Sig1Hunter

Gotcha... Problem is, "Breathalyzer" is the generic term that people use for the breath testing instrument. It is also the trademarked product name, which was the reference in the article. So, when someone says to me "give me a breathalyzer!" to prove to me their innocence, I am not going to go to the old junk closet at the station and pull out the actual Breathalyzer. Maybe now you see the irrelevance of the article? Eh...probably not...

Steely, don't believe everything you read, my friend! This article is laced with so many errors or factual omissions, that it made me laugh out loud. First, the "Breathalyzer" hasn't been used in God knows how long (here in Florida, at least). We do have the Intoxilyzer 8000, which prints results, constantly monitors itself, goes through self checks, yada yada yada. Basically, what the article says this "Alcotest" does. It makes it sound as if law enforcement is using antiquated 1950s technology in DUI investigations, and this is certainly not the case. Another case of the media misleading the public - shocking! EDIT - I just noticed the date on the article - 1998! Give me something a little more updated, Steely!

A couple things: 1) The police need to have reasonable suspicion of impairment before they can take the blood. So, they had to have something - odor of alcohol, admissions to drinking, etc. 2) If the police do have that reasonable suspicion, and the case involves serious bodily injury or death, then you CANNOT refuse the blood test. The cops can pin you down, stick a needle in your arm and forcefully take it if they have to. So, it seems there was something that led the cops to believe that there was alcohol and/or drugs involved here, so the blood was taken. -A DUI cop in Florida

Wow... I'm glad you guys aren't coaching the Bills...

A message of hope, in what will surely be a dark and gloomy night on TSW? How dare you!

WWI would be more equivalent to a public drunkenness charge. DUI laws are specifically written to include the word "vehicle" in the statute. A vehicle is anything from a wheelchair, to a bicycle, to a car. Cops are trained to apply the most appropriate charge to cases. In this case, the DUI charge fits better than the public intoxication charge simply because a "vehicle" was involved. Besides, the penalties are (basically) the same for a public intoxication and misdemeanor DUI charge. Its not like you lose a drivers license for a DUI bicycle charge.

Come on over! Bills game will be on and in full volume at my house in Mickey-land

EDIT: ARGH! I typed as fast as I could, and still you beat me!

Exactly! Watching the press conference, I sat there thinking "why isn't anyone (with the Raiders) stepping in to shut Al up?" He made himself look like the arrogant fool that he is, IMO

Why does he feel the need to air all these grievances on national TV? One reason, and one reason only - to keep from having to pay Kiffin. You sign the man to a contract, and fire him early? Pay the man. First he "sends" the warning letter to Kiffin. Three seconds later, he "hand delivers" the letter to Kiffin. Five seconds later he "Fed-exs" the letter to Kiffin? Al's old brain can't keep up with his new fangled lies. I truly feel bad for Kiffin.

Anyone notice that Jabari looks like P Diddy?

The Bills seem to have a pretty big following in the CFL area. It always puts a smile on my face when I see a Bills plate or bumper sticker.

Just a heads up. Trent will be the guest on the show - currently on

Sure thing. Go to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ Then, go to the right side of the page where "The life and legacy of Tim Russert" video icon is and click it. The video player will pop up with several videos. Select the one titled "A death in the family". There ya go. If I knew how to directly link this video in the post I would, but I don't, so I didn't.

First off, lets have a quick vocabulary lesson. Armed - in possession of a weapon. Now, maybe you didn't read the linked article, but it clearly says during the initial confrontation that the bad guy had two large metal flower stands in his hands. I count two weapons right there. Then, he refuses to drop said weapons. A proper escalation of force ensues (deployment of the TASER). The TASER has no effect, and the bad guy is able to get ahold of a TASER. Another weapon! Now, just based upon his previous behavior, what do you think his intent with the TASER is? Jumpstart his car? Probably not. So, one would deduce that he intends on using it on a police officer. If he gets the chance to use the weapon on the police officer, what is his next course of action once the officer is incapacitated? Logically speaking, the officer's gun is there for the taking and is probably his target. Now, a lesson in the use for force matrix. Deadly force is authorized (generally speaking, depending on individual agency policies) when a subject displays "aggravated physical resistance". Aggravated physical resistance is this: resistance likely to cause great bodily harm - a subject makes overt, hostile, attacking movements with or without a weapon with the apparent ability to cause death or great bodily harm to the officer or others. This is EASILY a proper escalation of force to deadly force. Moreover, as a law enforcement officer, I am not trained to shoot arms, legs, ears, or hands. My shooting training is focused on one thing, and one thing alone. That is STOPPING the threat. Voluntary muscle movement can occur for several seconds even after a vital organ such as the heart is destroyed. Do you think that shooting this guy in the kneecaps is going to stop him? Of course not! Furthermore, if an officer did shoot him in a manner outside of his training, that officer is now personally liable if the bad guy goes and kills or injures someone else during the fight! When we stay within the guidelines of our training, policy and procedures, and law, we are immune from any personal liability. From the information in the article, and my knowledge of basic training and general agency procedures, this is shooting is justified all day long. Class dismissed

This isn't like a domestic violence case. Victims don't need to "press charges" before someone can be charged with this crime.

The mighty Sparacus, eh?

I would be shocked if Marshawn's attorney let him utter a peep at any point in this investigation. If he did, he is a horrible attorney. It is plain to see that the police don't have enough to charge Marshawn. If they did, it would have been done by now. You can't be criminally charged for being the registered owner of a vehicle involved in a hit and run. Though, you have civil liability. The cops are hoping Marshawn proves their case for them by giving up the ghost. Otherwise, this case is going nowhere without a witness to put Marshawn as the driver when the crash occurred (or moments before the crash). You wouldn't think that would be too hard, since I am sure he stands out in a crowd pretty easily. Without this information, and without Marshawn admitting anything - case closed. With regards to the statement by police that Marshawn may face an obstructing charge: BS. One can't be charged criminally for invoking a Constitutional right. Sure, it looks bad in the court of public opinion if Marshawn doesn't step up and say something, and that it was the police are banking on. But, we are guaranteed certain rights which are the basis of what this country was founded on. One of those is the right against self-incrimination. With all that being said, one who leaves the scene of any crash is a spineless scumbag.

Brings new meaning to the phrase "Hol(e)y Cow", dontcha think? MOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Schefter says Keller

Awesome

From an HBO special on the last week of the 2007 season... A slightly above average income, and a very tolerant wife!

Did you call me a NG? Did YOU just call ME a NG? I may or may not know what it is, but I think I should be offended.

Geez. I changed the title just for you guys. Consider it my way of compromising. I thought if I used a cool word like "presser", as do the in-the-know Buffalo media types, I would get more credibility in my post. I know how revered the Buffalo media is around these parts... Oh, and PC equals probable cause. Just ask the Cincinnati Bengals

I just watched JP's press conference on BB.com, and each time I see the man talk, he makes me so proud that he is our quarterback. The guy seems to bleed Buffalo red, white, and blue. He takes his job seriously, always looking to improve. Yet, he has a kid-like quality / naiveness (is that a word?) about him. I know that many of us were frustrated with him in the beginning, but it is awesome to see how he has grown and I can't wait to see what he grows into as a QB and person. I am pumped for the next season, already, and we haven't even had the draft! Let's get it on!!