Commuters Beware: Cops Have a Sneaky New Trick for Catching Traffic Violators

| |

police chase

We’ve all done it from time to time. Nobody is a perfect driver, and sometimes we feel comfortable going over the speed limit, or talking on our cell phones, or driving some distance without a seat belt. And we’ve all experienced what it’s like to suddenly see a police officer sharing the same road with us. You and every other commuter on that road will instantly turn into a model driver at the sight of a cop, because you know that the slightest transgression will lead you down a bureaucratic hell of tickets, court dates, and traffic school.

The cops know this as well. They know you’re the perfect driver when you can see them. That’s why several police departments in Texas came together to create Operation Safe Driver. Despite the name, I suspect it has less to do with safety and more to do with revenue generation. Considering how successful this sneaky operation is, don’t be surprised if you see the cops using tactics like these where you live in the near future.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by Joshua Krause of The Daily Sheeple.

Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger .

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • enough is enough

    You dummies are standing up and moving around the vehicle while it’s in motion. Way to be overly nosy hypocrite POS!

    • Does that mean that you have never ridden in a bus, or you always stayed seated when it was in motion? If the violators weren’t violating, they wouldn’t have passed out all the citations. The trucker who was talking on his cellphone won’t get any sympathy from this one. He should enjoy paying the $2500 fine, assuming this is his first violation of a well-known federal law that could take his CDL away.

      • RJ O’Guillory

        ….do you need a new set on knee pads…or are the ones you currently use while sucking off corrupt government…they are still in good shape?
        RJ O’Guillory

        • I have never needed to service corrupt government officials doing their jobs enforcing traffic laws, having a 40 yer clean driving record, the last 25 on a CDL. If you’d obey the laws, you wouldn’t have the rotten opinion of those whose job it is to cite you when you act corruptly yourself.

          • Reverend Draco

            You do realize that the vast majority of traffic laws are 0% about public safety and 100% about revenue generation, yes?

            I admit, I never would have figured you for a Clover.

          • Anti Everything

            Reading your comments is like reading something a pig would write…You some kinda code enforcement shill? Or just a self appointed guardian for the establishment?

        • Amanda Ham

          Ha ha ha! I think 3BrONUAJno is really Oklahoma governor Mary Fallin (who reportedly gave blow jobs to an Oklahoma State Trooper, breaking up her first marriage).

          • Smarty

            He is pretty good at it. He’s given me a few and I have no complaints. He often complains about a sore neck though…

      • Bill

        Wow! You’re worse than a bad penny. You have a comment on EVERYTHING I read on this website – ALL THE TIME. You need to find a hobby…. or perhaps become a politician

        • What is wrong with waking up willing sheeple as a hobby? Of course, since you are comatose…

      • Reverend Draco

        He’ll get every bit of sympathy from me. . . a $2500 fine for the heinous crime of not harming anyone at all is egregious at best – also unlawful.

        http://archive.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance204.html

        Just as every husband needs a wife, every child needs a parent, and every teacher needs a pupil, so every crime needs a victim. Not a potential victim or possible victim or a supposed victim, but an actual victim.

        The victim, in this case. . . is the guy who just got robbed for $2500, and he deserves our sympathy.

      • Anti Everything

        Ya, you must need new knee pads and maybe some chapstick for your lips and rash medicine for that brown little nose

      • huntress

        You are a great useful idiot for cops. So, at what point is your line in the sand between privacy and tyranny? what’s next for these nosy cops,..seeing through your clothes just in case you have drugs in your pockets. But, i’m sure for someone like you, “if it saves only one life, its worth it”, right?

        • I am personally in favor of abolishing police departments and going back to using the well-regulated militia that we were introduced to by the second amendment, but there are too many people with your form of assuming ignorance to staff it, and where I live, it isn’t needed.

  • RJ O’Guillory

    …you might call it a bunch of fascist cock suckers who need to be dragged from their cozy little RV and charge with treason. Upon conviction, they need to be hanged naked along the sides of the highways where they so gleefully violate the citizen’s rights and their oath to The Constitution….fuck them…
    RJ O’Guillory

    • Where is the supposed right to violate laws passed by people we voted for?
      How is doing the jobs that they were hired to do a violation of their oaths?

      • George_Costanza

        “Laws” are only laws if they are in accordance with the Constitution.
        The most important thing is subject matter jurisdiction.
        Unless you are engaging in commerce upon the public way, the cops have basically zero say with how you travel.

      • Reverend Draco

        There is “legal,” and then there’s “lawful,” and the 2 are not the same.

