And the “I pulled you over because you peeled out” - I mean it’s fun. Anyway, if it’s harmless I don’t really see the problem.
And the “I pulled you over because you peeled out” - I mean it’s fun. Anyway, if it’s harmless I don’t really see the problem.
Police have plenty of ways to have fun that aren't Fourth Amendment violations.
If you wanna give out free ice cream cones, station a cruiser with a sign saying so. People can come to you just fine, without the "what the fuck, why am I getting pulled over?!" worries. The banana guy at least has an inkling of why there are flashing police lights in his rearview, but that doesn't make it OK.
(And, yes, I realise that this is exactly the same shape of argument that turns into victim blaming when it's about cat calling or worse. No, I don't have a principled way to distinguish the two cases.)
For example, your average cop in the UK, traffic or otherwise, doesn't carry a gun. Bobbies can get guns, but it's enough of a bureaucratic hassle that they seldom bother. The absence of guns makes a lot of the tension disappear that I read about in American encounters with low enforcement.
In Germany, police routinely carry guns, but also approximately no one is afraid they might get shot as a result of making the wrong move at a routine traffic stop. (Partially that's because every shot fired comes with lots and lots of red tape. Even warning shots. If the police officer actually hits a person, they get the police equivalent of a court martial. And that's mandatory, even when it's obvious they were doing the Right Thing. Just like a captain in the Royal Navy got a court martial, when their ship sank for any reason.
I say 'partially', because I suspect culture has a lot to do with it.)
If you mop floors and you have fun by twirling your broom and humming a tune, you're not affecting anyone.
If we give you a gun and the right to shoot people in the head and go home to sleep in your own bed, then we can ask you to lock in a little more than that and not pull over people because it's funny.
You want police to have a positive presence in the community. Innocent engagement with a banana car helps with that, doesn't hurt.
And if that sounds hackneyed and like a ridiculous standard, you're damn right it is: we let them have outsized influence in our existence as otherwise free people. Their standard has to be a double standard.
Are you under the impression all cops are known for is harassing banana cars?
Can they not pull up alongside and wave? Give a thumbs-up? Roll down the window?
Over here in reality, when a man with a badge and a gun pulls people over for a bit of fun: Refusing to play along with whatever game it is that they have in mind is a criminal offense.
I appreciate your anger, but it’s misplaced here.
The cop comfortable with pulling over the funny looking car (that looks like a banana) is the same cop with unreasonable understanding of the responsibility they're given.
It wouldn't matter if the banana car man has a sign that says "I love cops free donuts in the back"
What's really crazy to me is that someone is working over time to try to police (literally) other people's negative feelings about cop misconduct.
What inadequacy leads someone to see others upset at an obvious misuse of power and think "I need to stand up for the guys misuing it!"
It’s crazy to me that you view it as “policing” your opinions rather than simply seeing my viewpoint as just that, and opposing viewpoint.
I’m not policing you. Just offering a different perspective.
I apologize for speaking up. So much for free speech :)
But I’ll say it once more: it’s a freaking banana car. Lighten up bro! Very confused why you’re more upset than the driver of the banana is (who seems to want the attention and is getting it, the desired effect)!
> "I appreciate your anger, but it’s misplaced here."
Weird mix of narcissism to think anyone cares if you appreciate their anger, and arrogance to think you know where it belongs.
You're definitely confused. We can leave it at that.