User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 7:38:41 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which amendment prohibits .gov from infringing on your right to sleep in a car while shitfaced? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Physical control DUIs in a legally parked and not running car are BS. Fortunately in my area the court will accept an affirmative defense that you realized you were too drunk to drive and parked it in the interest of public safety. That said if it came to my attention I would still make the arrest for the following reasons: 1) It is not a Constitutional violation despite how stupid and illogical the law is, and 2) If it came to the attention of my superiors that I had PC for a DUI arrest, physical control or not, and did not make the arrest I would get beefed for failure to act/investigate/whatever. I'm not riding a 10 day suspension/firing/whatever for some dude I don't know who can't call a taxi. Sorry. I sincerely do wish you luck arguing the aforementioned affirmative defense. A reasonable solution would be to allow the cops to throw drunks who weren't actually driving in the back seat, drive them home, and voucher their car keys for pick up at the precinct the next day. But we can't do that because there was probably one time, somewhere, someone did that and the guy got a second key and went driving and killed a schoolbus full of nuns and a family of ducks crossing the road and that is somehow the police's fault for not predicting the future and they no doubt paid out millions of dollars in civil court and terrified administrators everywhere. So you are more than willing to sign a guy up for a shit load of expenses knowing that the case will be dropped because the person was acting in the interest of public safety? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Is there probable cause for a DUI arrest? Then yes, I will make that arrest 100% of the time in the interests of my own career survival. I have no discretion in DV arrests by law, and I effectively have no discretion in DUI arrests by administrative fiat and discipline. Am I supposed to feel bad about making an arrest on probable cause or something? That's my fucking job. The person to be arrested has to actually do something to get arrested, not my fault that they're ignorant of/chose to ignore the retarded physical control laws in place, and it is also not my fault I will get disciplined for exercising discretion in such an instance. I'll sign a petition and cast a vote to change physical control laws if you place one in front of me. I don't sleep drunk in my car so I'm not gonna go start one myself, not that big a deal. If your expecting me to risk my livelihood so you can sleep drunk in your car when it's illegal... sorry. Molon dental plan. But gun laws.are different, you won't enforce bans. Am I right? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Which amendment prohibits .gov from infringing on your right to sleep in a car while shitfaced? I'm going to go with the 4th on this one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 7:41:31 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What a pile of hippocritical bullshit. You're a chump. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Physical control DUIs in a legally parked and not running car are BS. Fortunately in my area the court will accept an affirmative defense that you realized you were too drunk to drive and parked it in the interest of public safety. That said if it came to my attention I would still make the arrest for the following reasons: 1) It is not a Constitutional violation despite how stupid and illogical the law is, and 2) If it came to the attention of my superiors that I had PC for a DUI arrest, physical control or not, and did not make the arrest I would get beefed for failure to act/investigate/whatever. I'm not riding a 10 day suspension/firing/whatever for some dude I don't know who can't call a taxi. Sorry. I sincerely do wish you luck arguing the aforementioned affirmative defense. A reasonable solution would be to allow the cops to throw drunks who weren't actually driving in the back seat, drive them home, and voucher their car keys for pick up at the precinct the next day. But we can't do that because there was probably one time, somewhere, someone did that and the guy got a second key and went driving and killed a schoolbus full of nuns and a family of ducks crossing the road and that is somehow the police's fault for not predicting the future and they no doubt paid out millions of dollars in civil court and terrified administrators everywhere. So you are more than willing to sign a guy up for a shit load of expenses knowing that the case will be dropped because the person was acting in the interest of public safety? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Is there probable cause for a DUI arrest? Then yes, I will make that arrest 100% of the time in the interests of my own career survival. I have no discretion in DV arrests by law, and I effectively have no discretion in DUI arrests by administrative fiat and discipline. Am I supposed to feel bad about making an arrest on probable cause or something? That's my fucking job. The person to be arrested has to actually do something to get arrested, not my fault that they're ignorant of/chose to ignore the retarded physical control laws in place, and it is also not my fault I will get disciplined for exercising discretion in such an instance. I'll sign a petition and cast a vote to change physical control laws if you place one in front of me. I don't sleep drunk in my car so I'm not gonna go start one myself, not that big a deal. If your expecting me to risk my livelihood so you can sleep drunk in your car when it's illegal... sorry. What a pile of hippocritical bullshit. You're a chump. Maybe, but I'm a chump with a great dental plan and I know how to spell hypocritical, so that puts me a couple levels above someone who can't even figure it out with the entire internet at their fingertips.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 7:42:28 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can see both sides of this. Drunk guy is sleeping it off.......cops are being dicks. Cool cops let the sleep it off. Drunk guy wakes up a few minutes later and decides he is OK to drive. Drunk guy hurts himself or somebody else in an accident. Everybody sues the cops for leaving a drunk guy in control of a running vehicle. So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 7:53:54 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm going to go with the 4th on this one. Sorry - I guess I should have said "on publicly accessible property where no parking ordinances are in effect". |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 7:56:08 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I can see both sides of this. Drunk guy is sleeping it off.......cops are being dicks. Cool cops let the sleep it off. Drunk guy wakes up a few minutes later and decides he is OK to drive. Drunk guy hurts himself or somebody else in an accident. Everybody sues the cops for leaving a drunk guy in control of a running vehicle. So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 8:05:04 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can see both sides of this. Drunk guy is sleeping it off.......cops are being dicks. Cool cops let the sleep it off. Drunk guy wakes up a few minutes later and decides he is OK to drive. Drunk guy hurts himself or somebody else in an accident. Everybody sues the cops for leaving a drunk guy in control of a running vehicle. So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ No, by and large the public just want to be left alone. Most people don't give a damn about a drunk sleeping it off in his car. In fact, I think most people would much prefer that as opposed to the same drunk deciding to just go ahead and chance it because the consequences of driving or sleeping are exactly the same. What a stupid fucking law. ETA: The only ones who care are the municipalities that can snag some sweet DUI fines and the hall monitor types. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 8:44:35 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe, but I'm a chump with a great dental plan and I know how to spell hypocritical, so that puts me a couple levels above someone who can't even figure it out with the entire internet at their fingertips.... