Pulled over today: weird experience

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP: ok I got it. My privilege is showing. FWIW I am not white, I am south Asian. Guess I’ll stick to the regular lanes from now on

No you don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Fair enough but part of that shouldn't be rewarding their choice with a faster commute on lanes that would be better used by people who have to commute through a corridor. Jobs are concentrated in dense areas - schools tend to be concentrated in neighborhoods. I hadn't thought of this before but I bet there are parents putting their kids in downtown daycares to take advantage of HOV rules - if so I do think that undermines the purpose of the lanes and is a legal form of cheating.

If it's legal, it's not cheating.

I suppose you could ask your elected representatives to change the HOV rules from two people (or three people) to two -- well, I don't know; how old do you have to be, before you count? Or do you also have to have a driver's license? Or do you also have to have a driver's license and demonstrate that, but for riding with somebody else, you would be driving yourself in your own vehicle? But I think that it would be simpler to keep the rule at just plain people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I say this as a South Asian woman born in America. My demographic (South Asian women raised in America) are an extremely entitled group of people. OP is a great example of this.

He probably pulled her over for a DWA. Everyone knows Asian drivers are the worst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP: ok I got it. My privilege is showing. FWIW I am not white, I am south Asian. Guess I’ll stick to the regular lanes from now on

I hope you keep driving HOV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I ride in the HOV with my dog and never had a cop stop me for it. Dogs are people too.

No, they're not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fair enough but part of that shouldn't be rewarding their choice with a faster commute on lanes that would be better used by people who have to commute through a corridor. Jobs are concentrated in dense areas - schools tend to be concentrated in neighborhoods. I hadn't thought of this before but I bet there are parents putting their kids in downtown daycares to take advantage of HOV rules - if so I do think that undermines the purpose of the lanes and is a legal form of cheating.

If it's legal, it's not cheating.

I suppose you could ask your elected representatives to change the HOV rules from two people (or three people) to two -- well, I don't know; how old do you have to be, before you count? Or do you also have to have a driver's license? Or do you also have to have a driver's license and demonstrate that, but for riding with somebody else, you would be driving yourself in your own vehicle? But I think that it would be simpler to keep the rule at just plain people.

Totally agree.

[Anonymous]

Ok wow. I’m the (entitled/ asshole) OP and back for the first time in a couple hours. Didn’t mean to create a firestorm.

[Anonymous]

He couldn't see your children, so he pulled you over. He wasn't trained well, so he didn't know how to respond to you, which is why he made an ass of himself. He was also putting himself at risk, no matter what anyone else thinks. There has already been one LEO struck and killed this year during a vehicle stop. Unless you want to be lumped together with everyone else, do not lump all law enforcement officers together. There are many, many good officers in this country, they are not all racist, they are not all assholes, and you would be surprised to find how many of them are very kind and compassionate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gotta tell you, OP - I think the true spirit of the HOV lane is for multiple potential DRIVERS to be in one vehicle to cut down on congestion ... plus, he didn't make a "mistake," he couldn't see your infants. I can guarantee he wasn't embarrassed - he was probably biting his tongue so he wouldn't say what I just wrote.

You are owed nothing.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How about non HOV world parent makes choice to have kids in neighborhood schools that don't involve them spending hours in the car every day? That would be good for kids and good congestion.

Seriously why do kids need to be commuting on 270?

The point of HOV should be to get more throughput of people who need to get through a congested corridor. It is hard for me to rationalize why kids need to get through that congested corridor but I live in DC purposefully so my kids are within walking distance of our home. But in fact it is bad policy to encourage parents to make different choices so I'm really not sure it is in the "spirit" of the law to have parents zipping around in HOV lanes with kids who really don't need to be going to school downtown - most jobs are downtown and most daycares and schools are not.

How about we let parents decide which works better for them, when the choices are (a) a daycare close to home but far from the job (b) a daycare far from home but close to the job? In the ideal world, everybody would also have a choice (c) home, daycare, and job all close together. But we are not in the ideal world, yet.

Fair enough but part of that shouldn't be rewarding their choice with a faster commute on lanes that would be better used by people who have to commute through a corridor. Jobs are concentrated in dense areas - schools tend to be concentrated in neighborhoods. I hadn't thought of this before but I bet there are parents putting their kids in downtown daycares to take advantage of HOV rules - if so I do think that undermines the purpose of the lanes and is a legal form of cheating.

There are absolutely are. Just like there are people who slug to take advantage of HOV rules or who drive electric cars or who carpool with their neighbors. Lots of people do things to legally take advantage of benefits offered to them.

And once again, if that reduces the time the parent is on the road by 15-30 minutes it is actually a net good.

If you are the PP going on about how everyone can choose a daycare. There are a lot of options but they are hard to get into. If you only get into two and one is next to your house and has 3 safety violations and one is close to the city and has a much better reputation you think the parent should put their child in the close bad one just to stay off the road? Or should we help parents make good chocies for their children without adding a population of people to the rush hour for two hours a pop?

No it really isn't a net good to society and is only a good to the parent - the point is to move people through a corridor more efficiently who need to get through the corridor. People going to work in cars with multiple people we want to move through the corridor as efficiently as possible to reward them for being more efficient. We don't want to give scarce space in the HOV lanes to people whose kids are electively enrolled in downtown daycare. We don't want to give the space to people who could travel at another time of day - we want incentives to reward the people who most need to be on the road at a particular time who are making smart choices. I fail to see why parents who elect to enroll their kids in school far from home should benefit from this system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I ride in the HOV with my dog and never had a cop stop me for it. Dogs are people too.

Why must you insult dogs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How about non HOV world parent makes choice to have kids in neighborhood schools that don't involve them spending hours in the car every day? That would be good for kids and good congestion.

