Last week's column about the flashing of headlights to warn other motorists of speed enforcement elicited a burst of impassioned responses.
To recap: A reader reported that he had been pulled over for flashing his headlights. He got himself a warning ticket for interfering with governmental operations. Here at the traffic desk, we have determined two things about this matter.
First, no specific state law exists that prohibits one driver from warning another about speed enforcement. Second, that police may stop a flasher and ask what the heck is wrong with those headlights, sir. This no doubt has an effect on drivers, warning tickets or not.
Let's share what three readers had to say. One of them actually wrote a letter, for which the U.S. Postal Service was grateful.
This fellow is self-titled as Miscreant Man.
"It won't be long when someone in gubment will read your paper and see that little notice warning people about that day's speed traps ... and then your office will be flattened by one of those steroidal SUVs that police find hard to find a use for. You have been warned."
The "little notice" is what is published on page 2B of this newspaper in the city edition. The Little Rock, North Little Rock and Pulaski County police authorities tell us where they intend to work speed enforcement. It's a fair warning, which includes a disclaimer that enforcement might be elsewhere, too.
The reference to "steroidal SUVs" is in regard to armored personnel carriers that the Pentagon has passed down to local law enforcement agencies, thus accelerating what some folks call the militarization of police work.
We now turn to another reader, who alerted us to a lawsuit in Missouri, Elli v. Ellisville.
Some poor guy, Michael Elli by name, was ticketed in this burg near St. Louis for flashing his lights to warn of radar ahead. The flashing violated a city ordinance in effect at the time -- but not any longer, because the American Civil Liberties Union took up the cause, filed a lawsuit in federal court and won a permanent injunction against the practice.
U.S. District Judge Henry Autrey said what the cops of Ellisville were doing was a violation of the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.
For a different perspective, here is Cheesehead, who used to have an "us v. them" attitude about the police.
"That changed when a heavy-drinking acquaintance admitted to me that he was sloshed to the gills one night and should not have driven home from the bar, but he did anyway. He said he was way over the speed limit when flashed by oncoming traffic and slowed down in time to evade detection."
No more flashing headlights for Cheesehead.
"From that moment on after passing a speed trap I never flash oncoming traffic, thinking that one of them might be a drunk ready to kill someone."
Mahatma@arkansasonline.com
Metro on 11/15/2014