So the bar for "bad cop" is set to "Drives like Balog and most other folks do when they think cops aren't around"? If someone is "bad" because they violate traffic regulations and laws they don't agree with whenever they think they can get away with it, then we might as well label 98% of our society as "bad".
However, 98 percent of us "civilians" don't
expect to be let off for speeding, reckless driving, or DUI without even a written warning, just because of a shiny piece of metal and/or an ID card in a wallet. And, as posted, the cops who give their brethren in uniform those breaks are equally wrong, and they count toward the 98 percent because they are NOT ... ENFORCING ... THE ... LAW when they cut their brethren those breaks.
Do you believe that police should mindlessly enforce all infractions they see no matter who is breaking the law and why, or do you believe that some level of discretion is acceptable?
Slippery slope alert: Once you accept that an official whose job is to "enforce" (not "interpret") the law should be allowed discretion in which laws he/she chooses to enforce, where do you draw the line as to which laws it's okay to ignore as opposed to which laws he/she should NOT be allowed to choose to ignore?
