- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:26 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
I'm guessing this made more sens in your mind.
I'll let the thread decide who's making assumptions and making sens(sp). God knows you'll never concede anything.
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:27 pm to Festus
quote:
I'll let the thread decide who's making assumptions and making sens(sp).
I'm sorry for not pressing the "e" key hard enough for you.
quote:
God knows you'll never concede anything.
There's nothing to concede. Until more evidence comes out, it doesn't look good for the cop.
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:27 pm to Boudreaux35
Just to make sure I'm on the same page as the OT today, now we are upset that cops are speeding when responding to a call?
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:28 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
So the other vehicle now caused this policeman to swerve?
Well let's picture a scenario that virtually everyone has been in at some point. If you're about to be run off the road by a dumbass 18-wheeler that doesn't check his blindspot and you swerve to avoid hitting him since you know you and your vehicle will lose badly in that matchup, and by swerving suddenly you lose control of your vehicle, is it your position that 0% blame falls on the driver of the 18-wheeler?
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:31 pm to Festus
quote:
That doesn't absolve the cop of using caution while overtaking vehicles responding to the call.
Just curious, do you have any info that the policeman wasn't using caution?
Deducing from the comments made by the guy in law enforcement in this thread, combined with personal observation of cops driving reckless, it seems like he was probably going so fast and reckless that he lost control of his vehicle when he and the other car changed lanes at the same time. Cars changing lanes at the same time happens all the time, without incident, due to people driving at a manageable enough speed to a avoid disaster.
This post was edited on 3/21/17 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:31 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
I'm sorry for not pressing the "e" key hard enough for you.
Sorry, I didn't want to offend you by assuming it was a key stroke incident as opposed to spelling error.
quote:
There's nothing to concede.
In your case, there never is.
quote:
Until more evidence comes out, it doesn't look good for the cop.
, to you, of course it doesn't look good. Until more evidence comes out, to most people, they don't assume it's not good for the cop based on almost zero reported facts. And no facts that would determine one way of the other. Like I said, you presume him guilty. You then work from that premise.
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:34 pm to Festus
quote:
Sorry, I didn't want to offend you by assuming it was a key stroke incident as opposed to spelling error.
quote:
In your case, there never is.
Not true, but sure.
quote:
to you, of course it doesn't look good.
Based on the article and the info contained in it, why would it?
quote:
Like I said, you presume him guilty.
Based on the info presented. I've reached my level for reasonable doubt in the absence of any other evidence.
How much would you be willing to wager the officer was blame-free?
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:34 pm to Funky Tide 8
quote:
According to the guy in law enforcement in this thread, he was going so fast and reckless that he lost control of his vehicle when he and the other car changed lanes at the same time.
If there is a witness to the accident in this thread, I didn't see him, and it's very possible he was acting reckless. I didn't know it was witnessed by another LEO. LNCHBX should have cited the witness version to support his case. Not the whole one car accident and no one being investigated as his premise for guilt.
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:35 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Until more evidence comes out, it doesn't look good for the cop
Exactly what kind of further evidence do you expect to come out of this? That the cop was speeding?
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:35 pm to Festus
I think the only point was that if a civilian hits the barrier wall in the median and the reason for losing control of the vehicle is that another car cut them off and they swerved to avoid it, the driver of the wrecked vehicle is getting a ticket for failure to maintain control.
Nothing more.
Nothing more.
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:35 pm to Festus
quote:
LNCHBX
Nice typo.
Am I doing that right?
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:37 pm to Funky Tide 8
Not sure if you're talking about what I posted, but if so I never said he was going "so fast and reckles." Don't put words into other people's mouths
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:37 pm to Funky Tide 8
quote:
According to the guy in law enforcement in this thread, he was going so fast and reckless that he lost control of his vehicle when he and the other car changed lanes at the same time. Cars changing lanes at the same time happens all the time, without incident, due to people driving at a manageable enough speed to a avoid disaster.
And has it been verified that the officer was "going so fast and reckless" that he lost control? Why is it assumed that the other driver is going 70 and the officer is going 100+? It's very common, especially late at night, for an oblivious/drunk left lane driver on the interstate to be going 50 while normal drivers are going 80+ in a 70.
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:38 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
So the other vehicle now caused this policeman to swerve?
you think the cop swerved just to swerve?
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:38 pm to Huey Lewis
quote:
Why is it assumed that the other driver is going 70 and the officer is going 100+?
Who assumed this?
quote:
for an oblivious/drunk left lane driver
Now we're getting to some assumptions.
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:38 pm to Golfer
quote:
I think the only point was that if a civilian hits the barrier wall in the median and the reason for losing control of the vehicle is that another car cut them off and they swerved to avoid it, the driver of the wrecked vehicle is getting a ticket for failure to maintain control.
I disagree. In no way is an automatic ticket issued for that. Especially if there is any witness that can confirm it. Even without a witness, police use a great deal of discretion in 1 vehicle accidents with no witnesses in regards to issuing a ticket. They will definitely cite the party in the police report for careless operation and the cause for the accident, but many/most times, not issue a traffic ticket.
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:38 pm to Funky Tide 8
"I'm in law enforcement and from what I've heard, he was responding to a call (not sure the type of call), another vehicle was in left lane. Officer switches to right lane to pass that vehicle, but while doing so, the vehicle in left lane also switches to the same lane. Officer swerved back left to avoid that vehicle, lost control, and struck center wall then flipped his unit. Again, this is what I've heard so not sure how accurate that is."
Here's what he said, don't see any mention of careless or reckless.?? Been a long time since I was in school, which one is it that enhances bullshite, adjective or adverb?
This post was edited on 3/21/17 at 12:42 pm
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:42 pm to Joe Davola
Now that's what I call posting with an agenda.
I'm sure he was hoping no one would catch the part about you not actually alleging he was going "so fast and reckless".
I'm sure he was hoping no one would catch the part about you not actually alleging he was going "so fast and reckless".
Posted on 3/21/17 at 12:43 pm to Festus
So I'm not the only person who caught that
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News