Stopped for Failure to Use a Seat Belt

[moseti]

Hello guys. I have a question. I was driving a limo car without any client. I guess I was in hurry and I forgot to buckle up. I got pulled out by a cop who explained to me I had broken traffic rules for failure to use seat belts. After a length discussion, I was set free, but in the process, I felt officer harassed me from his language and persistent threats of arrest. My question is, if such is a big crime, does it necessarily require kind of treatment I received?

[Mr. Knowitall]

If it were a big crime, you would be arrested and charged.

It is a traffic violation. You committed the violation. Presumably in your state it is a primary offense that allows for a traffic stop. Wear your seat belt in the future, don't argue with the police in the future when you're in the wrong, and consider yourself lucky that you didn't get a ticket.

[adjusterjack]

After a length discussion

There shouldn't be any discussion at all.

When you are told you broke a traffic law you say yes sir and sorry sir I'll be more careful in the future.

That you feel harassed is just your bad attitude showing.

[sniper]

Yup, you didn't wear a seatbelt when you were supposed to. If you are upset about what the officer said to you then file a complaint at his agency. Other than that, wear your seatbelt when you are legally obligated to.

[Highwayman]

What state is this?

[PTPD22]

Way back when I was a rookie, my training officer gave me some advice. He told me that traffic violators deserve either the ticket or the lecture, but not both. The difference is that the violator has the option to choose to refuse the lecture, and receive the ticket by default – but, not the other way around. Apparently, the office that stopped you chose to give you the lecture. From the tone of your post, it sounds like that was ineffective in convincing you to be more attentive to yourlegal requirements while driving, and he should have given you the ticket. So, to answer your question, no, your infraction does not “require that kind of treatment.” The officer could have (and, it sounds like, SHOULD have) simply given you the ticket without any discussion at all. I suspect that, had that happened, you would then be complaining that he didn’t give you a warning for such a “minor” offense.

[RandallCS]

Way back when I was a rookie, my training officer gave me some advice. He told me that traffic violators deserve either the ticket or the lecture, but not both. The difference is that the violator has the option to choose to refuse the lecture, and receive the ticket by default – but, not the other way around. Apparently, the office that stopped you chose to give you the lecture. From the tone of your post, it sounds like that was ineffective in convincing you to be more attentive to yourlegal requirements while driving, and he should have given you the ticket. So, to answer your question, no, your infraction does not “require that kind of treatment.” The officer could have (and, it sounds like, SHOULD have) simply given you the ticket without any discussion at all. I suspect that, had that happened, you would then be complaining that he didn’t give you a warning for such a “minor” offense.

This is an amazing response.