Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by Flux Capacitor, Nov 17, 2013.
This'd be so much easier if cannibalism wasn't frowned upon.
Is that an autocorrect malfunction? Did you mean Cannabis? If so I would say driving under the influence of cannabis is no better.
I'm pretty sure it was a funny.
You're not wrong, but apparently it takes quite a lot of weed to impair you even as much as a few drinks would.
Well, that shows that the 'limit' may need to be looked at. That or they've decided that they're going to intentionally arrest more people before they're doing anything dangerous. Should have had something that relates tenths of a gram to metrics actually used when smoking, though, to get a feel. Passing a bowl? Finishing one? Several? Just not sure how much they smoked.
Either way, the first couple tests, they were at 4-5 times the limit (7x for the daily user) and everyone was doing fine, instructor and cop would have let everyone go. If you can operate without any issues at 4-7x the limit, the limit is fucked up.
There isn't much of a point to doing it. Police Departments have better things to do than follow every lead on every person driving poorly, drunk or not.
As far as the signs that say "call 911" or something similar, that's more PR than an actual appeal to the masses. It's also a little self-defeating given how aggressively PDs nationwide are targeting people talking on their phones while in cars.
I was on 95 or 93 south of Boston (At some point they are the same road) and there was a limo that went back and further through all the lanes, completely wasted, there are 4-5 lanes there and just was insane.
I know from experience never ever call the cops. It's why guns on legal in this country because they cops will never show up. They are too busy stealing drugs and getting paid off.
If I have an emergency I call the fire department but even my neighbor had to call 911 twice to get anyone to show up and they weren't doing a damn thing. It was only a truck on fire 10 feet from his house and next to a tree. He was outside watering down his roof so the house wouldn't go up.
I did this once. I passed a guy to get into a turn-lane and looked over at his car and saw him take a big drink out of a beer bottle (I could clearly see the beer labeling on the bottle.) I made the turn and happened to come up on a policeman on the road shortly on the road I just got on. I flagged him down, and told him what I saw. Giving him description of the car and the driver and what I remembered from the plate. (I'd been behind the guy for a while and remembered part of it.)
The cop looked at me, told me I shouldn't have come to a stop on the road there where I had flagged him down and then drove off. He didn't go into pursuit of the drinking driver given the direction he turned on the road. Only a minute had passed at the very most and there was another signal shortly after that intersection so it's not like the guy would have gotten far.
This. Under no circumstances would police communications tell or encourage a civilian to tail someone who may be drink driving. Its asking for an accident, either from the caller who, so intent on following the suspect, doesn't pay attention themselves and hits someone, or from the suspect who realises they're being followed and decides to make off at speed or stop to have it out with their pursuer. There are dozens of factors considered when the police decide to pursue someone, none of which can be meaningfully assessed by speaking to someone they've never met on the end of a phone. Too great a risk. In fact, our call takers scripting software will prompt them to tell you not to continue following.
I can't speak for police in your area but most certainly take such calls seriously, and details are passed over the radio etc for officers to attempt to locate/stop.
Flux: I hope you've read this post by Timby. This, x like, a million. The streets of 'Frisco are safe without you suiting up and taking on the night, Bats.
This isn't Stockholm.
They should get 6 points and a £300 fine. If the phone is that urget call pull over (in a safe place)and take it or at the very minimum invest in a hands free device, some new cars even come with them inbuilt.
^Read the thread again, Macleod. He's not talking about taking a phone call from someone calling him. He's talking about calling the cops on another driver.
Good thing I wasn't in "'Frisco" then, right? Then again, who cares about geographical accuracy when you're making another smartass drive-by post. One of my threads just ain't complete without one from you, it seems.
I didn't "suit up" and head out looking for crime to fight, I came across one potentially in progress for the first time, called it in, and was subsequently surprised by the lack of response. That's a big difference from purposely going out and looking for trouble as you're trying so hard to make it seem.
^ you followed the guy. You aren't supposed to
Unless the police order you too. They tried to pull that shit on me once. Didn't work. There are advantages to untraceable prepaid phones. I'd never call the police with my normal phone, that just a whole 'nother bag of hurt.
I've been to over a dozen accident scenes where the driver was obviously drunk. Always called the police, they never showed up. So what do you do? Drive the idiot to the nearest repair shop, dump his car and let him sort the rest out. Its not a civilians job to fight crime.
I've stopped reporting drunk drivers. Nothing is ever done about it. Its easier to just overtake them and let the morons crash behind you where there is no chance if them injuring you and your passengers.
What an exciting life you lead there on the dark side of Sweden, "Doc." It's almost like something out of a movie.
Separate names with a comma.