        Some laws are lawful – that is, they have a basis in the Constitution – the rest are counterfeit albeit “legal.”

      • Anti Everything

        There NOT “laws” you idiot. Its called ‘CODE’ and ‘STATUTES’ that only apply to morons too stupid to know who they are in a legal realm. You cannot be this stupid.

        • Joe Blow

          “You cannot be this stupid.”
          Says the person that uses “there” instead of “they’re”.

          Glass houses/stones

          • S/he hasn’t figured out where all that broken glass came from, even though it appeared when the house disappeared.

          • Anti Everything

            I’ll work on that. I do it more often then I realize. Thanks for the heads up. However that does not change the content

        • I’m not stupid enough to stoop to ad hominem, which seems to be a part of your personal jurisprudence. Codes are made by lawyers from statutes, which find their origin in bills. If you are going to take me to task for ignorance, you should make sure it isn’t your ignorance.

      • Gambeir Bay

        Because they are not supposed to be passing laws we are aren’t voting on dipstick. They are supposed to assure the laws we and our forefathers established are upheld and modified sensibly for the good of both our nation and for the good of individuals. Not making up bullshit to enrich the state coffers so that they can line their own pockets. It’s called Taxation without representation, or it could also be called treason depending on what they are actually involved in by inventing laws without a public mandate.

        • I can’t figure out which thread your post is in reply to, and since it demonstrates a fulminating ignorance of the republic that was defined in the Constitution, it probably wouldn’t be worthy of spending my time on doing so.

          • Gambeir Bay

            OK, maybe I shouldn’t have called you a dipstick. I’m sorry about that. As for being a fulminating ignorant you’re only saying that because I was a butt hole to you. Again, sorry about that.

            Let me elaborate my understanding for you. Yes this is a Republic, but we say it’s a democratic republic. Why we say this has to do with the Bill of Rights, and those laws are what makes this Republic a hybrid.

            All nations are founded upon laws, and the laws that the Constitution are founded upon are the Ten Supreme Laws of the People: The Bills of Rights. A Bill in the vernacular of the epoch means law. Those laws are the prohibitions on government.

            What makes this Republic a hybrid, or democratic republic, are those laws, and it’s important to understand that the Constitution only exists because of them.

            There were many attempts to pass the Constitution in the various states, and every time the Constitution was rejected because it is only a framework for a system of government. It has no protections or prohibitions on excess of government power over the people or individuals. Thus, it failed repeatedly until James Madison took the Virginia Bill of Rights and added them on to the Constitution.

            The Bills of Rights are not amendments as the disinformation agents like to claim. They are legal definition for a Republic where in all individuals have certain legal rights which government is specifically precluded from invading upon. Also remember that those ten laws are the foundation for the entire legal system and the entire history of that systems rulings.

            All these invasions upon the prohibitions outlined in the Bills of Rights, such as are now going on in California, Washington State, and elsewhere involving firearms are first and foremost acts of Sedition, and High Treason. High Treason since we the people are the lawful government and those invasions constitute an act of war upon the people by traitors. It is that simple.

            The lawful path is clearly defined in the history of the United States for modification of the Bills of Rights and they don’t include Sedition and Treason. They include drafting a new government with new laws, and then submitting that draft to the people for a vote.

            The reason I took issue with you is that the idea of this nation being a Republic allows for that kind of “Top Down” Rulership, which is just what the self proclaimed unelected “Law Makers” would love to have. So it’s important to make the understanding clear that the only thing which keeps the jackbooted thugs at bay are those rights. Rights which they are ignoring and destroying with acts of sedition and treason.

            See, the Bill of Rights enables personal freedom against both the rich self appointed overlords, and the excess of mobs by placing the individual and their rights out of their reach, and this is what is being attacked so that another totalitarian system can be enabled under the guise of the common good.

            The reality is the common good is only served when everyone is free to act in their own best interest, or in whatever interest they choose even when the majority object.

            Therefore, it’s perfectly within reason to say there are several states and municipalities which are in open revolt right now, fulling subverting the supreme laws of the people, and these abridgements are open acts of seditious treasons upon all the people of these United States and not just upon the people of California and elsewhere.

          • Why would the founders, who openly despised democracy as much as they did monarchy, have created a oxymoronic democratic republic? Do you know the differences between a republic and a democracy?

          • Gambeir Bay

            Yes, they despised democracy because they feared it. A democracy is rule by the majority, which is of course another form of tyranny. A Republic is the other side of the coin where a self selected few rule the majority.

            This is where we began of course. Where only men, and only men of certain standards of wealth and land ownership could vote.

