Meet The Texan Man Whose Unique Way Of Helping Police Lands Him In Trouble

by
Zohaib Ahmed
You know how there are certain situations when no one is right and no one is wrong, still a conflict exits. This sort of disagreement has popped up in Frisco, Texas where a man – who had been arrested and later taken to court by the local police for warning drivers that a speed trap lay ahead – presented a unique argument in his defence.

You know how there are certain situations when no one is right and no one is wrong, still a conflict exits. This sort of disagreement has popped up in Frisco, Texas where a man – who had been arrested and later taken to court by the local police for warning drivers that a speed trap lay ahead – presented a unique argument in his defence.

The accused in question is a certain Ron Martin, who, when brought in front of the judge, argued that by letting car drivers know that the zone ahead is under surveillance, he was basically trying to do what the cops were doing – which is to make them slow their cars down.

About the incident, which took place last October, a police officer wrote: "I observed a couple cars drive by traveling westbound waving at us. Mr. Martin was observed standing in the center median of the six-lane divided roadway ... holding a sign in his right hand up over his shoulders that read 'Police Ahead.'"

When the cops approached Martin for an explanation, he anticipated his arrest and recorded the whole thing on his mobile phone. Later on, he told News 8 that what he did was not to save speed merchants, but he actually wanted them to slow down when passing through his community. In his defence, the threat of police presence up front served as an effective deterrent for drivers to take their foot of the pedal.

“Ultimately, we’re trying to do the exact same thing,” he said. “I just don’t wear a uniform. I’m the same thing as a speed limit sign, just reminding people that there is a limit here.”

His arrest was on the charges of violating the city’s sign ordinance, but the 33-year-old claims that the said ordinance is only for businesses, and so it isn’t applicable on him.

The next round of this interesting trial – which could very easily gravitate towards a long, arduous debate over free speech – will take place on February 21.

Carbonated.TV