Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Danestress

Members
  • Content Count

    7,513
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Danestress


  1. Theft or not theft, shoving trash in random places is so rude and selfish, I might be unable to let it slide. I probably would have taken it out and said, “Let me find a trash can for you.â€

     

    The grocery store may not care about the money. Fine. But the staff deserves respect. I have pretty much had it with people who believe the world is self-cleaning or cleaned by an army of underlings who should feel happy to tidy up after them.

    • Like 9

  2. This really is a hard situation. If your husband resigns now he will give up a goal that mattered a great deal to him, and also give up valuable retirement benefits. But he can still be very proud (as you can be) of his dedication and of the years he served. And it sounds like he can be very proud of his civilian job too.

     

    If he feels he has to resign, try not to end on a bitter note. The decision makers here aren’t in a position to say, “Yeah, your civilian job is more important that the other reservists’ job. The inconvenience to your family matters more than the other reservists’ situation.â€

     

    They make assignments based on their assessment of the needs of the unit. They may well want the best solider with a good deal of experiences and training. That makes good sense to me.

     

    He can resign, but he will feel better in the long run is he does it from a position of strength. He can choose resignation, but it wasn’t forced on him. He made choices that make deployment inconvenient, but he probably knew that deployment would be a possibility - he signed up for that. He hoped it wouldn’t happen before his 20 years were up, but it has. Now he is in a tough situation and has a choice to make. How hard for all of you.

    • Like 3

  3. All of the beaches will be crowded around the 4th. It’s not the ideal time to go, but you can still have a great vacation.

     

    From Raleigh, the Wilmington area beaches (Wrightsville etc) are easy to get to, and there are good rainy day options. I think you are close to two hours. I also like Ocean Isle and Holden beaches. Topsail has some nice area. Part of the community has had bad erosion. At any of the beaches I would check out reviews on specific parts of the beach to seek. You don’t want to rent where these is no beach at high tide.

     

    I have heard good things about Bald Head and Oak Islands.

    • Like 2

  4. I can tell you a couple reasons—painting every room isn’t cheap when you have to pay someone to do it and it’s too much work for middle-aged buyers. First time homebuyers might be willing but they also get spooked by homes that need a lot of work.

     

    One room or two, ok, but every.single.one? In a house that’s well over 400k (and the median is 275-300k)? Are they smoking crack??

     

    DH and I are too old to do that much painting ourselves (we don’t do DIY moves anymore either) and too cheap to pay for someone else’s color wheel foolishness (I’m talking royal blue, Pepto pink, lime green and lavender, all in the same house...we’ve seen this.).

    I am 50 and painting everything but the two story entry and vaulted living room myself. I have found that painting and especially prepping correctly is just too expensive. It’s hard to get someone who will labor over proper repair of drywall tape or junky trim corners like I will. If I hear million dollars, I guess I could, but I do not. I want it right. I am not a decorator or neat nick, but I guess it’s just my thing.

    • Like 1

  5. I would explain my position. But I would not draw a line in the sand. This seems like something that a young adult might need to learn for himself. I would be wary of setting myself up as the protector of an adult. I mean, sometimes we still are, but I want to send the message, “I trust that you can handle things and make decisions, but I am always here for you†rather than,â€You aren’t quite competent to handle decisions.â€

    • Like 1

  6. You are being so gracious about different viewpoints, and I hope you don’t feel we are piling on.

     

    I did notice two things. First, you want all the people you love to be there. I totally relate to how nice that can feel. But your sister was in your home, with you, being a messy, annoying, complicated human (because all of us are). Having her sitting in church with the crew was the big moment you wanted, but you actually had her in your home! And you are ready to not host again because she wasn’t at church. It reminds me of having toddlers - how sometimes it was such a pure pleasure to watch them sleep, and then I would think, “I had them awake and in their toddler glory all day, and I didn’t really embrace it. Why is watching them sleep the big draw? Do I not enjoy the part where they are fully themselves?â€

     

    Secondly, I am sure you don’t mean it and didn’t lay this in your sister, but she can’t be responsible for your “one happy moment†of the year.

     

    Resentment is a problem for me at the holidays. I definitely have those, “Why do I have to do all the work?†moments. But truthfully I have a lot of power to change that. It helps me to reframe everything I “have to do†as a, “want to do.†I want to make the meals. I want to wrap the presents. I want to keep things tidy. Most of those things I could just let go. The McDonalds drive through is open on Christmas Eve. Figuring out why I want to do things helps me feel less resentful.

    • Like 18

  7. I dont see how saying, “I am furious, I think this was wrong,†it’s a “tantrum.†Maybe I missed the part you are referring to.

