I don't know the whole parking situation but a cop shouldn't park where he must back out because if he/she is called out in an emergency he could cause an accident or injury there plus not make to the original call. So I'm not sure if the other spots are conducive to a quick get away. I understand it looks bad. Same with cops using cell phones. It is perfectly legal for a cop to use a cell phone while driving as they have an ear piece in one ear or dispatch is giving them info they don't want on the radio as some criminals monitor the radio dispatches. But the public automatically assumes the cop thinks he is above the law because they don't know it is not illegal for the cop to use the phone while driving.

I agree with Brett: Of all the abuses of public goodwill at work in our culture, this is among the most forgivable. I wouldn't be permitted to park like that when picking up a cup of mud, but I wouldn't worry about getting shot by a drug dealer that afternoon, either.

When the cops start shaking down the barrista for free scones, then we got a problem.

"I wouldn't be permitted to park like that when picking up a cup of mud, but I wouldn't worry about getting shot by a drug dealer that afternoon, either."

If you look at the occupations with the highest fatality rates, police officer does not even make the top 10. Moreover, a large proportion of police fatalities are not from altercations with criminals, but are instead a result of traffic accidents and the like. A lot of cops like to exaggerate the supposed dangers of their jobs.

To say that police deserve to be cut more slack because their job is so dangerous has got to be the dumbest argument around. But then, law-and-order conservatives have never been noted for being the sharpest tools in the shed. They are invariably empty vessels that make a hell of a lot of noise.

I'm fairly certain that legally, no parking-signs do not apply to cops and other first responders. Even if he's not on a call, he's probably working, and there are a LOT of requirements for where/how they can park. I know here, cops can't turn their engines off until the end of their shift as well as having to be able to pull straight forward to get out. So you can go to a restaurant, and have 3 running police cars lined up out front while they eat.

I think people who call the cops for little things like noisy bar patrons should probably not begrudge them their parking.

Nick S, a lot of other jobs are as dangerous, but not necessary to society. We can live without crabs. They perform a PUBLIC service and risk their lives for it. If you don't like their "perks" (parking-Ooooooo!) then don't call them to help you out, ever.

If you look at it from the perspective explained by momof4 and Brett, it wouldn't seem as annoying. Would they park there regardless of patrol guide rules? Probably, but the truth is that while getting that cup of coffee if he has to run out on a call he can't be held up backing out or being blocked in. His car in an alley for a few minutes is a temporary nuisance. There are bigger ways some of them flout their authority in our faces. This isn't one that bothers me.

> They perform a PUBLIC service and risk their
> lives for it. If you don't like their "perks"
> (parking-Ooooooo!) then don't call them to help
> you out, ever.

Zackly.

> There are bigger ways some of them flout their
> authority in our faces. This isn't one that
> bothers me.

Zackly.

If I ever call for a cop while he's in line for a Vente Latte, I'll hope he's parked for quick access to the thoroughfare.

A cop will never, ever ticket another cop. Nor will they ever ticket a car sporting a firefighter or police license plate, even if it's not a car for official business. That's why they do this kind of thing. The best recourse is to call the police station's non-emergency number with the license plate of the vehicle and file a complaint.

Because I always like to make a nuisance of myself to the people who may one day save my life, Sarah. It's an intelligent thing to do, and doesn't make you a small person at all.

And the fact that you will then be inundated with tickets for every little thing you do, well, that's unrelated.

Well, believe it or not, a Chief of Police ordered one of his officers to give his (the Chief's) wife a ticket for double parking. The officer was reluctant, but did what he was ordered to do. The Chief said my wife is not above the law. The reporter joked about him having to sleep on the couch that night.

Offtopic celebrity snark.

The stat is not for crab fishers but for "commercial fisherman", which means any fish that reach your table caught by American fisherman. The death rate is 6.5 that of police. Understandable, given the inherent violence of the sea and heavy machinery. I was in the USCG (patrolled Alaska, specifically the Aleutians) and have a lot of respect for these guys, especially when they do not crow about how dangerous their jobs are.

The next are loggers (5X); aircraft crew (3.9X); farmers/ranchers (2.3X); miners (heavy machine operators at 2.1); then roofers to industrial machine workers. You'll notice that all of these have to do, in some way, with heavy machinery or dangerous environments. Of course, none of these jobs amount to a public good.

The majority of police die in auto accidents (and no not high speed chases, most PDs have rolled back this practice), roughly 60%, which dovetails nicely with another stat that in collisions fatal to police, 42-45% were not wearing seat belts. 49 states have either a primary (17) or a secondary (32) law requiring seat belt usage. I doubt that there is an exemption for police.

I could go on to write that if you aren't exempt from a law but act as if you are, even believe you are, then you have a mindset that needs adjustment, but what would be the point?

What's a secondary law?

In a primary law state you can be pulled over and ticketed soley for failing to wear a seatbelt. In a secondary enforcemnet state you cant be pulled over for failing to wear a seat belt, but you can be ticketed in addition to something else like a broken taillight

Cops don't wear seatbelts so they can get out quickly. Most of us have seen and laughed at videos of cops caught up in their belts unable to get after a perp quickly. It (not wearing teh belt) can kill them. Much like fishing can kill some guy caught up in a line for his living. I don't eat seafood, so I have less sympathy for fishermen than some might have. I do live among my fellow man, however, so cops get my vote for protecting me from them. That, and I'm related to a lot of them.

