CARnage in Oklahoma City

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Skeptical on Sun Oct 25, 2015 12:39 pm


A toddler was among four people killed when an allegedly inebriated woman drove a car into crowds at an Oklahoma State University parade, Stillwater police said.

The Saturday crash also injured dozens of people, including 11 victims younger than 13. The car's driver has been arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence.

Three adults were pronounced dead at the scene, while the fourth victim, the 2-year-old boy, died from his injuries at Oklahoma University Medical Center Children's Hospital, according to a Stillwater Police Department statement.

Police on Sunday identified the adults killed as 23-year-old Nakita Prabhakar of Edmond and Stillwater residents Bonnie Jean Stone and Marvin Lyle Stone, both of whom were 65.

Of the 47 people treated after the crash, 17 remained hospitalized and five were in critical condition, police said.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/25/us/oklahoma-car-into-crowd/index.html

Should the driver be found to be in fact under the influence what actions should be taken.

If she was under the influence of alcohol then either ban all alcohol or perhaps like guns, have thorough background checks made on people buying alcohol so these incidents may be prevented.

Also, she apparently used a car to do the killing and injuries so perhaps a system of thorough background checks should be put in place to keep cars out of the possession of people like this.

If she was under the influence of drugs and if the drugs were other than prescribed medication such as marijuana for example then perhaps these drugs should be made ill ...............wait a minute aren't such drugs as marijuana, heroin, and cocaine already illegal in Oklahoma?

Last but not least ... one certainly has to feel for the innocent victims who were cut down just out having a good time.
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2527
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Darth Cheney on Sun Oct 25, 2015 4:06 pm

When are we finely going to ban cars...this madness must stop!

We should only allow cars that have a top speed of 5 mph.
avatar
Darth Cheney

Posts : 3206
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : SE SD

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Just Braying It on Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:13 am

Didn't take long, but I knew some moron would "finely" relate this to guns.

Just Braying It

Posts : 983
Join date : 2013-02-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Dr. Evil on Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:28 pm

That's a real interesting choice of comparison. The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities. In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer. Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?
avatar
Dr. Evil

Posts : 3338
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  nightlight88 on Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:00 pm

Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle. Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?
avatar
nightlight88

Posts : 1680
Join date : 2012-12-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Dr. Evil on Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:11 pm

nightlight88 wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle.  Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?

Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BAC laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.
avatar
Dr. Evil

Posts : 3338
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Gomezz Adddams on Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:29 pm

Dr. Jones wrote:
nightlight88 wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle.  Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?

Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BACK laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.




I'll throw the bs flag on that statement. While police can certainly sit outside of a bar observing for intoxicated people, they still have to demonstrate probable cause. The person would have to exhibit signs of intoxication such as unsteady movement, slurred speech, etc.
avatar
Gomezz Adddams

Posts : 2962
Join date : 2012-12-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Dr. Evil on Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:48 pm

Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
nightlight88 wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle.  Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?

Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BACK laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.




I'll throw the bs flag on that statement. While police can certainly sit outside of a bar observing for intoxicated people, they still have to demonstrate probable cause. The person would have to exhibit signs of intoxication such as unsteady movement, slurred speech, etc.

Probable cause is a rather loose term. They pull over everybody that leaves the bar. I've seen it happen more than once. They notify the public about saturation patrols exactly the same as they do about checkpoints, which also throw probable cause right out the window. I bet if you pushed the subject in court, you would find that the laws pertaining to the two after a public announcement are nearly identical.
avatar
Dr. Evil

Posts : 3338
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Clicker on Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:36 pm

A case in NM a few years ago went like this. A cop was sitting n the street in front of a bar trolling for DUIs. He nailed one right away. The guy got off because he claimed discrimination and profiling. The guy was native American and he got off because the bar was an "Indian" bar and the cop knew there were no other ethnic groups in the bar. Profiling has seen the release of a lot of really bad cases. A cop friend tells me that he can go into certain areas of town and stop 5 cars at random. He'll find 3 guns, all having been reported stolen in the possession of felons on parole. He can also net between 4-6 people on wants, warrants and parole violations. He'll also impound 2-3 cars. The cops know where to find the bad guys and our liberal whiner laws keep them from cleaning up the town.

