Worth a look - Pissed but not in charge?
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: Feral on 16 Jul 2010 02:50 D Walford wrote: > Agree but charging them for something they might or might not do is not > the answer. > There was/is always more than option and in this case in that > jurisdiction the cops choose the wrong option, they may have prevented a > drunk from driving but they also wasted a lot of theirs, the courts and > the defendants time. Times *have* changed Daz. In the good old olden days, they'ed have thrown them in the cell, fined them in the morning and sent them on their way. Probably, drunk and disorderly, or something like that. I don't think they have the resources and time to do that now. -- Take Care. ~~ Feral Al ( @..@) (\- :-P -/) ((.>__oo__<.)) ^^^ % ^^^
From: Noddy on 16 Jul 2010 02:51 "D Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message news:4c3ffe75$0$28662$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > Agree but charging them for something they might or might not do is not > the answer. Agreed. > There was/is always more than option and in this case in that jurisdiction > the cops choose the wrong option, they may have prevented a drunk from > driving but they also wasted a lot of theirs, the courts and the > defendants time. Yep. How hard would it be to take the guys keys and tell him he can collect them from X police station the next day? I mean, if coppers catch kids riding mini bikes in areas where they're not supposed to they go to the trouble of pulling out their plugs to stop them riding the things. -- Regards, Noddy.
From: D Walford on 16 Jul 2010 03:37 On 16/07/2010 4:50 PM, Feral wrote: > D Walford wrote: > >> Agree but charging them for something they might or might not do is not >> the answer. >> There was/is always more than option and in this case in that >> jurisdiction the cops choose the wrong option, they may have prevented a >> drunk from driving but they also wasted a lot of theirs, the courts and >> the defendants time. > > Times *have* changed Daz. In the good old olden days, they'ed have > thrown them in the cell, fined them in the morning and sent them on > their way. Probably, drunk and disorderly, or something like that. > > I don't think they have the resources and time to do that now. > That's their problem, a person shouldn't be victimised/harassed or charged just because the State is too stupid to provide Police with the resources they need. Daryl
From: D Walford on 16 Jul 2010 03:42 On 16/07/2010 4:51 PM, Noddy wrote: > "D Walford"<dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message > news:4c3ffe75$0$28662$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > >> Agree but charging them for something they might or might not do is not >> the answer. > > Agreed. > >> There was/is always more than option and in this case in that jurisdiction >> the cops choose the wrong option, they may have prevented a drunk from >> driving but they also wasted a lot of theirs, the courts and the >> defendants time. > > Yep. > > How hard would it be to take the guys keys and tell him he can collect them > from X police station the next day? I mean, if coppers catch kids riding > mini bikes in areas where they're not supposed to they go to the trouble of > pulling out their plugs to stop them riding the things. > Using common sense isn't something cops these days seem to be trained to do. In the "good old days" they would have just taken his keys but these days they must get brownie points for the number of charges they write so common sense is abandoned. Daryl
From: Noddy on 16 Jul 2010 05:27
"D Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message news:4c400d74$0$28652$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > Using common sense isn't something cops these days seem to be trained to > do. > In the "good old days" they would have just taken his keys but these days > they must get brownie points for the number of charges they write so > common sense is abandoned. Seems that way. -- Regards, Noddy. |