986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners - View Single Post

Grizzly · 07-21-2006, 06:28 AM

I completely agree with Z12358. Don't get me wrong, I don't like driving 55 or 65, and I believe that with the improvements in vehicles and roadways over the past few decades, that our speed limits could be raised considerably. However, you have to keep in mind that if we're permitted to drive at say 85, so will the SUV driving soccer mom who's refereeing a fist fight in the back seat, while talking on the phone, applying eyeshadow, changing the Barney DVD and scrubbing Lucky Charms out of her upholstery. The SDLL thing annoys the crap out of me, but many states, including the one I live in, don't even have laws governing slow traffic moving right. The Police in those states couldn't smooth the flow of traffic if they wanted to. I imagine they are as frustrated as the rest of us when they're trying to get somewhere and they come up behind said soccer mom, who will not move right, and is not legally responsible to do so.

pr0k, I know that many have successfully argued entrapment, but the argument is ridiculous. The definition of entrapment:

ENTRAPMENT - A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.

However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.

So, unless the Officer was in the driver's passenger seat calling his mom names and daring him to speed, there is no entrapment.

07-21-2006, 06:28 AM	#48
Grizzly Registered User Join Date: May 2006 Location: Annapolis Maryland Posts: 1,528	I completely agree with Z12358. Don't get me wrong, I don't like driving 55 or 65, and I believe that with the improvements in vehicles and roadways over the past few decades, that our speed limits could be raised considerably. However, you have to keep in mind that if we're permitted to drive at say 85, so will the SUV driving soccer mom who's refereeing a fist fight in the back seat, while talking on the phone, applying eyeshadow, changing the Barney DVD and scrubbing Lucky Charms out of her upholstery. The SDLL thing annoys the crap out of me, but many states, including the one I live in, don't even have laws governing slow traffic moving right. The Police in those states couldn't smooth the flow of traffic if they wanted to. I imagine they are as frustrated as the rest of us when they're trying to get somewhere and they come up behind said soccer mom, who will not move right, and is not legally responsible to do so. pr0k, I know that many have successfully argued entrapment, but the argument is ridiculous. The definition of entrapment: ENTRAPMENT - A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case. However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity. So, unless the Officer was in the driver's passenger seat calling his mom names and daring him to speed, there is no entrapment.