Forum Discussion
dodge guy wrote:
I`ve seen many things like this when traveling. some of them make me shake my head when I see them. I`ve even seen a cop that had someone pulled over where the cruiser was 3/4 in the right lane and the car he pulled over was on the shoulder. that`s just asking for someone to plow into the back of your police car. we had a cop here in town that would park so far over in the lane that if the cruiser was hit it would just run the officer over instead protecting him the way the placement is intended.
This is how officers are taught to position themselves. I think every state in the union has a "move over law" that REQUIRES drivers to move one full lane away from a stopped emergency vehicle. Regardless of this, there is almost always some clown that REFUSES to move over and will continue to drive in the right lane, even if it is 75% occupied by my marked cruiser.
I don't want my cruiser to be hit when I am sitting in it, because it will hurt and probably cause me serious injury. I CERTAINLY don't want to be hit by a car when I am not in mine. That is almost a guaranteed fatality. By putting my car so far over to the left, it gives me an added layer of protection against some idiot hitting me. Stupid people abound on the roadway.
Just an example...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gN3oqdxa6cs
Until you are standing on the side of the road and cars are zipping past you at 70+mph, you will never understand. I would encourage you to take a ride along with your local police agency... it might open your eyes.- Just a little hijack here, but how many of you have ever locked up the brakes on a Motorhome pulling a toad or trailer. I have, twice, so its hard to say what or should unless you have been there! One of the most important things in defensive driving is try to avoid getting in a situation where it is necessary.
dodge guy wrote:
jspringator wrote:
I can't believe they charged him unless he was drunk or high, texting, or going 80. He couldn't have been going that fast, because he got it hauled down pretty quick.
Half of the jury would see that curve, the space between the 2 vehicles and not know what to do. It is not plain or obvious.
I'm sure there are standards for directing traffic on an interstate highway, and I can't say what they are, but this shouldn't meet them. It would appear obvious that the officer was physically incapable of moving his cruiser. No one would have permitted anything be moved in a crime scene.
I agree. If that picture is taken right after the accident with nothing moved (and I don`t believe they moved anything with the death of a cop). then that entire scene is very hard to interpret when coming up on it even at less than the posted speed limit. I too would have a hard time making sense of it.
I`ve seen many things like this when traveling. some of them make me shake my head when I see them. I`ve even seen a cop that had someone pulled over where the cruiser was 3/4 in the right lane and the car he pulled over was on the shoulder. that`s just asking for someone to plow into the back of your police car. we had a cop here in town that would park so far over in the lane that if the cruiser was hit it would just run the officer over instead protecting him the way the placement is intended.
Going by the picture the HWY dept worker, and the police officer did not fully do their job (vehicle placement and proper marker placement) and in the process an officer lost his life because they didn`t follow procedure! And it sounds like the judge seen the same thing!
It was a tragic accident people. It`s unfortunate, but it`s time to move on!
I think it`s time to close this one down.
Tell the family of the officer that got killed that "it's time to move on." Every one with a license should have to go stand in traffic like that for eight hours before being allowed to drive. Your opinion would change I bet.
Jim- I agree. There's not a full lane there !
And if all the other traffic is in the other lanes on the left, why would anyone think it's OK to take off on their own and squeeze between the DOT truck and the squad car ? Apparently without even slowing down to 'creep' speed. dodge guy wrote:
jspringator wrote:
I can't believe they charged him unless he was drunk or high, texting, or going 80. He couldn't have been going that fast, because he got it hauled down pretty quick.
Half of the jury would see that curve, the space between the 2 vehicles and not know what to do. It is not plain or obvious.
I'm sure there are standards for directing traffic on an interstate highway, and I can't say what they are, but this shouldn't meet them. It would appear obvious that the officer was physically incapable of moving his cruiser. No one would have permitted anything be moved in a crime scene.
I agree. If that picture is taken right after the accident with nothing moved (and I don`t believe they moved anything with the death of a cop). then that entire scene is very hard to interpret when coming up on it even at less than the posted speed limit. I too would have a hard time making sense of it.
I`ve seen many things like this when traveling. some of them make me shake my head when I see them. I`ve even seen a cop that had someone pulled over where the cruiser was 3/4 in the right lane and the car he pulled over was on the shoulder. that`s just asking for someone to plow into the back of your police car. we had a cop here in town that would park so far over in the lane that if the cruiser was hit it would just run the officer over instead protecting him the way the placement is intended.
Going by the picture the HWY dept worker, and the police officer did not fully do their job (vehicle placement and proper marker placement) and in the process an officer lost his life because they didn`t follow procedure! And it sounds like the judge seen the same thing!
It was a tragic accident people. It`s unfortunate, but it`s time to move on!
I think it`s time to close this one down.
Wow, hope I don't need to be driving in the same accident scene as you in the future.
