Comments on: Obama, Feds Exempt Coppers From Tech Ban While Driving

By: kip wills

kip wills — Sun, 18 Dec 2011 02:23:12 +0000

Brian, This is an executive order, meaning that it only applies to federal employees. However, with all of the recent interest generated I think that it will only be a matter of time before we see NHTSA and/or congress push this down to the states like they did the speed limit 55 and .08 BAC. That is, they will tie federal highway funding to a state falling in line with federal guidelines.

By: Brian The Dog

Brian The Dog — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 03:17:44 +0000

A federal law? Who will enforce that federal statute? FBI perhaps? I did not know local police or Sheriff deputies were able to enforce federal codes? Maybe I am wrong? Please enlighten me. Also, do you really think cops are going to cite/arrest people on their cell phones while driving…Doubt it. All smoke and mirrors people. Nothing to see here folks, move along…..

By: Rick

Rick — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:56:16 +0000

pmurphy, thanks for the grammar lesson. I will try to rise to your level. There was no complete sentence in my last post, nor was there a contradiction however, there was a typo that you failed to catch. Complete sentence to follow.
My point since you seem to have missed it in your zeal to bash was only this, I do not have either a parole or probation officer. Gramar checked by a english major prior to posting.

By: Zippo

Zippo — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 22:57:06 +0000

Editor: Who is the unbias mediator for citizen complains about police is this area? Why do we need one? Is the problem getting better or worse?

Also, seems to me that if they wreck while on a personal call it should not be covered by the city insurace. If we write that into the insurace policy we could save some money.

I think they need to be on the phone and computer for work. They typically only kill innocent people when driving too fast chasing bad guys anyway, in which case they are just being wreckless drivers with a cause and probably not on the phone or computer.

By: pmurphy

pmurphy — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 21:47:56 +0000

Rick: You didn’t even manage 1 complete sentence without contradicting yourself. Here’s a tip-there is a reason this site gives you those three minutes after you click submit

Dave, I appreciate the attempt to maintain a respectable journalistic contribution, but your readers reflect your writing. If you find yourself with the same 10 “degenerate” single-minded fans (which is not helping your supposed cause), consider publishing articles a little more to the center to widen your base. You already know this so perhaps I’m just making a request for both our sakes; my desire being to have local print more accurate and less predictable than the Daily. It’s a thoroughly investigated and thought provoking headline that is supposed to fire the people up-most of your routine fanatics log on looking for a fight.

EDITOR NOTE–Murph, the only cause is truth and transparency in government. Our readership is way way up, but comments do indeed seem to come from a core group. Our records, however show 1/3 of all comments are new. The cop stuff is presenting a dilemma for us. They have 2 pr spinners who pump out DUI and kiddie porn stories about arrests, but there is NO ONE looking over the shoulder of the coppers–even those who get fired for bad stuff on duty, never to wear a badge again.

By: idahocrystal

idahocrystal — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:01:15 +0000

Just wanted to point out that this isn’t any more of a double standard than the seat belts police are exempt from wearing – whether or not they’re on duty, as tragically highlighted by the off-duty officer who died when his truck rolled not too long ago… (near Emmett or Cambridge, maybe?)

In any case, I think nearly ALL vehicular accidents could be avoided if EVERY driver would simply STFU & Focus…
= >

By: Rick

Rick — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 19:04:43 +0000

LJ although some of the officers are using the phone for official buisness it is safe to say the the majority of use is personal… and your “taking a report” comment is laughable.. am I to believe that they are on the phone taking a report while going to a call. how were they writing/typing this info…lol

By: Rick

Rick — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 18:59:23 +0000

by the way pmurphy… Rick doesnt have a parole officer or a probation office for that matter… but thanks for jumping to conclusions.. I assume you are “officer murphy”

By: Zippo

Zippo — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 18:22:27 +0000

Get the cops a much smaller car and they will keep an eye out.

By: pmurphy

pmurphy — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:46:31 +0000

Yes. A Guardian comment section actually worth reading! And I have learned so much…I think. Basically cops and robbers? But by far the most telling comments are from… “daddy” ie Editor? Did you really identify a readers employment and then threaten to get him in trouble with his boss? I didn’t hear you threaten to contact Rick’s parole officer? (maybe it was a deleted post or did you email him directly?) Come on, for being a self proclaimed champion of freedom of speech and transparency, I’m surprised by your addition to the above bout. You are right…fun, factual and informed!
PS Editor: please do not censor/delete/or email me. Everyone else: Good stuff!

EDITOR NOTE–“Threat” was tongue-in-cheek. The issue has been resolved privately. Our problem is poor conduct on the part of coppers baiting readers–and the GUARDIAN. We support justice, good police work, and civility. We don’t want this blog to degenerate to the level of comments found at a much bigger newspaper blog.