The crusade to eliminate guns needs gun violence to bitch about so it isn't in the Libs best interest to eliminate the bad guys who aid and abet them in their efforts.
avatar
Clicker

Posts : 760
Join date : 2012-12-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Skeptical on Mon Oct 26, 2015 4:13 pm

Dr. Jones wrote:  Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BAC laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.

What a bucket full of bullshit from a paranoid liberal who thinks the world is out to get him/her/it!

I have been stopped by a few saturation patrols in my lifetime and neither time was I "just leaving a bar" as you claim is when they are used.  I just happened be on that particular route while  traveling from a sporting event/movie/dinner to home where the saturation patrol was operating.

Another crock of bull about using minor infractions to check for sobriety.  I have been stopped two times in the last five years and neither time did I have to prove my sobriety: one time, as I was turning I accidently made the headlight go high beam ... a policeman stopped me and advised me that when I did he noticed one high beam light was inoperative.  Another time I had a police car following me and when I pulled into a grocery store parking lot he simply informed me my left brake light flickered while the right side was steady. BTW, no citations issued.
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2527
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  nightlight88 on Mon Oct 26, 2015 4:34 pm

Dr. Jones wrote:
nightlight88 wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle.  Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?

Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BAC laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.


You are wrong, they don't go after all drivers. If that were the case drivers just driving by a bar would be targeted, not just the patrons of the bar.
avatar
nightlight88

Posts : 1680
Join date : 2012-12-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Dr. Evil on Mon Oct 26, 2015 5:39 pm

Skeptical wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:  Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BAC laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.

What a bucket full of bullshit from a paranoid liberal who thinks the world is out to get him/her/it!

Can't be paranoia when I witnessed it myself,  with my own eyes.


I have been stopped by a few saturation patrols in my lifetime and neither time was I "just leaving a bar" as you claim is when they are used.  I just happened be on that particular route while  traveling from a sporting event/movie/dinner to home where the saturation patrol was operating.

I'm confused as to how many times you are saying you have been stopped.  It's almost as if you are pulling your story right out of your ass.  Anywho, it appears your "experience " is slightly different than mine.  A saturation patrol may look completely different in bumfuk than it does where you are from.  There were no movies,  or events where I grew up.  You were either at the bar, or you were at home.  Another possible caveat is the fact that the State said there was to much drinking and driving going on in our area,  so they sent extra HP's to our area.


Another crock of bull about using minor infractions to check for sobriety.  I have been stopped two times in the last five years and neither time did I have to prove my sobriety: one time, as I was turning I accidently made the headlight go high beam ... a policeman stopped me and advised me that when I did he noticed one high beam light was inoperative.  Another time I had a police car following me and when I pulled into a grocery store parking lot he simply informed me my left brake light flickered while the right side was steady.  BTW, no citations issued.

Completely untrue.   I got pulled over by the sheriff one Saturday night because I was missing a tailight on my service truck after I had been working late.   He told me that he wouldn't always pull someone over for that, I cut him off and said,  but on a weekend.....  He laughed and said yeah.  They pull you over to see if they smell alcohol.  Cops are notorious for pulling people over on the weekend for small stuff.
avatar
Dr. Evil

Posts : 3338
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Skeptical on Mon Oct 26, 2015 6:10 pm

Dr. Jones wrote: I'm confused as to how many times you are saying you have been stopped.  It's almost as if you are pulling your story right out of your ass.  Anywho, it appears your "experience " is slightly different than mine.  A saturation patrol may look completely different in fudge than it does where you are from.  There were no movies,  or events where I grew up.  You were either at the bar, or you were at home.  Another possible caveat is the fact that the State said there was to much drinking and diving going on in our area,  so they sent extra HP's to our area.[/color]

What is so confusing to you about:
few
/fyo͞o/
adjective & pronoun
determiner: few; adjective: few; comparative adjective: fewer; superlative adjective: fewest
1. a small number of.
"may I ask a few questions?"
synonyms: a small number, a handful, one or two, a couple, two or three;  



Are you saying the saturation patrols in South Dakota are different then this???  Why and what is the justification my experience should be the same as yours?

