Military Police markings arte a big NO GO!!!!

[Capt.Marion]

Bit of digging reveals this: According to NYS Vehicle and Traffic Laws, Title 3, Article 12, Section 396:

" § 396. Use of state and other seals and insignia on private vehicles
prohibited. 1. A person who shall use any seal, device of arms, sign,
lettering or insignia of the United States, or of this state or
political subdivision thereof, on any vehicle not owned or used by the
United States, this state or by such political subdivision thereof,
which such seal, device of arms, sign, lettering or insignia represents,
is guilty of a traffic infraction.
2. A person who shall use or display the words "Police Department,"
"Police" or any sign, lettering or device with the letters "P.D.," or
any other matter indicating ownership, possession or use by a police
department, on any motor vehicle or motor cycle not used by a duly
organized police department within this state and not actually operated
or used by a member or an employee of a duly organized police department
on any public highway, is guilty of a traffic infraction.
3. A person who shall use or display the words "Fire Department,"
"Fire" or any sign, lettering or device with the letters "F.D.N.Y.," or
any other matter indicating ownership, possession or use by a fire
department, on any motor vehicle or motor cycle not used by a duly
organized fire department within this state and not actually operated or
used by a member or an employee of a duly organized fire department on
any public highway, is guilty of a traffic infraction."

For those laws, see the NY State Assembly's Section on NYS Laws: http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menugetf.cgi?COMMONQUERY=LAWS


However, I must say the trooper's reaction was rather excessive. Most upstate NY State Troopers are pretty nice guys...

 

[ida34]

Rizzo and David Doyle beat me to the comments on the flashing beacons. One small point is that a lot of old cucv's are used by some departments. My old department in TN had a couple of cucv ambulances they used for Swat Vehicles. They did paint them white. I would not have made a stop on the vehicle unless he had red or blue flashing lights. Even having them installed in Michigan is against the law. In other states as long as they are not on you are OK. As to the making you peal them off I feel it was over the top. Although I have made people put on renewal tabs by the side of the road. I also do have people correct problems that are correctable to avoid a ticket but I would not make someone say remove window tint by the side of the road. I would just write a "fix it" citation and have them take it off at home then get it inspected later. If anyone ever feels that the LEO that pulled them over is wrong then take the ticket and go to court. He probably told you to remove the stuff instead of giving you a ticket. I would have refused and taken a ticket. Watch refusing to do what an officer says and make sure you are not standing on shaky rgrounds. In this situation respectfully state that you don't believe it is wrong and ask for the actual law that he is referencing. This is usually a page and paragraph designation for local or state law. You can then look it up later. At any rate talk to a supervisor at his department and ask to know the actual law reference so that you can make sure you are in compliance. He can then probably show you exactly what the officer was talking about in the code or tell you the officer was wrong when the code can't be found. The bottom line is to charge someone with a violation the exact law reference must be cited either on the ticket or in court. The judge is the one that must know that what the code is so he may not tell you in court but it should be part of the record. In other words, the officer does not need to prove anything to you. He must prove it to the judge or jury. This is why I say to respectfully ask to know the exact law that the citation was written on. That being said if it says "Military Police" and the state or local code does say that no non-LEO vehicle may be marked police then I would say you were in violation. He might also be thinking impersonating a police officer and I would say that from all the laws I know of about impersonating, this situation would not apply and it would be a real stretch. Do some research and if he was wrong complain to the supervisor. In asking you question to the supervisor it would probably work as a complaint as an supervisor that was competent would correct the officer if he was wrong even if you did not file a formal complaint.

As a side note, during my career I have noticed that there are kinds of people that ask questions. The first person generally wants to know something. The second wants to argue and will not hear any thing said. I answer questions on stops for the first person but I do not answer the second person. I just tell them to take it to court and that is the place to argue the case.

I had tried to stay away from this thread but got sucked in. I hope this helps you deal with the situation. Remember laws are not absolute. The are interpreted and only person that must be convinced that you did wrong is the trier of fact. That is the judge or the jury depending on the case. Most traffic cases are decided by the judge.

Good luck
Chuck

 

[ida34]

I just read the post by Capt. Marion and I would say you were not in compliance and he had you take them off to avoid getting the citation.

 

[67Beast]

Yes, but it would also mean that anyone in NY with "US ARMY" or "USMC" on thier vehicle would be in violation of section #1.

 

[emmado22]

No modern day (1980's on up) US Army trucks actually say US ARMY on them.. They should have the black star, and unit markings, but the Army did away with U.S. ARMY on their trucks a while ago.

I guess techically my humvee with 4ID markings is in violation of the laws here in NY, but if I get pulled over, if the PD doesnt know I'm NOT military (anymore) I tell them. the plates and inspection sticker is a good sign that Im not trying to "pull the wool over peoples eyes" The few times I got pulled over were all "friendly stops" with the PD wanting to check out the truck for the "ooh ahh thats cool" comments..

It also helps that all the local PD know me and like my MV's, and that I know the county sherriff personally, and a few NY State Troopers that are well known in my area...
I'll take my chances....

 

[ida34]

Yes, but it would also mean that anyone in NY with "US ARMY" or "USMC" on thier vehicle would be in violation of section #1.

Yes that would be true. Maybe you New York guys need to get together and get the law changed to exclude historic vehicles. I also think that MP marked vehicles would be pulled over much more than one marked like a regular military vehicle but it does appear that they would be in violation non the less.

 

[motorolanut]

Most state codes deal with colored lights installed not decals on vehicles...I can't speak for the state of Virginia, but myself being a Fleo/Leo in WV see both sides of the coin. It would be unprofessional for me to comment on his actions. There are alot of Wackers and Wanna be's out there...LOL although I have never seen or heard of anyone doing the military thing. Although some DOD police have jurisdiction when highways and interstates that run through DOD property Everyone has bad days though, got a A@s chewing from his Lt. or fought with the wife before his shift..I have been guilty of being too harsh myself sometimes..Just wear a BDU shirt and patrol cap wherever you go and leave them in the Blazer..LOL or try the blank magnets like Ida34 suggested. You never know having the words Police on a vehicle also makes you a target for some dumba@s to take pop shots at yaz...Silly yes but sadly true...

 

[gunhog11]

Yes, but it would also mean that anyone in NY with "US ARMY" or "USMC" on thier vehicle would be in violation of section #1.

Probably true, but unfortunately, irrevelant to this specific case, just as whether or not you're "acting" as a cop while driving a police-marked vehicle or not. The key problem here is the word "Police" being displayed, at least as it appears in the letter of NY law. Now for the record, I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm just interperting the law as it is presented in the above post. There's a couple of issues at play here, in the eyes of the law. While the driver may not be attempting in any way to impersonate an LEO, other members of the public may mistake him for one. And since most laws are seemingly designed with soceity's lowest common denominators in mind, that's what we get. You and I may know that 80s Dodge Diplomats aren't used as police cars anymore, but I guarantee if someone here takes one and has it marked up as a police vehicle and drives it on a public roadway, they'll probably be pulled over and cited just the same, since the average public likely doesn't know that 80s Diplomats aren't used as police vehicles anymore. While it may be common sense to you and I, we all know...or at least we should all know....that common sense isn't (and can't) be legislated. In fact, IIRC, in Kalifornia, one can't even drive a vehicle on a public roadway if it's even painted in the black and white paint scheme ala LAPD/CHP. Most collectors of police vehicles do use the aforementiond magnetic covers, signs, or lightbar covers on their vehicles as they drive or transport their rides between shows. Most states are primarily concerned with warning lights and their associated color, but many states and jurisdictions will also consider a marked police car in the same vein as one walking around in a very-correct police uniform...that is, not just a t-shirt that says "police" with a pair of jeans. I'm talking the full monty. Again, I could really care less one way or the other, I'm just interperting the law as it appears to read. And in this case, it appears pretty clear. Is it right? I don't know. Is it fair? I don't know. But it does seem to be clear so far as it relates to the State of NY.

 

[emr]

My 2 cents, As for haveing ANY beacon other than amber is just plain wrong not to have covered when driving on the road. It should be common sense, As for the markings, i think there is definitley alot of grey area, as for any historic or display vehicle, I do think and know I would not have any type of police mkgs and not have not in service cover on them magnetic or whatever, In the back of my CCKW i had a sign in yellow on the back that read"CAUTION "top line, ANTIQUE VEHICLE" second line, ONLY ONE STOP LIGHT, third line WATCH FOR HAND SIGNALS forth line, because of the only one tiny cat eye, it is MY responcibility to let others know what im doing, and watch out for there safety, As fo the Cop making him pull the markings off in front of him was PURE EGO! I have been in a lot of situatuions in my life and a fair guy would have said , Look i dont want to site U , so U need to remove them and stop by this weekend for me to see it, Or if U can find a statuate that says U can have them I will accept that, But its up to U to show me, OR U can show it to A judge, fair and resonable I think, but as for the im in charge attitude was taken to far in my eyes, Quick story, when I was 17 i had a red sticker and was working on it in shop class as a senior, i got pulled over going to school, i explained The shop teacher was letting me fix it in class, he said how long will this take, ? I said well a couple of months in class, he said OK If we see U with that red sticker this summer U will get a ticket, that was 1976, taday I would have gotten a ticket that day and every day, times are sadley different, Randy

 

[gunhog11]

My 2 cents, As for haveing ANY beacon other than amber is just plain wrong not to have covered when driving on the road. It should be common sense, As for the markings, i think there is definitley alot of grey area, as for any historic or display vehicle, I do think and know I would not have any type of police mkgs and not have not in service cover on them magnetic or whatever ............ As fo the Cop making him pull the markings off in front of him was PURE EGO! I have been in a lot of situatuions in my life and a fair guy would have said , Look i dont want to site U , so U need to remove them and stop by this weekend for me to see it, Or if U can find a statuate that says U can have them I will accept that, But its up to U to show me, OR U can show it to A judge, fair and resonable I think, but as for the im in charge attitude was taken to far in my eyes

Unfortunately, as we all know, the law does vary from state to state. Take Nevada for instance:

On amber beacon lights:

Reference: NRS 484.579 Flashing amber warning light: Limitations on operation and display; permit to mount on certain vehicles; fee.

1. It is unlawful to operate or display a flashing amber warning light on a vehicle except when an unusual traffic hazard exists or as authorized in NRS 484.582. This subsection does not prohibit the use of amber lights in electric signals for making turns.

2. It is unlawful for any person to mount flashing amber warning lights permanently on a vehicle without a permit from the Nevada Highway Patrol.

3. The Nevada Highway Patrol, upon written application, shall issue a permit to mount a flashing amber light on:

(a) Vehicles of public utilities.

(b) Trucks for towing vehicles.

(c) Vehicles engaged in activities which create a public hazard upon the streets or highways.

(d) Vehicles of coroners and their deputies.

(e) Vehicles of Civil Air Patrol rescue units.

(f) Vehicles of authorized sheriffs’ jeep squadrons.

(g) Vehicles which escort funeral processions.

(h) Vehicles operated by vendors of food or beverages, as provided in NRS 484.582.

4. Those permits expire on June 30 of each calendar year.

5. The Nevada Highway Patrol shall charge and collect the following fees for the issuance of a permit for the mounting of a flashing amber light:

(a) Permit for a single vehicle.......................................................................................... $2

(b) Blanket permit for more than 5 but less than 15 vehicles..................................... 12

(c) Blanket permit for 15 vehicles or more..................................................................... 24

6. Subsections 1 and 2 do not apply to an agency of any state or political subdivision thereof, or to an agency of the Federal Government.


and for violation of the above statute; in Nevada, the Trooper's actions, whether considered reasonable or unreasonable, would be in accordance with the law. Reference another statute:

NRS 484.493 Police officer to remove lights and sirens unlawfully installed or operated.

A police officer shall remove and destroy, or cause to be removed and destroyed, all red, blue or amber lights and all sirens unlawfully installed or operated. (Added to NRS by 1963, 1266; A 1985, 1041)


Again, I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the situation as tklm539 described it, I'm just showing what the law of (in this case) Nevada states. But, knowing and complying with the motor vehicle laws for the state you have a driver's license in, is implied when you get your license; and it wouldn't be a bad idea to check the laws for the states you might not have a license in engaging in any motor vehicle operations beyond simply following common traffic laws such as following posted signs.

 

[JB]

Just for fun here are two versions of the CUCV as a "police" vehicle. The 1009 came off of GL a while back. The 1010 as a highway patrol TAC team transport is up for sale by Mr. Parramore a few miles west of me.

 

[CCATLETT1984]

the "state trooper" is not a MILITARY POLICE vehicle, its what the state agency did with it when they got it through the surplus program.

 

[JB]

Yes I am aware the one the has STATE TROOPER on the side is not military police. I just wanted to post the pic due to the theme and as an example of how it was sold out of the state motorpool.

 

[CCATLETT1984]

that vehicle should not have been sold without the trooper markings being covered/removed.

 

[Somemedic]

If the NY statute is as it reads then:
you cant buy a firefighter edition or police edition Harley Davidson in that state and ride it without the risk of being cited? The 2003 jeep Willys with its proper sticker package can be cited. Anyone driving around with a 9/11 FDNY memorial sticker who isnt affiliated with a FD or PD could be cited? Any former crown vic with the "police interceptor" badge on the back left trunk lid is subject to citation were the driver not with a police agency. A crown vic taxi with the spotlight still attached would be a grey area...
Seems like the good state of NY might wanna update and amend this law. Alot of antique fire truck restorers would be shot in that state

 

[Bigmick]

The law is kinda the same 'make it up as you go along' in the UK as well, I got pulled over by a patrol car on the way to a military show, the cop said he wasn't happy about me driving a military police vehicle so close to an army camp (Aldershot, for those that know) I said I was sorry he wasn't happy and what could I do to cheer him up (for some reason he didn't find that amusing) I explained that the vehicle I was in was US Army not British, that it was in desert camo not green, that it had civilain license plates not military, and that I was in jeans and a T shirt not any kind of uniform, and the 33x12.5x15 mud terrains were legal, and that it had been converted to amber indicators etc etc, he still wrote me a ticket, over here it's called a HORT1, produce all your documents at your nearest police station within 7 days.
So as soon as I got back I went to the cop shop, showed them all my documents and they asked if I'd like to make a formal complaint against the officer, as I had made no driving error and the vehicle was in roadworthy condition, he had stopped me 'under suspicion' which is illegal now, I couldn't be bothered with the hassle and let it go.
We can have blue and red lights on the vehicles as well, as long as they don't work, if they do work they have to be covered up.
Good job I never mentioned it was fitted with 2x100 watt sirens, wailers, yelps, hi-lo's, 2 tones, bull horn and PA.

 

[Mike_Pop]

This is my car that I bought in NJ on eBay. I've driven it across the country twice and had most police officers wave to me. I did get stopped in Wyoming for speeding and the officer asked why I didn't paint over the decals. I wonder if this were registerd as an antique vehicle? Would I be allowed to have a red beacon on top?

 

[gunhog11]

The law is kinda the same 'make it up as you go along' in the UK as well, I got pulled over by a patrol car on the way to a military show, the cop said he wasn't happy about me driving a military police vehicle so close to an army camp (Aldershot, for those that know) I said I was sorry he wasn't happy and what could I do to cheer him up (for some reason he didn't find that amusing) I explained that the vehicle I was in was US Army not British, that it was in desert camo not green, that it had civilain license plates not military, and that I was in jeans and a T shirt not any kind of uniform, and the 33x12.5x15 mud terrains were legal, and that it had been converted to amber indicators etc etc, he still wrote me a ticket, over here it's called a HORT1, produce all your documents at your nearest police station within 7 days.
So as soon as I got back I went to the cop shop, showed them all my documents and they asked if I'd like to make a formal complaint against the officer, as I had made no driving error and the vehicle was in roadworthy condition, he had stopped me 'under suspicion' which is illegal now, I couldn't be bothered with the hassle and let it go.
We can have blue and red lights on the vehicles as well, as long as they don't work, if they do work they have to be covered up.
Good job I never mentioned it was fitted with 2x100 watt sirens, wailers, yelps, hi-lo's, 2 tones, bull horn and PA.

The same would probably be true here if tklm539 were driving an obvious British/British marked vehicle here in the States. Likely not much bother over it.

 

[ida34]

If the NY statute is as it reads then:
you cant buy a firefighter edition or police edition Harley Davidson in that state and ride it without the risk of being cited? The 2003 jeep Willys with its proper sticker package can be cited. Anyone driving around with a 9/11 FDNY memorial sticker who isnt affiliated with a FD or PD could be cited? Any former crown vic with the "police interceptor" badge on the back left trunk lid is subject to citation were the driver not with a police agency. A crown vic taxi with the spotlight still attached would be a grey area...
Seems like the good state of NY might wanna update and amend this law. Alot of antique fire truck restorers would be shot in that state

In the original post the vehicle was marked with military police parkings. It obviously applies to makings used by police and fire departments. I don't see how you think a spotlight would violate that law. The 2003 jeep willys does not say US Army if I remember correctly. Police edition Harley Davidsons do not come maked with any markings on them. And I am not even going to comment on the bumper sticker. The original poster had large lettering saying military police not a bumper sticker. He was in obvious violation of the law posted. Come on. The fact is a normal person would not think a car was a police car or fire department vehicle based on a bumper sticker. Military vehicles are marked like the one the post is about so a normal person would think that it was a real military police vehicle. The only change I could see in the law is a historically plated vehicle being exempt. The police are out of control and I could see them shooting someone for a civil infraction. Watch out fire truck restores!!!!!!

 

[mangus580]

I would not have made a stop on the vehicle unless he had red or blue flashing lights. Even having them installed in Michigan is against the law.

Interesting, I went to michigan at least once with my 2000 S10 Blazer with a full BLUE lightbar on the roof. No issue what so-ever, and I spent almost a week there!

Did I miss the NY Law posting?