Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:47:16 -0400, gfretwell wrote:


Suing the government is usually a futile activity. You spend a lot of
money and seldom win.

And let's not forget the crime of driving with money.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/12/1296.asp

Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:47:16 -0400, wrote:

Did you see the story about the 72 year old guy who was arrested last
week at a checkpoint in the cape?
He blew a 0.0 and they still insisted he was intoxicated and took
urine. The cop said it came back positive for a drug the guy says he
wasn't taking based on a test strip. Too bad, off you go.
They are still waiting for the lab report.
The Cape Chief was interviewed in the snooze press and he was asked,
what if the urine test is really indicating something you took days
ago. He said too bad, if the cop thinks you are intoxicated you are
guilty.

Interesting. I saw the original story but not the follow up. I met
Petrovich once and he seemed like a reasonable guy. Maybe not.
Something is definitely wrong with that whole incident and I hope it
gets adjudicated in an intelligent manner.

Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:04:09 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:47:16 -0400, wrote:

Did you see the story about the 72 year old guy who was arrested last
week at a checkpoint in the cape?
He blew a 0.0 and they still insisted he was intoxicated and took
urine. The cop said it came back positive for a drug the guy says he
wasn't taking based on a test strip. Too bad, off you go.
They are still waiting for the lab report.
The Cape Chief was interviewed in the snooze press and he was asked,
what if the urine test is really indicating something you took days
ago. He said too bad, if the cop thinks you are intoxicated you are
guilty.

Interesting. I saw the original story but not the follow up. I met
Petrovich once and he seemed like a reasonable guy. Maybe not.
Something is definitely wrong with that whole incident and I hope it
gets adjudicated in an intelligent manner.

The problem with these kinds of news reports is that you don't know
what prompted the investigation initially. It might have been an open
container - there may have been visual or verbal clues - could be
anything. I was stopped once after a 24 hour shift when we had a rash
of medical incidents and I was the only available medic - I had maybe
half hour of sleep or so and was stopped on the way home - I guess I
was less than driving a straight line. Everything came back negative,
but the cop was still suspicious, but he called the Chief and he
explained the situation - he came out, I parked the car and the Chief
took me home from there.

You just can't have an opinion based on incomplete information.

Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:47:16 -0400, wrote:

They can do the "dog search" while you are still arguing about it and
if the dog "alerts" (whatever that means) they have probable cause.

Depends on the dog actually. It's based on their "play" behavior.
They are usually tested with a tennis ball believe it or not. All
dogs love balls and the way they deliver the ball back to the trainer
is how the "alert" is developed.

For example, some dogs will return to the trainer and drop the ball at
the trainer's feet and paw at it - some will sit - some will drop the
ball and bark - some will lie down with it between their paws - one
dog I worked with back in the day would actually bounce up and down
(strangest thing I ever saw).

What you do is work with that when you are training for drug/bomb
work. Each dog is different - they are all trained the same way, but
their response to winning the "game" is different.

Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:36:24 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


The problem with these kinds of news reports is that you don't know what
prompted the investigation initially. It might have been an open
container - there may have been visual or verbal clues - could be
anything. I was stopped once after a 24 hour shift when we had a rash
of medical incidents and I was the only available medic - I had maybe
half hour of sleep or so and was stopped on the way home - I guess I was
less than driving a straight line. Everything came back negative, but
the cop was still suspicious, but he called the Chief and he explained
the situation - he came out, I parked the car and the Chief took me home
from there.

You just can't have an opinion based on incomplete information.

Times may be a-changing. Here in NJ, we have Maggie's Law, which allows
sleep deprived drivers to be charged with vehicular homicide if any one
is killed because of a drowsy driver. There have been studies
demonstrating that people who have been awake for 24 hours are impaired
to the same level as someone with a blood alcohol level of .10. Which
raises all sorts of interesting liability issues:

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news...8/12/31404.htm

Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:36:24 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

The problem with these kinds of news reports is that you don't know
what prompted the investigation initially. It might have been an open
container - there may have been visual or verbal clues - could be
anything.

I believe it was a DUI checkpoint. It will be an interesting case if
it goes to court. We have a lot of drivers in FL who are impaired by
age, nothing else.

Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:04:09 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:47:16 -0400, wrote:

Did you see the story about the 72 year old guy who was arrested last
week at a checkpoint in the cape?
He blew a 0.0 and they still insisted he was intoxicated and took urine.
The cop said it came back positive for a drug the guy says he wasn't
taking based on a test strip. Too bad, off you go. They are still
waiting for the lab report. The Cape Chief was interviewed in the snooze
press and he was asked, what if the urine test is really indicating
something you took days ago. He said too bad, if the cop thinks you are
intoxicated you are guilty.

Interesting. I saw the original story but not the follow up. I met
Petrovich once and he seemed like a reasonable guy. Maybe not.
Something is definitely wrong with that whole incident and I hope it
gets adjudicated in an intelligent manner.

It's not an isolated case. Here's a similar case from 1997.

http://www.getmadd.com/daytonaarrest.htm

Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:53:48 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 23:36:24 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


The problem with these kinds of news reports is that you don't know what
prompted the investigation initially. It might have been an open
container - there may have been visual or verbal clues - could be
anything. I was stopped once after a 24 hour shift when we had a rash
of medical incidents and I was the only available medic - I had maybe
half hour of sleep or so and was stopped on the way home - I guess I was
less than driving a straight line. Everything came back negative, but
the cop was still suspicious, but he called the Chief and he explained
the situation - he came out, I parked the car and the Chief took me home
from there.

You just can't have an opinion based on incomplete information.

Times may be a-changing. Here in NJ, we have Maggie's Law, which allows
sleep deprived drivers to be charged with vehicular homicide if any one
is killed because of a drowsy driver. There have been studies
demonstrating that people who have been awake for 24 hours are impaired
to the same level as someone with a blood alcohol level of .10. Which
raises all sorts of interesting liability issues:

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news...8/12/31404.htm

Believe me - I know from sleep deprivation and driving. Ashamed to
admit it, but it's true.

And I think it should be treated the same as drunk driving - the
results are the same.

Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 08:01:29 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


http://www.insurancejournal.com/news...8/12/31404.htm

Believe me - I know from sleep deprivation and driving. Ashamed to admit
it, but it's true.

Haven't we all? I have mixed emotions about the law, however. It seems
to me, a public service campaign citing the dangers of drowsy driving
might have been a better way to go. Vehicular homicide seems a little
harsh for someone who may not even know he has broken a law, let alone
know the dangers of drowsy driving.

And I think it should be treated the same as drunk driving - the results
are the same.

I can't deny that. Yet, while there are people who have never tasted
alcohol, let alone driven drunk, I'll bet there are few who haven't
pushed the envelope when it comes to drowsy driving. Still, people are
dying because of our stupidity.

I wonder how long it will be before liability for sleep deprivation hits
the workplace. Working in the oil field, I can remember some very long
hours, adding danger to the already risky job. I still have all my
fingers, but sometimes I wonder how I retained them. ;-)

Pelosi, Friedman, Soros, et. al
 

On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 07:35:20 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 08:01:29 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


http://www.insurancejournal.com/news...8/12/31404.htm

Believe me - I know from sleep deprivation and driving. Ashamed to admit
it, but it's true.

Haven't we all? I have mixed emotions about the law, however. It seems
to me, a public service campaign citing the dangers of drowsy driving
might have been a better way to go. Vehicular homicide seems a little
harsh for someone who may not even know he has broken a law, let alone
know the dangers of drowsy driving.

Good point.

And I think it should be treated the same as drunk driving - the results
are the same.

I can't deny that. Yet, while there are people who have never tasted
alcohol, let alone driven drunk, I'll bet there are few who haven't
pushed the envelope when it comes to drowsy driving. Still, people are
dying because of our stupidity.

Also a good point. I've often wondered if it's because our society has
become so complex that we can't help but be distracted in one way or
another.

At the Battle of Hue, I was up for 36 hours straight and finally
collapsed - flat out collapsed and woke up in Danang a day later -
have no idea how I got there. I know I walked out to the LZ for
evacuation because I was told I did - don't remember anything about it
though and about half of the time I was there.

Not a thing.

I wonder how long it will be before liability for sleep deprivation hits
the workplace. Working in the oil field, I can remember some very long
hours, adding danger to the already risky job. I still have all my
fingers, but sometimes I wonder how I retained them. ;-)

Oh - we could swap stories I'll bet.

I damn near fell off a production platform I was so freakin' tired -
lucky an oil worker was right there and grabbed me before I wandered
off the side. :)

Damn - now that I think about it...

I'm going to take a nap.... :)