GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-29-2012, 19:58   #351
Ohio Copper
Senior Member
 
Ohio Copper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: In the hood
Posts: 3,964
I was personally responsible for removing almost 40 intoxicated drivers from our roadways this year.


I dont give two ****s what happened to them in court, I took them off the road that night and possibly saved the lives of other people.

Argue away.
Ohio Copper is online now  
Old 12-29-2012, 20:05   #352
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,827
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Where did you get that information? It isn't anywhere in the linked DUI Blog post: “Yes, We Have No Quotas”. I cannot weave anything there into the story you're telling.
I know it doesnt fit your little agenda...

[http://www.duiblog.com/2005/04/page/2/

People arrested by Boulder police on suspicion of drinking and driving are being told in county court that the police department may have a "quota" for such arrests. The disclosure by prosecutors ‘ required by law when the government has evidence that can help the defense ‘ evolved last week after a Boulder police officer testified about his quota during a drunken-driving trial….


"An agency could have their contact terminated if it doesn’t reach its goals,"

Are you claiming that the DA lied when he informed defendants of this or is the cop lying while under oath in court? I guess the other alternative is that the DA and cop were correct and they did have DUI quotes.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 12-29-2012, 20:09   #353
Napalm561
Senior Member
 
Napalm561's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge View Post
Here in the Seattle area, DUI checkpoints are (happily) either non existent, or so rare I have neither seen or heard of one -- so pardon my ignorance.

Question: For those areas that actually do this kind of stuff regularly - Is it common practice to actually have the calibrated breathaylzer machine on the scene at the checkpoint? I'm not talking about the small portable device the officer can stick in your window... but the actual "intoxalyzer" machine usually found back at the station.

I know my reply is several pages behind, but here's my answer. Typically, the breathalyzer machine or "Intoxilyzer" is not transported or moved into open areas where the environment is not controlled. A controlled environment for the machines ensure that any evidence that is collected via breath sample (after the subject has been arrested) is valid due to consistent temperatures, humidity, etc. Another reason is, the newer "Intoxilyzer 5000) uses an internet connection to automatically send the breath sample results to DPS. This is done for a few reasons. One, all system readings are sent along with each breath test sample to ensure that the machine is properly functioning. It also provides an additional record to the state of the arrestee's breath test results. If a subject has a BAC result of .00, then a police officer cannot charge that person with a valid DUI. In addition, the arrestee's drivers license information is sent along with the result. It helps eliminate lost records, due to human error, for subjects that continue to get DUI convictions ( more that 1 per 10 years in Okla.)
__________________
Be courteous to criminals. Let them finish their sentences.

Wiping the turds of humanity from the ass of society from 1600 to midnight.
Napalm561 is offline  
Old 12-29-2012, 20:12   #354
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,827
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray9898 View Post
Don't bother....it will be ignored and 10 posts from now someone will again repeat they have a "right to drive their car".

I don't see the confusion. The Constitution protects the right to travel as fundamental, it does not protect the right to drive on the public roadway, the right to pilot an airplane, to be the engineer on a train, or the captain of a cruise ship. Those are privileges subject to licensing, restrictions, regulation, fees and revocation.

I will give them more to ignore.
Just like the right to own guns. Just not what is in common use today.

The enemy is apparent. You can weave your little story that people have no "right to travel" by car but you sir know you are 100% full of crap. Yes. Full of CRAP.

Want to knwo where you and AK are full of it.

"unrestrained use of the highway"

What the courts have said is that you cannot use the govts streets without permission. IF I never use the govt streets, I have a right to travel by any means I choose. Therefore, yes, I have a RIGHT to operate a car and travel by it. I simply cannot use the govt streets. The license is to use public right of ways for motor vehicles.

Need more help?

The ability to drive a motor vehicle on a public roadway is not a fundamental right.

