A Chat With Jesus

[FlowBee]

Sorry, I actually thought this WAS in off topic  

Here is my latest experience with the WSP. They were running a DUI enforcement on highway 99. I think they are .....  it because they believe you commited a crime. Of course the real lesson here is not to give drunk idiots rides to Taco Hell, no matter how broke and hungry you are.

W.T.F.

You know, its Gestapo tactics like this that make ME want to carry a digital video recorder with me at all times.  I normally get along fine with the police, but this would make me pissed off enough to drive straight to the station and give the chief a piece of my mind  (after dropping off my drunk friend at home).    Maybe even a note on legal letterhead.

Some cops just need their asses kicked.

[Scratch33]

 my room mate (who has an IQ of *maybe* 75 when he is SOBER) leans his head out the window and yells some untilligable drunken gibberish at the stater.

   I think I would've pulled over a little farther down the road and had him get out and check that rear tire, it looks a little low on air.  

SCRRREEECCHHHH!  See ya.

[highside]

   I think I would've pulled over a little farther down the road and had him get out and check that rear tire, it looks a little low on air.  

SCRRREEECCHHHH!  See ya.

The thought did occur to me, but the thing is that I know the guy is a moron, so how pissed off can I really get when he does exactly what I expect? It was my fault for putting myself into such a position.

As far as the Gestapo tactics, see the above statement as well. I grew up here, I know how the WSP operates, so I'm not going to get too bent when they do exactly what they have always done. You really just have to be polite and keep your opinions to yourself when you are dealing with them, and you will be fine, assuming of course that you are actually innocent of the crime they are investigating. Yeah, it sucks that there are ways to end up on the wrong side of that encounter even if you didn't do anything, but thats how it is. Getting pissed off about it is how you discover just how bad it can get.

[blueridgerider]

I know how you feel about the WSP.  I just beat my second ticket of the summer yesterday.  First was for 75 in a 50 zone, but I had just completed a pass and had witnesses (my riding buddies) to prove it.  Second ticket was for 70 in a 60.  This was on hwy 5 near fort Lewis, and anyone familiar with this area will know that 70 is the normal speed there.  I beat that one because the officer didn't provide his affidavit to the court.  These are the first tickets I've gotten in 20 years.  I think the WSP is on a campaign against motorcycles.  

Not sure your ticket comparison matches up.  While you may have had good reason - yours were ACTUALLY cases of doing something illegal.

[Mr Sunshine]

Of course the real lesson here is not to give drunk idiots rides to Taco Hell, no matter how broke and hungry you are.

The real lesson is to keep the windows rolled up and to hit the lock button if you automatic windows so the drunk person can't yell at the cops.  


Remember...it was for free food.

[Thor]

Sorry, I actually thought this WAS in off topic  

Here is my latest experience with the WSP. They were running a DUI enforcement on highway 99. I think they are generally pretty carefull about this and never have a problem because they are pulling over drunks who won't even remember what happened. I threw them for a loop though. I work nights and had gotten home to find my room mate loaded out of his mind and hungry. He offered to pay if I drove us to Taco Bell. Well, I never turn down free food so into the car we went. On the way back we are passing a WSP car with a driver pulled over, my room mate (who has an IQ of *maybe* 75 when he is SOBER) leans his head out the window and yells some untilligable drunken gibberish at the stater. Once I get over the disbelief and the cop is out of view I begin calmly explaining that the Washington State Patrol is not the best bunch of folks to hassle on a state highway. I went on to describe their reputation for not having a real sense of humor that normal folk can relate to.

Anyways, about 5 minutes later I see a blacked out cruiser way back in my rear view mirror. Then a white car with exempt plates passes me (and the cruiser) at about 60 (in a 40) and slows to 25 in front of me. I actually saw him coming and never got closer than about 50 yards off his bumper. Big suprise, next thing I see are the dreaded reds and blues behind me. Once I pulled over the trooper stated that he pulled me over for "following too closely", I didnt ask him why he chose not to pull over the white car for doing 20 over and nailing his brakes right in front of me, I already knew the answer to that one. Long story short I did the full on roadside field sobriety test including the breathalyzer. What was most interesting about this is that I probably failed it stone sober, and the test was such that most probably would (they don't really give a score, they just want footage of you stumbling around trying to jump through the hoops). Anyways after about half an hour of this, and the trooper asking me if I was "sure" that I wasnt drinking because he could "smell some alcohol on my breath" (which was minty fresh BTW), and shining a friggin SureFire (*really* bright) flashlight in my eyes (they tell you to follow the light, and they move it all over the place for about 5 minutes straight, anyone with any propensity at ALL for motion sickness *will* get nauseous and vertigo, they do this BEFORE they have you stand on one foot and walk in a straight line) I think they were a little suprised when I blew a 0.00 on the machine, because all of a sudden it was Mr Officer Friendly after that.