            The Bills of Rights were not a part of the first drafts of the Constitution because obviously the people who invented this government didn’t think that their government would be repeatedly voted down.

            Of the original 13 States, only one approved the Constitution on the first vote. All the other states repeatedly rejected the new federal government. One state doing so four times.

            So what it amounts to is that all these wealthy land owning men weren’t about to approve a government that had no prohibitions of government power, and when examined the entire Constitution itself was devoid of any protections against government excess, and was in fact actually written with an eye to creating an American Monarchy.

            This is why the Bills of Rights are tacked on to the Constitution, but tacked on or not, those ten supreme laws are the laws of the people themselves and as such they laid the foundation for the American Legal system.

            The only thing that really matters here, in my opinion, is to recognize that there is an established lawful pathway to change government laid out in the historical record.

            We have people right now involved in sedition and treason because they are not following the lawful pathway to succession of government. Instead of doing what is clearly required for a lawful change in government they are involved in subversions and intrigue.

            Take the on going subversions of the1st and 2nd Bill of Rights.

            If California, for example, wished to abolish the 1st and 2nd Bills of Rights then they need to do one of two things. They can attempt to get the necessary support to leave the Union, a 2/3rds majority in the house and senate is required I believe. Alternatively they can call for a Constitutional Convention and draft a new form of government and put that out for public vote is there is enough support from the other states. Otherwise, they are in rebellion right now, and in full violation of the laws which protect the rights of individuals.

            Now they are not going to do that because once those doors are open there’s no closing them and it’s unlikely that all the states would remain in the union.

            The Constitution doesn’t define American Values, the Bills of Rights define what is America, and that is the supremacy of the individuality over the majority and over the government itself.

            If we lose this, if the people in California and elsewhere cannot be made to understand the importance of these rights, then they will descend into that mob rule, that communism controlled by the oligarchs who would love nothing better to tear up these laws.

            Finally, the Constitution is a contract. Law is all about contracts. You cannot change the terms of the contract without voiding the contract. Several states are in full rebellion right now because they have abridged the prohibitions on government excess which the Bills of Rights describe, and they are doing that with tact approval of a central government that is doing nothing to uphold and restore the contract which the citizens of these states live in.

            We are descending into dangerous lawlessness where self appointed rulers are inventing their own laws, and where in there is no law coming out of the supposed central government to restore order.

          • Where did you learn such a twisted form of American history?

          • Gambeir Bay

            More correctly one might ask why you’re having an issue with this? In other words, it seriously begs the question if you are you really an American since you seem to have little understanding of the fundamentals.

            You may wish to consult the foremost authorities on the Constitution, such as Forrest McDonald and then follow that up with reading the Anti-Federalist Papers and research of Professor Herbert Storing after having read James Madison’s supposedly “Secret Notes on the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

            What the Anti-Federalists Were For: The Political Thought of the Opponents of the Constitution. http://www.amazon.com/What-Anti-Federalists-Were-For-Constitution/dp/0226775747/ref=as_sl_pc_tf_til?tag=juddsbookreviews&linkCode=w00&linkId=HJTBUXXQDUDOOVOK&creativeASIN=0226775747

          • It calls into question my Americanism less than it does yours, given your apparent ignorance of the source of mine:-) Those of us who never pursued the liberal education of those better funded or more patient with didactics will, inevitably, be found wanting in comparison to those who weren’t so disabled. I’ll check out the book.

          • Gambeir Bay

            It was a serious question: Are you an American?

            Nobody but nobody was going to be stupid enough to vote for the new Federal Constitution without provisions that it would not become another disguised dictatorship because those people had just fought the armies of a dictator.

            That’s how and why you ended up with the Bills of Rights. They are not to be abridged in any form. Only a new government approved by the people themselves can lawfully alter the contract.

            There is no other lawful way around that and that’s how it’s supposed to be. To prevent would be rulers from hijacking the power just as they are trying do right now.

            They are not following the lawful path because they cannot succeed by following that path. Thus they use fake mass shooting, using private armies (hired gunmen) with the complicit assistance of a corrupted media (Propaganda was legalized for use against the American People by the so called owners of the Public Airways in the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act). So basically billionaires are attempting to sway the masses to disarm so that they can create another totalitarian police state just like the did in Communist Russia, in Nazi Germany, both of which also began their rise to power with private armies inside their own borders.

            You want to disarm the people? Then you need to do so by disarming the private armies of the Billionaires, the so called security companies. 18 thousand of which are the ones right now controlling the access to the front doors of your own governments public buildings.

