Hacker News Reader

Comment by eqreqeq | Hacker News Reader

>> The other solution is to be really, really nice. To be incredibly accommodating. To engender a spirit of goodwill, joviality and kindness such that the flunky wants to help you.

That is not a practical solution. It sounds almost like a bribe. I'm not saying that you should be rude to anybody, but you shouldn't have to kiss somebody's ass just so that they do their jobs. Is a slippery slope. Now you are kissing their asses, latter that will not be enough and the demands for bribes will be the next logical step. No, the line has to be drawn here.

Politeness is fine, more than that and you are kissing their asses.

View on HN

So I was pulled over while driving a few months ago.

I was trying to keep up with a friend, I got behind and I made a really stupid, illegal and probably dangerous maneuver in trying to keep up. Happened to be a cop at that intersection who pulled me over.

Officer comes to the car, and asks about what I just did. I pretty much immediately admit to doing it, and tell him that it was a terrible lapse of judgement on my part. He takes me license/reg back and runs it, then comes back and just asks me how long I've been driving. I told him about 5 hours or so, and he says he meant how many years. I tell him 15 or so.

He comments that he can't find any tickets or things on my record, and I tell him I've never had one. He just tells me to not do it again and to move on. I apologized again and told him I appreciated him keeping an eye out for the public safety.

Now I know that you're supposed to be super defensive, and next to an asshole to the cop in citing all your rights and admitting to nothing. But really, I messed up. It was better for me to admit what I did and accept responsibility.

So... this might be the kissing up that the prior post is talking about. Did I technically 'have' to do it? No. But I'm pretty sure if I had done otherwise, I would have left with a ticket.

Maybe, but it's also just as likely to have resulted in a ticket after confessing.

Not sure why you're getting downvoted, because you're absolutely right. In fact, the parent's anecdote is just that: an anecdote. The reality of the matter however is that you should never, ever admit wrong-doing under any circumstances. Use the minimum amount of words for basic communication with the cop, be polite, and then deal with whatever ticket is written (either pay it or contest it in court).

I once had a CHP officer tell me in so many words that if I hadn't admitted to speeding, he would have written me a ticket.

Stonewalling isn't necessarily the best strategy, particularly if you both know you were in violation.

This is quite likely to depend on the colour of your skin...

I definitely considered this. I was driving through the border of a traditionally black neighborhood and college campus. I'm a white male, and it was some frat party weekend on the campus and I got the sense he was looking to nail drunk students.

If I wasn't white, I think its highly possible things would have turned out differently.

Every encounter I've had with police so far (a few traffic stops, being caught dumpster diving, being in a few parks in Boston after midnight), I've found it just to be better to be nice. I've walked away from every situation so far with zero tickets, arrests, handcuffings, etc...

Jeez... what do we teach kids these days?

If you've done wrong, admit it. Don't lie about it.

If you get a ticket, accept it as deserving punishment for putting other lives at risk.

Particularly in the US, talking to the police is a bad idea. There's a famous video about it.

I've seen the video, and know that overall its good advice.

I think though, depending on various factors, that playing 'nice' can definitely get you further than stonewalling the cop. It all depends what you (potentially) did, who you are (being a white, upper middle class male doesn't hurt), and what you think the worse-case scenario will be.

So? If you _know_ you've done something wrong, and you get caught, then you should own up and accept the consequences.

My experience is people have more respect for people who will admit to a mistake/wrong-doing than for someone who will try to weasel their way out of trouble.

Know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em. Sometimes pragmatism beats principle.

If you did something wrong, and know it, I think it's laudable to own up to it and be nice about it. If you get a free pass, great, if not, well, you deserve it.

The OP was trying to do something right, and got punished for it.

>you shouldn't have to kiss somebody's ass just so that they do their jobs.

You don't. The person in this story did her job. He wouldn't sign the papers so she seized the boat. She also doesn't have the authority to change the papers. Her job is, if something goes sideways, impound everything and let the other parties sort it out.

The author of the article wanted a small and very reasonable exception made for his case. Everyone would agree that the change from CAD to USD is small and inconsequential and in this case more accurate. But that's not how "the system" works, and so he's not asking them to do their job.

If you just want the public official you're dealing with to do their job, then all you have to do is refrain from being difficult. If you want small special favors, then be nice. It's that easy.

Yours is a minority viewpoint here, and I wish it got more explanation.

If the bureaucrat's only two options were a) let the guy have the boat, or b) take the boat so someone else can sort it out, then I'm definitely more sympathetic to the bureaucrat here.

Is that understanding correct?

From the point of view of the border, the item has already been released from Canada. They almost certainly can't just dump it back on the other side (they would have to refuse it entry to the US). They also can't give it to him w/o the proper paperwork (bureaucracy aside, that paperwork insures that the proper fees and taxes are administered). If he won't sign, the only thing they can do is hold the property. Eventually, they'll bill the owner for the cost of holding it or sell it at auction.

I don't know the code at all, but logic suggests this is the most likely scenario.

He is not explaining how things ought to be, he is explaining how things are. I think you guys agree.

While we're on the topic of explaining how things are... I don't think anyone's too surprised that Michael Arrington failed a congeniality test.

but you shouldn't have to kiss somebody's ass just so that they do their jobs

This is what I thought when I saw the US custom of tipping bartenders.

> That is not a practical solution. It sounds almost like a bribe.

I would say that, for better or worse (worse, obviously), it is both.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com