't understand the concern. I am the same type of drive that Gannon has described himself as. I am not in any rush to get anywhere. Nothing is that important. I don't care if cops are hiding, I don't care if they are enforcing laws more during a certain period than normal, good. There are far too many jackasses driving recklessly, endangering their own life and mine, even though I'm following all the traffic laws. Pull em' over, I don't care. Bring in some revenue from it, pay for my city services with your idiocy, I don't care. It's a law, and if you break it, I really don't care if the cop was hiding before he pulled you over. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 8646 Registered: 12-2003 |
OH, it is stress-free AND safe, most times. You give the stress to the person behind you, and never pay attention when they try to give it back as they pass. I'm going to market a series of bumper-stickers soon to discover how many of my fellow law abiders are willing to encourage others that they really DON'T care how fast everyone else wants to drive. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 8650 Registered: 12-2003 |
Stumperstickers, I'm going to call them! |
