[dkp2LT]

http://autos.aol.com/article/warning...est=latestnews

A year ago or so there was a big deal around here because of a speed trap where one group of officers were stopping speeders & another group were stopping cars that flashed their headlights to warn drivers.

If the purpose of a speed trap is safety and not revenue, then isn't flashing headlights to slow drivers down producing the same result?

Interested in LEO's thoughts on this ruling.

[AdamZ]

It's another idiot after $$$. He will be feeling quite silly when someone is going too fast and can't stop for a red light then T-bones him. Idk what they are doing in Florida but that's bull shit.

Now let me pull out my Ohio Revised Code....Alright... This is 2921.32 of the Ohio Revised Code.

No person, with purpose to hinder the discovery, apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of another for crime or to assist another to benefit from the commission of a crime.

OR---

2921.31 "Obstructing official business" is more fitting.

(A) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct, or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s official capacity, shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.


I was going to pass a fellow officer shooting lidar. Ar car coming toward me warned me of him shooting lidar by flashing his lights (during the day. Smart right?) I turned on him and pulled him over. Just warned him but there it is. Ohio has a law for absolutely everything.

[strych9]

Originally Posted by AdamZ

It's another idiot after $$$. He will be feeling quite silly when someone is going too fast and can't stop for a red light then T-bones him. Idk what they are doing in Florida but that's bull shit.

Now let me pull out my Ohio Revised Code....Alright... This is 2921.32 of the Ohio Revised Code.

No person, with purpose to hinder the discovery, apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of another for crime or to assist another to benefit from the commission of a crime.

I was going to pass a fellow officer shooting lidar. Ar car coming toward me warned me of him shooting lidar by flashing his lights (during the day. Smart right?) I turned on him and pulled him over. Just warned him but there it is. Ohio has a law for absolutely everything.

Speeding is literally considered a "crime"? Plus, First Amendment rights are federal, not state law. So your great state of Ohio can do as it pleases, but according to the ruling, Ohio law as you stated it would be a violation of basic rights. If, in fact, speeding is considered a "crime".

No offense, Adam, but you didn't address the OP's question at all. I'm curious about your position on that. It's a great question.

[AdamZ]

Going to make me read through the 3 page definition of crime now .

I did answer his question. He asked what my opinion was. I answered bull shit. lol. States also have to follow the constitution. We can't do what ever we please.

[strych9]

Originally Posted by AdamZ

Going to make me read through the 3 page definition of crime now .

I did answer his question. He asked what my opinion was. I answered bull shit. lol. States also have to follow the constitution. We can't do what ever we please.

[AdamZ]

Originally Posted by strych9

are you a defense DA?

[AdamZ]

Ahhh damnit I looked at the wrong code. I still think I could get him on Obstructing Justice but 2921.31 "Obstructing official business" is more fitting.

(A) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct, or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s official capacity, shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.

Strych agree/disagree?

[Edwin320]

Florida has a similar law as the one you cited. There is some pretty specific case law that defines the scope of hampering or impeding a public official in the performance of the public official's lawful duties that narrows the scope of those duties such that flashing lights would not qualify as obstruction. Basically, unless you have a specific target in your enforcement operations in Florida, generally warning about the presence of a speed trap is constitutionally protected under the First Amendment. I am not familiar with Ohio case law, or with jurisprudence related to the specific statute you cited, but I don't see how any statute that limits freedom to flash your lights to warn oncoming drivers of a speed trap could survive constitutional scrutiny. It probably can't.

[Edwin320]

Originally Posted by AdamZ

Ahhh damnit I looked at the wrong code. I still think I could get him on Obstructing Justice but 2921.31 "Obstructing official business" is more fitting.

(A) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct, or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s official capacity, shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.

Strych agree/disagree?

The lawful duty at issue is to catch a speeder. There is nothing in that law that prevents notification that would induce a potential speeder that has not yet been caught to slow down. Now, if you tag a speeder, and someone tries to prevent you from ticketing the speeder you caught, that person would be in violation of this statute.

[AdamZ]

Originally Posted by Edwin320

The lawful duty at issue is to catch a speeder. There is nothing in that law that prevents notification that would induce a potential speeder that has not yet been caught to slow down. Now, if you tag a speeder, and someone tries to prevent you from ticketing the speeder you caught, that person would be in violation of this statute.

I see what you're saying and that's all well and good. Let's look at it from a different view. Commen sense and from a normal persons thoughts and perception.

I am driving 35 MPH in a 25. A little kid runs out infront of me and I lay on the breaks but could not react/stop in time. I hit the kid at 20 mph which could cause a small kid some serious injuries. If I had been going the speed limit I would have hit him at 10 (I know that's not accurate. Physics does come in play) which would cause little to no injuries.

Say the day before I was warned yesterday of a speed trap so I slowed down and didn't get pulled over. Now I feel fine to speed again. Which later resulted in me injuring a kid.

I just worked a 16 yo fatal 3 days ago (http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225799). I really don't care about people finding loopholes in the law. This guy is obviously just trying to be obnoxious and make money. He even said it was fun. Use common sense. It's not ok to warn people to slow down so that they are speeding the next day.

[Rockin the BlueSS]

could this be explained kinda like shouting fire in a building? under the first amendment you have the freedom of speech to yell fire, yet it is illegal to do so if there is no fire...

[strych9]

Originally Posted by AdamZ

Ahhh damnit I looked at the wrong code. I still think I could get him on Obstructing Justice but 2921.31 "Obstructing official business" is more fitting.

(A) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct, or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s official capacity, shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.

Strych agree/disagree?

I don't believe that flashing the lights impedes a LEO from performing his/her lawful duties. As the code is written, that action would not apply.

Originally Posted by Edwin320

The lawful duty at issue is to catch a speeder. There is nothing in that law that prevents notification that would induce a potential speeder that has not yet been caught to slow down. Now, if you tag a speeder, and someone tries to prevent you from ticketing the speeder you caught, that person would be in violation of this statute.

^^This explains what I meant from the previous statement.

Originally Posted by AdamZ

I see what you're saying and that's all well and good. Let's look at it from a different view. Commen sense and from a normal persons thoughts and perception.

I am driving 35 MPH in a 25. A little kid runs out infront of me and I lay on the breaks but could not react/stop in time. I hit the kid at 20 mph which could cause a small kid some serious injuries. If I had been going the speed limit I would have hit him at 10 (I know that's not accurate. Physics does come in play) which would cause little to no injuries.

Say the day before I was warned yesterday of a speed trap so I slowed down and didn't get pulled over. Now I feel fine to speed again. Which later resulted in me injuring a kid.

I just worked a 16 yo fatal 3 days ago (http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225799). I really don't care about people finding loopholes in the law. This guy is obviously just trying to be obnoxious and make money. He even said it was fun. Use common sense. It's not ok to warn people to slow down so that they are speeding the next day.

As the OP stated, the guy flashing his lights as a warning could potentially have the same benefit as a visible speed trap: slowing down traffic. From my point of view, the same potential speeder would likely slow down in that area based on either scenario, with the thought that there may be another speed trap present.

LOL, no, I'm no DA. I just like to press points to gain perspective. I respect what you're up against out there.

[AdamZ]

I concede. There is no win here. Just like talking to my GF

[strych9]

Originally Posted by AdamZ

I concede. There is no win here. Just like talking to my GF

To be clear, I am not your girlfriend.