[Rushtalk] Cops To Collect Traffic Fines On the Spot Via Credit or Debit Card

John A. Quayle blueoval57 at verizon.net
Tue Dec 2 15:00:04 MST 2014


At 04:52 PM 12/2/2014, Stephen A. Frye wrote:
>Content-type: multipart/alternative;
>  boundary="Boundary_(ID_x0gzAZ8qwRIi9bfYjC8/Aw)"
>Content-language: en-us
>
>I couldn’t possibly care less what the 
>motivation is when it comes to DUI’s. Get them 
>off the road. I think DUI’s should be 
>agonizingly fined, lose driving privileges 
>forever, and serve substantial jail time.

         I vehemently disagree and I lost a 
parent to a drunk driver in 1964 when the legal 
limit was .15 (now, there's a bill being 
introduced to make the limit .04). The pendulum 
has swung too far the other way. Cops are way too 
aggressive and they don't have to prove 
impairment. This is the easiest and most 
devastating way to ruin an innocent person's 
life. I personally know cops who have left a bar 
and driven themselves home without incident when 
they couldn't mumble a coherent sentence. That simply isn't fair!

>
>From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com 
>[mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On Behalf Of John A. Quayle
>Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2014 12:55 PM
>To: Rushtalk Discussion List; Rushtalk
>Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Cops To Collect Traffic 
>Fines On the Spot Via Credit or Debit Card
>
>At 09:41 AM 12/2/2014, Carl Spitzer wrote:
>
>Proof tickets are not about public safety.
>CWSIV
>
>          And that includes DUI's as well............
>
>
>
>--
>
>
>Under Texas Bill, Cops To Collect Traffic Fines 
>On the Spot Via Credit or Debit Card
>
>
>
>
>
>November 12, 2014
>
>
>
>Source: 
><http://www.infowars.com/under-texas-bill-cops-to-collect-traffic-fines-on-the-spot-via-credit-or-debit-card/>Adan 
>Salazar
>
>http://www.blacklistednews.com/Under_Texas_Bill%2C_Cops_To_Collect_Traffic_Fines_On_the_Spot_Via_Credit_or_Debit_Card/39138/0/38/38/Y/M.html 
>
>
>
>
><http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/BillStages.aspx?LegSess=84R&Bill=HB121>H.B. 
>No. 121, introduced on Monday by State Rep. 
>Allen Fletcher, concerns “an alternative means 
>of payment of certain criminal fines and court costs.”
>
>“Under the procedure, a peace officer making an 
>arrest of a defendant (1) shall inform the 
>defendant of: (A) the possibility of making an 
>immediate payment of the fine and related court 
>costs by use of a credit or debit card; and (B) 
>the defendant’s available alternatives to making 
>an immediate payment,” the bill, still in its initial phase, states.
>
>The House bill goes on to explain that “a peace 
>officer making an arrest of a defendant: (2) may 
>accept, on behalf of the court, the defendant’s 
>immediate payment of the fine and related court 
>costs by use of a credit or debit card, after 
>which the peace officer must release the defendant.”
>
>Backers of the bill may attempt to argue it 
>merely provides an additional method for the 
>courts to expedite the collection of outstanding 
>payments, and may say it will free up jail space 
>to be able to hold more criminal offenders, or 
>free up court dockets to deal with more important cases.
>
>However, should the bill pass, it would deal a 
>devastating blow to the citizenry’s right to due 
>process, which among other things mandates an 
>appearance and assessment before a magistrate 
>prior to a case proceeding to trial, and would 
>set the legal precedent wherein everyday police 
>officers would be empowered to take on the roles 
>of judge, jury and executioner – and charge “related court costs.”
>
>Not explicitly stated is the fact that, under 
>the bill, traffic cops would be required to 
>carry around credit card swiping machines, in 
>addition to citizens’ private credit or debit 
>card information, which could open the doors to 
>a litany of personal security risks and liabilities.
>
>If the bill were to pass, it would follow a 
>disturbing trend set by other states such as 
>North Carolina, whose populace recently voted in 
>favor of passing a 
><http://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_Criminal_Defendant_May_Waive_Jury_Trial_Amendment_%282014%29>law 
>permitting criminal defendants to waive their 
>rights to a jury trial, allowing law enforcement 
>to pressure them into surrendering due process as part of a plea bargain.
>
>In areas such as Tenaha, Texas, where 
><http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/09/texas-police-shakedown-lawsuit_n_1758134.html>cops 
>were exposed to be running a racket operation 
>tantamount to highway robbery, it would be much 
>easier for police to extract wealth from 
>unsuspecting travelers who would rather pay 
>immediate fines than revisit an out-of-the-way 
>small town for a trivial court appearance.
>
>Indeed, the passage of H.B. No. 121 would go a 
>long way in destroying the illusion that traffic 
>cops work in the interest of public safety, and 
>would lay bare that the state leverages 
>arbitrary traffic laws to fleece the American public.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Rushtalk mailing list
><mailto:Rushtalk at csdco.com>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>_______________________________________________
>Rushtalk mailing list
>Rushtalk at csdco.com
>http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20141202/a06ce2be/attachment.html 


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list