That’s because the last thing anyone wants is a loud noise complaint to escalate into a shooting.
edit: misread the title, assumed this was about them doing this in Paris (also recently announced)
2. No human endeavor is perfect. I am willing to accept some tragic mistakes in exchange for the prevention of crimes and the dissuasion of criminals.
2. There is no evidence that any prevention of crime was gained in exchange for the deaths of these innocent unarmed people. If anything it created an environment where the law is respected less.
I mostly agree with this, but there needs to be an effort to hold people accountable when mistakes are made, and to change processes to help ensure that these mistakes don't happen again, or at least happen less often. Police departments across the US seem near-violently resistant to this.
I also think the existing criminal courts and prosecutors hold police reasonably accountable. They could do better.
Yes, when you enforce laws, some people are a-holes and escalate to unlawful violence. Sometimes cops, sometimes civilians.
The appropriate reaction to make sure that isn't tolerated either, to improve police-community relations, to train police better, and to review whether we need to update laws to match consensus on expected human behavior.
The appropriate reaction is not in a hundred miles of "oh, well, gosh, do we really need to enforce laws anymore? Someone might get hurt!", and the forum is a worse place for tolerating that mentality.
Now, to be sure, there are many laws that fit the last category above and should probably be scaled back for being petty and kafkaesque. But, "don't wake up a million people around you for your own personal thrills" does not make the list.
Traffic stops could then be relegated to imminent dangers like drunk or otherwise reckless drivers, and serious crimes.
If the ticket is for the vehicle owner then yes I could see this working. Perfect for emissions violations and vehicle code violations. You could also double-check for stolen license plates as it should be fairly easy to automate the detection of most car makes/models as long as the car hasn't been heavily modified.
That seems like an asinine way to apply that law. If the vehicle is registered to you, it's your responsibility. Lent it to your uncle and he rolled a stop? Well, the car's registered to an owner, that's their problem to sort out.
I think it would only take one instance of a friend borrowing my car, getting a fine, and that friend refusing to pay the fine, for me to stop lending them my car -- lesson learned. Or hell, why would I even want to be friends with someone who would do that to me?
In Australia its still your problem. If someone else was borrowing the car you have to get them to admit they were using it at the time. The only way I think you will get off is if you report the car as stolen at the time.
Jaywalking is a good example, it doesn't get enforced basically ever and when it does it's overwhelmingly poor minorities. So the city has just been adding pedestrian crossings in areas where people where people jaywalk to reduce the incentive.