Then you obviously have read nothing about the case. The police had instituted a zero-tolerance policy. Any infraction, however slight, was to be enforced. They were trying to send a message (less to the populace than to the city council who were publically complaining about the police laxness)
For a minor infraction (one fry) they did arrest every MINOR. They were looking for headcounts. Many adults at the same time (even with the zero-tolerence policy in place) were let off with warnings. The cops were specifically forbidden to use any discretion. They were being judged by their superiors on how many infractions they could find. Regardless of the paperwork, I don't think they were "not seeing" things they did not want to deal with. On 7/21/05, SStewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I cannot believe that any officer is required to arrest or ticket every > individual that violates even the smallest infraction IE: > > Officer: Miss it's illegal to eat in the Metro > 12 year old: oops, sorry officer (drops fries in the garbage) it won't happen > again > Officer: Thank You... walks off, having done his job. > > For a minor infraction they're not going to arrest or ticket anyone without > due cause. IE: the smart mouth bratty kid. They'd never be able to keep up if > this wasn't the case. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:165837 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
