This could be you...

[PayrollHRGuy]

Or just use the speakerphone feature of the phone.

 

[Zigner]

Or just use the speakerphone feature of the phone.

Except that one would still have to touch the phone, unless the phone has a built-in voice-activated assistant.

 

[CdwJava]

I think you'd be cut a bit of slack by the police if you were using your phone to call in a possible DUI driver.

And, if you DO call in a possible DUI driver, please, please, PLEEEZE, tell the call taker or dispatcher what actions the driver is taking that make you believe he or she might be impaired! Too many times we get these calls and the caller gives us zip, nada, zilch, nothing to support an investigative detention of the vehicle/driver.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Except that one would still have to touch the phone, unless the phone has a built-in voice-activated assistant.

You mean there is phone without Siri?


"Hey Siri, is there a phone without Siri?

Hmm, seem there are. Who would have known?

 

[NeilTheCop]

Not to be argumentative, but vehicles are generally registered to the owners. Firearms do not require to be registered in many states; the most ardent 2A supporters rail against "the government" knowing how many and which kind of weapons they own. In your example, how can one be sure that the unsafe gun owner has had all of their firearms stripped from them?

You don't, simple as that. A felon is not allowed to own a firearm and if he's caught with one is probable jail time. If a driver is found driving with a suspended or revoked license due to a DUI he maybe gets fined, but can still get the car returned.
They still don't treat the car as a deadly weapon if it's in the wrong hands. And someone with multiple DUI convictions is defiantly the wrong hands.
Imagine if someone was stupid with a firearm and later they gave him the firearm back. He then went out and using the same firearm killed someone. They would be baying for the blood of whoever returned the gun.
Why is this treated differently?
https://www.9news.com/article/news/...crash/73-1f851e39-09d4-4fe6-825c-a2cb6b8ea583

 

[PAPP]

Thank you for your replies, PayrollHRGuy, Zigner and CdwJava.
I didn't know there was a bluetooth speaker that attaches to a visor. It's much better option for me than a bluetooth earpiece. Thank you for a good suggestion!

I promise I'll study what kinds of driving behaviors are considered DUI. I don't want to waste the emergency call takers' time. Most of my life I had lived in cities and driving a car was not required. Even though I have held my driver's license for a long time, I'm actually a newbie driver. I need to learn many things.

Thank you for letting me ask the question here, Just Blue. Also, thank you for posting the DUI case. I heard it in the news, but I didn't think about it deeply. I didn't know many things which has been discussed here. I'm thinking about what I can do to make a change. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to think about it!

 

[Zigner]

Personally, I feel that you should call for any erratic driver. Not just a guy/gal who's being a jerk or speeding...but truly erratic. The driver you call on might not just be DUI - you might be calling on a person who is having a medical emergency, and that is just as important.

 

[bcr229]

I promise I'll study what kinds of driving behaviors are considered DUI.

You can get a DUI for over the counter meds. Benadryl is one that knocks me out, there's no way I could safely drive if I took a typical adult dose of it.

 

[PAPP]

Benadryl was used to be my son's long flight sleeping pill, bcr229! It's no wonder for me you can't drive safely after you take it. It's quite forgotten medicines affect driving. Thank you for reminding of it.

I really hope we can find an innovative way to prevent DUI. Too many people die because of it.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I really hope we can find an innovative way to prevent DUI. Too many people die because of it.

Actually, great headway has been made. There is a mix of things that go into this. Safer cars, stricter laws and greater awareness.

 

[PAPP]

Thank you for posting the organization's URL, PayrollHRGuy. It is a great source of information. I don't drink and my whole family and friends are social drinkers. I usually don't hear about drinking problems in person and I haven't paid attention to DUI so much. It's a great opportunity for me to educate myself about it. Thank you, again!

 

[aldaron]

Bullshit. Completely made up statistic Conservative estimations put the injury rate at about the same magnitude for distracted driving (which texting is lumped into) as DUI.

BS! Speeding alone kills as many as DUI, throw in distracted driving and the numbers go up by at least 5 figures yearly.
"The NTSB identified more than 100,000 deaths due to speeding between 2005 and 2014. That's nearly as many as were killed in alcohol-involved crashes."
"Every mile an hour that you increase by, you're increasing your likelihood of a crash," NTSB acting chairman Robert Sumwalt said. "This study showed that we can improve the way that we set speed limits and enforce speed limits."
Speeders are killers knowing that their actions could kill someone.

 

[CdwJava]

Hardly BS! The poster FlyingRon responded to had contended that thousands more were killed from speed and texting than DUI - that's not true. Nationally, the stats for fatal collisions involving impaired drivers has held steady at about 30% for many years - the same with speed-related deaths (which, by the way, can also be part of the impaired driving stat ... i.e. speeding because of impairment). Each equates to approximately 30% of motor vehicle fatalities annually. Texting deaths is exceedingly difficult to quantify since it relies not on any objective, scientific data, but an admission by the driver (if they survive) or a witness/passenger. In CA texting as a primary collision factor is so small as to be non-existent (i.e. less than 1%), and some states may not even make an attempt to collect this data.

Aldaron, you write that "Speeders are killers knowing that their actions could kill someone." Well, the SAME is true of impaired drivers!

I have been to far more collisions and fatalities over the decades that involved impaired drivers than drivers engaged in speed alone (without chemical impairment). Anecdotally, I (and I suspect most cops) have witnessed far more carnage at the hands of impaired drivers than unimpaired speeding ones.

 

[not2cleverRed]

I'm hoping that at least one DD reads of this tragedy and rethinks driving while drunk again. Every person that has gone out drinking and drove after is just lucky if they didn't injure or kill someone with their actions. Just pure luck. They may not be so lucky next time.

Well, I was half right... MA's RMV is in covering their backside overdrive... I'm skeptical about whether this will be a permanent attitude change.

https://patch.com/massachusetts/bea...ti3SGijYdxRpcDyKjXNsdSG51-GmISPv3qxP16Byaj2hA

 

[ajkroy]

Well, I was half right... MA's RMV is in covering their backside overdrive... I'm skeptical about whether this will be a permanent attitude change.

https://patch.com/massachusetts/bea...ti3SGijYdxRpcDyKjXNsdSG51-GmISPv3qxP16Byaj2hA

It sounds like they should be covering their backsides. From what they are reporting around here, instead of inputting suspension/revocations/DUIs etc into the computer system, they were putting them in bins. 53 bins, to be exact. The guy who took out the 7 bikers had a DUI in May in CT, refused the breathalyzer, and should have had his license revoked. But no one at the RMV in MA was on the ball...so he still maintained his commercial drivers license.