     

    When her scores were posted, she gave her head a little shake and raised an eyebrow. Later she told a reporter she was furious. No throwing skates, no shouting, no mentioning other skaters by name, no stomping.

     

    What “tantrum†did I miss?

    • Like 1

  8. I am no great scorer or commentator on figure skating. I can’t argue that Ashley Wagner is ‘right’ in her protests.

     

    But she’s always said what she thinks, and women who do that will always be criticized. My guess is that if she wouldn’t trade her right to speak her mind for a spot on the Olympic team no matter how badly she wanted it. If that’s how the selection process works, that makes me mad too! I hope that’s not how it works.

     

    I think the top three skaters earned their spots in the Olympic team. But I like Ashley and I am sad for her.

    • Like 1

  9. Southerner here. I have never been called "Babe" in my life (except maybe by a boyfried). I think it has a dismissive quality. I have been called, "Baby" but only by older women and in a very affectionate way.

     

    Darling, Honey, Sweatheart? All the time. "Ma'am" I get called every day. I don't think anything of it. In a tense or heated exchange these words can sound vaguely demeaning (with the exception of 'Ma'am'), but generally they are just ways of being warm. I never use terms of endearment with Men I don't know well, though.


  10. I want to gain some basic education for dealIng with medical emergencies. If I take a Red Cross CPR and AOE class and a first aid class, how prepared would I really be to handle a crisis? It seems like a three hour class once every two years might give me just enough knowledge to be dangerous!

     

    I am in our children's ministry a lot and baby sit for friends. I also like to hike and camp. There are older people in my life. I feel a nagging sense that I should know what to do in an emergency, but would a Red Cross class really prepare me? Is there something else people recommend?

    • Like 1

  11. Are you suggesting that at some point there was a law in Utah stating that possession of a Utah driver's license automatically grants police the right to draw your blood at any time for any reason without probable cause?

     

    The 2016 Supreme Court ruling stated that even when a suspect has been arrested for DUI, police still need a warrant to draw blood unless there are exceptional circumstances preventing them from getting the warrant in a timely matter. That part doesn't even apply here, because the victim was not under arrest or even suspected of DUI, and Payne stated on camera that he knew he couldn't get a warrant because there was no probable cause.

    Of course I was not suggesting that. I just thought it was strange you relied on a case affirming the the legality of revoking a drivers license when a suspect refuses a blood test.

     

    I don't think anyone can argue in good faith that the officer had authority to order a blood test, with no warrant, on an unconscious patient who couldn't and didn't consent and wasn't not even a suspect, let alone being under arrest.


  12. Nurses should quote policy. But PEOPLE in general should realize this isn't some stupid random rule the hospital has for funsies. News articles should do their job in pointing out that this is an important law protecting our rights.

     

    I'm also disturbed by people who think cops should be obeyed without question. Do people not care that we actually have rights as citizens of this country?

     

    ETA: But yes, I would also expect nurses to have a pretty good knowledge of what the law entails as part of their job. Doctors, nurses, all medical professionals. It's an important job, and the laws surrounding it are very important.

    I don't understand how to comment quote by quote. But (1) I think the news sources I have read make it pretty clear that this wasn't the hospital having funsies and that these is constitutional law that applies

    (2)I agree. I feel l like I spend a lot of time trying to tell people what their rights are when stopped/questioned/detained by police officers. Some people think they don't need to protect their civil rights. Sigh.

    (3) I think this nurse did have a good idea about the requirement for her to draw blood. I bet most do. She was very professional. She called her supervisor to confirm the policy. She consulted the policy to confirm and also to try to explain to the cop why she couldn't do what he wanted. I am glad she had that policy to print out instead of having to pull up legislation and cases interpreting it. I don't understand anyone thinking this policy was some kind of private agreement.

    • Like 2

  13. Even in the unlikely event that she was unaware that the hospital's policy was based on actual law, and not just some administrator's preference, reporters are not limited to reporting one person's perception of the event. That's just crappy reporting to not cite the fact that the police were trying to bully her into committing an illegal act and violating a patient's constitutional rights. Too many people are reading reports citing "hospital policy" and thinking she should have complied because police authority trumps "hospital policy." Police authority does not trump constitutional law.

     

     

     

     

    Even if a police phlebotomist was somehow ignorant of a key Supreme Court decision that specifically affected his authority to do his job (which is ridiculous in itself), he should at least be aware of Utah state laws going back to 1979:

     

    "Utah’s implied consent statute requires any person who operates a vehicle in the State of Utah to submit to a chemical test to determine alcohol or drug content. Although that person may withdraw the consent, an officer may seek a warrant to forcibly collect a sample.

