6py7

Just some food for thought from Minnesota Statue 169.17:

169.17 EMERGENCY VEHICLE.
The speed limitations set forth in sections 169.14 to 169.17 do not apply to an authorized emergency vehicle responding to an emergency call. Drivers of all emergency vehicles shall sound an audible signal by siren and display at least one lighted red light to the front, except that law enforcement vehicles shall sound an audible signal by siren or display at least one lighted red light to the front. This provision does not relieve the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle from the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of persons using the street, nor does it protect the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle from the consequence of a reckless disregard of the safety of others.

Think about that and what it means. When is the last time you were driving on the interstate or even a road and you saw a police car go speeding by you, except with no lights or sirens activated. Now normally I wouldn’t care about this, as I speed all the time. However, when it’s the same people who are increasingly sitting in conspicuous places to enforce speed limits, I have a problem with it. According to this statue, if a police vehicle speeds without a siren or one red light on the front of the vehicle activated, their speed is not protected by this statue, and they are illegally speeding. They should be subject to the same speeding tickets, fines, and insurance reporting that the rest of us are.

Now what can be done about this? I don’t think it’s very likely that a fellow officer will issue a ticket. I can tell you I will be reporting what I see here and filing written complaints with the appropriate law enforcement agencies. The same laws regarding speed need to apply to those enforcing them.

After digging a little more, this may fall under Minnesota Statue 609.43:

609.43 MISCONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE.
A public officer or employee who does any of the following, for which no other sentence is specifically provided by law, may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both:
(1) intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the office or employment within the time or in the manner required by law; or
(2) in the capacity of such officer or employee, does an act knowing it is in excess of lawful authority or knowing it is forbidden by law to be done in that capacity; or
(3) under pretense or color of official authority intentionally and unlawfully injures another in the other’s person, property, or rights; or
(4) in the capacity of such officer or employee, makes a return, certificate, official report, or other like document having knowledge it is false in any material respect.

So, by definition, any officer who speeds illegally (presumably while on duty) has done an act knowing it is not lawful, so they are subject to up to a year in jail or up to a $3000 fine. Who is realistically going to enforce this?