That was my latest insight into how the WSP operates. That was almost certainly an illegal operation with the decoy car, and I did learn that the Field Sobriety Test is actually just a means of making you look like a drunk for the jury. I also noted just how poorly a person gets treated when the police really think they can get away with it because they believe you commited a crime. Of course the real lesson here is not to give drunk idiots rides to Taco Hell, no matter how broke and hungry you are.

If they ask you to do a field sobriety test, politely reply, "No."  If you haven't been drinking they aren't going to arrest you, and if you have they are going to arrest you anyways.

[stefrrr]

The real lesson is to keep the windows rolled up and to hit the lock button if you automatic windows so the drunk person can't yell at the cops.  


Remember...it was for free food.

The only potential for problem there is if your passenger needs to throw up...  

[Walker]

Not sure your ticket comparison matches up.  While you may have had good reason - yours were ACTUALLY cases of doing something illegal.

Nope, sorry.  Executing a pass on a 2-lane road in Washington state allows you to exceed the legal posted speed for as long as it takes to execute the pass, get over, and slow down.  A minimum 10 to 15 mph speed superiority was recommended in my driver's ed class way back in the day.   In that instance, there is NO speed limit (assuming that it was not a posted No Passing zone).  The faster you execute the pass, the safer you are.  

In the second instance, the speed along I-5 from South Tacoma and past Fort Lewis is consistently over 70 mph.  Going that speed there is conservative and prudent to keep up with the flow of traffic, unless you'd like to become a grease spot on the interstate.  The really ought to raise the speed limit there after the Steilicom exit, but definately after the Dupont exit until you get to Olympia.

[Mookie]

If they ask you to do a field sobriety test, politely reply, "No."  If you haven't been drinking they aren't going to arrest you, and if you have they are going to arrest you anyways.

Won't they just take you down town and force you to give a blood alcohol test then?  That seems like an even worse way to go, especially if you haven't been drinking.

[highside]

If they ask you to do a field sobriety test, politely reply, "No."  If you haven't been drinking they aren't going to arrest you, and if you have they are going to arrest you anyways.

That might be legally sound advice, but really I think that the real-world application of that philosophy might prove problematic. There aren't any attorneys at the road side at three in the morning. My mission in an encounter with law enforcement is to proceed about my business as soon as possible with as little pain as necessary. I am a *very* stubborn and contrary type of personality, but I understand that sometimes it is up to me to jump through the hoops and prove my innocence. I hate that the system works that way, but I ain't gonna fix it by spending a night in jail. If I were actually drunk, then I would probably refuse to do the test.   I would imagine that the cops know that.

There are limits though. I'll do the test because I know I am sober and thats the fastest way to get to the breathalyzer to prove it. However, there won't be any searching of my car of other such nonsense. You have to weigh the risks. There is really no risk to taking a FST. It's inconvenient and stupid, but its less inconvenient than not taking it.

[Yakiman]

"...perfectly legal and perfectly safe..." and they still gave you the jab?  Really?

No! Do I sense doubt in this reply!! Have I drawn a dubious detractor with my little joke! Has doubt, that stubborn resister of opposing opinion smelling of pickle farts, crawled under the back flaps of the circus tent to ruin the show?

Yes, sir, “really”.

If just a curious question, my apologies.

If the first attempt to lead us into some pro-law-and-order crapola, know that here, at least, you’d be dealing with someone who has studied the subject back to when Adam’s 13th son, Motikits, became the first policeman in human history. And, with him was naturally born the concept of passive corruption, when mankind first learned that when given two bits worth of power no man could resist running it into a buck and a half.

The key words here are “unsafe pass”. It is a purely subjective accusation based on…. Well, the previous paragraph.

The only defense against such a charge is to argue the case in court, which in this country is a system that has deteriorated to a situation much like having foxes rule against the wolves on the matter of whether they all will have the chickens for dinner.

Chief Yakiman

[stevent]

I found out about the WSP's sense of humor years ago on I-5 in Seattle, tootling along on my HD on my way to work @ 2300. Officer friendly howls up to within a foot of my back wheel and hits the hi beams, then red and blues so I pull over and get off the bike, turn around and face him hands in plain sight etc. After a few questions he asks me what's in the bag strapped to the sissy bar, I had already told him I was on my way to work, where I worked and what time I started 1/2 a dozen times so I tell him it's my lunch; a cheese sandwich and 12 oz's of Coke.