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Physical control DUIs in a legally parked and not running car are BS. Fortunately in my area the court will accept an affirmative defense that you realized you were too drunk to drive and parked it in the interest of public safety. That said if it came to my attention I would still make the arrest for the following reasons: 1) It is not a Constitutional violation despite how stupid and illogical the law is, and 2) If it came to the attention of my superiors that I had PC for a DUI arrest, physical control or not, and did not make the arrest I would get beefed for failure to act/investigate/whatever. I'm not riding a 10 day suspension/firing/whatever for some dude I don't know who can't call a taxi. Sorry. I sincerely do wish you luck arguing the aforementioned affirmative defense. A reasonable solution would be to allow the cops to throw drunks who weren't actually driving in the back seat, drive them home, and voucher their car keys for pick up at the precinct the next day. But we can't do that because there was probably one time, somewhere, someone did that and the guy got a second key and went driving and killed a schoolbus full of nuns and a family of ducks crossing the road and that is somehow the police's fault for not predicting the future and they no doubt paid out millions of dollars in civil court and terrified administrators everywhere. So you are more than willing to sign a guy up for a shit load of expenses knowing that the case will be dropped because the person was acting in the interest of public safety? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Is there probable cause for a DUI arrest? Then yes, I will make that arrest 100% of the time in the interests of my own career survival. I have no discretion in DV arrests by law, and I effectively have no discretion in DUI arrests by administrative fiat and discipline. Am I supposed to feel bad about making an arrest on probable cause or something? That's my fucking job. The person to be arrested has to actually do something to get arrested, not my fault that they're ignorant of/chose to ignore the retarded physical control laws in place, and it is also not my fault I will get disciplined for exercising discretion in such an instance. I'll sign a petition and cast a vote to change physical control laws if you place one in front of me. I don't sleep drunk in my car so I'm not gonna go start one myself, not that big a deal. If your expecting me to risk my livelihood so you can sleep drunk in your car when it's illegal... sorry. What a pile of hippocritical bullshit. You're a chump. Maybe, but I'm a chump with a great dental plan and I know how to spell hypocritical, so that puts me a couple levels above someone who can't even figure it out with the entire internet at their fingertips.... You're willing to compromise the freedom of your fellow man for a paycheck, even though you disagree with the validity of a highly questionable/bs law. You justify this because you're doing it " in the interests of my own career survival". That speaks volumes about you as a person. As far as what "level" you're on? I'm thinking you'd be perfectly comfortable having HIllary's belt buckle pressed against your forehead a couple times a day as long as it earned you a great dental plan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 8:56:48 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're willing to compromise the freedom of your fellow man for a paycheck, even though you disagree with the validity of a highly questionable/bs law. You justify this because you're doing it " in the interests of my own career survival". That speaks volumes about you as a person. As far as what "level" you're on? I'm thinking you'd be perfectly comfortable having HIllary's belt buckle pressed against your forehead a couple times a day as long as it earned you a great dental plan. Compromising the freedom of my "fellow man" is literally my job description. That's what I get paid to do genius, determine if someone has violated the law or not and take them to jail for doing it if they did. Congratulations on figuring something incredibly obvious out? Sorry that triggers you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 9:52:29 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1. In Florida, you can get a DUI on private property - as in driving your tractor in the middle of your fenced thousand acre field. This assumes, of course, that the police have a legal way to get to where you are. 2. A drunk is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. His ignition key is in his shoe. How does a cop get RS for a nonconsensual encounter (which obviously commences when the cop raps on the window with his flashlight)? Assuming RS (a big assumption), how does he get PC for an arrest without the key, which cannot be discovered by the pat-down of outer clothing authorized by Terry? How does he get the key without PC for an arrest or search? 3. A drunk is asleep behind the wheel of his car, which is legally parked, with the motor running. What is the RS for the nonconsensual encounter that leads to PC for a DUI? 4. A sober person is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. What RS exists for a nonconsensual encounter? 5. Objectively, how does a sleeping drunk differ from a sleeping sober person when observed through a rolled-up car window? I asked something similair a couple pages ago, no real answer. Valid questions that should be answered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 10:03:52 PM EDT
[#10]
That sucks. I bet your friend can beat this case but I wouldn't call it a win, lawyers ain't cheap.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 10:48:14 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1. In Florida, you can get a DUI on private property - as in driving your tractor in the middle of your fenced thousand acre field. This assumes, of course, that the police have a legal way to get to where you are. 2. A drunk is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. His ignition key is in his shoe. How does a cop get RS for a nonconsensual encounter (which obviously commences when the cop raps on the window with his flashlight)? Assuming RS (a big assumption), how does he get PC for an arrest without the key, which cannot be discovered by the pat-down of outer clothing authorized by Terry? How does he get the key without PC for an arrest or search? 3. A drunk is asleep behind the wheel of his car, which is legally parked, with the motor running. What is the RS for the nonconsensual encounter that leads to PC for a DUI? 4. A sober person is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. What RS exists for a nonconsensual encounter? 5. Objectively, how does a sleeping drunk differ from a sleeping sober person when observed through a rolled-up car window? 1. Agree, and why would I want to mess with that? 2, 3, 4 and 5 to some extent. I don't go looking for these, but I have gotten calls from businesses about people doing all of these. 3. Passed out behind the wheel: I have a report from several years ago where I detoxed the father of a then pro foot ball kicker who had played college ball (I didn't recognize the name, but people at the jail did) where when I woke him up and identified myself to him, "his reply was "fuck you" in a thick eastern European accent". I could have done a DUI on him, but detoxed him after he could not call someone to come get him. 5. Good point, cracked window you may smell the "alcohol emitting from his breath and or person", open beer or liquor bottles in the interior, the fact that their pants are unzipped or they have pissed themselves etc. For the record, I hate doing DUI's, because they are time consuming and paperwork intensive for what they are. I can complete a DV battery arrest in less time and with less paperwork, but DUI's come with the job. I will do them, but often the borderline or quasi DUI's will be given a chance to call someone or get a detox hold instead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 10:54:11 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If the car was not on he would have been fine probably. However, I would take this one to court a good lawyer could help probably |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 10:54:46 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1. Agree, and why would I want to mess with that? 2, 3, 4 and 5 to some extent. I don't go looking for these, but I have gotten calls from businesses about people doing all of these. 3. Passed out behind the wheel: I have a report from several years ago where I detoxed the father of a then pro foot ball kicker who had played college ball (I didn't recognize the name, but people at the jail did) where when I woke him up and identified myself to him, "his reply was "fuck you" in a thick eastern European accent". I could have done a DUI on him, but detoxed him after he could not call someone to come get him. 5. Good point, cracked window you may smell the "alcohol emitting from his breath and or person", open beer or liquor bottles in the interior, the fact that their pants are unzipped or they have pissed themselves etc. For the record, I hate doing DUI's, because they are time consuming and paperwork intensive for what they are. I can complete a DV battery arrest in less time and with less paperwork, but DUI's come with the job. I will do them, but often the borderline or quasi DUI's will be given a chance to call someone or get a detox hold instead. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
