• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NYC mayor's SUV caught breaking traffic laws

The referenced codes do not say what you claim they say.

Then read the rest of the damn code. Look up the referenced definition of authorized emergency vehicle in the state code as I did. And btw, your dodge is noted, I never posted that NYC police officers make up their own traffic regs as you have twisted it. I said quite clearly that NYC itself has exemptions from the state code and make it's own traffic code. It is the city, not the officers who make their own traffic regs and they do differ somewhat from the state's regs.

But then I posted that and you, being proven wrong, reframe and talk strawman.

You are wrong to say that code exempts the police from obeying laws concerning speed, stop signs, etc

Playing like you cannot read now? Police on a call fall explicitly under the authorized emergency vehicle definition in code. Authorized emergency vehicles are exempt from ALL traffic codes, again explicitly by code.

It is the point. You're defending behavior that is wrong. I don't defend behavior that is wrong.

Nice reframe, still a dodge I see.


No, proven by your avoidance of the posted code.
 
And more from the referenced state code (referenced by applicable NYC code):

101. Authorized emergency vehicle. Every ambulance, police vehicle, fire vehicle, civil emergency vehicle,
emergency ambulance service vehicle, environmental response vehicle, sanitation patrol vehicle, hazardous materials
vehicle, and ordnance disposal vehicle of the armed services of the United States.

(b) The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may:
1. Stop, stand or park irrespective of the provisions of this title;
2. Proceed past a steady red signal, a flashing red signal or a stop sign, but only after slowing down as
may be necessary for safe operation;
3. Exceed the maximum speed limits so long as he does not endanger life or property;
4. Disregard regulations governing directions of movement or turning in specified directions.


(c) Except for an authorized emergency vehicle operated as a police vehicle, the exemptions herein granted to
an authorized emergency vehicle shall apply only when audible signals are sounded from any said vehicle while
in motion by bell, horn siren, electronic device or exhaust whistle as may be reasonably necessary, and when
the vehicle is equipped with at least one lighted lamp so that from any direction, under normal atmospheric
conditions from a distance of five hundred feet from such vehicle, at least one red light will be displayed and
visible

And police on duty on a call are considered emergency operation:

Section 114-b. Emergency Operation. The operation, or parking, of an authorized emergency vehicle, when such
vehicle is engaged in transporting a sick or injured person, transporting prisoners, pursuing an actual or suspected
violator of the law, or responding to, or working or assisting at the scene of an accident, disaster, police call, alarm of
fire, actual potential release of hazardous material or other emergency. Emergency operation shall not include returning
form such service.

http://www.health.ny.gov/professionals/ems/pdf/srgvat.pdf
 
Then read the rest of the damn code. Look up the referenced definition of authorized emergency vehicle in the state code as I did. And btw, your dodge is noted, I never posted that NYC police officers make up their own traffic regs as you have twisted it. I said quite clearly that NYC itself has exemptions from the state code and make it's own traffic code. It is the city, not the officers who make their own traffic regs and they do differ somewhat from the state's regs.

It's not my burden to prove your claims. That's for you to do.

Please link to the code that says police officers do not have to follow the laws about speeding, stop signs, signalling, etc


But then I posted that and you, being proven wrong, reframe and talk strawman.

No, the code you referred to (but didn't link to) does not refer to speeding, stop signs, etc. Those exemptions refer to police officers not having to obey pedestrian traffic signals (they can ignore the "Don't Walk" signs), traffic signals at railroad crossings, etc. They don't say what you claim they say




Playing like you cannot read now? Police on a call fall explicitly under the authorized emergency vehicle definition in code. Authorized emergency vehicles are exempt from ALL traffic codes, again explicitly by code.

It does not say that the police fall under the authorized emergency vehicle definition. Please show where it says that instead of just claiming that it does.



Nice reframe, still a dodge I see.

No dodge. Just the truth. I don't defend bad behavior. You are.




No, proven by your avoidance of the posted code.

Nope. The code you posted does not say what you claim it says
 
Okay, great, it's common knowledge and you don't have to prove it because you say so.

you have yet to prove anything that you have said so there you have it. yes common knowledge doesn't have to be sourced. hence why it is called common knowledge.
you also evidently haven't read the first post in the thread.

if there is no emergency and or they are not responding to a call any security detail/cop must follow traffic laws.
i am sorry that you feel that these people are above the laws, but they are not. the same laws that apply to us apply to them.
 
And more from the referenced state code (referenced by applicable NYC code):





And police on duty on a call are considered emergency operation:



http://www.health.ny.gov/professionals/ems/pdf/srgvat.pdf

You see? *NOW* you're actually posting the applicable law. And it doesn't seem to support your conclusion

For one thing, I notice you start your quoting at section (b). Section (a) says:

(a) The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when involved in an emergency operation, may exercise the privileges set forth in this section, but subject to the conditions herein stated.

IOW, the exemptions only apply if, and only if, the mayor's driver is considered to be involved in an emergency operation. Your quote as to the definition of "emergency operation":

Section 114-b. Emergency Operation. The operation, or parking, of an authorized emergency vehicle, when such
vehicle is engaged in transporting a sick or injured person, transporting prisoners, pursuing an actual or suspected
violator of the law, or responding to, or working or assisting at the scene of an accident, disaster, police call, alarm of
fire, actual potential release of hazardous material or other emergency. Emergency operation shall not include returning
form such service.

You bolded two sections, which indicates that you think those two apply to this situation. However, the first clearly does not. In this instance, the mayor's driver was not "responding to, or working or assisting at the scene of an accident". That clearly does not apply

That's leaves the exemption that applies to when officers are engaged in a "police call". Being on duty is not the same as responding to a police call.
 
Speeding is not worse than drugs, the rapid deline of your argument into trolling tells me you've just given up.

You are correct. I have surrendered. I'm sorry I was silly, didn't mean to troll. It was a (failed) attempt at humor. A topic like this can only go so far before all the debate value gets lost. I'm reduced to mocking my own arguments. My post may have been a waste of valuable electronic space but no harm was intended. :peace?
 
Back
Top Bottom