Sig1Hunter
-
Posts
2,112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Sig1Hunter
-
-
Why don't you look at the date on the article.
It was merely meant as an article on the breathalyzer being phased out since 1998. Since so many people were referring to the breathalyzer I posted that article, boneeous headius.
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...
-
[by OWEN MORITZ
Friday, April 17th 1998, 2:04AM
After 44 years, the Breathalyzer is a hiccup away from retirement.
New York state police said yesterday they will phase out the Breathalyzer, which has been used to test drivers for drunkenness since 1954, and replace it with a high-tech, infra-energized, electrochemical, fail-safe tool called the Draeger Alcotest.
"It takes us into the next millennium with equipment that is much more advanced," said Trooper Robert Sawicki.
Another trooper, David Miller, said that comparing the Breathalyzer to the $7,000 Draeger Alcotest 7110 Mark III is like comparing a typewriter to a word processor.
"The typewriter does a great job, but now you can use a computer that does a spell check for you and saves you time," he said.
The only thing that won't change is that motorists accused of driving drunk still will have to exhale into a hose at the police barracks.
The Breathalyzer measures the alcohol content of a person's blood through a chemical reaction in a test that takes 25 minutes to administer, police said. The Alcotest checks blood-alcohol content by two methods in a single use in only 15 minutes.
The Breathalyzer, in use since 1954 and a staple of every TV cop show from "Dragnet" to "NYPD Blue," has long been vulnerable to challenges by defense attorneys because of the potential for human error the operator has to calibrate testing gauges and the machine provides no printed readouts.
The Alcotest virtually eliminates the potential for human error, state troopers said. The machine prints out the results and has a built-in microprocessor that constantly monitors itself and shuts down when proper procedures are not followed.
The new equipment has been used by state troopers based in Albany and Middletown. Troopers in western New York are expected to make the switch later this year. The entire state police force should be equipped by sometime in 1999.
A spokesman for New York City police said the department has ordered two Draeger Alcotests and will evaluate the equipment before deciding whether to order more.[/i]
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!
-
Just as an aside, if I was his lawyer and he was drinking at 7AM in the morning heading out to the beach, I would have told Stallworth to not submit to the test. This honestly sounds like an unfortunate accident.
C
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
-
As much as I like Trent, I was surprised that he was still in the game after the third pick.
[ I agree....we needed a relief pitcher in this circumstance...pehaps at half time. I also agree with the comment Trent ought to get a few games off. This season is gone without a BIG change. What is there to lose at this point. Although JP will be gone next year...(Ralph thinks JP has leporacy, and Trent in Ralph's guy) I think there is nothing to lose giving JP as shot to win a couple of games. Why not try the QB with the ARM. It is now clear that Trent does not have a better HEAD than JP...they appear equivalent in that area based on the last 4 games. Anyhow, with JP earning 1.9 mil this year, let him earn a little of that trying the relief role...at least until he fails. If they go to far under 500...then lets see Hamden for a couple of trys. Later folks!)
Wow...
I'm glad you guys aren't coaching the Bills...
-
12) Yeah, this sucked, but a win next week would go far to erase this nightmare.
GO BILLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A message of hope, in what will surely be a dark and gloomy night on TSW? How dare you!
-
I think drunk in public would be a better charge as I'm not really afraid of being killed by a drunk person in a wheelchair. Same goes with a BWI. A person walking in traffic poses just as much risk as a bicycle. And yet there is no WWI.
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.
-
Grrrrr - the one weekend I have to travel to Orlando for "work" (AST Dew Tour finals - so fun work) and the game is on in VT!!!
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!
-
Al Davis has become a complete parody of himself. This kind of crap worked back in the 60's, maybe the 70's but not today. The guy is a litiguous jerk who likes to spend his money trying to bully people around with the legal system when they don't give him his way or when things don't work out how he wants them to.
The fact that he went on TV to make his case against Kiffin should tell you all you need to know. If he really had a case, he wouldn't need to try and win it in the court of public opinion, where too many people believe anything they hear. The man has absolutely no class or dignity whatsoever.
Yeah, he didn't want to admit he made a mistake in hiring. He didn't want to admit that if he wanted a yes man, that he was going to be out $4 Mil to get him. He's been trying to get Kiffin to quit ever since. Good for you Lane. You wouldn't be intimidated into giving up the cash, so now he's going to run a smear campaign to weasel out of his deal with you.
Al Davis is a freakin' joke.
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
-
Al is making some pretty fierce statements in his press conference, claiming Kiffin was trying to get fired, lying to players, lying to the media, lying to the owner, etc.
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?
-
pats*, Bills and Lions most watched teams on DTV in the Orlando area.
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
-
I would have love to see this live, if anyone can find it online for me and post it that'd be awesome.
Sure thing.
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.
-
Dude, all I want to hear is someone in law enforcement tell me what their protocol is when there are three officers and one unarmed assailant. I'm sure that my ignorance, naivete, foolishness, and whatever else I'm exhibiting can be solved pretty quickly...I just want to know what they are trained to do in this sort of situation.
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
-
Perhaps its depending on if the women is going to press charges, probly more of a civil suit if anything, Im sure she will be se t for life
This isn't like a domestic violence case. Victims don't need to "press charges" before someone can be charged with this crime.
-
No....I AM SPARTACUS!!.....and I was not driving the Porche! And I will not tolerate that Canadian b-atch slandering the good name of the mighty Sparacus! (by the way, what are you talking about???)
The mighty Sparacus, eh?
-
I think he's protecting whoever was really driving the car. His lawyer is OOT and obviously can't get back soon so he's told Marshawn to shut up. I think when his lawyer gets into town they'll talk to the police and possibly prove it wasn't Marshawn and refuse to help the investigation as far as who was driving. I think the police's comment about his "obstructing" justice says a lot.
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.
-
-
QB then.
Schefter says Keller
-
You making potato salad?
Awesome
-
-
You know what NG stands for don't you?
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.
-
too confusing....
PC can mean:
Patrol Craft [ship type]
Peace (in) Christ
Peace Corps
PerCent; PerCentage
Personal Computer [Apple and IBM want you to believe a specific kind]
Photo Copy [being sent to individual or organization name that follows]
Player Character [see NPC]
Police Constable
Politically Correct
PolyCarbonate [A plastic material]
Post Card
Post Cibum [Lat: after meals]
President's Choice [a popular brand name in Canada]
Primary Center
Printed Circuit
Privileged Character
Privy Council
Production Control
Program Counter
Progressive Conservative party [Canada]
Publications Committee
while PR can mean:
PayRoll
Problem Report
Public Relations
Puerto Rico
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
Stallworth was slightly over the legal limit
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Actually, a lot of people don't understand... the trained law enforcement officer can easily determine impaired or nervous. The "eye test" is usually the one that shows the difference.
Of course, if you are dealing with jacknut LEO who has no clue as to what he is doing, all bets are off.