1. In Florida, you can get a DUI on private property - as in driving your tractor in the middle of your fenced thousand acre field. This assumes, of course, that the police have a legal way to get to where you are. 2. A drunk is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. His ignition key is in his shoe. How does a cop get RS for a nonconsensual encounter (which obviously commences when the cop raps on the window with his flashlight)? Assuming RS (a big assumption), how does he get PC for an arrest without the key, which cannot be discovered by the pat-down of outer clothing authorized by Terry? How does he get the key without PC for an arrest or search? 3. A drunk is asleep behind the wheel of his car, which is legally parked, with the motor running. What is the RS for the nonconsensual encounter that leads to PC for a DUI? 4. A sober person is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. What RS exists for a nonconsensual encounter? 5. Objectively, how does a sleeping drunk differ from a sleeping sober person when observed through a rolled-up car window? 1. Agree, and why would I want to mess with that? 2, 3, 4 and 5 to some extent. I don't go looking for these, but I have gotten calls from businesses about people doing all of these. 3. Passed out behind the wheel: I have a report from several years ago where I detoxed the father of a then pro foot ball kicker who had played college ball (I didn't recognize the name, but people at the jail did) where when I woke him up and identified myself to him, "his reply was "fuck you" in a thick eastern European accent". I could have done a DUI on him, but detoxed him after he could not call someone to come get him. 5. Good point, cracked window you may smell the "alcohol emitting from his breath and or person", open beer or liquor bottles in the interior, the fact that their pants are unzipped or they have pissed themselves etc. For the record, I hate doing DUI's, because they are time consuming and paperwork intensive for what they are. I can complete a DV battery arrest in less time and with less paperwork, but DUI's come with the job. I will do them, but often the borderline or quasi DUI's will be given a chance to call someone or get a detox hold instead. Unrelated, but it seems to me like doing DUI arrests would actually be a bit easier because they're been lawyered to death over the years. At this point, I'd figure that the ever present lawyering would produce what amounts to copy/paste reports to cover all the bases. I can't imagine that it's that much work these days. And I don't know about you, but every minute spent doing paperwork (especially if it's been almost reduced to Mad Libs form-filling) is a minute I don't have to spend doing real work. 
I guess every guy sees it differently. I'm on the outside looking in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 10:56:18 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That sucks. I bet your friend can beat this case but I wouldn't call it a win, lawyers ain't cheap. Quote HistoryQuoted:
That sucks. I bet your friend can beat this case but I wouldn't call it a win, lawyers ain't cheap. I doubt it. APC laws are written such a way that they are almost impossible to beat. Quoted:
snip All of the above applies to me as well, I've never arrested anybody for sleeping it off in the passenger seat. I HAVE arrested people for pulling over on the highway shoulder to sleep it off once they were halfway home and didn't think they could make the other half, or they were trying to go 50 miles south and ended up passed out in a parking lot off the side of the highway 50 miles north. All those people usually blow well over .15 by the way. Hell, I even arrested a girl for DWI for moving her car forward in the driveway so her ride home from the bar could pull in. Granted, your front yard is privately owned but PUBLICLY accessible and she almost crashed her car through the neighbors house.... But I never have and never will arrest a guy for sleeping in the passengers seat of his car in the bar parking lot, car running or not. What happens if you let someone "sleep it off" but they wake up soon after, drive home, and kill someone on the way? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 11:13:44 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Unrelated, but it seems to me like doing DUI arrests would actually be a bit easier because they're been lawyered to death over the years. At this point, I'd figure that the ever present lawyering would produce what amounts to copy/paste reports to cover all the bases. I can't imagine that it's that much work these days. And I don't know about you, but every minute spent doing paperwork (especially if it's been almost reduced to Mad Libs form-filling) is a minute I don't have to spend doing real work.
I guess every guy sees it differently. I'm on the outside looking in. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. In Florida, you can get a DUI on private property - as in driving your tractor in the middle of your fenced thousand acre field. This assumes, of course, that the police have a legal way to get to where you are. 2. A drunk is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. His ignition key is in his shoe. How does a cop get RS for a nonconsensual encounter (which obviously commences when the cop raps on the window with his flashlight)? Assuming RS (a big assumption), how does he get PC for an arrest without the key, which cannot be discovered by the pat-down of outer clothing authorized by Terry? How does he get the key without PC for an arrest or search? 3. A drunk is asleep behind the wheel of his car, which is legally parked, with the motor running. What is the RS for the nonconsensual encounter that leads to PC for a DUI? 4. A sober person is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. What RS exists for a nonconsensual encounter? 5. Objectively, how does a sleeping drunk differ from a sleeping sober person when observed through a rolled-up car window? 1. Agree, and why would I want to mess with that? 2, 3, 4 and 5 to some extent. I don't go looking for these, but I have gotten calls from businesses about people doing all of these. 3. Passed out behind the wheel: I have a report from several years ago where I detoxed the father of a then pro foot ball kicker who had played college ball (I didn't recognize the name, but people at the jail did) where when I woke him up and identified myself to him, "his reply was "fuck you" in a thick eastern European accent". I could have done a DUI on him, but detoxed him after he could not call someone to come get him. 5. Good point, cracked window you may smell the "alcohol emitting from his breath and or person", open beer or liquor bottles in the interior, the fact that their pants are unzipped or they have pissed themselves etc. For the record, I hate doing DUI's, because they are time consuming and paperwork intensive for what they are. I can complete a DV battery arrest in less time and with less paperwork, but DUI's come with the job. I will do them, but often the borderline or quasi DUI's will be given a chance to call someone or get a detox hold instead. Unrelated, but it seems to me like doing DUI arrests would actually be a bit easier because they're been lawyered to death over the years. At this point, I'd figure that the ever present lawyering would produce what amounts to copy/paste reports to cover all the bases. I can't imagine that it's that much work these days. And I don't know about you, but every minute spent doing paperwork (especially if it's been almost reduced to Mad Libs form-filling) is a minute I don't have to spend doing real work.