Definition: Saturation patrols involve law enforcement deploying additional police officers to targeted roadways during select time periods to detect and apprehend impaired drivers.

Executive Summary: The primary focus for officers during these patrols is to find impaired drivers by observing changes in driving behaviors, while also looking out for any traffic violations by motorists. The behaviors most often assessed are: lane deviation, following too closely, reckless or aggressive driving and/or speeding (Greene, 2003). The intention of this heavier police presence is to increase motorists’ perception that they will be arrested if they drive drunk. Saturation patrols are legal in all 50 states, and do not present many legal issues beyond those associated with routine traffic stops.

More Detail: Measured in arrests per working hour, these blanket patrols are viewed by some as the most effective method of apprehending drunken drivers (Greene, 2003). Saturation patrols can be as effective, or more effective than sobriety checkpoints in apprehending hardcore drunken drivers who often evade checkpoints. Many police departments favor them over sobriety checkpoints for their effectiveness, reduced staffing, and the comparative ease of operating saturation patrols. Adequate publicity is needed though, to reap the deterrence effect more commonly associated with sobriety checkpoints.

http://duijusticelink.aaa.com/issues/detection/saturation-patrols

Dr. Jones wrote:     Completely untrue.   I got pulled over by the sheriff one Saturday night because I was missing a tailight on my service truck after I had been working late.   He told me that he wouldn't always pull someone over for that, I cut him off and said,  but on a weekend.....  He laughed and said yeah.  They pull you over to see if they smell alcohol.  Cops are notorious for pulling people over on the weekend for small stuff.


I should feel a tad sorry for the treatment you get from the police representative but then if yoU display just a little of the attitude you do here then no wonder they lean on you so I surely don't!
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2527
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Dr. Evil on Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:53 pm

Skeptical wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote: I'm confused as to how many times you are saying you have been stopped.  It's almost as if you are pulling your story right out of your ass.  Anywho, it appears your "experience " is slightly different than mine.  A saturation patrol may look completely different in fudge than it does where you are from.  There were no movies,  or events where I grew up.  You were either at the bar, or you were at home.  Another possible caveat is the fact that the State said there was to much drinking and diving going on in our area,  so they sent extra HP's to our area.[/color]

What is so confusing to you about:
few
/fyo͞o/
adjective & pronoun
determiner: few; adjective: few; comparative adjective: fewer; superlative adjective: fewest
1. a small number of.
"may I ask a few questions?"
synonyms: a small number, a handful, one or two, a couple, two or three;  



Are you saying the saturation patrols in South Dakota are different then this???  Why and what is the justification my experience should be the same as yours?

Definition: Saturation patrols involve law enforcement deploying additional police officers to targeted roadways during select time periods to detect and apprehend impaired drivers.

Executive Summary: The primary focus for officers during these patrols is to find impaired drivers by observing changes in driving behaviors, while also looking out for any traffic violations by motorists. The behaviors most often assessed are: lane deviation, following too closely, reckless or aggressive driving and/or speeding (Greene, 2003). The intention of this heavier police presence is to increase motorists’ perception that they will be arrested if they drive drunk. Saturation patrols are legal in all 50 states, and do not present many legal issues beyond those associated with routine traffic stops.

