• ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 hours ago

    We give someone with a high school diploma a few weeks of training a badge and a gun. They don’t even have to fully understand the law.

    And now they can tell if you’re high or not from first sight.

  • taiyang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I mean, so can I in a sense – guys passed out on my couch. “Yup, he’s too high to drive.”

    In seriousness, I wish they’d just bust people driving recklessly. It’s almost every day now that I’m almost side swiped by an aggressive muscle car driver; it’s driving me crazy. I don’t care what they’re on, alcohol, cocaine, meth, or just pure uncut Machismo, I need those people fucking jailed before it’s my kid on the news about getting hit and run’d.

    • pinkystew@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 hours ago

      We as a society must have a solution which is not the police solving every fucking inconvenience. They are literally killing us in our own homes. Please do the difficult mental work of figuring out a better solution than “call the cops”. I know it’s convenient but our overreliance on it has resulted in one the greatest incarceration crisis of our lifetime. I know you’re angry but please start thinking of other ways to solve problems.

      • taiyang@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Odd for you to call vehicular manslaughter an inconvenience, but let’s be clear: you can both reduce police involvement where it is not needed (such as mental health crisis) while still maintaining some order for actual dangerous offenders. You can also approach a problem from multiple angles, such as making prisons more about rehabilitation than punishment, or addressing future crime by investing in education and family welfare.

        None of that means you also can’t address a very local problem of 40,000 annual hit and runs with 8,000 deaths. Living in South LA, you literally see street take overs at least once a week usually with stolen cars. Doing two things at once- that is, addressing the current problems while also preventing future ones- shouldn’t be difficult for someone “doing the mental work” like yourself.

        • pinkystew@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          How many of those 40,000 hit and runs with 8000 deaths were prevented by police officers?

          Your strategy doesn’t work.

          If police and prisons made us safer, we’d be the safest country on the planet. We’re not. Police hurt people after a crime has been committed, not before. Your strategy does. not. work.

          • taiyang@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            46 minutes ago

            That’s the point of police reform. They weren’t prevented because reckless driving isn’t enforced here. The police here suck, and have always sucked, and should be replaced and reformed.

            Now, if you’re done misconstruing my argument to fit your virtue signaling, why don’t you say the solution to hit and run drivers, and while you’re at it, street take overs?

            • pinkystew@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              29 minutes ago

              I’m not working signaling because I never hear anyone say this: The police should be fully abolished, the prisons should be emptied, and the judicial system should be forced to find a way to solve societal problems without them. This is because they are a for-profit, corrupt, wildly inhumane and ineffective system that has resulted in generations of Americans losing their lives behind bars for harmless crimes.

              You keep bringing up reckless driving, but the majority people in jail aren’t there for vehicle offenses. They’re mostly kids who got caught with marijuana. Do you really want a wildly racist institution, which takes away people’s freedom for profit to continue to operate just because you’re inconvenienced by other people driving?

              Stop being selfish. The problem affects more than just you.

              • BougieBirdie
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 minutes ago

                They keep bringing up reckless driving because that was the thesis of their original comment. They’re concerned about reckless driving because it results in violence, bodily harm, and death in their community.

                You came stomping in here about police reform and the disproportionate rate of incarceration for non-violent offenders. And while those criticisms are valid, they’re misplaced here.

                Further arguing the point is demeaning to everyone involved

  • TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    The police are legally allowed to lie about everything not under oath or not to another public servant. It is one reason to never bother with their polygraph. They lie about the results, and then act like their lie is proof.

    They lie to the press all the time about officers names, ages, and whereabouts. It is their reflex to just lie and worry about it later.

    Even breathalyzer are less reliable than the police would dare admit.

    • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I really wonder what a rebooted from scratch ethical police force would look like. A force with honor and integrity and all those words they print on the side of the cars. A respected, well-paid job.

      You know, something like what they show on every TV program airing on CBS, but real.

      • taiyang@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 minutes ago

        It’s tricky, since you have inherent power imbalances and the jobs dangerous on top of that. I think you can look at Japans older model where they basically just have a pen and paper and chill out in kobans (corner police boxes) to just help people with directions and any disorders. Less heroic TV types and more glorified public assistants.

        Would never fly here, but police are adorable in Japan.

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Nobody (especially pharmaceutical corporations) ever wants to talk about prescription mind altering medications and how normalized its become to be heavily medicated and still drive a vehicle on the highway. I’ve run into people in public at grocery stores and restaurants who obviously have had way too much medication and are literal zombies or wide eyed freaks then get into a car and drive away.

    This isn’t shaming anyone for taking medication. It’s a good thing in the right circumstances but if someone has taken so much that it affects their ability to react to things quickly while operating a vehicle, it’s definitely something to worry about. It’s something I think about all the time when I’m driving down a public highway anywhere.

    • bbuez@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Mfers put me on gabapentin for my then undiagnosed scoliosis, the plan was to ramp me up to “hopefully” null my pain. I went into a irrational panic that I had rabies, among other things, and certainly shouldn’t drive when my eyes wouldn’t stay still. I got myself into physical therapy and that turned out to be all I needed.

      • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Wow I’m really glad I had heard stories about that stuff in the past. I had to see specialists for back problems and they offered that drug, and I said no thanks, and physical therapy did the trick for me also. I feel like I end up turning down half the drugs the doctors offer me in recent years.

        • bbuez@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          32 minutes ago

          I sometimes feel like I toe the line in conversation of being anti-medication but that is not my intention ever.

          However, with testament of my mother who has worked at a number of hospitals, there are shit doctors. She keeps a list of doctors she’s assisted that she would never want to be worked on by, and that’s really freaky to me. Its a slippery slope to think you know better than doctors as a whole… but with some doctors you just may, and it really may save you a lot of suffering.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    93
    ·
    8 hours ago

    i have witnessed 100% sober drivers, blowing zero on a breathalyzer being arrested because the cops felt like it. anyone else failing so hard at their jobs would be fired, and these people are supposed to be trusted with extra responsibilities and human killing devices.

    acab

  • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Field sobriety tests are about as accurate as Tarot readings.

    In most jurisdictions, the police can arrest you for refusing. Some experts say that if you’re sober, it’s better to refuse and be arrested, and then find it in court.

    • iMastari@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      If I refuse a field sobriety test and request s breathalyzer or blood test instead, would I still be arrested?

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Refusing a breathalyzer is expensive though thanks to implied consent. The ticket for that is a ton of points.

      • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        7 hours ago

        If you’re sober you should absolutely agree to the breathalyzer and the blood test.

        It’s the field tests that are bogus.

      • cows_are_underrated@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        What? You have to pay for the blood test if you refuse the breath analyzer? Everyday I learn something new about the US and everyday I’m shocked about it.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Not sure if you have to pay for the blood test (it wouldn’t surprise me), but part of driving on a public road is consenting to a breathalyzer test. They do need a warrant to draw your blood against your will, but they may bully the hospital into doing it anyway. Refusing to take one is a crime that in combination with any other violation can get your license suspended.

          It may be worth going that route if you are marginally over the limit and a few hours would sober you up.

  • Omgboom@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    8 hours ago

    The problem is there is no legal threshold for marijuana like there is for alcohol. If they think you are at all intoxicated they will take you in. Never admit to a cop that you have ingested marijuana in any capacity if you are pulled over.

    • gdog05@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Also, don’t lie about it. Just respectfully refuse to answer any questions about it.

        • Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Marijuana stays in your systen for a very long time since it is a fat soluable drug, so even if you smoked 2 days ago and you’re stone-cold sober, you will still test positive for THC.

        • CptEnder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Not sure why this is downvoted and honestly really fucking hate how smokers get a pass on this tolerance bs.

          Don’t get high and drive. Don’t drink and drive. There is absolutely no grey area. Not because of interactions with police but because you could fucking kill someone.

          • Timmy_Jizz_Tits@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 hours ago

            You’re kind of missing the point. You’re correct on principle but the issue is how to actually regulate it and create laws around it. Im totally in favor of media campaigns with that point, it is a north star. Thats what they actually do in California. Still, someone can be .02 BAC and be be fine to drive. I’m sure there’s some alcoholics that can be over .08 and pass a coordination test, due to their tolerance. The .08 is the law for a good reason though.

            The only way to do that for thc would be a blood test, to the best of my knowledge. I don’t think that’s practical. The answer is definitely NOT police discretion though.

          • ianhclark510
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 hours ago

            So because I’ve consumed a legal substance I’m no longer able to drive a car ever again? What are you on about

          • rImITywR@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 hours ago

            That’s my point though? Making the decision to drive under the influence and getting stopped by the police are completely separate events. And you only have control over one of them.

  • sgibson5150@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Fuck driving. You’d be lucky to get me off the couch. 😆

    Obviously ACAB, but…I have known a few jackasses who thought nothing of driving while high. Just don’t. And don’t reply to me about how you “know your tolerance” or that you can “handle it”. Fuck you, you’re impaired. Don’t do it.

    • brian@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      51 minutes ago

      While in principle, I don’t disagree. If you’re impaired, you shouldn’t drive. I lost a parent after they were hit by a drunk driver.

      However, there are monstrously different amounts of impairment. You have reaction times and motor skills, decision making and judgement, awareness and attention.

      Implying any type of impairment to be an unequivocal “no” to driving is short sighted, in my opinion. It’s the easy argument to point at any mind-altering substance: caffeine, tobacco, or antidepressants could be classified an impaired driver.

      It’s also worth pointing out that even different emotions could dramatically alter driving performance. Not that we would ever think about restrictions on crying while driving.

      • ohellidk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        or video recording possibly? depends hugely on the judge/corruptness of the court/state. some courts throw out cases based on pure testimony because of the lack of documented evidence in situations like this one. this is usually why cops will make you do sobriety tests, it is used to validate and document the fact that someone is too intoxicated to drive. these actions are usually also recorded, and presented as evidence to the district attorney. a good lawyer can get you out of this situation, especially if its just speculation from the officer. the more evidence they have on you, the harder it is to prove your innocence, and vise-versa. either way, lawyer up!