See that? Understand why you are full of crap?
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 12-29-2012, 20:20   #355
Napalm561
Senior Member
 
Napalm561's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray9898 View Post
I would turn my badge in as would every officer I know on a personal level. I have been a lover of firearms since childhood and carried for many years under a state of GA CCW permit long before I ever entered LE. My life is full of friends and family who are not LE just like every other officer. So to paint us with the broad brush that we only care about our self because we will have gun rights as LEO's is flawed.
Same here, I have and will do my job to protect others Civil and Constitutional rights as a priority. It is part of my oath.
I had this discussion with a fellow co-worker 2 days ago. He is an armed security officer, I am a police officer for the same department. I stated to him that there is no way in Hell I'd go door-to-door to collect firearms legally owned by law-abiding citizens. I too, would turn my badge in. To assume that any police officer would violate a persons civil or constitutional rights just because someone instructs them to do so is to also assume that police officers do not hold our Constitutional rights in the highest regard, and that we are not human beings, but heartless drones.
__________________
Be courteous to criminals. Let them finish their sentences.

Wiping the turds of humanity from the ass of society from 1600 to midnight.
Napalm561 is offline  
Old 12-29-2012, 20:45   #356
Napalm561
Senior Member
 
Napalm561's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
How do you measure it? Show me data showing the city you work for has deterred drunk driving through check points.

You want to spend money on doing something. YOU need to prove its effective.

If I claim their are aliens (not the mexican types,the outspace types) and want funding to guard against their invasion, they need to prove aliens exist; I do not need to prove alines don't exist.

So, since you can't prove deterrence, then you are arguing that everything you do is hokus-pokus BS that cant be proven effective.

So show us data that you personally, as an LEO have had a deterrence to prevent DUI or murder and are actually earning your salary. Show us data.

If the company I work for asked me to show data of what i have accomplished, that is easy to do.
DUI's exist. Now give me money to go deter them!
Every person that was driving under the influence of alcohol/ drugs, that I removed from control of a vehicle and arrested after gathering more than enough PC, potentially saved the driver's life, passenger's life, or innocent family's life. These results cannot be measured, only assumed. That's why I use the term "potentially". An exact number of lives saved for each DUI driver arrested cannot be given, unlike the number of people killed by drunk drivers. And that number is way too high, even if it were 1. Therefore, the only data that can be presented is geographical, showing a decline or increase in DUI fatalities or accidents in a certain region from previous data results. Thus, if those results are not in your immediate geographic area, they may not mean much to you.
__________________
Be courteous to criminals. Let them finish their sentences.

Wiping the turds of humanity from the ass of society from 1600 to midnight.
Napalm561 is offline  
Old 12-29-2012, 20:50   #357
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,158
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
...........
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"

Last edited by AK_Stick; 12-30-2012 at 02:01..
AK_Stick is online now  
Old 12-29-2012, 21:13   #358
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 42,620
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
I know it doesnt fit your little agenda...

[http://www.duiblog.com/2005/04/page/2/

People arrested by Boulder police on suspicion of drinking and driving are being told in county court that the police department may have a "quota" for such arrests. The disclosure by prosecutors ‘ required by law when the government has evidence that can help the defense ‘ evolved last week after a Boulder police officer testified about his quota during a drunken-driving trial….


"An agency could have their contact terminated if it doesn’t reach its goals,"

Are you claiming that the DA lied when he informed defendants of this or is the cop lying while under oath in court? I guess the other alternative is that the DA and cop were correct and they did have DUI quotes.
Your allegation was that under threat of losing their grant funding, the department admitted to having quotas.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
Dunno. There was a threat of it, so the PD admitted to putting in "performance goals"
Here is the complete statement by Mairi Nelson.
Quote:
"An agency could have their contact terminated if it doesn’t reach its goals, but we look at all the goals," said Mairi Nelson, spokeswoman for the Colorado Department of Transportation, which allocates the grant money. Those goals also include performing a number of DUI saturation patrols and checkpoints and participation in statewide campaigns that crack down on the crime, Nelson said.
Now, the first excerpt from the Boulder Daily Camera news report quoted in the DUI Blog states that it was after the police officer testified about his quota that the prosecutors were forced to divulge information about DUI arrest quotas.

The second excerpt was the police chief's denial of using quotas.

The third excerpt introduces information about The Law Enforcement Assistance Fund which provides grants.

