Police Argument (Split from How are you gentlemen? )

[John]

There are over 42,000 traffic fatalities a year, 3 times more than homicides.
the police are not there to be your friend.
Enforcing traffic laws and thus reducing fatality risk is in the public's best interest.
The "look there is crime over there" argument against highway patrolling is extremely weak logic trying to justify your personal entitlement that you can break highway laws.

Not trying to turn this into a cop-bashing thread, but it really saddens me to see how the police spend more time harassing the average joe on the road rather than serving the public. Virginia is probably the worst at it - take for instance my visits to Norfolk. Area is pretty run down with some serious crime problems. Instead, the police are all over the interstate (on average I saw 12-20 people pulled over every commute on 6 miles of interstate I drove, which caused awful traffic - please note that people already drive pretty slow there as is). I would much rather see my taxpayer dollars go towards the police spending more time in the community, serving the people, assisting as necessary - end result would be narrowing the rift between "us" and "them."

Why are you drawing extremes? Going 10 over the speed limit is hardly risking a fatality. Fatalities are caused by many reasons, most of which are nearly impossible to police (think natural causes, sleeping motorists, stupidity). In the meantime, women are being raped, cars are getting stolen, and people are getting stabbed for $10, but the police are too busy sitting on the side of the interstate creating more hazards than anything (I can't tell you how many people I see get rear-ended as traffic slams on their brakes when they see a cop). This is one thing that California has right - less police on interstates to improve the efficiency of traffic flows. The difference is truly night and day.

It is a true misallocation of resources - period.