To the statement in Red, I know in the NW, State Patrol officers are taught to park just that way with the cruisers tires turned to the left, to protect the officer and the vehicle they have pulled over.
Now Days as stated earlier many states have laws that require drivers to give emergency vehicles a clear lane when on the shoulder.
It was also stated that witnesses saw the MH traveling faster than the other slowing traffic. Lastly who in their right mind would try to squeeze a MH and trailer through that tight of opening.
It is not like the officer pulled out in front of him, the cruiser and sign truck were in place. Keeping the cruiser straight gives maximum rearward effect of the lights. Looking at the picture to me the Sign truck has a partial block on the right lane the cruiser the next lane out, and you would believe you should drive between them? :S
Sorry, I would never see that way, no way should a logical mind think to go between two emergency vehicles.jspringator wrote:
I can't believe they charged him unless he was drunk or high, texting, or going 80. He couldn't have been going that fast, because he got it hauled down pretty quick.
Half of the jury would see that curve, the space between the 2 vehicles and not know what to do. It is not plain or obvious.
I'm sure there are standards for directing traffic on an interstate highway, and I can't say what they are, but this shouldn't meet them. It would appear obvious that the officer was physically incapable of moving his cruiser. No one would have permitted anything be moved in a crime scene.
I agree. If that picture is taken right after the accident with nothing moved (and I don`t believe they moved anything with the death of a cop). then that entire scene is very hard to interpret when coming up on it even at less than the posted speed limit. I too would have a hard time making sense of it.
I`ve seen many things like this when traveling. some of them make me shake my head when I see them. I`ve even seen a cop that had someone pulled over where the cruiser was 3/4 in the right lane and the car he pulled over was on the shoulder. that`s just asking for someone to plow into the back of your police car. we had a cop here in town that would park so far over in the lane that if the cruiser was hit it would just run the officer over instead protecting him the way the placement is intended.
Going by the picture the HWY dept worker, and the police officer did not fully do their job (vehicle placement and proper marker placement) and in the process an officer lost his life because they didn`t follow procedure! And it sounds like the judge seen the same thing!
It was a tragic accident people. It`s unfortunate, but it`s time to move on!
I think it`s time to close this one down.- I've no comments on this specific case or the sentence as I don't know the details.
minnow wrote:
This was not an accident. It could of been prevented.
Nearly all accidents could have been prevented by making other decisions at an earlier time. For example, not driving at all that day, buying a different vehicle, taking that job offer in another part of the country/world, deciding not to get a driver's license at all, etc... If your definition of "accident" is something that couldn't possibly have been prevented through decisions made earlier in life, then to you, there is no possibility of anything ever being an accident. Veebyes wrote:
All in an effort to shave a few seconds off of travel time. We all see it every day. The "me first" attitude. "My time is more important than yours."
This was no accident. It was caused by human error. It was a crash. Accidents happen when there is nothing that the human could have done to avoid it such as a mechanical failure, a blowout, a sudden severe incapaciting medical condition.
:h I generally thought "accident" meant mainly that something was unintentional, not on purpose, and not expected. It usually seems to me to carry somewhat of an implication that there could be the possibility of avoidance with better forethought or planning or care. (Webster's New World dictionary seems to suggest this meaning, as well, at least with one of its definitions.)
A tree being struck by lightning and falling on my roof I would not call an accident. A tree being cut with a chainsaw that falls on my roof I would consider an accident—it's presumably not an intentional act, but nevertheless could be avoided by using ropes or wedges or calling Rick who is an experienced licensed arborist.
In this case, it does appear at first glance that the driver was probably acting imprudently and at least a little negligently, but I see no evidence at all that he was purposing to kill a police officer or damage property. Hence, the death would be an accidental death, and the tragedy an accident—or so I take it.
It's a good reminder to all of us to drive carefully and alertly, doubly so when operating big and heavy and cumbersome vehicles.- All in an effort to shave a few seconds off of travel time. We all see it every day. The "me first" attitude. "My time is more important than yours."
This was no accident. It was caused by human error. It was a crash. Accidents happen when there is nothing that the human could have done to avoid it such as a mechanical failure, a blowout, a sudden severe incapaciting medical condition. jspringator wrote:
I can't believe they charged him unless he was drunk or high, texting, or going 80. He couldn't have been going that fast, because he got it hauled down pretty quick.
Half of the jury would see that curve, the space between the 2 vehicles and not know what to do. It is not plain or obvious.
I'm sure there are standards for directing traffic on an interstate highway, and I can't say what they are, but this shouldn't meet them. It would appear obvious that the officer was physically incapable of moving his cruiser. No one would have permitted anything be moved in a crime scene.
This is why in many cases emergency personal close the entire road most of the time. To keep themselves safe while working the crash! Too many drivers don't pay attention when the should, then you have those like mentioned before that no matter how well marked they will think doesn't apply to them!!!!!
