Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL at "putting himself at risk." Yeah, a real hero to be on traffic patrol. He was doing a job that pays very well; no need to thank him for "his service." He is well compensated.

Why do you hate children? How else is she supposed to say "I have two children in the back seat" that meets your non-smugness standards?

+1

You have no idea how many officers are injured or killed during traffic stops, do you?

Keep posting; the more you write, the more your bias and uneducated "contributions" will speak for themselves.

I didn't write anything, except a +1. LOL. But by all means, keep going......No, please do.......

Anonymous wrote:As a black male I love to hear white peoples weird experiences with the police! Ahhh to be white in America! Sounds amazing! Let me tell you about the time I was detained in a club for "suspicious activity". I ended up with a broken nose.

OP never said she was white. Why are you being so racist?

I’d be upset because now under your license/license plate is the warning that you were in the HOV as a single passenger.

There was no warning to give because you broke no law. I’d have pushed that more. I understand he must have been embarrassed to realize he was wrong but entering a warning in the system is wrong as well.

Example, husband was pulled over for a taillight out. The police gave him a warning and logged it in the system. About a week later another policeman noticed this light out and pulled him over. He said he was going to give him a warning but when he ran his info he saw he’d been warned the week prior and not taken care of it. A ticket was then issued.

So now say you make a mistake and get in the HOV solo and get pulled over, your warning has been logged on a false accusation and you’ll just straight up get the ticket.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL at "putting himself at risk." Yeah, a real hero to be on traffic patrol. He was doing a job that pays very well; no need to thank him for "his service." He is well compensated.

Why do you hate children? How else is she supposed to say "I have two children in the back seat" that meets your non-smugness standards?

+1

You have no idea how many officers are injured or killed during traffic stops, do you?

Keep posting; the more you write, the more your bias and uneducated "contributions" will speak for themselves.

If you were the "snowflake" poster you really did go off the rails. Nobody was saying that he had to know before hand- just his reaction once he saw the babies. Before you comment nobody was arguing about his work or putting himself at risk.

Anonymous wrote:LOL at "putting himself at risk." Yeah, a real hero to be on traffic patrol. He was doing a job that pays very well; no need to thank him for "his service." He is well compensated.

Why do you hate children? How else is she supposed to say "I have two children in the back seat" that meets your non-smugness standards?

+1

I don't hate children; However, I DO have little tolerance for those who can't see the forest for the trees; this is not rocket science.

As PP's have stated - there aren't spirits of law AND if the laws were intended to only cover licensed drivers it would have been IN the laws written but the important theme in play here was the refusal of the police officer to admit error and, while this was no where close to the fear a black/brown driver would have felt it is the mentality of policing on always right/never wrong and no recourse. Again - if pushed for his number - this (she didn't say white) woman could have easily expected him to make up an excuse to write another ticket just to punish her. Black/brown/imperfect English speaker in same situation we all know could easily have found themselves in an escalated encounter.

It was a weird experience OP and just because you got off with just a benign stop I do think it helps to highlight the misconduct of police right no matter reality.

Being stopped on a major highway is dangerous too so again even though nothing happened it was wrong

I was pulled over once for "passing a bus." The bus I passed was a city commuter bus, NOT a school bus and I did not cross a double yellow line in order to pass. I asked, genuinely, if it was illegal to pass a city bus. The officer stammered for a bit then said he'd give me a warning instead of a ticket. I was annoyed because it was ridiculous, but probably more so than I should have been.

Anonymous wrote:LOL at "putting himself at risk." Yeah, a real hero to be on traffic patrol. He was doing a job that pays very well; no need to thank him for "his service." He is well compensated.

Why do you hate children? How else is she supposed to say "I have two children in the back seat" that meets your non-smugness standards?

+1

You have no idea how many officers are injured or killed during traffic stops, do you?

Keep posting; the more you write, the more your bias and uneducated "contributions" will speak for themselves.

LOL at "putting himself at risk." Yeah, a real hero to be on traffic patrol. He was doing a job that pays very well; no need to thank him for "his service." He is well compensated.