Next thing I know, I'm in cuffs in the back of the car, he's called for back up and they're both going through my lunch with a fine tooth comb, evidence bags at the ready, probably had a tow truck on the way for the bike. After shaking my can of pop and listening to it and picking through everything else in there they finally let me go reminding me how much they hate smart ass's and how would I like to take a detour through King County Jail next time..

Humourless bunch of fascists

[Yakiman]

I found out about the WSP's sense of humor years ago on I-5 in Seattle, tootling along on my HD on my way to work @ 2300. Officer friendly howls....

Humourless bunch of fascists

Your first mistake was relying on objective consideration, which is a TWO word concept!  

Besides, everyone knows all HD rider secretly belong to the Hells Angels...

[Mr Sunshine]

Won't they just take you down town and force you to give a blood alcohol test then?  That seems like an even worse way to go, especially if you haven't been drinking.

They lack probable cause

[highside]

They lack probable cause

All the probable cause they need to require a breathalyzer test is their own "expert" opinion that you were driving irratically, refusal to take the breath test is a crime that carries the same punishment as a DUI. So yes, they can just thrown you in jail on their own word on this one.

[Mr Sunshine]

All the probable cause they need to require a breathalyzer test is their own "expert" opinion that you were driving irratically, refusal to take the breath test is a crime that carries the same punishment as a DUI. So yes, they can just thrown you in jail on their own word on this one.

No refusing to take the breathlizer is not a crime with the same punishment as a DUI.  Yes they suspend your license for a year but it is NOT a DUI.  

Besides I was talking about refusing the road side sobritity test which is not a breathlizer test.  There is no requirement you take those sobrity tests just like you don't have to take the breathlizer.  Instead insist on a blood test.  This way if you really are on the edge you have a chance to burn it off AND the test is much more accurate than the breathlizer (a double edge sword) AND you don't get your license suspended for not taking the test as you are taking the test, just the blood version and not the breathlizer.


Now the reason for the sobrity tests is because of RCW 46.61.506 Section 4.ii.

The person being tested did not vomit or have anything to eat, drink, or smoke for at least fifteen minutes prior to administration of the test;

If you are gonna drink...make sure you smoke and keep lighting up.  Or keep eating that candy of yours...new market...long lasting jaw breakers.

[highside]

No refusing to take the breathlizer is not a crime with the same punishment as a DUI.  Yes they suspend your license for a year but it is NOT a DUI.  

Besides I was talking about refusing the road side sobritity test which is not a breathlizer test.  There is no requirement you take those sobrity tests just like you don't have to take the breathlizer.  Instead insist on a blood test.  This way if you really are on the edge you have a chance to burn it off AND the test is much more accurate than the breathlizer (a double edge sword) AND you don't get your license suspended for not taking the test as you are taking the test, just the blood version and not the breathlizer.

Riiiiiight. I think you are forgetting that i WAS NOT DRUNK. You are actually saying that I should have refused the FST, which would have prompted a Breathalyzer test (remember I was "following too close" ie: driving erratically = PC). Which I could have then refused and simply been given a ONE YEAR suspension of my license (which is actually a longer suspension than blowing dirty on a first offense; 3-4 months) or I could have insisted on a blood test and spent the next three hours and a tow truck fee to get a blood draw. Yeah, that does sound like a much better plan than spending 40 minutes jumping through hoops and going about my business.

[Mr Sunshine]

Riiiiiight. I think you are forgetting that i WAS NOT DRUNK. You are actually saying that I should have refused the FST, which would have prompted a Breathalyzer test (remember I was "following too close" ie: driving erratically = PC). Which I could have then refused and simply been given a ONE YEAR suspension of my license (which is actually a longer suspension than blowing dirty on a first offense; 3-4 months) or I could have insisted on a blood test and spent the next three hours and a tow truck fee to get a blood draw. Yeah, that does sound like a much better plan than spending 40 minutes jumping through hoops and going about my business.

I didn't suggest you do anything. I orignally was talking to Mookie but you thought for some reason I was talking to you.

[Andrew]

Thats what I did, and why I am no longer a Christian. Biggest mistake my local parochial school teachers ever made was tell us to read the bible, I guess it didnt occur to them that I would actually do it.    

+1  

"Religion is the opiate of the masses"

[highside]

I didn't suggest you do anything. I orignally was talking to Mookie but you thought for some reason I was talking to you.

Silly me, since I was responding to a post in which you quoted me and in which we are discussing a specific situation that I related.