Getting any unwanted attention???

[Vash]

Not enough info in the original post.

And your driving a sports car get used to it. If you want to blend in there are other cars you can get that are boring.

[SoloSK71]

Since I plan to go down to the track when the local police racing team is there, I don't think I can say it will be unwanted attention. Especially since I lived next door to one of them

- SK

[Agent Icebox]

Originally Posted by Vash

Not enough info in the original post.

And your driving a sports car get used to it. If you want to blend in there are other cars you can get that are boring.

[Buckbo]

I was driving a red sports car 6:30am going 6mph over the posted limit. In the other direction a patrol car passed by and made a sudden U-turn. I won't go into details but he looked for me then finally went on his way. Two weeks later driving a brown sedan on the same stretch of road going 10 mph over the same policeman crested the same hill in the opposite direction and didn't look my way. Color and car does matter.

[2SSJIM]

Police officers are people that admire a hot car just as many of us do but they still have a job to do. Yes! Some officers have made it a power trip to them, but it is a very select few and they usually don't last on the force that long. I for one am ok with an officer pulling me over just to check my ride out. I've had mine for one day and have been asked to pull over by civilians so they can check the car out and with that in mind.... i think I would feel safer it it was an officer!

[CWI]

Originally Posted by mikenmar

Interesting counterpoint from Snopes here, although it focuses on "red cars" not "red sports cars":

http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/redcars.asp

As McGruff has pointed out in this and other threads, it is not illegal for police to pull you over to ask questions. Is it profiling people that drive 400+ HP cars? Not my place to determine that. I just know if it happens to me, I will be annoyed and probably ask if they don't have something better to do. If they want a close look and answers to questions, they should go to a dealer like everyone else.

If we could stop them just top ask about their cars and equipment, many of them would tell us they are working and have things to do, leave me alone. I don't think they should be able to stop ust just for the sole reason to check out the car, that is not what they are getting paid for. I can't take time from my job while getting paid just to look at cars. It may not be illegal, but not exactly right either.

[CWI]

Oh, when I am driving somewhere it's because I have somewhere to go and I drive like I have somewhere to go, unlike some people on the road that drive like they don't have someplace to go.

I also don't plan an extra 15 minutes into my trip for someone to check out my car.

[mikenmar]

Originally Posted by CWIweldace

As McGruff has pointed out in this and other threads, it is not illegal for police to pull you over to ask questions.

Yes, it is illegal. McGruff (if that's who it was) is wrong.

The Supreme Court has ruled on this in numerous cases. To pull you over, the cop needs to have (at least) reasonable suspicion that you have broken the law.

Here's the Supreme Court case that established the rule, Delaware v. Prouse:

Facts of the Case: A Delaware patrolman stopped William Prouse's car to make a routine check of his driver's license and vehicle registration. The officer had not observed any traffic violation or suspicious conduct on the part of Prouse. After stopping the car, the officer uncovered marijuana. The marijuana was later used to indict Prouse.

Question: Did the officer's search of Prouse's automobile constitute an unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment?

Conclusion: Yes. In an 8-to-1 decision, the Court held that the privacy interests of travelers outweighed the state interests in discretionary spot checks of automobiles. The Court found that random checks made only marginal contributions to roadway safety and compliance with registration requirements; less intrusive means could have been used to serve the same ends. Officers must be held to a "probable cause" standard for searches, otherwise individuals would be subject to "unfettered governmental intrusion" each time they entered an automobile.

I'm a criminal defense attorney, and I deal with traffic stops all the time. I know what the law is.

Here's another case, Whren v. United States:

The Fourth Amendment guarantees "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." Temporary detention of individuals during the stop of an automobile by the police, even if only for a brief period and for a limited purpose, constitutes a "seizure" of "persons" within the meaning of this provision. See Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 653 (1979); United States v. Martinez Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 556 (1976); United States v. Brignoni Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 878 (1975). An automobile stop is thus subject to the constitutional imperative that it not be "unreasonable" under the circumstances. As a general matter, the decision to stop an automobile is reasonable where the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred. See Prouse, supra, at 659; Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 109 (1977) (per curiam).