More Detail: Measured in arrests per working hour, these blanket patrols are viewed by some as the most effective method of apprehending drunken drivers (Greene, 2003). Saturation patrols can be as effective, or more effective than sobriety checkpoints in apprehending hardcore drunken drivers who often evade checkpoints. Many police departments favor them over sobriety checkpoints for their effectiveness, reduced staffing, and the comparative ease of operating saturation patrols. Adequate publicity is needed though, to reap the deterrence effect more commonly associated with sobriety checkpoints.

http://duijusticelink.aaa.com/issues/detection/saturation-patrols

Dr. Jones wrote:     Completely untrue.   I got pulled over by the sheriff one Saturday night because I was missing a tailight on my service truck after I had been working late.   He told me that he wouldn't always pull someone over for that, I cut him off and said,  but on a weekend.....  He laughed and said yeah.  They pull you over to see if they smell alcohol.  Cops are notorious for pulling people over on the weekend for small stuff.


I should feel a tad sorry for the treatment you get from the police representative but then if yoU display just a little of the attitude you do here then no wonder they lean on you so I surely don't!

Society generally,  but certainly not always, reserves the word "few" for three or more things.   In your comments that hypothesis was well supported by the trifecta of fun consisting of event/movie/dinner from the aforementioned post.  In considering your entire statement one could certainly draw the conclusion that you were talking about three separate events.

There is no reason to feel sorry for the treatment we received from law enforcement.  We had a lot of fun gaining our reputation.  

The most memorable night was when we heard they were backed up 4 deep hiding in a business parking lot on the way into town from the bar.   We all took off walking the .5 mile into town mob style right past them as they were sitting waiting for us to drive by.  We just waived.
avatar
Dr. Evil

Posts : 3338
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Skeptical on Mon Oct 26, 2015 8:37 pm

Dr. Jones wrote:   Society generally,  but certainly not always, reserves the word "few" for three or more things.   In your comments that hypothesis was well supported by the trifecta of fun consisting of event/movie/dinner from the aforementioned post.  In considering your entire statement one could certainly draw the conclusion that you were talking about three separate events.

There is no reason to feel sorry for the treatment we received from law enforcement.  We had a lot of fun gaining our reputation.  

The most memorable night was when we heard they were backed up 4 deep hiding in a business parking lot on the way into town from the bar.   We all took off walking the .5 mile into town mob style right past them as they were sitting waiting for us to drive by.  We just waived.

Mox Nix, immaterial whether it be two, three, or four times the point remains I wasn't just leaving a bar.

But if it turns your crank by all means continue to patronize bars and run the risk of being cited for a DUI.

DANG, almost forgot ...... Vale !
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2527
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Gomezz Adddams on Tue Oct 27, 2015 9:04 am

Dr. Jones wrote:
Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
nightlight88 wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle.  Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?

Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BACK laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.





I'll throw the bs flag on that statement. While police can certainly sit outside of a bar observing for intoxicated people, they still have to demonstrate probable cause. The person would have to exhibit signs of intoxication such as unsteady movement, slurred speech, etc.

Probable cause is a rather loose term.  They pull over everybody that leaves the bar.  I've seen it happen more than once.  They notify the public about saturation patrols exactly the same as they do about checkpoints, which also throw probable cause right out the window.  I bet if you pushed the subject in court, you would find that the laws pertaining to the two after a public announcement are nearly identical.

Skeptical's link has no trouble defining probable cause.

Executive Summary: The primary focus for officers during these patrols is to find impaired drivers by observing changes in driving behaviors, while also looking out for any traffic violations by motorists. The behaviors most often assessed are: lane deviation, following too closely, reckless or aggressive driving and/or speeding

Just as I had stated.
avatar
Gomezz Adddams

Posts : 2962
Join date : 2012-12-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Dr. Evil on Tue Oct 27, 2015 9:33 am

Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
nightlight88 wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle.  Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?

Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BACK laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.