I guess every guy sees it differently. I'm on the outside looking in. I could see how you think that, but here is the basic steps at my agency: PC for the stop, handle the initial violation, then go into the DUI investigation. Conduct field sobriety exercises with demonstrations and performance, grade performance of the exercises. If PC exists for DUI make arrest. Secure or tow arrestees vehicle. Transport to jail. Once at jail, take them to the Intoxilyzer room and start video. Begin 20 minute observation period and read implied consent. If they burp, puke or have to piss/shit, start observation period over. Take breath samples or get a refusal. Upon results or at the time of refusal, advise of Miranda rights, Complete citation and do the Alcohol Influence Report. Seize license and issue citation which serves as hardship license pending administrative hearing with DHSMV hearing officer. Book Subject into jail. Review any in car video if it was used/available, and annotate which digital storage device it was recorded on so that you can have it down loaded for evidence. Complete offense report. The offense report will need to have detailed information on physical observations, performance and any statements made by the arrestee. If it is not in your report, good luck on bringing it up in depos or court. If a DUI or refusal, wait approximately no more than 10 days to go to the DHSMV office for a administrative hearing with a hearing officer to determine if the license will be suspended. DUI's are one of the more paperwork intensive arrests there are. If it is a DUI with a traffic crash, fuck my life. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 12:36:32 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, by and large the public just want to be left alone. Most people don't give a damn about a drunk sleeping it off in his car. In fact, I think most people would much prefer that as opposed to the same drunk deciding to just go ahead and chance it because the consequences of driving or sleeping are exactly the same. What a stupid fucking law. ETA: The only ones who care are the municipalities that can snag some sweet DUI fines and the hall monitor types. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can see both sides of this. Drunk guy is sleeping it off.......cops are being dicks. Cool cops let the sleep it off. Drunk guy wakes up a few minutes later and decides he is OK to drive. Drunk guy hurts himself or somebody else in an accident. Everybody sues the cops for leaving a drunk guy in control of a running vehicle. So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ No, by and large the public just want to be left alone. Most people don't give a damn about a drunk sleeping it off in his car. In fact, I think most people would much prefer that as opposed to the same drunk deciding to just go ahead and chance it because the consequences of driving or sleeping are exactly the same. What a stupid fucking law. ETA: The only ones who care are the municipalities that can snag some sweet DUI fines and the hall monitor types. That might be the most important statement in this entire thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 12:43:19 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I doubt it. APC laws are written such a way that they are almost impossible to beat. What happens if you let someone "sleep it off" but they wake up soon after, drive home, and kill someone on the way? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That sucks. I bet your friend can beat this case but I wouldn't call it a win, lawyers ain't cheap. I doubt it. APC laws are written such a way that they are almost impossible to beat. Quoted:
snip All of the above applies to me as well, I've never arrested anybody for sleeping it off in the passenger seat. I HAVE arrested people for pulling over on the highway shoulder to sleep it off once they were halfway home and didn't think they could make the other half, or they were trying to go 50 miles south and ended up passed out in a parking lot off the side of the highway 50 miles north. All those people usually blow well over .15 by the way. Hell, I even arrested a girl for DWI for moving her car forward in the driveway so her ride home from the bar could pull in. Granted, your front yard is privately owned but PUBLICLY accessible and she almost crashed her car through the neighbors house.... But I never have and never will arrest a guy for sleeping in the passengers seat of his car in the bar parking lot, car running or not. What happens if you let someone "sleep it off" but they wake up soon after, drive home, and kill someone on the way? Are there potential repercussions to an officer who lets the "potential" drunk call a cab/friend and goes home? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 12:55:47 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Guy I know went to some kind of festival/party in Indiana with some friends. They took his vehicle because he has an SUV but another guy agreed to be DD. My friend couldn't find the other guys so he climbed in the cargo area, remote started it and went to sleep. He sleeps in the back regularly when hunting so he thought no big deal. About 5 am a cop wakes him up beating on the glass. Friend explains that he wasn't driving and that the vehicle hadn't moved in 12 hours but the cop gives him a breathalyzer anyway. He blows a .086 and the cop takes him to jail.  Did he have the keys? Same as if he were sitting behind the wheel legally speaking. For all the cop knew the drunk just got tired so he pulled over to sleep, or could wake up and drive off. Was he drunk? Yes. Was he in a vehicle? Yes. Did he have actual possession of the keys? Yes. Hell, he even had the engine running. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 12:57:45 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My friend was in socal and parked on the beach for a fire/party. He put his keys in a ziploc bag and buried them in the sand under his jeep and still got a DUI for sleeping in passenger seat. DUI for keys in ignition doesn't surprise me at all. In your friends case it was a bad arrest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 12:59:23 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, by and large the public just want to be left alone. Most people don't give a damn about a drunk sleeping it off in his car. In fact, I think most people would much prefer that as opposed to the same drunk deciding to just go ahead and chance it because the consequences of driving or sleeping are exactly the same. What a stupid fucking law. ETA: The only ones who care are the municipalities that can snag some sweet DUI fines and the hall monitor types. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I can see both sides of this. Drunk guy is sleeping it off.......cops are being dicks. Cool cops let the sleep it off. Drunk guy wakes up a few minutes later and decides he is OK to drive. Drunk guy hurts himself or somebody else in an accident. Everybody sues the cops for leaving a drunk guy in control of a running vehicle. So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ No, by and large the public just want to be left alone. Most people don't give a damn about a drunk sleeping it off in his car. In fact, I think most people would much prefer that as opposed to the same drunk deciding to just go ahead and chance it because the consequences of driving or sleeping are exactly the same. What a stupid fucking law. ETA: The only ones who care are the municipalities that can snag some sweet DUI fines and the hall monitor types. Judging by the number of 911 calls I hear dispatched to "check the welfare" of drunk/crazy people, tattletaling about someone drinking in public, and "disturbance in progress" calls when people complain about others having the temerity to get into a loud disagreement, I must disagree with your premise. Most people, at least in urban areas, are excessively concerned with what other people are doing, and they just love dialing 3 magic numbers to dispatch somebody else to check on it so they can walk away and feel like "I did something!" without actually having to ask the nasty half-conscious transient "Hey are you ok?" and risk talking to him. I wish the general public just wanted to be left alone. It would make life much easier for everybody. Despite what some people here think I actually prefer to spend my time investigating and attempting to arrest those who actually victimize other people. 95% of my time is actually spent mollifying busybodies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 12:59:48 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No key in the ignition as it doesn't even have one. He remote started it to have the air on since it was hot and humid. In remote mode the car will not go into gear until you sit in the driver seat and manually press the start button. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Keys in ignition in a lot of places will fuck you. If he didnt have keys accessible he would have been ok. No key in the ignition as it doesn't even have one. He remote started it to have the air on since it was hot and humid. In remote mode the car will not go into gear until you sit in the driver seat and manually press the start button. So, all he had to do to take iff was jump in the drivers seat and press "go?" And the distinction between that and keys in the ignition is what exactly? As I said though, legally the car didn't even have to be running. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:01:16 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't blow. And he'll beat the charge. Wasn't "in control" of vehicle. Most states have either laws or case law that says you must be in drivers seat or in direct control. At least in Michigan "don't blow" will still land you in the jail, and get your license revoked too. Implied consent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:06:53 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: At least in Michigan "don't blow" will still land you in the jail, and get your license revoked too. Implied consent. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Don't blow. And he'll beat the charge. Wasn't "in control" of vehicle. Most states have either laws or case law that says you must be in drivers seat or in direct control. At least in Michigan "don't blow" will still land you in the jail, and get your license revoked too. Implied consent. Our DUI guys usually just get a blood warrant and don't even bother with the machine. It's more accurate, will detect DUI drugs, you can't stall, the judge determines if PC exists basically right away, and we usually release a straight up DUI with a criminal citation once the processing is completed(car gets impounded for set number of hours, no point in incarcerating a misdemeanor non violent crime) so there's not many safer places to leave a drunk than a public hospital. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:18:20 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Judging by the number of 911 calls I hear dispatched to "check the welfare" of drunk/crazy people, tattletaling about someone drinking in public, and "disturbance in progress" calls when people complain about others having the temerity to get into a loud disagreement, I must disagree with your premise. Most people, at least in urban areas, are excessively concerned with what other people are doing, and they just love dialing 3 magic numbers to dispatch somebody else to check on it so they can walk away and feel like "I did something!" without actually having to ask the nasty half-conscious transient "Hey are you ok?" and risk talking to him. I wish the general public just wanted to be left alone. It would make life much easier for everybody. Despite what some people here think I actually prefer to spend my time investigating and attempting to arrest those who actually victimize other people. 95% of my time is actually spent mollifying busybodies. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can see both sides of this. Drunk guy is sleeping it off.......cops are being dicks. Cool cops let the sleep it off. Drunk guy wakes up a few minutes later and decides he is OK to drive. Drunk guy hurts himself or somebody else in an accident. Everybody sues the cops for leaving a drunk guy in control of a running vehicle. So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ No, by and large the public just want to be left alone. Most people don't give a damn about a drunk sleeping it off in his car. In fact, I think most people would much prefer that as opposed to the same drunk deciding to just go ahead and chance it because the consequences of driving or sleeping are exactly the same. What a stupid fucking law. ETA: The only ones who care are the municipalities that can snag some sweet DUI fines and the hall monitor types. Judging by the number of 911 calls I hear dispatched to "check the welfare" of drunk/crazy people, tattletaling about someone drinking in public, and "disturbance in progress" calls when people complain about others having the temerity to get into a loud disagreement, I must disagree with your premise. Most people, at least in urban areas, are excessively concerned with what other people are doing, and they just love dialing 3 magic numbers to dispatch somebody else to check on it so they can walk away and feel like "I did something!" without actually having to ask the nasty half-conscious transient "Hey are you ok?" and risk talking to him. I wish the general public just wanted to be left alone. It would make life much easier for everybody. Despite what some people here think I actually prefer to spend my time investigating and attempting to arrest those who actually victimize other people. 95% of my time is actually spent mollifying busybodies. I've only made calls like that twice. Once when I witnessed two very drunk or disoriented people litterally stumbling back and forth from one side of the street to the other and nearly hitting one of them as he stupered out in front of my car, they were a danger to themselves and others. As it happened they were also literally right next to the fire station, as in they were stumbling around right in front of the driveway, so all that was needed to check on them would be to pop oit of the door, no need to even start a car. The second was after observing a visibly stoned women at the grocery store who was flushed red, talking a mile a minute to no one in particular, knocking things over, breathing heavy, had her eyes bugging out and who kept sniffing every few seconds in the checkout line, walk out to the parkinglot, still jabbering to herself at a mile a minute, and then get into her car and start the engine, all while still talking to noone (and no, she did not have Bluetooth), not sure what she was on, my guess was cocain, but those I have described it to said it sounded more like meth. I called in her license plate and a description of her car. She should not be operating a vehicle while high, again, she was a danger to herself and others. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:24:18 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe, but I'm a chump with a great dental plan and I know how to spell hypocritical, so that puts me a couple levels above someone who can't even figure it out with the entire internet at their fingertips.... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Physical control DUIs in a legally parked and not running car are BS. Fortunately in my area the court will accept an affirmative defense that you realized you were too drunk to drive and parked it in the interest of public safety. That said if it came to my attention I would still make the arrest for the following reasons: 1) It is not a Constitutional violation despite how stupid and illogical the law is, and 2) If it came to the attention of my superiors that I had PC for a DUI arrest, physical control or not, and did not make the arrest I would get beefed for failure to act/investigate/whatever. I'm not riding a 10 day suspension/firing/whatever for some dude I don't know who can't call a taxi. Sorry. I sincerely do wish you luck arguing the aforementioned affirmative defense. A reasonable solution would be to allow the cops to throw drunks who weren't actually driving in the back seat, drive them home, and voucher their car keys for pick up at the precinct the next day. But we can't do that because there was probably one time, somewhere, someone did that and the guy got a second key and went driving and killed a schoolbus full of nuns and a family of ducks crossing the road and that is somehow the police's fault for not predicting the future and they no doubt paid out millions of dollars in civil court and terrified administrators everywhere. So you are more than willing to sign a guy up for a shit load of expenses knowing that the case will be dropped because the person was acting in the interest of public safety? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Is there probable cause for a DUI arrest? Then yes, I will make that arrest 100% of the time in the interests of my own career survival. I have no discretion in DV arrests by law, and I effectively have no discretion in DUI arrests by administrative fiat and discipline. Am I supposed to feel bad about making an arrest on probable cause or something? That's my fucking job. The person to be arrested has to actually do something to get arrested, not my fault that they're ignorant of/chose to ignore the retarded physical control laws in place, and it is also not my fault I will get disciplined for exercising discretion in such an instance. I'll sign a petition and cast a vote to change physical control laws if you place one in front of me. I don't sleep drunk in my car so I'm not gonna go start one myself, not that big a deal. If your expecting me to risk my livelihood so you can sleep drunk in your car when it's illegal... sorry. What a pile of hippocritical bullshit. You're a chump. Maybe, but I'm a chump with a great dental plan and I know how to spell hypocritical, so that puts me a couple levels above someone who can't even figure it out with the entire internet at their fingertips.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:26:08 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did he have the keys? Same as if he were sitting behind the wheel legally speaking. For all the cop knew the drunk just got tired so he pulled over to sleep, or could wake up and drive off. Was he drunk? Yes. Was he in a vehicle? Yes. Did he have actual possession of the keys? Yes. Hell, he even had the engine running. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Guy I know went to some kind of festival/party in Indiana with some friends. They took his vehicle because he has an SUV but another guy agreed to be DD. My friend couldn't find the other guys so he climbed in the cargo area, remote started it and went to sleep. He sleeps in the back regularly when hunting so he thought no big deal. About 5 am a cop wakes him up beating on the glass. Friend explains that he wasn't driving and that the vehicle hadn't moved in 12 hours but the cop gives him a breathalyzer anyway. He blows a .086 and the cop takes him to jail. Did he have the keys? Same as if he were sitting behind the wheel legally speaking. For all the cop knew the drunk just got tired so he pulled over to sleep, or could wake up and drive off. Was he drunk? Yes. Was he in a vehicle? Yes. Did he have actual possession of the keys? Yes. Hell, he even had the engine running.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:27:20 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would place someone with integrity and personal honor over someone who can't spell or use the internet. I can see where someone with low personal character would not, however. What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:31:24 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I would place someone with integrity and personal honor over someone who can't spell or use the internet. I can see where someone with low personal character would not, however. What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:35:57 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: SC11B, valiant enforcer of stupid laws. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I would place someone with integrity and personal honor over someone who can't spell or use the internet. I can see where someone with low personal character would not, however. What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? The test for whether or not a law should be obeyed used to be whether or not it was Constitutional, I see now the actual metric is "Does SmilingBandit and the rest of the GD "I do what I want!" brigade think it's stupid." I have been viewing things through a false lens this whole time, the scales have now fallen from my eyes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:39:12 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The test for whether or not a law should be obeyed used to be whether or not it was Constitutional, I see now the actual metric is "Does SmilingBandit and the rest of the GD "I do what I want!" brigade think it's stupid." I have been viewing things through a false lens this whole time, the scales have now fallen from my eyes. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I would place someone with integrity and personal honor over someone who can't spell or use the internet. I can see where someone with low personal character would not, however. What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? The test for whether or not a law should be obeyed used to be whether or not it was Constitutional, I see now the actual metric is "Does SmilingBandit and the rest of the GD "I do what I want!" brigade think it's stupid." I have been viewing things through a false lens this whole time, the scales have now fallen from my eyes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:40:05 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I would place someone with integrity and personal honor over someone who can't spell or use the internet. I can see where someone with low personal character would not, however. What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:40:47 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are there potential repercussions to an officer who lets the "potential" drunk call a cab/friend and goes home? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That sucks. I bet your friend can beat this case but I wouldn't call it a win, lawyers ain't cheap. I doubt it. APC laws are written such a way that they are almost impossible to beat. Quoted:
snip All of the above applies to me as well, I've never arrested anybody for sleeping it off in the passenger seat. I HAVE arrested people for pulling over on the highway shoulder to sleep it off once they were halfway home and didn't think they could make the other half, or they were trying to go 50 miles south and ended up passed out in a parking lot off the side of the highway 50 miles north. All those people usually blow well over .15 by the way. Hell, I even arrested a girl for DWI for moving her car forward in the driveway so her ride home from the bar could pull in. Granted, your front yard is privately owned but PUBLICLY accessible and she almost crashed her car through the neighbors house.... But I never have and never will arrest a guy for sleeping in the passengers seat of his car in the bar parking lot, car running or not. What happens if you let someone "sleep it off" but they wake up soon after, drive home, and kill someone on the way? Are there potential repercussions to an officer who lets the "potential" drunk call a cab/friend and goes home? Waking the potential drunk up and making him call a cab/uber/friend to pick him up is light years different than letting them sleep in the car... With the keys where they could wake up, still be intoxicated, and drive home. What happens if this happens and said driver kills someone? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:41:21 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If he has access to the keys, he is in control of the car. His best bet would have been to hand over the keys to someone else, then sleep it off. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If the car was not on he would have been fine probably. However, I would take this one to court a good lawyer could help probably If he has access to the keys, he is in control of the car. His best bet would have been to hand over the keys to someone else, then sleep it off. 
THAT'S what the law means when it says "Drunk In-Possession Of Keys!" @OP - Lawyer time, this might make a good pay day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:44:09 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The test for whether or not a law should be obeyed used to be whether or not it was Constitutional, I see now the actual metric is "Does SmilingBandit and the rest of the GD "I do what I want!" brigade think it's stupid." I have been viewing things through a false lens this whole time, the scales have now fallen from my eyes. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I would place someone with integrity and personal honor over someone who can't spell or use the internet. I can see where someone with low personal character would not, however. What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? The test for whether or not a law should be obeyed used to be whether or not it was Constitutional, I see now the actual metric is "Does SmilingBandit and the rest of the GD "I do what I want!" brigade think it's stupid." I have been viewing things through a false lens this whole time, the scales have now fallen from my eyes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:44:25 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Waking the potential drunk up and making him call a cab/uber/friend to pick him up is light years different than letting them sleep in the car... With the keys where they could wake up, still be intoxicated, and drive home. What happens if this happens and said driver kills someone? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:45:55 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sure the law varies state to state, in Missouri he would have been screwed no matter what if he had the keys in his possession. Oh, and for all of the "refuse to blow" comments... That's an automatic one year revocation AND conviction. Can you imagine the havoc we would have if we started letting people get away with passengering around drunk? He wasn't driving. He doesn't have to blow if he's not driving. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:47:46 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We all make our own choices. You have stated what is important to you a couple of times already in your posts. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I would place someone with integrity and personal honor over someone who can't spell or use the internet. I can see where someone with low personal character would not, however. What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? I have indeed stated I am unwilling to risk career discipline and financial instability in order to do a solid for some stranger who decided to get drunk and sleep in his car, a violation of a stupid, yet ENTIRELY CONSTITUTIONAL law enacted by the elected representatives of most states in the union. My paycheck is more important to me than cutting someone I don't know a break on a crime they committed. Furthermore, this situation is hypothetical to begin with, as I have never actually arrested someone for sleeping, while drunk, in a legally parked car, and can't even imagine a situation where I would come about that knowledge(see FLA1A's post on the subject.) I fail to see how that tells you, a complete stranger, a single fucking thing about my personal integrity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:49:00 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What happens if he sees me drunk in the bar and I have keys in my pocket? I could walk out and go drive drunk.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Waking the potential drunk up and making him call a cab/uber/friend to pick him up is light years different than letting them sleep in the car... With the keys where they could wake up, still be intoxicated, and drive home. What happens if this happens and said driver kills someone?