Down in the fourth excerpt is Ms. Nelson's general statement. No where is it indicated she threatened to terminate Boulder's funding because Boulder did not meet arrest goals before the officer testified.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921

Last edited by RussP; 12-29-2012 at 21:14..
RussP is offline  
Old 12-29-2012, 21:17   #359
NorthernAlpine
RLTW
 
NorthernAlpine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Red State
Posts: 145
If you're out driving under any influence and questionable enough to have your blood sampled, you've earned it.

and for all you LE types on here...

I don't care how many hearts you break or butts you hurt.

Thanks for giving up your holiday so the Mrs and I's cab has a better chance of getting us home. Just for the dumb **** everyone is saying on here, I'm bringing a few bottles of something decent to the local Sheriff's station.
__________________
Remember Danny - Two wrongs don't make a right but three rights make a left.
Ty Webb
Nobody else really uses the term "meleee weapons" unless it is leaking into mall ninja land from the large population of D&D playing mall ninjas.
Bren
NorthernAlpine is offline  
Old 12-29-2012, 21:17   #360
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 42,620
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
I know it doesnt fit your little agenda...
What is my agenda, DanaT?
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline  
Old 12-29-2012, 21:18   #361
ray9898
Senior Member
 
ray9898's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Georgia
Posts: 17,163


Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post

Need more help?

The ability to drive a motor vehicle on a public roadway is not a fundamental right.

See that? Understand why you are full of crap?


That's what we are talking about.
ray9898 is offline  
Old 12-29-2012, 21:33   #362
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,719


Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
What is my agenda, DanaT?
He may answer it with more honesty than you did in post 230
certifiedfunds is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 00:01   #363
sombunya
Senior Member
 
sombunya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Californy
Posts: 2,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin108 View Post
And at that time you might as well sign them up for their 99 weeks of unemployment, put them on welfare, get them on the waiting list for public housing, start the paperwork for food stamps and WIC, and get their phone number ported to their Obamaphone.

You want to destroy people's lives over a simple mistake. Now keep in mind we're only talking about DUI, not any accidents or injury, just simply having more of a given substance in their body than a bureaucracy chooses to allow.

Painting with broad strokes is so moronic. Lumping together anyone who drives after having a beer is ridiculous.

Allowing sobriety check points is trying to trade freedom for security. It's a waste of resources paid for by hard-earned tax dollars and assumes anyone who happens to be on that stretch of road is guilty without probable cause.
Not a simple mistake, a major blunder. And, have you ever heard of a "conditional license"? That does not destroy a person's life. As far as I know people can't collect unemployment benefits while they are in the calaboose. Family goes on welfare? Blame the buttwipe that put them there.

Also, your comment "we're only talking about DUI", remember, that means DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE. I wonder how many people who have lost loved ones to this would agree with your reasoning? You and I perceive the severity of this very differently.

This is really quite simple; if you've consumed any alcohol at all, any at all, don't drive. I've never heard of any ill effects from not consuming liquor.
__________________
.



http://www.hopeforpaws.org

Last edited by sombunya; 12-30-2012 at 00:05.. Reason: addendum
sombunya is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 01:47   #364
meleors
Cranky Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 858
Quote:
Originally Posted by sombunya View Post
I've never heard of any ill effects from not consuming liquor.
Go ahead and try to have sex with your wife of 15 years without downing a few shots! Go ahead. I dare ya!
meleors is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 06:25   #365
packinaglock
John 3:16 <><
 
packinaglock's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Loxahatchee Fl
Posts: 4,597
Quote:
Originally Posted by meleors View Post
Go ahead and try to have sex with your wife of 15 years without downing a few shots! Go ahead. I dare ya!
Actually I'm going on 18 years and I still hammer that whisker biscuit 3-4 times a week drinking or sober.
__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
packinaglock is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 06:45   #366
shadow_dog
Hilljack
 
shadow_dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 2,513
Blog Entries: 4


