Police Roadblocks in San Antonio (Kyle, Howe: versus, office, roach)

[majormadmax]

Originally Posted by Orincarnia

(i'm so glad its not illegal to record public acts by police officers in texas!)

What I find shocking is that it is legal ("a defense to prosecution") to warn other drivers of the presence of the police enforcing traffic laws...

§ 38.15. INTERFERENCE WITH PUBLIC DUTIES.
(a) A person commits an offense if the person with criminal negligence interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or otherwise interferes with:
(1) a peace officer while the peace officer is performing a duty or exercising authority imposed or granted by law;
(2) a person who is employed to provide emergency medical services including the transportation of ill or injured persons while the person is performing that duty;
(3) a fire fighter, while the fire fighter is fighting a fire or investigating the cause of a fire;
(4) an animal under the supervision of a peace officer, corrections officer, or jailer, if the person knows the animal is being used for law enforcement, corrections, prison or jail security, or investigative purposes;
(5) the transmission of a communication over a citizen's band radio channel, the purpose of which communication is to inform or inquire about an emergency; or (6) an officer with responsibility for animal control in a county or municipality, while the officer is performing a duty or exercising authority imposed or granted under Chapter 821 or 822, Health and Safety Code.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.
(c) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(1) that the conduct engaged in by the defendant was intended to warn a person operating a motor vehicle of the presence of a peace officer who was enforcing Subtitle C, Title 7, Transportation Code.
(d) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the interruption, disruption, impediment, or interference alleged consisted of speech only.
(e) In this section, "emergency" means a condition or circumstance in which an individual is or is reasonably believed by the person transmitting the communication to be in imminent danger of serious bodily injury or in which property is or is reasonably believed by the person transmitting the communication to be in imminent danger of damage or destruction.

It's bad enough that this state doesn't allow DWI checkpoints because it somehow violates a person's Fourth Amendment rights, but in most places I've lived signaling others to warn of the police can be considered an obstruction of justice.

[SabresFanInSA]

Originally Posted by majormadmax

What I find shocking is that it is legal ("a defense to prosecution") to warn other drivers of the presence of the police enforcing traffic laws...



It's bad enough that this state doesn't allow DWI checkpoints because it somehow violates a person's Fourth Amendment rights, but in most places I've lived signaling others to warn of the police can be considered an obstruction of justice.

I dont see why that is a problem. Isnt the argument that law enforcement is only doing this to provide for safer roads? By warning people (this very thread for example) sure there are going to be some people who avoid the locations but it is also going to make people slow down or maybe get that inspection/registration renewed. I know that when I know there are police patrolling the area (like my neighborhood lately) I tend to slow down, make sure I stop definitively at stop signs, pay more attention, etc.

[majormadmax]

Originally Posted by SabresFanInSA

I dont see why that is a problem. Isnt the argument that law enforcement is only doing this to provide for safer roads? By warning people (this very thread for example) sure there are going to be some people who avoid the locations but it is also going to make people slow down or maybe get that inspection/registration renewed. I know that when I know there are police patrolling the area (like my neighborhood lately) I tend to slow down, make sure I stop definitively at stop signs, pay more attention, etc.

As I said, in many states it is considered obstruction of justice.

Also, you should be driving that way ("slow down, make sure I stop definitively at stop signs, pay more attention") all the time, not just because the police are present...

[Bo]

Some posts above were deleted. Folks, this is an open forum. There is no need to broadly discredit the opinion of anyone who posts here solely because of where they live.

[SabresFanInSA]

Originally Posted by majormadmax

Also, you should be driving that way ("slow down, make sure I stop definitively at stop signs, pay more attention") all the time, not just because the police are present...

I get that, but if that were the case we wouldnt need traffic cops at all would we?

The point I was simply trying to make is that I make a concerted effort to pay more attention. Anyone who says they dont roll the odd stop sign now and again, or gets up over the speed limit is lying. (insert "I have never rolled a stop sign in my life" here)

Isnt is always better to prevent someone from doing something wrong versus letting them do it and punishing them? Some times just their presence is enough...

...unless...

...this is nothing more than a revenue generator in which case I can see how it would be more profitable to catch someone doing something wrong instead of preventing it before it happens.

[majormadmax]

Oh, I do believe a little enforcement has the secondary effect of causing others to re-think their actions, and that is a good thing; but honestly I get sick and tired of people who don't take responsibility for their actions and place blame on the police for simply doing the job we want them to do! (And that isn't directed towards you, SabresFanInSA; but at some of the earlier comments in this thread).

These narrow-minded statements don't take into consideration how those actions affect others. Who pays the price when an uninsured driver hits another vehicle? Who bears the burden of responsibility when a person who doesn't wear a seatbelt is severely injured because of that decision? Who is put in danger when a reckless driver screams through traffic cutting off other motorists?

Is it a “right” to drive? No, it is a privilege, and it comes responsibility. For those who are not up to the task, we have the police and a legal system to take care of the problem.

I don’t want to live in a place where going 5 MPH over the speed limit will get you a ticket (like it is back where I am from in Florida), but something is needed to curb the tide of idiot (and rude) drivers that have increased in this town.

And I am sure we’ve all recently experienced an episode where another driver does something stupid, and if you honk or flash your lights at them they flip you off or cuss at you. It almost seems to be a daily occurrence around here, and I am beginning to believe they honestly (and mistakenly) feel it is OK to drive like that as the majority of the time there is no police intervention. This is my point…it’s time to reel these morons in, which is why I welcome the increased effort to catch bad drivers. It’s about time…

...and if the city can make a little money because of it, then God bless 'em! Why should we have to pay for their idiocy as is the case?

[SabresFanInSA]

Originally Posted by majormadmax

I don’t want to live in a place where going 5 MPH over the speed limit will get you a ticket (like it is back where I am from in Florida), but something is needed to curb the tide of idiot (and rude) drivers that have increased in this town.

And I am sure we’ve all recently experienced an episode where another driver does something stupid, and if you honk or flash your lights at them they flip you off or cuss at you. It almost seems to be a daily occurrence around here, and I am beginning to believe they honestly (and mistakenly) feel it is OK to drive like that as the majority of the time there is no police intervention. This is my point…it’s time to reel these morons in, which is why I welcome the increased effort to catch bad drivers. It’s about time…

...and if the city can make a little money because of it, then God bless 'em! Why should we have to pay for their idiocy as is the case?

This I am 100% on board with.

(learned to drive in Florida...whole different world)

[Newk]

de Zavala Road construction update! Looks like the construction has moved closer to the entrance to Tanglewood, and away from de Zavala's intersection with IH-10. Anyone know what it is like at 4:35pm in the afternoon going west on de Zavala from IH-10?

[ashbeeigh]

Originally Posted by Newk

de Zavala Road construction update! Looks like the construction has moved closer to the entrance to Tanglewood, and away from de Zavala's intersection with IH-10. Anyone know what it is like at 4:35pm in the afternoon going west on de Zavala from IH-10?

Which entrance? I use all three and haven't had any problems (or seen any construction aside from the bit by Ridgehaven). I also only saw minimal construction by the post office and by the Valero this morning. It looks like this bit is wrapping up.

[Newk]

Originally Posted by ashbeeigh

Which entrance? I use all three and haven't had any problems (or seen any construction aside from the bit by Ridgehaven). I also only saw minimal construction by the post office and by the Valero this morning. It looks like this bit is wrapping up.

Maybe I should have rephrased that, it has now moved btwn Tanglewood and Oakmont Downs, on the Dezavala portion.