It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
originally posted by: Shamrock6
originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
originally posted by: Shamrock6
originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
originally posted by: Shamrock6
originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
a reply to: semperfortis
I await your follow up toxicology report that you intend to supply us with.
I'm sorry, was there a question there? Because it looks a snarky, petulant statement to me.
They said the truck driver wasn't impaired. Did I miss where they handed out copies of the test results to the press?
^ that's a rhetorical question, by the way.
A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked in order to make a point, rather than to elicit an answer.[1] Though classically stated as a proper question, such a rhetorical device may be posed declaratively by implying a question, and therefore may not always require a question mark when written.
The face making sums it all up nicely champ
The name calling is even better and against ATS rules.....
I am not your "champ"
Indeed. I guess I should flag every comment when somebody says "friend" or "pal" or shamrock. Those are all names, after all. If you were offended by "champ" I dunno what to tell you.
Toodles
www.urbandictionary.com...
Toodles
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: Witness2008
And there is absolutely no reason here to make any assumptions that they wouldn't. Threads like this should never even make their way to a place like this. Creating big piles of dung out of virtually nothing but someone's speculation because they salivated over this happening to cops, when in fact it's just an every day tragedy that happens to all kinds of people. Even saints like the ones commenting here. And it's abhorant. In my opinion.
Considered an intrusive method, a blood alcohol test can quickly determine the amount of alcohol in the blood at the time the sample is taken. Since the body continues to break down alcohol at a steady rate after drinking, the time that passes between drinking and collecting the blood sample will affect the results. Therefore, it is important to have the test conducted as quickly as possible from the time of the driving incident.
originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
For those saying that blood alcohol tests are the only option on an unconscious person I say BS. Mouth swabs are as fast as breathalyzers. And blood tests don't take that long considering they take them at DUI checkpoints.
Considered an intrusive method, a blood alcohol test can quickly determine the amount of alcohol in the blood at the time the sample is taken. Since the body continues to break down alcohol at a steady rate after drinking, the time that passes between drinking and collecting the blood sample will affect the results. Therefore, it is important to have the test conducted as quickly as possible from the time of the driving incident.
So again I'll ask (not rhetorically as not to piss off our resident LEOS here) why no mention of any test or results being done on the officer who was driving and only the truck driver?
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys
Besides the union thing, if they did a blood test they can't release the results without a court order. It's considered part of their treatment records and can only be released with consent of the patient.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
That or blood draw are the only ways that you can run a test on an unconscious person.