Heck I go into work EARLY every day except Sunday. I have been thru them, no issues. I was pulled over once for a weave, sober and let go, no issues. By going to work early you see all kinds of stuff. And yes I have called in drivers who were driving eractic. The last time was on a deserted section of freeway. Driver was all over the 3 lanes, almost hit a bridge pillar. I stayed behind him for about 10 miles giving the dispatcher locations till a LEO could get there. After the guy was pulled over the LEO called me on my cell and thanked me and told me the guy wasn't drunk. Just playing on his cell as he was going to work. LEO told me he jumped on the guys arse pretty good and gave him a couple of citations for stuff he had seen. The only fault I see is that here in Ohio they are broadcast the day before on the radio and tv as to the locations where they will be. If you get caught, you are stupid in more than one way, and deserve what you get.
__________________
NRA lifer

Last edited by shadow_dog; 12-30-2012 at 06:46.. Reason: spelling
shadow_dog is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 07:14   #367
happyguy
Na Ben Don Chat
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 14,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
I know it doesnt fit your little agenda...

[http://www.duiblog.com/2005/04/page/2/

People arrested by Boulder police on suspicion of drinking and driving are being told in county court that the police department may have a "quota" for such arrests. The disclosure by prosecutors ‘ required by law when the government has evidence that can help the defense ‘ evolved last week after a Boulder police officer testified about his quota during a drunken-driving trial….


"An agency could have their contact terminated if it doesn’t reach its goals,"

Are you claiming that the DA lied when he informed defendants of this or is the cop lying while under oath in court? I guess the other alternative is that the DA and cop were correct and they did have DUI quotes.
Setting goals is a management function.

Achieving goals and doing it according to the parameters set by society is a supervisory function.

Regards,
Comrade Happyguy
__________________
"Success isn't a result of spontaneous combustion. You have to set yourself on fire." - Arnold H. Glasgow
happyguy is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 08:26   #368
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,827
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray9898 View Post
That's what we are talking about.
You cant read once again. Travel.Can you read "travel"?

Shall I post it again?

As an example, I can TRAVEL on my property without having any drivers license. Even more, I can travel with a vehicle that is not "approved" or licensed.

Now to continue showing you ignorance, if you are on a FEDERAL road, since they are not controlled or maintained by the state, they do not fall under STATE rules of drivers licenses. That doesn't happen you say? Go on to an FR (forest road). There is NO licensing requirements to TRAVEL on them or even OPERATE a motor vehicle on them.

So, once again, there is a RIGHT to travel. It is just the states have gotten through their courts that they can regulate travel on THEIR roads. However, as soon as it is not "their" roads, they cannot violate the right to travel.

But I will tell you what big guy. Go give someone a ticket on a FR for driving an unlicensed vehicle and see if it holds up.

Oh, yes, and lets talk about why many racing parts are sold. They get around the emission/DOT laws because they are for "off-highway" use. The govt cant regulate that (at this time)
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 08:27   #369
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,827
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
What is my agenda, DanaT?
I cant explicitly say it without an infraction.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 08:28   #370
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,719


Quote:
Originally Posted by sombunya View Post
Not a simple mistake, a major blunder. And, have you ever heard of a "conditional license"? That does not destroy a person's life. As far as I know people can't collect unemployment benefits while they are in the calaboose. Family goes on welfare? Blame the buttwipe that put them there.

Also, your comment "we're only talking about DUI", remember, that means DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE. I wonder how many people who have lost loved ones to this would agree with your reasoning? You and I perceive the severity of this very differently.

This is really quite simple; if you've consumed any alcohol at all, any at all, don't drive. I've never heard of any ill effects from not consuming liquor.
No, in many cases it is a simple mistake and destroying someone's life over it is wrong. That chicken little crap is why some people don't take your side seriously.

Last edited by certifiedfunds; 12-30-2012 at 08:31..
certifiedfunds is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 08:29   #371
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 43,582
Blog Entries: 1


Keep talking about what you don't know about.