Amy, when cops (and the OTHER law enforcement agencies and proliferating SWAT teams) enforce law with such finicky to-the-letter precision, we're rightly appalled.

Besides: The real offense is that SUV. It's big, and other motorists can't see around it. It costs a lot of money, and taxpayers pay for it. It's capacious, and the space it takes is probably wasted. It's heavy, so it probably violates neighborhood standards for vehicle weight. And it's American, so it's presumably shitty in any case.

We gotta pick our fights.

I have to agree with Amy. The suggestions that some people are making on this board are actually insulting to policemen. First, they assume that cops in general take advantage of their position to break the law, and that they are sufficiently secure in doing so because no other cop in the world would dream of actually calling them on it. And they also assume that cops are petty and vindictive and would respond to any such complaints by not performing the functions for which they are paid. "Amy Alkon is calling 911 about an armed robber in her house? Ignore it. She's the bitch who complained about a squad car illegally parked."

Is that what you really think? Well, yeah, it is.

"The next are loggers (5X); aircraft crew (3.9X); farmers/ranchers (2.3X); miners (heavy machine operators at 2.1); then roofers to industrial machine workers... Of course, none of these jobs amount to a public good."

So, you live in a house with no wood or paper (and no roof), have never flown, and don't eat? I think we have different ideas about 'a public good.'

I don't argue that police do not have an important job. It's not the most important or the most dangerous job, but those are two of the reasons always cited for overlooking the bad actions or behavior of police.

"I'm fairly certain that legally, no parking-signs do not apply to cops and other first responders."

That may be true, but there's an aggregate negative effect. A widespread perception exists today among the public that the law-giving class, including legislators and law enforcers, have exempted themselves from the laws they create and enforce. We've all seen stories like the case of Congressmen William Jefferson, who declared his offices immune from search warrant and had nearly the entire U.S. Congress stand behind him, and how Congressmen and their staffs consider themselves exempt from insider-trading laws. This sort of thing happens at the local level too. Every time a cop parks in the handicap space at the donut shop, or blips his lights and sirens to go through intersections because it's the end of his shift and he's in a hurry to get back to the station, people notice and respect for the law declines.

The "cops don't wear seat belts so they can get out quickly" is a rationalization (better called an irrationalization) Yes, cops don't wear seat belts so they can get out 2-3 seconds faster (really test it) but they die more often in collisions because they don't wear seat belts. Let's do a logic test on this one...oops, failure.

Seat belt usage in secondary usage states is about 69%, in primary about 80%. Factoring in both secondary and primary, the police could reduce their deaths by roughly 35% if they wore seat belts (I factored in primary and secondary, 80% vs 69% wear, the number of deaths not using by 42%, and the overall death rate, and went really conservative). The "officer safety" paradigm that results in shooting people with cell phones, or "gee, I feared for my safety because he made a furtive move" is not significant in saving LEO's lives versus just wearing a seat belt. But it does mean more beatings, more pepperspray, more tasing, and more shootings.

LEO's seldom arrive when an incident is going on, but usually after. They protect us, overwhelmingly, by removing criminals after the fact not during. So the seat belt issue is BS, 3 seconds means nothing.

So this hero-worship based on "they'll save me while I'm getting an ass-beating, or raped", is just so much boot-licking, right-wing, authoritarian delusion. I'm right-wing, and to my shame always test on the authoritarian side of life.

And yeah, I agree with Cousin Dave, Amy, et al, that when police use their privilege outside of where it applies, they reduce respect for both the law and the police.

If you want an example, there are 7 police officers on various forms of suspension and charges because they falsified an off-duty officer's collision with a school bus. You've got officers in Seattle who falsified police reports but the Union got them reinstated. The problem is when officers get a break, it's because they committed a crime (check the DUI issue, where police have twice the alcoholism of the general population [I took this from a police website in Florida,] the check points should be for the police. How is that equal protection by due process by the 14th Amendment?

Too right, Ariel. The likelihood that anyone will ever have the police save their life is miniscule compared to the likelihood that you will ever be a victim of police brutality, harassment or be booked by the police for a minor or trivial offense. To suggest that we should turn a blind eye to police misconduct because there is a million-to-one chance they may one day save your ass is craven and pathetic.

Even if police do sometimes protect innocent people from harm, why should we be overly grateful that they are simply doing the job that they are paid to do out of our tax revenue? To hear others tell it, you would think that cops are a bunch of saints who simply donate their time and risk their lives out of a selfless love of humanity. Moreover, to the extent that some jobs are more hazardous than others, this is normally reflected to some extent in pay and benefits. So police should not get as much pay and perks as those who perform others jobs with greater fatalities.

This hero-worshiping of cops is indeed cringeworthy, the worst kind of mindless, authoritarian, fascistic supplication. People who express such inane views frankly deserve to live in a jackboot police state. I am never surprised anymore at just what a bunch of gullible sheep much of the population are nowadays. As the old saying goes, 'keep the people in a constant state of fear, and they will be forever anxious to be led to safety, and accept whatever measures are deemed necessary'.

Well said Nick!