I'll throw the bs flag on that statement. While police can certainly sit outside of a bar observing for intoxicated people, they still have to demonstrate probable cause. The person would have to exhibit signs of intoxication such as unsteady movement, slurred speech, etc.

Probable cause is a rather loose term.  They pull over everybody that leaves the bar.  I've seen it happen more than once.  They notify the public about saturation patrols exactly the same as they do about checkpoints, which also throw probable cause right out the window.  I bet if you pushed the subject in court, you would find that the laws pertaining to the two after a public announcement are nearly identical.

Skeptical's link has no trouble defining probable cause.

Executive Summary: The primary focus for officers during these patrols is to find impaired drivers by observing changes in driving behaviors, while also looking out for any traffic violations by motorists. The behaviors most often assessed are: lane deviation, following too closely, reckless or aggressive driving and/or speeding

Just as I had stated.

And just as I had stated, probable cause is a loose statement:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/can-police-sit-outside-of-a-bar--watch-people-leav-305404.html

This legal assessment easily quantifies my statements.  Sorry for the inconvenience.
avatar
Dr. Evil

Posts : 3338
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Gomezz Adddams on Tue Oct 27, 2015 10:43 am

Dr. Jones wrote:
Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
nightlight88 wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle.  Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?

Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BACK laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.





I'll throw the bs flag on that statement. While police can certainly sit outside of a bar observing for intoxicated people, they still have to demonstrate probable cause. The person would have to exhibit signs of intoxication such as unsteady movement, slurred speech, etc.

Probable cause is a rather loose term.  They pull over everybody that leaves the bar.  I've seen it happen more than once.  They notify the public about saturation patrols exactly the same as they do about checkpoints, which also throw probable cause right out the window.  I bet if you pushed the subject in court, you would find that the laws pertaining to the two after a public announcement are nearly identical.

Skeptical's link has no trouble defining probable cause.

Executive Summary: The primary focus for officers during these patrols is to find impaired drivers by observing changes in driving behaviors, while also looking out for any traffic violations by motorists. The behaviors most often assessed are: lane deviation, following too closely, reckless or aggressive driving and/or speeding

Just as I had stated.

And just as I had stated, probable cause is a loose statement:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/can-police-sit-outside-of-a-bar--watch-people-leav-305404.html

This legal assessment easily quantifies my statements.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

You mean this legal assessment one from one of the legal eagles on your link?

"Yes, a cop can wait outside of a bar for as long as they like. However, they cannot just look and 'get' people for DUI. Unless the persons exiting display signs of intoxication and then drive a car, or commit traffic offenses after leaving, they cannot be stopped by the police." - Donald John Ramsell

And this one:

"The short answer is yes, police can sit outside bars whenever and for however long they like. But a person doesn't just "get" a DUI like a door prize. A person must show signs of intoxication. Police will watch for steady or unsteady movement and slurred speech, bloodshot and glassy eyes. If someone exhibits these signs then yes, the person may be arrested for a DUI if they got to a car." - Vijay Ratan Sharma

Both are examples of probable cause.



avatar
Gomezz Adddams

Posts : 2962
Join date : 2012-12-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Dr. Evil on Tue Oct 27, 2015 10:54 am

Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
nightlight88 wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle.  Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?

Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BACK laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.





I'll throw the bs flag on that statement. While police can certainly sit outside of a bar observing for intoxicated people, they still have to demonstrate probable cause. The person would have to exhibit signs of intoxication such as unsteady movement, slurred speech, etc.

Probable cause is a rather loose term.  They pull over everybody that leaves the bar.  I've seen it happen more than once.  They notify the public about saturation patrols exactly the same as they do about checkpoints, which also throw probable cause right out the window.  I bet if you pushed the subject in court, you would find that the laws pertaining to the two after a public announcement are nearly identical.

Skeptical's link has no trouble defining probable cause.

