MoCo residents -- answer the survey on the police department.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I filled it out, but what a waste of time.

This wasn't a survey. It's prep work for taking money out of the police department and allocating it to other, or soon-to-be-created, departments.

Get ready for the Montgomery County Violence Interrupter Unit!

I'm all for it. We don't need armed police officers to fill out crash reports or issue tickets to commercial trucks parked on residential streets.

And what about drunk drivers, wife beaters, and murderers? Should a social worker handle that too?

I think that most people are capable of understanding that Agency X is best suited to handle Problems A and B, while Agency Y is better suited to handle Problems C and D. In fact that's basically the structure of survey.

So, should armed police officers handle homicide? In my opinion, yes.

Should armed police officers handle domestic violence? In my opinion, not as the lead agency; they're not very good at it.

Should armed police officers handle drunk driving? In my opinion, not routinely; there needs to be more automated enforcement, and there need to be stricter requirements with more enforcement for establishments that serve alcohol.

How do you automate enforcement of impaired driving?

It was a good start when the requirement went into effect for mandatory ignition interlocks after the first DUI. Lots more speed cameras and red-light cameras would also help, with consequences for the owners of vehicles that get over a certain number of citations in a given period of time. Prevention of impaired driving would obviously help as well.

What do you think the chances are of an impaired driver getting pulled over on any given impaired-driving trip? They've got to be quite low, which means the current system isn't working well anyway. Not to mention that pulling drivers over is dangerous for the police officers.

Do you know that most drunk drivers actually drive really slowly? So your speed camera idea is not a winner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I filled it out, but what a waste of time.

This wasn't a survey. It's prep work for taking money out of the police department and allocating it to other, or soon-to-be-created, departments.

Get ready for the Montgomery County Violence Interrupter Unit!

I'm all for it. We don't need armed police officers to fill out crash reports or issue tickets to commercial trucks parked on residential streets.

And what about drunk drivers, wife beaters, and murderers? Should a social worker handle that too?

I think that most people are capable of understanding that Agency X is best suited to handle Problems A and B, while Agency Y is better suited to handle Problems C and D. In fact that's basically the structure of survey.

So, should armed police officers handle homicide? In my opinion, yes.

Should armed police officers handle domestic violence? In my opinion, not as the lead agency; they're not very good at it.

Should armed police officers handle drunk driving? In my opinion, not routinely; there needs to be more automated enforcement, and there need to be stricter requirements with more enforcement for establishments that serve alcohol.

How do you automate enforcement of impaired driving?

It was a good start when the requirement went into effect for mandatory ignition interlocks after the first DUI. Lots more speed cameras and red-light cameras would also help, with consequences for the owners of vehicles that get over a certain number of citations in a given period of time. Prevention of impaired driving would obviously help as well.

What do you think the chances are of an impaired driver getting pulled over on any given impaired-driving trip? They've got to be quite low, which means the current system isn't working well anyway. Not to mention that pulling drivers over is dangerous for the police officers.

They are assuming the danger so the public doesn't have to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It was a good start when the requirement went into effect for mandatory ignition interlocks after the first DUI. Lots more speed cameras and red-light cameras would also help, with consequences for the owners of vehicles that get over a certain number of citations in a given period of time. Prevention of impaired driving would obviously help as well.

What do you think the chances are of an impaired driver getting pulled over on any given impaired-driving trip? They've got to be quite low, which means the current system isn't working well anyway. Not to mention that pulling drivers over is dangerous for the police officers.

They are assuming the danger so the public doesn't have to.

That's the idea, but it's not so effective for protecting the public. Plus, wouldn't it be great if you could achieve the same results, or better results, without endangering police officers? So let's think of ways to do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Do you know that most drunk drivers actually drive really slowly? So your speed camera idea is not a winner.

Do they come to complete stops at all stop signs and red lights, too? Automated red light enforcement is a thing that already exists right here in Montgomery County.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do you know that most drunk drivers actually drive really slowly? So your speed camera idea is not a winner.

Do they come to complete stops at all stop signs and red lights, too? Automated red light enforcement is a thing that already exists right here in Montgomery County.

I don't think a $40 ticket discourages people from driving while impaired. It doesn't put them in the court system where they receive mandatory counseling/treatment. It doesn't create a record of repeat offenses that eventually makes them lose their license. It just lets them keep driving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do you know that most drunk drivers actually drive really slowly? So your speed camera idea is not a winner.

Do they come to complete stops at all stop signs and red lights, too? Automated red light enforcement is a thing that already exists right here in Montgomery County.

I don't think a $40 ticket discourages people from driving while impaired. It doesn't put them in the court system where they receive mandatory counseling/treatment. It doesn't create a record of repeat offenses that eventually makes them lose their license. It just lets them keep driving.

The current low chance of getting pulled over by a police officer doesn't discourage people from driving while impaired either. So let's think of something that's more effective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Do you know that most drunk drivers actually drive really slowly? So your speed camera idea is not a winner.

Do they come to complete stops at all stop signs and red lights, too? Automated red light enforcement is a thing that already exists right here in Montgomery County.

I don't think a $40 ticket discourages people from driving while impaired. It doesn't put them in the court system where they receive mandatory counseling/treatment. It doesn't create a record of repeat offenses that eventually makes them lose their license. It just lets them keep driving.

The current low chance of getting pulled over by a police officer doesn't discourage people from driving while impaired either. So let's think of something that's more effective.

It actually does discourage normal people. Not the alcoholics though.