          • Sorry, I read it as sarcastic.
            I am a natural born American citizen, meaning that I was born in the United States to two American citizens. I’m being pedantic because there are those who think that the founders were interested in the location of person’s birth rather than his/her parent’s citizenships when determining their qualification for the presidency.
            If the Bill of Rights was so organic to the Constitution, why did it follow it by over four years? Why does it address itself directly to the Congress if it was meant to apply to any other part of the government, them lacking the authority to violate said enumerated but not guaranteed rights? How can the Constitution be a binding contract when all the signatories are dead? Are you saying that the clauses defining the amendment of the Constitution are spurious?

          • Gambeir Bay

            Give me a little time. I have to surrender the Computer for a few hours. I greatly appreciate your honest response.

          • Gambeir Bay

            Article VII of the newly drafted Constitution stated that the document would not become binding until it was ratified by nine of the 13 states. Five States (Republics actually) ratified the original draft of the Constitution. The were Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut.

            Massachusetts, Maryland, New Hamshire, and South Carolina and other states opposed the document, as it failed to reserve undelegated powers to the states and lacked constitutional protection of basic political and individual rights, such as freedom of speech, religion, freedom from unwarranted searches, freedom to possess weapons, and the freedom to print and publish without restriction. All things prohibited by Royal Edicts.

            The Bills of Rights are organic to the American Experience, and without them there would be no Constitution. They came out of the experience not only from having a refresher course in totalitarianism under King George, but also from the understandings which many people already had first hand experience with while living under the European Monarchs and nobles before coming to America.

            So that was the situation, one where the Constitution was born dead because it lacked these provisions.

            The situation became intractable as a result, and after a while a desperate leadership, now facing internal opposition as well at the hangman’s noose outside the US, then set about resolving the problem.

            A compromise was made where the other states would agree to ratify the Constitution with the assurance that the drafted 12 Amendments to the document would be immediately proposed. Which the were of course. After all, this isn’t like today, this is back when the constituency was the law because they were also the army, so not doing what was promised meant a trip to an Oak Tree for final judgement.

            Therefore, as fully expected On September 25, 1789, the first Congress of the United States adopted 12 amendments to the U.S. Constitution–the Bill of Rights–and sent them to the states for ratification.

            Ten of these amendments were ratified in 1791.

            It’s worthy to note that Rhode Island continued to refuse to ratify the Constitution over the issues of Slavery and the new governments ability to control the currency. Only when the other 12 states decided that they would isolate Rode Island, and by cutting commercial transport to that state, did Rode Island adopt the Constitution, and even then it was by the slim margin of just two votes.

            Thus on May 29, 1790 Rode Island became the last of the original 13 states to ratify the Constitution.

            The American People tend to think of themselves as newbee’s in the world, but today our Constitution and it’s Bills of Rights are now the oldest written Constitution in the world. Everyone else’s having failed or been overthrown.

          • Were you a little under 4 years old when you were conceived?

  • michael smith

    The police force definitely have to justify this expense…
    Interestingly, all those cops can stand in the aisle “safely”. I’m sure that was cleared with OSHA beforehand.

  • PERS ponzi 1st repsonders
  • John Ricci

    This just in…an accident involving an overturned tour bus on hwy#…

    • I have driven the highways of the lower 48 for a quarter century and never seen a overturned tour bus. They don’t tend to roll. They tend to flop over on one side and slide on it. The greatest danger is that it is a LEO driving it instead of a professional driver, since they don’t have to comply with the regulations that apply to the rest of us.

    • huntress

      And i bet they weren’t wearing their seatbelts. Do we as citizens get to charge the cops for not wearing their seatbelts as well talking on their phones?

  • PERS ponzi 1st repsonders
  • PERS ponzi 1st repsonders

    Crashes caused by cops leave victims wanting justice

    KHOU… – Crashes caused by cops leave victims wanting justice. … The I-Team found 155 major accidents where Houston police were at fault .
    HPD like other law enforcement agencies in Texas are unaccountable for their negligence which causes harm.

  • whiteberry

    I wonder how much “asset forfeiture” took place to afford those cops such a fancy ride…

    • huntress

      Agreed. That’s certainly a fancy bus they have. I think an audit should be done.

    • I guess it hadn’t dawned on you that they could have seized it.

  • Ben William

    Yeah, the cops are using more and more unmarked vehicles in Colorado to gin up revenue.

    • huntress

      You are correct. The morrison cops have quite revenue generating business. All the latest equipment, complete with a full swat team for a population of 430. Legalized stealing. The police chief is trying to “make a name for himself” at the victims expense.

      • Ben William

        He probably wants an increase in salary as well.