Executive Summary: The primary focus for officers during these patrols is to find impaired drivers by observing changes in driving behaviors, while also looking out for any traffic violations by motorists. The behaviors most often assessed are: lane deviation, following too closely, reckless or aggressive driving and/or speeding

Just as I had stated.

And just as I had stated, probable cause is a loose statement:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/can-police-sit-outside-of-a-bar--watch-people-leav-305404.html

This legal assessment easily quantifies my statements.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

You mean this legal assessment one from one of the legal eagles on your link?

"Yes, a cop can wait outside of a bar for as long as they like. However, they cannot just look and 'get' people for DUI. Unless the persons exiting display signs of intoxication and then drive a car, or commit traffic offenses after leaving, they cannot be stopped by the police." - Donald John Ramsell

And this one:

"The short answer is yes, police can sit outside bars whenever and for however long they like. But a person doesn't just "get" a DUI like a door prize. A person must show signs of intoxication. Police will watch for steady or unsteady movement and slurred speech, bloodshot and glassy eyes. If someone exhibits these signs then yes, the person may be arrested for a DUI if they got to a car." - Vijay Ratan Sharma

Both are examples of probable cause.




Speaking of a distinction without a difference.....
avatar
Dr. Evil

Posts : 3338
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Gomezz Adddams on Tue Oct 27, 2015 11:13 am

Dr. Jones wrote:
Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
Gomezz Adddams wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:
nightlight88 wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote:That's a real interesting choice of comparison.  The US takes a real active role on combating DUI fatalities.  In fact we've cut the death rate in half since 1980 when we really started taking up case against this deadly killer.  Are you suggesting that we follow the same active role in gun control?


It seemsto me that law enforcement goes after the actual person who did the damge with their vehicle.  Do they go after all the drivers because of the action of a few drunk drivers?

Absolutely.  We have checkpoints, saturation patrols that will pull over every person leaving a bar, regular patrols that will pull you over for the most minor of infractions to check for sobriety.  We all deal with this.  Not to mention the fact that BACK laws pertain to you whether you've ever caused an accident or not.





I'll throw the bs flag on that statement. While police can certainly sit outside of a bar observing for intoxicated people, they still have to demonstrate probable cause. The person would have to exhibit signs of intoxication such as unsteady movement, slurred speech, etc.

Probable cause is a rather loose term.  They pull over everybody that leaves the bar.  I've seen it happen more than once.  They notify the public about saturation patrols exactly the same as they do about checkpoints, which also throw probable cause right out the window.  I bet if you pushed the subject in court, you would find that the laws pertaining to the two after a public announcement are nearly identical.

Skeptical's link has no trouble defining probable cause.

Executive Summary: The primary focus for officers during these patrols is to find impaired drivers by observing changes in driving behaviors, while also looking out for any traffic violations by motorists. The behaviors most often assessed are: lane deviation, following too closely, reckless or aggressive driving and/or speeding

Just as I had stated.

And just as I had stated, probable cause is a loose statement:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/can-police-sit-outside-of-a-bar--watch-people-leav-305404.html

This legal assessment easily quantifies my statements.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

You mean this legal assessment one from one of the legal eagles on your link?

"Yes, a cop can wait outside of a bar for as long as they like. However, they cannot just look and 'get' people for DUI. Unless the persons exiting display signs of intoxication and then drive a car, or commit traffic offenses after leaving, they cannot be stopped by the police." - Donald John Ramsell

And this one:

"The short answer is yes, police can sit outside bars whenever and for however long they like. But a person doesn't just "get" a DUI like a door prize. A person must show signs of intoxication. Police will watch for steady or unsteady movement and slurred speech, bloodshot and glassy eyes. If someone exhibits these signs then yes, the person may be arrested for a DUI if they got to a car." - Vijay Ratan Sharma

Both are examples of probable cause.




Speaking of a distinction without a difference.....