Clearly the only solution is to make it illegal to drink if you own a car, there's just too many loopholes for people to slip through. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:50:51 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have indeed stated I am unwilling to risk career discipline and financial instability in order to do a solid for some stranger who decided to get drunk and sleep in his car, a violation of a stupid, yet ENTIRELY CONSTITUTIONAL law enacted by the elected representatives of most states in the union. My paycheck is more important to me than cutting someone I don't know a break on a crime they committed. Furthermore, this situation is hypothetical to begin with, as I have never actually arrested someone for sleeping, while drunk, in a legally parked car, and can't even imagine a situation where I would come about that knowledge(see FLA1A's post on the subject.) I fail to see how that tells you, a complete stranger, a single fucking thing about my personal integrity. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would place someone with integrity and personal honor over someone who can't spell or use the internet. I can see where someone with low personal character would not, however. What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? I have indeed stated I am unwilling to risk career discipline and financial instability in order to do a solid for some stranger who decided to get drunk and sleep in his car, a violation of a stupid, yet ENTIRELY CONSTITUTIONAL law enacted by the elected representatives of most states in the union. My paycheck is more important to me than cutting someone I don't know a break on a crime they committed. Furthermore, this situation is hypothetical to begin with, as I have never actually arrested someone for sleeping, while drunk, in a legally parked car, and can't even imagine a situation where I would come about that knowledge(see FLA1A's post on the subject.) I fail to see how that tells you, a complete stranger, a single fucking thing about my personal integrity. <Removed -40xb> |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:59:18 AM EDT
[#40]
This is a perfect example of legislators not considering unintended consequences. Sitting or sleeping is the equivalent of driving, so you might as well drive.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 2:09:53 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ <Removed -40xb> Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would place someone with integrity and personal honor over someone who can't spell or use the internet. I can see where someone with low personal character would not, however. What exactly have you gleaned about my character and personal honor from this thread? That I refuse to exercise discretion for the benefit of complete strangers when faced with probable cause that a(constitutional, but stupid) law has been violated because exercising such discretion will have professional consequences? I have indeed stated I am unwilling to risk career discipline and financial instability in order to do a solid for some stranger who decided to get drunk and sleep in his car, a violation of a stupid, yet ENTIRELY CONSTITUTIONAL law enacted by the elected representatives of most states in the union. My paycheck is more important to me than cutting someone I don't know a break on a crime they committed. Furthermore, this situation is hypothetical to begin with, as I have never actually arrested someone for sleeping, while drunk, in a legally parked car, and can't even imagine a situation where I would come about that knowledge(see FLA1A's post on the subject.) I fail to see how that tells you, a complete stranger, a single fucking thing about my personal integrity. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ <Removed -40xb> I don't think the font is big enough. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 2:13:46 AM EDT
[#42]
Had a friend get a pubic intox and DUI arrest in his own front yard. Keys were in the ignition, he was sitting behind the wheel with a bottle in his hand, when the cop showed up. The public into stuck due to it being a dry city. The DUI was dropped as we could prove the truck could not be driven. The intake and carb were sitting on the ground next to the truck.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 2:37:58 AM EDT
[#43]
Nah...you're buddy is good an fucked. You put the key in the damned ignition, the cops say the vehicle is capable of being put into motion and you're in charge of it.
Don't ask me how I know about that shit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 2:48:18 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nah...you're buddy is good an fucked. You put the key in the damned ignition, the cops say the vehicle is capable of being put into motion and you're in charge of it. Don't ask me how I know about that shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 4:00:35 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What happens if he sees me drunk in the bar and I have keys in my pocket? I could walk out and go drive drunk.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Waking the potential drunk up and making him call a cab/uber/friend to pick him up is light years different than letting them sleep in the car... With the keys where they could wake up, still be intoxicated, and drive home. What happens if this happens and said driver kills someone?
In that case. I hope you don't have a dog. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 4:08:51 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Unrelated, but it seems to me like doing DUI arrests would actually be a bit easier because they're been lawyered to death over the years. At this point, I'd figure that the ever present lawyering would produce what amounts to copy/paste reports to cover all the bases. I can't imagine that it's that much work these days. And I don't know about you, but every minute spent doing paperwork (especially if it's been almost reduced to Mad Libs form-filling) is a minute I don't have to spend doing real work.
I guess every guy sees it differently. I'm on the outside looking in. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
1. In Florida, you can get a DUI on private property - as in driving your tractor in the middle of your fenced thousand acre field. This assumes, of course, that the police have a legal way to get to where you are. 2. A drunk is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. His ignition key is in his shoe. How does a cop get RS for a nonconsensual encounter (which obviously commences when the cop raps on the window with his flashlight)? Assuming RS (a big assumption), how does he get PC for an arrest without the key, which cannot be discovered by the pat-down of outer clothing authorized by Terry? How does he get the key without PC for an arrest or search? 3. A drunk is asleep behind the wheel of his car, which is legally parked, with the motor running. What is the RS for the nonconsensual encounter that leads to PC for a DUI? 4. A sober person is asleep in the back seat of his car, which is legally parked. What RS exists for a nonconsensual encounter? 5. Objectively, how does a sleeping drunk differ from a sleeping sober person when observed through a rolled-up car window? 1. Agree, and why would I want to mess with that? 2, 3, 4 and 5 to some extent. I don't go looking for these, but I have gotten calls from businesses about people doing all of these. 3. Passed out behind the wheel: I have a report from several years ago where I detoxed the father of a then pro foot ball kicker who had played college ball (I didn't recognize the name, but people at the jail did) where when I woke him up and identified myself to him, "his reply was "fuck you" in a thick eastern European accent". I could have done a DUI on him, but detoxed him after he could not call someone to come get him. 5. Good point, cracked window you may smell the "alcohol emitting from his breath and or person", open beer or liquor bottles in the interior, the fact that their pants are unzipped or they have pissed themselves etc. For the record, I hate doing DUI's, because they are time consuming and paperwork intensive for what they are. I can complete a DV battery arrest in less time and with less paperwork, but DUI's come with the job. I will do them, but often the borderline or quasi DUI's will be given a chance to call someone or get a detox hold instead. Unrelated, but it seems to me like doing DUI arrests would actually be a bit easier because they're been lawyered to death over the years. At this point, I'd figure that the ever present lawyering would produce what amounts to copy/paste reports to cover all the bases. I can't imagine that it's that much work these days. And I don't know about you, but every minute spent doing paperwork (especially if it's been almost reduced to Mad Libs form-filling) is a minute I don't have to spend doing real work.