  • John Conner

    These people are disgusting.

  • Hunter

    Not about generating citations, huh? Then you’re telling me you got that bus for free, then? Lying POS.

  • Anti Everything

    I believe that is an illegal search.

    • Frank

      It would be interesting to see a ticket challenged, the “violation” having been observed by a cop riding in the stealth bus, as a violation of the ticketed driver’s Reasonable Expectation of Privacy. It would, no doubt, be countered with the “it was in plain view” – along with “any other observant driver could have seen it.”

  • Frank

    Okay, Drama Queen – Joshua Krause – “you know that the slightest transgression will lead you down a bureaucratic hell of tickets, court dates, and traffic school.” Any person with a sound mind will know that claim just isn’t true for the vast majority of drivers. Although, if you’re a habitual offender or you’re just a generally jacked up person and continually make bad decisions, yes, you can expect to tangle with the bureaucracy.
    I give the cops credit for being creative and stealthy – and the objective being to prevent accidents and improve driver behavior. Personally, I have no sympathy for those who text while driving and get busted. I see it all the time and the many accident near-misses that those drivers are okay with – other drivers usually not knowing how close they came to having their day ruined by a careless, selfish fellow motorist.

    • Reverend Draco

      I give the cops credit for being creative and stealthy – and the
      objective being to INCREASE revenue and improve police coffers.

      FIFY

  • Chinbato

    The bottom line is- cops are not there to protect & serve anymore. They are revenue generators/money collectors for the Mafia- i.e- city, county, state, etc.

    Last time I checked, TX was not 100% crime free. Until it is, focus on targeting actual criminals, not targeting the people who most likely pay their paychecks- the tax payers! And everyone wonders why the general public distrust cops now a days…

  • Oboehner

    “She got the seatbelt under her arm…” Meanwhile the cops are standing in the aisle of the bus.
    And how much did that bus cost?

  • I forgot

    What was their bus doing driving in the far left lane?

  • Good fucking Grief! The tyranny on the roads just keeps expanding, just like the tyranny everywhere else!
    Certainly, there are some traffic rules that a driver should rightfully follow on a public street; for example, no one has a right to drive 85mph down a densely-populated, narrow, residential street. But what we have in this country is a police state on the roads, including in respect to enforcement of the warranted laws, moreover, the existence and enforcement of the unwarranted traffic laws, like the seatbelt laws! The seatbelt and helmet laws alone should have spurred the people to revolution, because of the premises upon which they are based!
    Revolution is the only recourse!
    robertsrevolution.net

    • Gambeir Bay

      I agree, but this started when people gulped down the corporate propaganda about compulsory auto insurance, so now we have that in all but two states, and that’s corporate extortion for driving on public highways that our taxes paid for. Essentially signing over the right to travel to insurance companies?

      In places like Oregon these assholes will steal your car for not being insured and still take you to jail. Every time I see an insurance advertisement I see an in my face sneer by organized crime.

      The people deserve what they have now. They didn’t care about others, and it did nothing to protect them or anyone else. You still have to pay for uninsured motorist just like you always had to.

      The people signed up for corporate totalitarianism and they keep validating that by electing the same corrupted democrats and republicans year after year. Either that or voting really is pointless.

  • Concerned1

    The problem with most of you as that you see things so black and white, when nothing is that cut and dry. The reality is, most of the violations are made up to generate revenues, and serve no one but the governments that collect the money. It’s legal harassment in many cases. However, I’m not 100% against what they are doing in situations like people texting while driving, or under the influence, speeding, etc. There are many laws that ARE there for public safety, and I have no problem with police enforcing them. They mention a woman with both hands off the wheel and texting. She should at a minimum get a fine. I personally do not care if she dies by being that stupid. That said, I don’t want to see someone else die because of it. You can never have 100% freedom. Some laws are necessary for a civilized society.

    • Gambeir Bay

      Congress passed 44 thousand laws last year. How many do you think were designed to help the common good?

      God Knows what these clowns in the State Legislatures have passed, and none of which seem to have been helpful to me.

  • Gambeir Bay

    Hi, I’m with the Orwellian PD, and you’re under arrest for picking your nose and driving at the same time.

    • huntress

      That is exactly how ridiculous the cops have become. Enough is enough!!! If these jackboots have so much time and money on their hands, why aren’t they on the friggin border patrolling the real criminals!

    • Reverend Draco

      I hear that picking your nose when a cop goes by is a great way to avoid being pulled over – he doesn’t want your boogers on his pen.

  • RE

    Yeah, cutting down on accidents…
    But OH BOY! That money is soooooooo nice!