Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

noob_tube03 t1_j336kln wrote

Reply to comment by zeratul98 in Seeing these all over the place. by Harmony_w

That is literally my point. The CPD should be held accountable for not doing their job (at traffic enforcement).

That said, stripping a CPD of their gun if they're only on traffic enforcement creates a huge amount of issues. For example, it gives them a good excuse to increase head count as they would claim needing x number of people for patrol vs y for traffic. If you just treat them the same it keeps the budget down. Plus, if a traffic stop is done on someone dangerous, it feels like a waste for them to need to call in backup. Not every traffic stop is citing someone parking in the bike lane.

​

Bounty programs are ripe for abuse. Traffic cameras aren't legal in Cambridge/MA, so a bounty program likely wouldnt be either

4

zeratul98 t1_j345ce8 wrote

>For example, it gives them a good excuse to increase head count as they would claim needing x number of people for patrol vs y for traffic

Good thing they don't get to set their own budget

>Plus, if a traffic stop is done on someone dangerous, it feels like a waste for them to need to call in backup

This is rare, and another weak argument. Without more clarification, your argument implies police should be more armed and/or they should travel in larger groups. If you don't agree with either concept, why is the status quo the right level?

>Bounty programs are ripe for abuse

Everything is abusable. It's about balancing trade-offs. I struggle to imagine what kind of terrible abuse someone could do with this though. No one's going to be dragging cars into bike lanes for the sake of getting a cut of a ticket

1