Here's another, more recent case, Bingham v. City of Manhattan Reach, in which the motorist actually filed a lawsuit because the cop stopped him without suspicion:

Here, Bingham was driving on a road when Schreiber, a police officer, began to follow Gingham in his patrol car. Schreiber stopped Bingham and then arrested him for driving with an expired license.

Bingham sued the officer and the city, alleging that the officer's conduct violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. [sec] 1983, and that the city was vicariously liable for the officer's actions. Bingham also alleged that the traffic stop was race-based. Defendants argued that the stop was reasonable and not motivated by race. The officer asserted that plaintiff had been driving erratically, while plaintiff testified that he was driving safely and lawfully. Defendants also argued that even if the stop were unreasonable, plaintiff could not recover under [sec] 1983 because it was only a de minimis violation of plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights, and that the officer was entitled to qualified immunity. The trial court granted defendants summary judgment on the issue of whether the stop was race-based, but denied summary judgment on the remaining issues. Both parties appealed.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. It is well-settled that a traffic stop is a seizure for Fourth Amendment purposes and must therefore be based on reasonable suspicion, the court said.

BTW, if anybody wants to contradict this, I invite you to actually cite the law or case to back up your assertion, like I did.

[oachalon]

Originally Posted by Soulrÿche

i drive a Evo and i commute from riverside to Los Angeles everyday.. i get revved engines at lights, i get neons trying to race me.. civics all the time.. i just smile at them, and continue on at my 80 mph.. knowing full well all i need to do is apply some gas.. and they will see my tail end.. lol.. i saw a guy i the new pontiac.. g8? and he was acting like he was all that.. sad..i thought to myself.. you could have gotten a real car.. @_@
/soul

Soul, you do know the g8 is on the sample platform as the camaro. If its a gt it has the L99 like the auto camaro but at 361hp, and the gxp has the LS3 with 415hp. I would call a rwd sports sedan with 361hp or 415hp a real car.

[DDustiNN]

Originally Posted by CWIweldace

Oh, when I am driving somewhere it's because I have somewhere to go and I drive like I have somewhere to go, unlike some people on the road that drive like they don't have someplace to go.

I also don't plan an extra 15 minutes into my trip for someone to check out my car.

[Soulrÿche]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

You don't think a 300+ HP RWD sedan is a real car?

vs the camaro? no..

/soul

[Soulrÿche]

Originally Posted by oachalon

Soul, you do know the g8 is on the sample platform as the camaro. If its a gt it has the L99 like the auto camaro but at 361hp, and the gxp has the LS3 with 415hp. I would call a rwd sports sedan with 361hp or 415hp a real car.

and ya i know it.. i myself would have rather spent the money on the camaro.. hence the comparision.. and i dont think it was either.. we were pretty much neck and neck on the freeway.. and i wasnt really trying..

note: the point of my post was to say i see it everyday in my car.. i imagine in the new camaros your gonna see the other muscle cars try to taunt you. I just ignore them. I know what my car has and can do.. as to the g8.. its a decent looking car.. just imho not a camaro..

[Soulrÿche]

Originally Posted by carfansince73

I agree. The EVO is quick, yes, but in the end it's still a four door econobox that looks very close to the FWD POS base model. The G8 is badass looking.

bleh.. i can do without the g8.. looks like the same old pontiac. Even with the body kits ect ect..

tbh, i had considered the mustang and while not bad looking.. camaro's really show what i consider to be a muscle car look for the new century.

[ahart04]

Originally Posted by Soulrÿche

and ya i know it.. i myself would have rather spent the money on the camaro.. hence the comparision.. and i dont think it was either.. we were pretty much neck and neck on the freeway.. and i wasnt really trying..

note: the point of my post was to say i see it everyday in my car.. i imagine in the new camaros your gonna see the other muscle cars try to taunt you. I just ignore them. I know what my car has and can do.. as to the g8.. its a decent looking car.. just imho not a camaro..

Actually, that's not just your opinion, but fact. Be weary of the fact that in a place of INFORMATION, you can't just post without thinking. People are here to read, and every word is vital to a person's meaning. To state such obtruse statements, is to ask for a flaming in the third degree. Remember a Pontiac is a GM car, and your touting an EVO. You have to remember which forum you are on, and know the general preferences of them. Now you just seem silly, and uninformed, even though you may not be.