Here in MN if you are driving in the parking lot of Wal-mart on a Revoked license I can charge you for that. Yes, on privately non- government owned property.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Copatalk 2
------------------

171.24 VIOLATIONS; DRIVING WITHOUT VALID LICENSE.
Subdivision 1. Driving after suspension; misdemeanor. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 5, a person is guilty of a misdemeanor if:
(1) the person's driver's license or driving privilege has been suspended;
(2) the person has been given notice of or reasonably should know of the suspension; and
(3) the person disobeys the order by operating in this state any motor vehicle, the operation
of which requires a driver's license, while the person's license or privilege is suspended.
Subd. 2. Driving after revocation; misdemeanor. A person is guilty of a misdemeanor if:
(1) the person's driver's license or driving privilege has been revoked;
(2) the person has been given notice of or reasonably should know of the revocation; and
(3) the person disobeys the order by operating in this state any motor vehicle, the operation
of which requires a driver's license, while the person's license or privilege is revoked.
Subd. 3. Driving after cancellation; misdemeanor. A person is guilty of a misdemeanor if:
(1) the person's driver's license or driving privilege has been canceled;
(2) the person has been given notice of or reasonably should know of the cancellation; and
(3) the person disobeys the order by operating in this state any motor vehicle, the operation
of which requires a driver's license, while the person's license or privilege is canceled.
Subd. 4. Driving after disqualification; misdemeanor. A person is guilty of a misdemeanor
if the person:
(1) has been disqualified from holding a commercial driver's license or been denied the
privilege to operate a commercial motor vehicle;
(2) has been given notice of or reasonably should know of the disqualification; and
(3) disobeys the order by operating in this state a commercial motor vehicle while the person
is disqualified to hold the license or privilege.
Subd. 5. Gross misdemeanor. A person is guilty of a gross misdemeanor if:
(1) the person's driver's license or driving privilege has been canceled or denied under
section 171.04, subdivision 1, clause (10);
(2) the person has been given notice of or reasonably should know of the cancellation or
denial; and
(3) the person disobeys the order by operating in this state any motor vehicle, the operation
of which requires a driver's license, while the person's license or privilege is canceled or denied.
Subd. 6. Responsibility for prosecution. The attorney in the jurisdiction in which the
violation occurred who is responsible for prosecution of misdemeanor violations of this section is
also responsible for prosecution of gross misdemeanor violations of this section.
Subd. 7. Sufficiency of notice. (a) Notice of revocation, suspension, cancellation, or disqualification is sufficient if personally served, or if mailed by first class mail to the person's last known address or to the address listed on the person's driver's license. Notice is also sufficient if the person was informed that revocation, suspension, cancellation, or disqualification would be imposed upon a condition occurring or failing to occur, and where the condition has in fact occurred or failed to occur.
(b) It is not a defense that a person failed to file a change of address with the post office, or failed to notify the Department of Public Safety of a change of name or address as required under section 171.11.
History: (2720-144h, 2720-145j) 1939 c 401 s 23,25; 1943 c 331 s 3; 1947 c 479 s 2;
Ex1971 c 27 s 26; 1980 c 520 s 4; 1984 c 622 s 17; 1989 c 307 s 33; 1993 c 347 s 16; 1994 c 615
s 20; 1994 c 636 art 2 s 6; 1997 c 12 art 3 s 8; 1999 c 238 art 2 s 91
--------------------
__________________
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters".

"A person who won't reason has no advantage over one who can't reason."

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

“Ignorance is a lot like alcohol: the more you have of it, the less you are able to see its effect on you.”


Originally Posted by Rooster Rugburn:
Didn't the whole sheepdog thing actually start right here on Glock Talk? A bunch of wannabees bought a bunch of T-shirts and took an oath to defend those who won't defend themselves?

Last edited by TBO; 12-30-2012 at 08:43.. Reason: add statute
TBO is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 08:33   #372
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,719


Quote:
Originally Posted by TBO View Post
Keep talking about what you don't know about.

Here in MN if you are driving in the parking lot of Wal-mart on a Revoked license I can charge you for that. Yes, on privately non- government owned property.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Copatalk 2
That is wrong. It should not be. Its an over reach of the state. Any officer who would do that should be ashamed.

Last edited by certifiedfunds; 12-30-2012 at 08:35..
certifiedfunds is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 08:42   #373
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,827
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBO View Post
Keep talking about what you don't know about.