It really must suck being as moronic as you are.  You wouldn't know a distinction if it bit you in your ass. I didn't realize you came from such a shallow gene pool so didn't think I'd need to spell it out for you. The distinction is while you claim every car is being stopped after the driver is being observed leaving a bar regardless, the two lawyers (specializing in DUI's no less) from your link state specifically that the driver must be exhibiting impaired behavior (cause) for the stop. The two situations not the same, fcukstik.
avatar
Gomezz Adddams

Posts : 2962
Join date : 2012-12-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Skeptical on Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:32 pm

Dr. Jones wrote: And just as I had stated, probable cause is a loose statement:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/can-police-sit-outside-of-a-bar--watch-people-leav-305404.html

This legal assessment easily quantifies my statements.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

It is just possible a person who staggers out of a bar and trying to unlock the driver side rear door on a coupe is a "probable cause" scenario for cop watching people coming out of a bar.
avatar
Skeptical

Posts : 2527
Join date : 2012-12-26
Location : Right here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Dr. Evil on Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:57 pm

Skeptical wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote: And just as I had stated, probable cause is a loose statement:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/can-police-sit-outside-of-a-bar--watch-people-leav-305404.html

This legal assessment easily quantifies my statements.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

It is just possible a person who staggers out of a bar and trying to unlock the driver side rear door on a coupe is a "probable cause" scenario for cop watching people coming out of a bar.



Now try explaining that to Gomerr.
avatar
Dr. Evil

Posts : 3338
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Clicker on Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:10 pm

Years ago (1969) I had an experience in Anaheim, Ca. I'd been in a bar all nite with friends and was too drunk to drive so I sacked out in the back seat. A cop starts beating on my car and informed me that it was illegal to sleep in my car in the parking lot. So I got in the passenger seat and read a book which prompted another cop to tell me I couldn't do that either. I got out of the car and sat on a bus bench and the cop took me in for public drunk. I passed the breath test since it had been 4hrs since I'd had a drink, and they had to let me go. My son the cop years later told me that it was common practice in some areas to try and get the drunk in the driver seat and bust him. Just lucky I guess.
avatar
Clicker

Posts : 760
Join date : 2012-12-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Gomezz Adddams on Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:14 pm

Dr. Jones wrote:
Skeptical wrote:
Dr. Jones wrote: And just as I had stated, probable cause is a loose statement:

http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/can-police-sit-outside-of-a-bar--watch-people-leav-305404.html

This legal assessment easily quantifies my statements.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

It is just possible a person who staggers out of a bar and trying to unlock the driver side rear door on a coupe is a "probable cause" scenario for cop watching people coming out of a bar.



Now try explaining that to Gomerr.

Skeptical is correct in his illustration of probable cause. However that isn't what you arguing Fcukstik. You are arguing that "saturation patrols will pull over every person leaving a bar". The fact that someone leaves a bar is not probable cause in and of itself. One needs to exhibit some form of intoxication and an attempt to drive a vehicle for cause. Glad to see a denizen of the lower gene pools is finally catching up with the conversation.
avatar
Gomezz Adddams

Posts : 2962
Join date : 2012-12-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Dr. Evil on Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:23 pm

Clicker wrote:Years ago (1969) I had an experience in Anaheim, Ca.  I'd been in a bar all nite with friends and was too drunk to drive so I sacked out in the back seat.  A cop starts beating on my car and informed me that it was illegal to sleep in my car in the parking lot.  So I got in the passenger seat and read a book which prompted another cop to tell me I couldn't do that either.  I got out of the car and sat on a bus bench and the cop took me in for public drunk.  I passed the breath test since it had been 4hrs since I'd had a drink, and they had to let me go.  My son the cop years later told me that it was common practice in some areas to try and get the drunk in the driver seat and bust him.  Just lucky I guess.


The Grand Poobah will NOT be pleased...
avatar
Dr. Evil

Posts : 3338
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: CARnage in Oklahoma City

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum