I was out in a rural area where the railroad comes to within 100 or so feet of the main road, parallel to it. At one point there is a small rural road that intersects with the main road and the railroad, and at the rail crossing there is actually a set of lights and such.
Today as I drove by that crossing there were some railroad pickup trucks and workers out there doing work in that area around the tracks, crossing lights, etc. As I got within 1/8 mile of them I started blowing my K/P5 setup.
The first thing I saw was this fairly bulky worker who was standing by himself in the middle of the tracks, snap his head around to look behind him and then DART off of the tracks as fast as his legs could carry him. His head was turning every direction as he was running, gut flopping, almost tripping in the process. I guess it was one of those things that you just have to be there to appreciate but it was FREAKING HILARIOUS. I literally laughed until I had tears in my eyes for a good mile or more.
There were 5-6 other workers nearby and they all stopped and raised up (most were bent down near their trucks) and looked around, and just looked at each other in confusion. I could see they were talking to each other, smiling and watching as I passed by while continuing to blow the horns.
My favorite scare so far, ranks just above blowing the horns when approaching a busy railroad crossing and watching the reactions of people crossing/near the tracks ahead.
I wouldn’t recommend blowing near the tracks to scare people. If the FRA catches you, you can be fined for up to $10,000 and they will confiscate the horns.
This sounds right up there with the rumors like “it’s a federal law that you can’t have train horns on your truck, $40,000 fine and prison time if you get caught” and such.
Oh, and I’d love to see someone attempt to “confiscate” the horns physically. I’m not dumb enough to let anyone search or touch my vehicle without a warrant or court order. It’s also darned unlikely that one of those railroad pickups could catch me in order to obtain my identification and attempt to go through the necessary channels to confiscate them legally.
Okay, I’ve spent the last half hour searching for info and browsing on the FRA website to try and verify the claim made above. I may still be proven wrong, but so far it seems that the FRA has control and jurisdiction over railroad companies and operators only and probably not the general public.
Wow, are you like 18yo? Any police officer has a suspicion that your vehicle was part of violating any law…he/she doesn’t need a court order. For instance, if what was stated in the original post was witnessed, and it caused a panic or even a witnessed injury by the law…I can promise you that if that officer wants to, he/she is going to remove you from your vehicle, put some nice shiny bracelets on you, and take you to jail. Your vehicle will be towed to impound, and they can do as they please with it. Whether it be give it back to you as is, remove the horns, or even seize it permanently. There are alot of states that do not fool around with anything. I suggest to anyone considering “horning” someone to a fashion in which injury is possible, to carefully reconsider the consequences you can face in your area. Ignorance always gets the best of most people.
Sorry for the off-topic rant, I just try to steer those who seem clueless…back into the right direction. Didn’t mean to scare anyone, but sometimes a reality check is necessary.
I always encourage people to USE THERE TRAIN HORNS RESPONSIBLY.
All I can say about this topic is it is not a good idea to be blasting anywhere near a RR crossing or anywhere where RR employees are working. It is a huge safety risk for those who work for the RR and for drivers near the crossing.
Not 18, 34, yes I’ve had my share of experiences with the law (from both sides) and know enough about how the real world works.
Actually, a third party statement without property damage is in almost all cases not arrestable nor can/will the officers charge you as long as they don’t catch you in the act of doing whatever the third party accused you of. They can come and talk to you and 'conduct an investigation" and it depends on your responses where it goes from there. As long as you do not openly admit to whatever they are investigating and as long as you refuse their request to search for evidence, there isn’t a lot they can do.
For instance, cops get called to your house by a neighbor complaining about loud music. When the cops arrive, there is no loud music at that time. The neighbor can complain until he is blue in the face, but until you play your music when the officer is within earshot, all he can do is advise you to keep it down and leave. He cannot meet his burden of proof for a criminal citation (much less arrest or siezure of property) based on a third party witness statement. Aside from statements you may make to incriminate yourself or your consent to search for evidence (which you should not give), the officer’s investigation is otherwise limited to physical evidence in plain view.
Same thing if a neighbor claims you were speeding by his house, or any other host of circumstances you could dream up that do not involve property damage (like, say, a hit-and-run wreck) or physical personal injury (like, say, domestic violence with visual signs of abuse of a person). In those other “he-said-she-said” situations where there is no physical proof of the act supposedly committed, the third party complaintant can attempt to press charges themselves (which is much more difficult to prove in court and most individuals would realize this is not likely to be worth their time) but the officer himself cannot criminally cite you for something he did not witness you doing himself and cannot find significant physical evidence to support (like, say, scratches on a vehicle due to a hit-and-run, items someone claims you stole in plain view, etc.).
If you refuse to make incriminating statements about your actions and also refuse to consent to his search for evidence, an officer would likely have three main options.
allow you to go with a warning based on lack of evidence
attempt to illegally search further for evidence that may support third party claims. Even if said evidence is located, it’s fairly likely that a court could reject the evidence since it was obtained during an illegal search…especially on such a low priority issue as noise violation or improper use of a horn. Judges don’t like their time being wasted on petty bu!!poop, they have drug possession and DUI cases to deal with.
allow the third party to press charges against you without significant evidence, knowing that it is highly likely that the charges will be dropped in court and it will be a waste of everyone’s time including his own (a fact that he will advise the third party of).
A very specific set of circumstances would have to occur for this to happen.
A) you are dumb enough/unlucky enough to commit the crime in plain view of the officer. In this case, it can go down exactly as you describe.
aside from that…
B) a third party witness sees you commit the crime, is close enough to get your identifying information, or is able to chase you closely enough to do so. Or is able to alert the police quickly enough, and the police are close enough in the area to find you and stop you. The third party has to be willing to come and identify you, make statements, and press charges himself. After which time the police release you and your vehicle pending court. The third party witness has to be willing to come to court and testify, be cross examined etc. if needed. And there has to be a judge willing to convict you of a minor infraction with no supporting physical evidence other than a third party witness statement, which usually does not happen.
True story: One time a series of events led to another vehicle striking mine from behind while I was traveling 45mph through town. The other vehicle passed me and ran, but not before I obtained his tag number and vehicle description, then I stopped and called the cops.
It was a hard hit and the contents of my interior were strewn about the car, but miraculously there was not much more than a minor scratch on my rear bumper, a scratch that could be attributed to normal use (as opposed to a scratch containing another paint color). The reporting officers told me this and said that even though they had located the other vehicle and did also observe mild damage to the front of it, there was not enough evidence that a crime had occurred and they could not charge him.
They gave me the option to press charges myself, which I took. My wife (who was also in the car) and I spent several hours driving to the police station and filing reports, giving a deposition, etc. Come court day we were again both there (taking more of our time, gas, energy). The prosecutor wanted no part of assisting with the case. The reporting officers were not present. The defendant and his attorney were present, and the attorney asked why I was wasting everyone’s time with this. The judge heard the matter, I was not allowed to testify, the judge quickly decided to “take the matter under advisement for 60 days” which is essentially a probationary period where the defendant is not convicted of this charge as long as he does not get charged with any other crimes during that “advisement period”.
I’ve also had my vehicle broken into and items stolen. Police said had a good idea of who did it, there was even a security video tape of the crime. Nothing ever came of it and no charges were ever filed because there was not enough evidence.
More or less was wanting to make sure you were just young and didn’t know how things worked. And you are right, as I did state, my example was if the officer witnessed it. I was just hoping you weren’t going to have an attitude with an officer if you did happen to get pulled over, but I try not to interpret things like that through just text…it always gets misunderstood.
Everyone thinks they’re an expert when it comes to the law. I say, use them responsibly, don’t do anything stupid, and don’t try to be above the law. If a cop wants to search your vehicle, then by all means let him search it.
Negative ghostrider, negative, I say again, abort.
EDUCATE YOURSELF.
When dealing with the police, one of the most useful phrases to memorize is “I do not consent to any searches”. No matter how they word the question or statement, as soon as you hear the word “look”, “search”, or “check”, your reply should automatically be “I do not consent to any searches”.
THERE IS NEVER ANYTHING POSITIVE THAT CAN COME FROM YOU GIVING INFORMATION TO THE POLICE OR ALLOWING THEM TO SEARCH YOU OR YOUR PROPERTY.
We’ll just leave it where it is right now. You’ll never see what I am trying to tell you, but go with what you think is necessary. Fwiw, I have nothing to hide…but apparently you do. You should reconsider alot of the things you do to draw attention to yourself…for instance, if you have horns. With your mentality towards LEO, you are going to get picked apart.
Ah, I get it now. You’re one of those, “If you don’t have anything to hide, then why does it matter if the police/government/whatever authority violates your rights, just let them do what they want” types. I understand. I don’t agree, but I understand.
I don’t really have “anything to hide” other than the fact that I often drive 5-10mph faster than others, and have horns and a stereo system that sometimes make noise. I don’t do drugs, I don’t drink and drive, I have no warrants, in fact I have a clean driving record and have never been convicted of any “crime” not defined as “speeding”.
That still doesn’t mean I want to give free reign to any officer of the law who stops me for any reason by kissing his a$$ or consenting to waive my rights. There are good cops and crappy ones, they are all human and can make errors in judgement by mistake or even overstep their bounds intentionally. How do you know which one you are dealing with at a given moment?