Here in MN if you are driving in the parking lot of Wal-mart on a Revoked license I can charge you for that. Yes, on privately non- government owned property.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Copatalk 2
You keep talking about what you dont know about. Take a simple walk up to the City Management office and look at the agreements with these parking lots. They have put in place agreements with the city govts as part of the development deals to treat them as public areas. Many times these lots are "leased" to the cities to allow this for a nominal amount (for example $1 a year).

Go read the land development agreements, or are those too big of contracts for you to understands. You know the agreements that give tax breaks, etc.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 08:44   #374
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,827
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
That is wrong. It should not be. Its an over reach of the state. Any officer who would do that should be ashamed.
He has never actually had to negotiate any type of commercial land use contract with a city. forgive his ignornace and all knowing. You know, he is our overloard and can do as he wants so dont question him.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline  
Old 12-30-2012, 08:49   #375
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 43,582
Blog Entries: 1


Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
You keep talking about what you dont know about. Take a simple walk up to the City Management office and look at the agreements with these parking lots. They have put in place agreements with the city govts as part of the development deals to treat them as public areas. Many times these lots are "leased" to the cities to allow this for a nominal amount (for example $1 a year).

Go read the land development agreements, or are those too big of contracts for you to understands. You know the agreements that give tax breaks, etc.
Wrong.

The courts have ruled on this. You can be cited for DAR/DAS/DAC off your property while not on a roadway.

The parking lots are NOT gov roads, are not gov property, and do not have "agreements" with the city/police/etc.

They are the sole property of the owner (Wal-mart, Costco, Target, Sam's club, etc).

I'll show another example of you talking out your posterior.
Below read and find you can be charged for driving conduct NOT ON ANY TYPE OF A ROAD:


169.13 RECKLESS OR CARELESS DRIVING.
Subdivision 1. Reckless driving. (a) Any person who drives any vehicle in such a manner as to indicate either a willful or a wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of
reckless driving and such reckless driving is a misdemeanor.
(b) A person shall not race any vehicle upon any street or highway of this state. Any person who willfully compares or contests relative speeds by operating one or more vehicles is guilty of racing, which constitutes reckless driving, whether or not the speed contested or compared is in excess of the maximum speed prescribed by law.
Subd. 2. Careless driving. Any person who operates or halts any vehicle upon any street or highway carelessly or heedlessly in disregard of the rights of others, or in a manner that endangers or is likely to endanger any property or any person, including the driver or passengers of the vehicle, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
Subd. 3. Application. (a) The provisions of this section apply, but are not limited in application, to any person who drives any vehicle in the manner prohibited by this section:
(1) upon the ice of any lake, stream, or river, including but not limited to the ice of any boundary water; or
(2) in a parking lot ordinarily used by or available to the public though not as a matter of right, and a driveway connecting the parking lot with a street or highway.
(b) This section does not apply to:
(1) an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call or when in pursuit of an actual or suspected violator;
(2) the emergency operation of any vehicle when avoiding imminent danger; or
(3) any raceway, racing facility, or other public event sanctioned by the appropriate
governmental authority.
History: (2720-177) 1937 c 464 s 27; 1939 c 430 s 5; 1947 c 428 s 11; 1967 c 569 s 2;
Ex1971 c 27 s 7; 1983 c 236 s 1; 1984 c 622 s 15; 2006 c 260 art 2 s 1
------------------

Dana,

It's okay, you can man up and admit:


  • You were wrong
  • You have now learned (or at least been provided with a learning opportunity).
__________________
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters".

"A person who won't reason has no advantage over one who can't reason."

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

“Ignorance is a lot like alcohol: the more you have of it, the less you are able to see its effect on you.”


Originally Posted by Rooster Rugburn:
Didn't the whole sheepdog thing actually start right here on Glock Talk? A bunch of wannabees bought a bunch of T-shirts and took an oath to defend those who won't defend themselves?

Last edited by TBO; 12-30-2012 at 08:50.. Reason: format text spacing
TBO is offline  
Closed Thread


Tags
call me by my title, doctor danat, drive sober, moving goalpost, roadblocks, still get pulled over
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:24.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,217
358 Members
859 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42