Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    9,096

    Default Re: Illegal Use of Handicapped Placard, CVC 4461(C)

    Quote Quoting EWYLTJ
    View Post
    Carl,

    You are once again showing your bias. Just as I am biased towards the defendant is innocent until proven guilty, you have the bias of "cops are always right and THEY should get the benefit of the doubt first". That is always our fundamental disagreement. I believe the State has a higer burden than the public. You believe the opposite. However, I submit that once a society places the public's burden over that of the state, then you simply have a police state. I know from a cop's perspective, a police state may sound pretty good... but I live in America... and American's aren't too partial to the concept of a police state.
    The defendant is innocent until proven guilty. In fact, several times here it has been posited that the court will probably find for the defendant.

    If that wasn't an option, your argument would have more merit.

    The OP says the guy was handicapped all his life and he is now a young adult. I'm pretty sure this would have been pretty obvious.
    Again, you can tell from an internet post if someone is handicapped to the point where visual observation becomes prima facie?

    Further, the status of the person in the van is not part of this issue. The issue, if you remember, is whether or not the applicable law justified the ticket given.

    Because the placard was not made out to anyone present, the ticket was given properly.

    Even if he wasn't sure, I think prudence would dictate that he afford some benefit of doubt. After all... which would be the more desireabe scenario: A guy get away with a phony placard, or a handicapped guy being forced to be wheeled a mile or so in that insane parking lot traffic??? Imagine if the guy would have suffered an injury while wheeling himself through that lot.... do you think the city would likely share in that liability? I think they would and they should. So, your cop's poor judgement not only put the handicapped guy at risk, but he put the city at risk as well.
    Again, I see no reason that the handicapped person and/or his friends could not have been dropped off at the time of the ticket.

    Walking through the traffic was the choice of the people in the van. If there was hazard, they could have a) decided not to go to the event; b) dropped the people off closer to the stadium and THEN parked; or c) parked and then taken a cab to the stadium. They choose to do none of these. At a certain point, we must assume that people are responsible for analyzing a situation and making a judgment call as to their own safety.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,622

    Default Re: Illegal Use of Handicapped Placard, CVC 4461(C)

    Jeff, you are quite the hypocrite. On one hand, you make tons of assumptions based on the limited amount of information given by the OP that would justify the cop's position.... then, in the same post, you insinuate that I am unreasonable for making any assumptions based on the available posts. Do you get nosebleeds sitting that high on your perch??

    I never said the cop wasn't technically within his right to give the ticket... although you like to argue that point to death. I said the cop failed to exercise a reasonable amount of judgement. Your response was that the cop is not AUTHORIZED to exercise judgement. If a man who has been bound to a wheelchair all of his life has to prove his disability with a piece of paper, then we have stepped over the line into the relm of stupidity (but you seem to be comfortable in that relm). I suppose that if the guy had a bullet wound in the chest, the cop wouldn't have the medical training necessary to authorize him access to an ambulance (before you start to pick that apart, I'll make the obvious statement for you that my analogy was extreme for the effect of making a point, not to offer a real scenario for debate.... hopefully I haven't challenged your narrow thinking too much).

    The bottom line is... you, and a handful of others like you, will ALWAYS twist the situation to convince the OP that they were wrong and that the cop/state was right. You clearly place a higher burden on the public than you do the state. My suggestion earlier still stands... maybe you would be more comfortable living in a country like communist China where the standards are more to your liking.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    9,096

    Default Re: Illegal Use of Handicapped Placard, CVC 4461(C)

    Quote Quoting EWYLTJ
    View Post
    Jeff, you are quite the hypocrite. On one hand, you make tons of assumptions based on the limited amount of information given by the OP that would justify the cop's position.... then, in the same post, you insinuate that I am unreasonable for making any assumptions based on the available posts. Do you get nosebleeds sitting that high on your perch??
    If you look very closely, you will see that I said that NO ONE outside of a medical doctor can make the determination whether someone is handicapped.

    Again, this has nothing to do with this case.

    I never said the cop wasn't technically within his right to give the ticket...
    Cool, then we are done?

    although you like to argue that point to death. I said the cop failed to exercise a reasonable amount of judgement.
    Oh, not done.