Why do you hate children? How else is she supposed to say "I have two children in the back seat" that meets your non-smugness standards?

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh well, sounds like you'll live. At least you weren't shot & killed.

+1

+2
Not to mention he's right about the spirit of HOV. You ended up with only a warning, his is truly a no harm no foul situation, what outcome are you looking for?

There is no "spirit of the HOV." That's just some bullsh#t the officer made up. The law is the law. When did living, breathing babies stop qualifying as "persons"?

The appropriate response from a respectful and socially well-adjusted man is to laugh at the mistake, wave at the babies, and say "Have a good day, ma'am."

Bootlickers like you disgust me.

+3

THIS. Let's make up laws as a police officer, shall we?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The mark of a truly weak man is one who does not have the confidence to admit an honest mistake. We are human.

Personally, I think he sounds like a f#cking loser.

How is it a mistake when he couldn't SEE her snowflakes .... Snowflakes that shouldn't count because they are not keeping their own vehicles off the road?

He didn't make a mistake. He was doing his job and putting himself at risk to do it. I guarantee he was frustrated with your probable self-entitled smugness.

LOL at "putting himself at risk." Yeah, a real hero to be on traffic patrol. He was doing a job that pays very well; no need to thank him for "his service." He is well compensated.

Why do you hate children? How else is she supposed to say "I have two children in the back seat" that meets your non-smugness standards?

You're just as poor adjusted as the officer. On the spectrum?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh well, sounds like you'll live. At least you weren't shot & killed.

+1

+2
Not to mention he's right about the spirit of HOV. You ended up with only a warning, his is truly a no harm no foul situation, what outcome are you looking for?

There is no "spirit of the HOV." That's just some bullsh#t the officer made up. The law is the law. When did living, breathing babies stop qualifying as "persons"?

The appropriate response from a respectful and socially well-adjusted man is to laugh at the mistake, wave at the babies, and say "Have a good day, ma'am."

Bootlickers like you disgust me.

Really. The "spirit" doesn't exist. At what age does this "spirit" qualify a rider? 6? 16? What if my 89 year old non-driving dad is in the passenger seat? Does he qualify? Stoopid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The mark of a truly weak man is one who does not have the confidence to admit an honest mistake. We are human.

Personally, I think he sounds like a f#cking loser.

How is it a mistake when he couldn't SEE her snowflakes .... Snowflakes that shouldn't count because they are not keeping their own vehicles off the road?

He didn't make a mistake. He was doing his job and putting himself at risk to do it. I guarantee he was frustrated with your probable self-entitled smugness.

His mistake, and what made him an ass, is when he saw the babies he could not admit he was wrong. He made up an ASS story about the spirit of the law. Nobody is bashing the police here- just this guy who was too proud to admit that the babies count. His mistake was not stopping her- it's a good thing he did.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh well, sounds like you'll live. At least you weren't shot & killed.

+1

+2
Not to mention he's right about the spirit of HOV. You ended up with only a warning, his is truly a no harm no foul situation, what outcome are you looking for?

Honest question, should you not take HOV with kids/nondrivers? I can see both sides.

-np

Yes they should. IMO the HOVs serve two purposes. Reducing drivers yes and helping families. People sheparding kids around frequently need to take more complicated commutes as they drive to one location to deal with their kids and then drive to work. Streamlining them does improve general traffic congestion. The rules are about people in the car, if they wanted it to be about carpooling then they would specify children in carseats don't count.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The mark of a truly weak man is one who does not have the confidence to admit an honest mistake. We are human.

Personally, I think he sounds like a f#cking loser.

How is it a mistake when he couldn't SEE her snowflakes .... Snowflakes that shouldn't count because they are not keeping their own vehicles off the road?

He didn't make a mistake. He was doing his job and putting himself at risk to do it. I guarantee he was frustrated with your probable self-entitled smugness.

NP, and you sound truly deranged. Snowflakes? Her kids "shouldn't count"? (That's not how laws work, btw.) "I guarantee he was frustrated with your probable self-entitled smugness."???