Seriously why do kids need to be commuting on 270?

The point of HOV should be to get more throughput of people who need to get through a congested corridor. It is hard for me to rationalize why kids need to get through that congested corridor but I live in DC purposefully so my kids are within walking distance of our home. But in fact it is bad policy to encourage parents to make different choices so I'm really not sure it is in the "spirit" of the law to have parents zipping around in HOV lanes with kids who really don't need to be going to school downtown - most jobs are downtown and most daycares and schools are not.

How about we let parents decide which works better for them, when the choices are (a) a daycare close to home but far from the job (b) a daycare far from home but close to the job? In the ideal world, everybody would also have a choice (c) home, daycare, and job all close together. But we are not in the ideal world, yet.

Fair enough but part of that shouldn't be rewarding their choice with a faster commute on lanes that would be better used by people who have to commute through a corridor. Jobs are concentrated in dense areas - schools tend to be concentrated in neighborhoods. I hadn't thought of this before but I bet there are parents putting their kids in downtown daycares to take advantage of HOV rules - if so I do think that undermines the purpose of the lanes and is a legal form of cheating.

There are absolutely are. Just like there are people who slug to take advantage of HOV rules or who drive electric cars or who carpool with their neighbors. Lots of people do things to legally take advantage of benefits offered to them.

And once again, if that reduces the time the parent is on the road by 15-30 minutes it is actually a net good.

If you are the PP going on about how everyone can choose a daycare. There are a lot of options but they are hard to get into. If you only get into two and one is next to your house and has 3 safety violations and one is close to the city and has a much better reputation you think the parent should put their child in the close bad one just to stay off the road? Or should we help parents make good chocies for their children without adding a population of people to the rush hour for two hours a pop?

No it really isn't a net good to society and is only a good to the parent - the point is to move people through a corridor more efficiently who need to get through the corridor. People going to work in cars with multiple people we want to move through the corridor as efficiently as possible to reward them for being more efficient. We don't want to give scarce space in the HOV lanes to people whose kids are electively enrolled in downtown daycare. We don't want to give the space to people who could travel at another time of day - we want incentives to reward the people who most need to be on the road at a particular time who are making smart choices. I fail to see why parents who elect to enroll their kids in school far from home should benefit from this system.

Too bad. Lobby to change the law. Cops can interrogate every person they pull over with kids Israeli airport style to see if their trip is necessary or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How about non HOV world parent makes choice to have kids in neighborhood schools that don't involve them spending hours in the car every day? That would be good for kids and good congestion.

Seriously why do kids need to be commuting on 270?

The point of HOV should be to get more throughput of people who need to get through a congested corridor. It is hard for me to rationalize why kids need to get through that congested corridor but I live in DC purposefully so my kids are within walking distance of our home. But in fact it is bad policy to encourage parents to make different choices so I'm really not sure it is in the "spirit" of the law to have parents zipping around in HOV lanes with kids who really don't need to be going to school downtown - most jobs are downtown and most daycares and schools are not.

How about we let parents decide which works better for them, when the choices are (a) a daycare close to home but far from the job (b) a daycare far from home but close to the job? In the ideal world, everybody would also have a choice (c) home, daycare, and job all close together. But we are not in the ideal world, yet.

Fair enough but part of that shouldn't be rewarding their choice with a faster commute on lanes that would be better used by people who have to commute through a corridor. Jobs are concentrated in dense areas - schools tend to be concentrated in neighborhoods. I hadn't thought of this before but I bet there are parents putting their kids in downtown daycares to take advantage of HOV rules - if so I do think that undermines the purpose of the lanes and is a legal form of cheating.

There are absolutely are. Just like there are people who slug to take advantage of HOV rules or who drive electric cars or who carpool with their neighbors. Lots of people do things to legally take advantage of benefits offered to them.

And once again, if that reduces the time the parent is on the road by 15-30 minutes it is actually a net good.

If you are the PP going on about how everyone can choose a daycare. There are a lot of options but they are hard to get into. If you only get into two and one is next to your house and has 3 safety violations and one is close to the city and has a much better reputation you think the parent should put their child in the close bad one just to stay off the road? Or should we help parents make good chocies for their children without adding a population of people to the rush hour for two hours a pop?

No it really isn't a net good to society and is only a good to the parent - the point is to move people through a corridor more efficiently who need to get through the corridor. People going to work in cars with multiple people we want to move through the corridor as efficiently as possible to reward them for being more efficient. We don't want to give scarce space in the HOV lanes to people whose kids are electively enrolled in downtown daycare. We don't want to give the space to people who could travel at another time of day - we want incentives to reward the people who most need to be on the road at a particular time who are making smart choices. I fail to see why parents who elect to enroll their kids in school far from home should benefit from this system.

Well stated!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He couldn't see your children, so he pulled you over. He wasn't trained well, so he didn't know how to respond to you, which is why he made an ass of himself. He was also putting himself at risk, no matter what anyone else thinks. There has already been one LEO struck and killed this year during a vehicle stop. Unless you want to be lumped together with everyone else, do not lump all law enforcement officers together. There are many, many good officers in this country, they are not all racist, they are not all assholes, and you would be surprised to find how many of them are very kind and compassionate.

Jesus Christ calm down. This particular cop was a dick. You weeping for all the other cops that might be tarred with his brush (when no one has done anything approaching that in this thread) is a bit of an overreaction, and I'm not sure what you're even talking about with the bolded unless you're threatening to racially profile the OP as payback for not liking cops as much as you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok wow. I’m the (entitled/ asshole) OP and back for the first time in a couple hours. Didn’t mean to create a firestorm.

It's called "cause and effect" OP ... like, "if I drive in the HOV lane with two impossible-to-see babies, will I possibly be pulled over by an officer doing his job?