    Your response was that the cop is not AUTHORIZED to exercise judgement. If a man who has been bound to a wheelchair all of his life has to prove his disability with a piece of paper, then we have stepped over the line into the relm of stupidity (but you seem to be comfortable in that relm).
    Of course the officer can exercise judgment. But cannot judge whether or not a person is medically handicapped. That is not their job.

    However, the officer can also decide NOT to let someone slide. That was apparently the case here.

    I suppose that if the guy had a bullet wound in the chest, the cop wouldn't have the medical training necessary to authorize him access to an ambulance (before you start to pick that apart, I'll make the obvious statement for you that my analogy was extreme for the effect of making a point, not to offer a real scenario for debate.... hopefully I haven't challenged your narrow thinking too much).
    Nope, but you bring up the obvious point.

    Other than the wheelchair (which people may sit in even when NOT handicapped), how was the officer to know the person was handicapped?

    You are insisting that the officer cut a break. While that was certainly possible, I am saying that there is no compelling fact that said that the officer's decision was not the correct one.

    The bottom line is... you, and a handful of others like you, will ALWAYS twist the situation to convince the OP that they were wrong and that the cop/state was right.
    No, in fact I remember saying that the OP would probably be found innocent here.

    The difference is that you seem to want to make the cop on the street the judge. We have judges for that.

    You clearly place a higher burden on the public than you do the state. My suggestion earlier still stands... maybe you would be more comfortable living in a country like communist China where the standards are more to your liking.
    You keep saying that over and over. You must think it quite witty.

    This is a fairly black and white traffic matter. In fact, though I think it unlikely, the judge could find that the ticket was valid.

    The letter of the law was violated. Whether you like it or not.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default Re: Common Sense in Enforcement of Laws

    And the reason I believe the OP will get the matter dismissed is NOT that the officer did anything wrong at all (as it is clear he did not), but because state law requires it.

    From the CA Penal Code ... section 4 - right at the beginning:

    4. The rule of the common law, that penal statutes are to be
    strictly construed, has no application to this Code. All its
    provisions are to be construed according to the fair import of their
    terms, with a view to effect its objects and to promote justice.

    When the situation is explained to a judge in the proper venue, I suspect the judge will make the right decision and dismiss the matter.

    - Carl

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    853

    Default Re: Common Sense in Enforcement of Laws

    You know what I think is funny? The poster claims that the police and the government are interfering in the personal lives of others by writing the ticket and not excercising judgement, but says this:

    However, I submit that once a society places the public's burden over that of the state, then you simply have a police state.
    Yet, the poster is willing to use that government interference when it is in his favor. Handicapped parking is interference in itself- you are interfereing with the property owner by telling him who can park in what spot, and the person parking by telling him he needs a permit to park there.

    As far as cops excercising judgement- what would you do if a cop excercised judgement to allow a non-handicapped person to park in a handicapped spot, and this required your handicapped relatives to wheel themselves down the road?

    I bet you are all for interference and police involvement then.

    People's point of view changes, depending on whose ox is being gored.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default Re: Common Sense in Enforcement of Laws

    That's a good point. If we start allowing for such subjective judgments, then the officers can start allowing people in to the handicapped spots for all manner of reasons. Granted, the OP's nephew's condition was likely apparent with some inspection, but it still requires a subjective determination by an officer such that he effectively offers a pass on the law. Then, using the argument offered by many, if he allows this one person to violate the code section, why not others? This can lead to all manner of problems ... one of the more common in San Diego is accusations of racial bias (which is also why many officers there cite instead of warn ANYONE).

    - Carl

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    9,096

    Default Re: Common Sense in Enforcement of Laws

    Great point.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Is a Basement a Common Area or Limited Common Element
    By thirdlaw in forum Real Estate Ownership and Title
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-18-2011, 01:45 AM
  2. Back Yard Considered Common for More than Ten Years, Now Limited Common
    By ctcondo_owner in forum Real Estate Ownership and Title
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-05-2010, 11:28 AM
  3. Towing: Selective Enforcement of Towing Laws
    By dpt1218 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-25-2010, 10:49 AM
  4. Child Support Enforcement Laws
    By Ironwil in forum Child Custody, Support and Visitation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-24-2009, 09:58 PM
  5. Laws Concerning Judgement Enforcement and Notification
    By announcerjohn in forum Driver's Licenses
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-08-2009, 07:59 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources