Airport Police vs Romulus Police

[Gas Man]

Airport, Romulus Police Disagree On Patrols

ROMULUS, Mich. -- Romulus police officers are being so aggressive that another police agency is warning drivers to be wary of a so-called “speed trap.”

Detroit Metropolitan police are outing Romulus officers who are pulling over drivers for speeding in the area of Interstate 94 around the airport.

"Under the bridge might be an unmarked Dodge Charger that’s there to nail you," said airport spokesman Mike Conway.

Conway said Romulus police are pulling over record-number of drivers in an effort to raise cash.

"To us, it’s more of a revenue generation for the city of Romulus than traffic safety enforcement," he said.

Conway said court records show the city has written 10,000 tickets since July 1st.

The Wayne County Airport Authority has even begun circulating fliers that read, "The Romulus Police Department has dramatically increased its patrols at the entrances and exits to Detroit Metropolitan Airport, using unmarked vehicles. Please be careful to observe all speed limits and traffic laws."

Airport officials said they plan on turning the flier into a billboard and will leave it up until the Romulus police stop targeting those entering and leaving the airport.

The airport police chief sent out an e-mail to officers telling them to park in front of a Romulus police patrol car if you see one and turn on overhead lights to warn drivers to slow down.

Romulus police said they are just doing their job and patrolling all of Romulus, including the area around the airport.

"We're going to be looking at those areas to make sure people are not speeding, to target traffic enforcement efforts in those areas to maintain safety and keep people safe on the roads,” said Romulus Lt. John Leacher. "That's our goal."

I can attest that they also do this on I-275 as well. Romulus police like many other police find something that works and they run with it. IT IS more about revenue than anything else. If it wasn't they would target other areas. :down:

[Particle Man]

and then they'll wonder why people hate the cops...

[Corey]

Would a Star Trek joke be too geeky and obvious?

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by Corey

Would a Star Trek joke be too geeky and obvious?

I was thinking it but figured I'd let it go

[OneSickPsycho]

Ok... and the point?

You break the law and get caught, you pay the fucking ticket and be a man. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this increased enforcement of laws.

[VatorMan]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

Ok... and the point?

You break the law and get caught, you pay the fucking ticket and be a man. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this increased enforcement of laws.

If you design the law in order to increase enforcement-I see a problem. Reductions from 55 to 35 MPH zones are notorious speed traps.

[Mr Lefty]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

Ok... and the point?

You break the law and get caught, you pay the fucking ticket and be a man. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this increased enforcement of laws.

Thank you... I was wondering the same thing

Originally Posted by VatorMan

If you design the law in order to increase enforcement-I see a problem. Reductions from 55 to 35 MPH zones are notorious speed traps.

this doesn't say anything about recently reduced speed area's...

they found a place where people speed alot... and so they're writing alot of tickets... I don't see the problem.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

Ok... and the point?

You break the law and get caught, you pay the fucking ticket and be a man. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this increased enforcement of laws.

The point is that this sort of enforcement does little or nothing to improve public safety, which is ultimately the primary job of police. It ties up officers who would be better used roaming and ticketing drivers in other areas who go unpunished, while performing acts that are more dangerous than simple speeding. Yes, I've been in the area

[azoomm]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

The point is that this sort of enforcement does little or nothing to improve public safety, which is ultimately the primary job of police. It ties up officers who would be better used roaming and ticketing drivers in other areas who go unpunished, while performing acts that are more dangerous than simple speeding. Yes, I've been in the area

[Devil's advocate]

But, if people are chronically breaking the law in one area, wouldn't it make sense to position officers to ensure the law is followed THEN move on to another area? I love the idea of the warnings - as it keeps people following the law with the announced threat of penalty. It didn't change the law - just made it more obvious.

[OneSickPsycho]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

The point is that this sort of enforcement does little or nothing to improve public safety, which is ultimately the primary job of police. It ties up officers who would be better used roaming and ticketing drivers in other areas who go unpunished, while performing acts that are more dangerous than simple speeding. Yes, I've been in the area

Like I said, I know the reason they are doing it... However, how did Giuliani clean up NYC? He started giving tickets to jaywalkers... If you cannot manage the small things, how can you expect to manage the bigger things?

So... It stands to reason that if the increased ticketing in one area causes a behavior shift of the drivers in that area, then that would free up resources to allocate to another area.

My point is... just because there is a possibility of more severe crimes in the area, an officer should ignore someone breaking the law?