I guess every guy sees it differently. I'm on the outside looking in. Many, maybe most, lawyers who specialize in DUIs are douchebags whose idea of lawyering is to beg, lie, and wheedle for continuances until no one remembers anything about the case. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 4:43:00 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can see both sides of this. Drunk guy is sleeping it off.......cops are being dicks. Cool cops let the sleep it off. Drunk guy wakes up a few minutes later and decides he is OK to drive. Drunk guy hurts himself or somebody else in an accident. Everybody sues the cops for leaving a drunk guy in control of a running vehicle. So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ Then get the guy sleeping it off for a PI and everybody wins! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 11:31:16 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All of the above applies to me as well, I've never arrested anybody for sleeping it off in the passenger seat. I HAVE arrested people for pulling over on the highway shoulder to sleep it off once they were halfway home and didn't think they could make the other half, or they were trying to go 50 miles south and ended up passed out in a parking lot off the side of the highway 50 miles north. All those people usually blow well over .15 by the way. Hell, I even arrested a girl for DWI for moving her car forward in the driveway so her ride home from the bar could pull in. Granted, your front yard is privately owned but PUBLICLY accessible and she almost crashed her car through the neighbors house.... But I never have and never will arrest a guy for sleeping in the passengers seat of his car in the bar parking lot, car running or not. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've been a cop for 10 years and made 100's of OVI arrests. While probably okay by the letter of the law, that arrest is total horeshit IMO. All of the above applies to me as well, I've never arrested anybody for sleeping it off in the passenger seat. I HAVE arrested people for pulling over on the highway shoulder to sleep it off once they were halfway home and didn't think they could make the other half, or they were trying to go 50 miles south and ended up passed out in a parking lot off the side of the highway 50 miles north. All those people usually blow well over .15 by the way. Hell, I even arrested a girl for DWI for moving her car forward in the driveway so her ride home from the bar could pull in. Granted, your front yard is privately owned but PUBLICLY accessible and she almost crashed her car through the neighbors house.... But I never have and never will arrest a guy for sleeping in the passengers seat of his car in the bar parking lot, car running or not. Finally !! How many pages did it take!?!?! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 11:49:30 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That might be the most important statement in this entire thread. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can see both sides of this. Drunk guy is sleeping it off.......cops are being dicks. Cool cops let the sleep it off. Drunk guy wakes up a few minutes later and decides he is OK to drive. Drunk guy hurts himself or somebody else in an accident. Everybody sues the cops for leaving a drunk guy in control of a running vehicle. So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ No, by and large the public just want to be left alone. Most people don't give a damn about a drunk sleeping it off in his car. In fact, I think most people would much prefer that as opposed to the same drunk deciding to just go ahead and chance it because the consequences of driving or sleeping are exactly the same. What a stupid fucking law. ETA: The only ones who care are the municipalities that can snag some sweet DUI fines and the hall monitor types. That might be the most important statement in this entire thread. And yet it will be largely ignored by the ones who shout the loudest that DUI laws are for public safety. Arresting someone for doing the responsible thing and going to sleep after realizing that they are too drunk to drive is the definition of insanity. All that does is incentivize people to chance it on the road. And or what, because they might possibly do something wrong? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 11:54:21 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Judging by the number of 911 calls I hear dispatched to "check the welfare" of drunk/crazy people, tattletaling about someone drinking in public, and "disturbance in progress" calls when people complain about others having the temerity to get into a loud disagreement, I must disagree with your premise. Most people, at least in urban areas, are excessively concerned with what other people are doing, and they just love dialing 3 magic numbers to dispatch somebody else to check on it so they can walk away and feel like "I did something!" without actually having to ask the nasty half-conscious transient "Hey are you ok?" and risk talking to him. I wish the general public just wanted to be left alone. It would make life much easier for everybody. Despite what some people here think I actually prefer to spend my time investigating and attempting to arrest those who actually victimize other people. 95% of my time is actually spent mollifying busybodies. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can see both sides of this. Drunk guy is sleeping it off.......cops are being dicks. Cool cops let the sleep it off. Drunk guy wakes up a few minutes later and decides he is OK to drive. Drunk guy hurts himself or somebody else in an accident. Everybody sues the cops for leaving a drunk guy in control of a running vehicle. So arrest the guy for the officer's convenience , because the guy "might" wake up and drive? Brilliant. The cop's convenience would be to ignore the drunk guy in the parked car - no paperwork involved. However, the public, that you apparently think is above reproach, tends to frown on it's public servants leaving drunks where they can later drive off while still intoxicated........ No, by and large the public just want to be left alone. Most people don't give a damn about a drunk sleeping it off in his car. In fact, I think most people would much prefer that as opposed to the same drunk deciding to just go ahead and chance it because the consequences of driving or sleeping are exactly the same. What a stupid fucking law. ETA: The only ones who care are the municipalities that can snag some sweet DUI fines and the hall monitor types. Judging by the number of 911 calls I hear dispatched to "check the welfare" of drunk/crazy people, tattletaling about someone drinking in public, and "disturbance in progress" calls when people complain about others having the temerity to get into a loud disagreement, I must disagree with your premise. Most people, at least in urban areas, are excessively concerned with what other people are doing, and they just love dialing 3 magic numbers to dispatch somebody else to check on it so they can walk away and feel like "I did something!" without actually having to ask the nasty half-conscious transient "Hey are you ok?" and risk talking to him. I wish the general public just wanted to be left alone. It would make life much easier for everybody. Despite what some people here think I actually prefer to spend my time investigating and attempting to arrest those who actually victimize other people. 95% of my time is actually spent mollifying busybodies. Well, with a population of about 320 million, it stands to reason that there are a bunch of hall monitors out there. That doesn't mean that most people wouldn't prefer to be left alone and MYOB. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
