I-Team: Mayor's motorcade caught on tape (Rahm Emmanuel running red lights)

Eyewitness News ABC 7 ^ | May 7, 2014 | Ben Bradley

[Fester Chugabrew]

Is it not a bit ludicrous to think that a guy whose office effects millions of people should not (despite all derelictions on his part) be accorded the courtesy of getting from one side of town to the other in an official motorcade without the obstructions the people whom he serves must deal with from day to day? You can bet there are people in the state who have “authorized” such behavior, and for good reason. Besides, it get’s his derelict a$$ out of the way that much quicker.

It is the Office of the Mayor of Chicago. The Office deserves respect. Respect begets privileges, albeit circumscribed, for even the Mayor of Chicago is forbidden by law to endanger the citizenry with his motorcade(s). Running through red lights is a small privilege.

What kind of citizenry would want to see the Mayor of Chicago slapped with fines and frog-marched over his official motorcade running red lights? A citizenry both petty and uneducated; the same kind Rahm Emanuel depends on for re-election.

[BlueDragon]

Let me try to put it another way.

No. Lacking some retraction on your part, I'm not willing to just "let you put it another way" when that includes assumption of privilege which is then abused. Small-time corruption, almost negligible, but it was enough for Rahm's office to apologize over, which rather undoes your own excuses for the creep.

Not interested in your further opinions or excuses.

You don't know me in the least. You have guessed wrong, about what you don't know about.

[Fester Chugabrew]

The abuse of a privilege does not negate its legitimacy. You ought to know that, as little as I know you.

[BlueDragon]

He does not have the privilege under the law.

Look elsewhere.

[Fester Chugabrew]

This may or may not convince you, but today I called the Illinois Vehicle Code people, who in turn took the question to the Illinois State Police liaison. They said that the code I cited below (625 ILCS 5/11-205) precisely governs the Mayor of Chicago’s circumstances, and that his motorcade vehicles by law are treated as squad cars. He is thereby exempt from being penalized for his supposed infractions.

If you want the phone number it’s not hard to find. Pat was gracious in taking a considerable amount of time to ascertain the nature of things and send it up the food chain for evaluation. The response time was several hours.

I also took time to look at the video, read the story, and evaluate further whether this really merits all the hubbub put forth by WLS-TV, who care not a wit to dig up any really dirt on Rahm, but would instead incite the peons to a sense of “unfairness,” when in truth there are times when public officials are, and ought to be, accorded special privileges.

[hoosierham]

Maybe if the officials realize how bad the chains are then those chains will be loosened if not cut.

[Fester Chugabrew]

To respect and honor proper authority is not a great burden, or “chain.” Red lights are a proper authority, but we are not so subservient to them that we obey them to a “T.” Emanuel has since ordered his body guards to be more circumspect. This is an area - a small one - where some give and take is both needed and helpful.

[BlueDragon]

There are no "special privileges" afforded to Rahm under the law.

He is thereby exempt from being penalized for his supposed infractions.

No, he is not. Technically, neither are "squad cars" exempt, except for under the proscribed conditions. This is where the door for abuse is opened, for there is otherwise no need for the mayor to be traveling in a "police vehicle" unless the little ballerina was under arrest, though somewhere in city filings or charter, it is likely provision has been made to turn the CPD into mayoral office bodyguards and provide transportation. That transportation itself is not what is narrowly being objected to, but rather the scofflaw approach.

That police are not given tickets for breaking the traffic laws when they break them needlessly, is yet another matter. Again, it is very near to precisely there, that the abuse of law begins (in instances such as this).

But they CAN get ticketed when or if not operating under the stipulated conditions. Like --- they cannot just decide to turn on their siren -- because they don't want to stop at a red light. But cops do this at times, not always justifiably so, under the law.

Read this part again

(b) The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law or when responding to but not upon returning from a fire alarm, may exercise the privileges set forth in this Section, but subject to the conditions herein stated.

Getting to a meeting, even an officially scheduled government function, such as a City Council meeting IS NOT AN EMERGENCY.

Beating the traffic, getting to his office a few minutes sooner, IS NOT AN EMERGENCY.

Being on-time for Rahm's pedicure, IS NOT AN EMERGENCY.

What actual EMERGENCY would require the mayor of Chicago to need himself respond as a first responder? When would a mayor's motorcade ever be in "hot pursuit" of a fleeing criminal?

Just turning on lights and siren is not enough. There must be some emergency, some chase, etc., as stipulated by law.

All this free rent I've been enjoying in your head, is still too damn high

[Fester Chugabrew]

I have consulted Illinois legal authorities on this very subject and text of law, and they differ from your assessment. The privileges accorded emergency vehicles extend to municipal officials provided they take appropriate measures, which they have. Even WLS has a follow up story to the same effect. Surely it does not bother you that people who are granted authority also have some latitude for the sake of the expedient exercise of their office. Were you raised to despise proper authority? Are you a Libertarian? Have you changed the bong water since last month?

[hoosierham]

Red lights are a traffic control device,not a proper authority.

Most criminals work they way from minor to major offenses,so as former New York mayor Guliani(?) demonstrated, cracking down on littering and loitering in Times Square reduced more srious rime as well.

My concern regarding “authorities” abuses of power and privileges is that as they grow accustomed to disregard minor laws they will be emboldened to ignore major laws.

I ticketed self-important stop sign runners in my time and heard their BS.The laws of physics don’t care about respecting authority when the “important official” causes a collision or is struck by the vehicle with the right-of-way.Flipping on lights and sirens at the last second to justify official running the traffic control is a dangerous and despicable habit.I personally observed an officer in an unmarked car run a stop sign (with other traffic both vehicular and pedestrian present)while talking on a handheld cellphone in a city crass enough to have little signs bolted just under the stop sign denoting the $ amount of the fine for running said sign . Most crashes I have seen and too many fatal ones were at intersections,and someone’s attitude of being in too big a hurry to wait meant someone never got to go home!!

[hoosierham]

If Dad makes the rule:”don’t run in the house” but Dad routinely breaks the rule ,everyone else will resent the rule and be inclined to break it despite good reasons for it being a rule.

[BlueDragon]

I have consulted Illinois legal authorities on this very subject and text of law, and they differ from your assessment.

You talked to a cop about cops obeying the laws. Wonderful. But stupid, like asking the fox if it's ok for him to harvest a few chickens whenever there is justifiable need, like, he's hungry or just want's to.

You don't get it. Emergency vehicles need to have "emergency" reasons for not observing traffic laws. Under the codes, they must be in response to some form of emergency. "Efficiency of government", like getting Rahm, or someone associated with his office through traffic quicker, is not an emergency.

The privileges accorded emergency vehicles extend to municipal officials provided they take appropriate measures, which they have.

Extend to "municipal officials" provided they take "appropriate measures"?

You keep making stuff up. Lights and sirens alone are NOT "appropriate measures" under the codes (laws).

[Fester Chugabrew]

I did not speak to a cop. I spoke to the people who interpret and apply Illinois State Vehicle code; the people who tell law enforcement what the law means. The Mayor of Chicago has the latitude to run red lights and speed with his motorcade, provided there is no unnecessary danger presented to civilians. You’re just jealous, like a typical lefty, that authority exists in a manner that can be exerted with flexibility, and you have this knee jerk reaction to any occasion where authority has privileges you do not.

[Fester Chugabrew]

If Dad makes the rule:”don’t run in the house” but Dad routinely breaks the rule . . .

20 supposed violations over a period of 2 years with cameras watching your every move is hardly "routine." There is plenty of reason for resentment when it comes to Rahm Emanuel without sulking over petty offenses that have no legal ground for prosecution.

[BlueDragon]

First off, you don't understand the law, even after reading it -- then having it shown back you again.

There needs to be some sort of "emergency". Deal with it -- for that is the law, regardless of how it is abused.

You now say;

I did not speak to a cop

but just a few comments ago said;

but today I called the Illinois Vehicle Code people, who in turn took the question to the Illinois State Police liaison.

You can't even keep your lies straight.

Get your mind right -- like I told you in the beginning. But since you won't in the least (have to salvage that pathetic ego, I guess) then goodbye.

May your chains rest lightly on you, and posterity forget we ever knew you.

[Fester Chugabrew]

When we 1.) inquire of the State of Illinois in regard to its laws, and 2.) reference the specific code pertinent to the situation, 3.) inquire as to whether the Mayor of Chicago is to be held accountable under the same as his motorcade occasionally speeds or runs through red lights, and 4.) receive an answer in the negative directly from the very same people, I tend to take their word for it sooner than I do from some crank on FR with an axe to grind.

You accuse me lying when I say I did not speak to a cop. I spoke to the individual responsible for fielding my inquiry, who in turn spoke to a liaison for the Illinois Secretary of State, who in turn spoke to a liaison for the Illinois State Police, who in turn are responsible to enforcing the very code under discussion. Obviously enforcement of the law involves cops. Obviously if the supposed offender were breaking the law we would want to know why the cops are not applying legal code under the circumstances. Who else are we supposed inquire of, the tooth fairy? But I did not speak to one cop. Only their bosses. Your manner of accusation and argument is characteristic of the left, so please, little pigeon, drop it.

I’m not chained to petty bitching. I’m not chained to a feckless application of the law. I’m not chained to a patent disregard for the order of creation that allows for certain people to have privileges other people do not. I gave up the bong decades ago. So don’t go lecturing me about “chains.”

[hoosierham]

Get some Chapstik.

[BlueDragon]

I’m not chained to a feckless application of the law.

But you are.

dictionary.com --feckless

Did you know that most varieties of English are in fact “feck”-less? They don’t contain a word feck, only the negative counterpart feckless. The “feck” in feckless began as a short form of effect used in the Scots dialect. So feckless essentially means "ineffective,"

It would have been easier here if you had not been arguing both sides of the point --- saying he wasn't breaking any laws (when what his drivers were doing was bending the laws until they broke -- doing so with some regularity) but that his "office" should be afforded privilege to nullify the plain and clear intents of the law for sake of convenience and "efficiency".

Because it is the mayor of Chicago, the law itself becomes ineffective, for none who are tasked with enforcing the law dare to enforce it.

I’m not chained to a patent disregard for the order of creation that allows for certain people to have privileges other people do not.

Proponents of slavery used to make similar arguments.

There is no "order of creation" that privileges certain people over others. Not in this nation, and if it be God who guides the nations, including THIS one -- then the double-sidedness of your positions become glaringly apparent while they also backslide to 'rule of [earthly] kings', and such.

We are a nation of laws, in that the laws are to rule over us, in comparison to "persons" rule over us.

There is a distinct difference. Your language usage in this regard has been dangerously sloppy.

I gave up the bong decades ago. So don’t go lecturing me about “chains.”

Your bong had little chains on it?

It is not me who deep down inside, is secretly jones'n for good 'ol feudal Europe, where some collection of dukes, earls and kings can rule in conjunction with the Latin "Church", for that was disordered all along, being part and parcel of the fallen nature of man...

It's not my fault that so many Americans are so inwardly conflicted, but that of centuries of dangerously half-blind [Roman] Catholic theologians, among other errors. This nation represented to the world a break with feudalism (and Catholicism's stranglehold on the "Western mind") so that men could live free, not just "some" men live free, or only "some" afforded that which is stipulated against according to plain and clear intents of the laws, regardless of all the double-talking and excuse making for it having become something different.

Those theologians were not alone in their dimness of sight, it is plain enough for those with eyes to see, for what is the default condition of mankind but for the most prideful or vicious to assume command, taking due care all along the way to maintain their own hold on "power" over other human beings, anyway they can, justifying themselves to themselves by telling themselves anyone other than themselves would be even worse and more harmfully corrupt and abusive then they themselves are...

That is the "world" according to the flesh, and can be found anywhere one cares to look.

In this context, that is the "order of creation" which you are allowing room for, and is for the materialistic unregenerate and animalistic, but is not the way of a nation of free men.

John 3:5

[Fester Chugabrew]

According to the State of Illinois: Mayor’s motorcade = squad cars. Squad car = “authorized emergency vehicle.” The Mayor’s motorcade is not the only example of vehicles other than police cars and fire trucks that may serve as “authorized emergency vehicles.

When it comes to matters of civil authority there are offices that place people over others. If you’d like to prove your point that all people are equal in terms of civil authority, try waltzing into Mayor Emanuel’s office, sitting down in his chair, and governing the City of Chicago. Unilaterally change the law so that only police cars and fire trucks en route to an emergency may speed and run red lights.

Your dog doesn’t hunt, sir. Rather than admit that both according to the written law and the law as its practiced in Illinois, you have been incorrect in your assertions and arguments, you’ve decided to dig in your heels and rant. I’m sorry you’re jealous of the Mayor of Chicago for his small privilege of getting around town quicker than others less than once a month. One day perhaps you’ll grow up and realize there is such a thing as civil authority, and that it, like any other station in life, has both perks and disadvantages. Keep it up, little pigeon.

[BlueDragon]

According to the State of Illinois: Mayor’s motorcade = squad cars. Squad car = “authorized emergency vehicle.”

So?

Subsection (b) has been refuting you all along, in regards to Chicago mayoral (driver's) habit or running red lights and excess speed.

Unilaterally change the law so that only police cars and fire trucks en route to an emergency may speed and run red lights.

That's what the law actually says now, for the most part.

I'm sorry hat your pride is so fragile you cannot admit to the slightest error, when that slight error is enough to have made most of your words be falsehoods engaged in for reason that I offended you.

Keep it up, little pigeon

Or what? Just what are going to do? Threaten me?