     

     

     

    Due process requires that a peace officer must have reasonable grounds for his belief that the person requested to submit to the chemical test was driving or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs; reasonable grounds exist where the facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge and of which he had reasonably trustworthy information are sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that the situation exists. Ballard v. State, Motor Vehicle Div., 595 P.2d 1302 (Utah 1979) "

     

    There were no grounds whatsoever for believing that the truck driver was under the influence, which Payne admitted on camera, when he said he knew he could not get a warrant since there was no probable cause. I think he knew perfectly well that he had no legal right to demand the blood sample, but just assumed he could bully the nurse into doing it.

    I don't understand why you are citing a case about civil revocation of a drivers license. Utah has revised its implied consent laws since this case anyway, but how do you think it applies to this case?


  14. Eta: Also, I'm tired of everyone talking about the policy. It's the LAW. The hospital can't or shouldn't have some private agreement to let police break the law. It disturbs me greatly that apparently that police department is used to presuming intimidation to get that "agreement" from medical staff.

    The Supreme Court decision limiting police authority to obtain involuntary blood draws is pretty recent. It takes a long time to revise legislation, and many states still have laws on the books that include "implied consent" for obtaining blood draws.

     

    The hospital and police department weren't making a private agreement. Would you suggest the hospital not have a policy but just tell nurses to "follow the law?"


  15. It really bugs me that so many of the news stories about this event portray the nurse's refusal to allow the blood draw as "hospital policy" when in fact she was defending the patient's constitutional rights, not just the hospital's policy. The Supreme Court ruled that forced blood draws are a violation of the 4th Amendment, unless the person gives consent, is under arrest, or the police have obtained a warrant. What the cop was demanding was not just a violation of "policy," it was absolutely, unequivocally illegal.

    Because from her perspective, she was following policy. She wasn't citing constitutional law. Apparently the cop claimed to be acting under the old 'implied consent' law. She didn't argue new case law, f she was aware of it. She relied on hospital policy. We don't necessarily want nurses interpreting the Bill of Rights nor do we expect them to. That's why the hospital and police department had a clear policy that complied with the law.

    • Like 4

  16. Am I understanding correctly that this nurse was from the burn unit not the ER?

     

    I'm wondering if this has been an ongoing thing with the police department but usually it is understaffed and overworked ER nurses they are dealing with who don't have the time or mental energy to argue so just give in to their bullying?

    Hard to say. It is kind of a special circumstance that the patient was (1) unconscious and (2) a victim and (3) there were no grounds at all (let alone probable cause) to think the victim was also committing a crime.


  17. Yes. And when it comes to light later that possibly things were not done as they were told, they might have cause to demand cases be reopened.

    What would they not have been told?

     

    In cases in which the results of a blood draw were used as evidence, an attorney would have had the opportunity to look into whether their was a warrant, consent, or probable cause and to obtain the evidence and raised that issue.


  18.  

     

     

    As far as I'm concerned, every single case involving labwork and this cop needs to be investigated for legality now. Even his cases that should have been valid will now be in question and possibly tossed bc of his thuggery. What an asshole disgrace to the badge.

    That would have been the job of the defense attorney.


  19. Am I right to think that the hospital had probably already drawn blood for legitimate treatment reasons? Would a ER check drugs/other substances in a case like this in order, for example, to insure that they don't administer sedative that are dangerous in combination with alcohol?

     

    I ask because I question the idea that the officer wanted to protect the patient in a potential civil suit or to protect the police department if there were a suit against it by the patient. I am thinking in either situation, those records would be subpoenaed anyway. Am I wrong?

    • Like 2

  20. Okay. I am remembering based on a discussion a while ago, not on personal study. Thanks for clearing it up.

     

    One thing I do know is that some officers are genuinely unaware that you have to have a good cause (I'm avoiding using technical jargon because I'm clearly messing that up :P) to stop a person (either in cars or on foot) and require they stay stopped. Some think you can hold a person for no clear reason while waiting for more information, even if that person asks to leave. There is a lot to cover in the Police Academy, from physical fitness, and skills like police car driving, target practice, basic Spanish, and report writing, to knowledge like procedure, state, local, and federal law, location of key resources, etc. Some things just don't get covered with the depth they deserve (people's constitutional rights! would be a big one.

    I agree that even in cities like ours that have dedicated police academies with six months of training, there is only so much that can be covered. New officers still have so much to learn, and if we want cops to continue that education and stay up to date on training, we have to have the funds for that (and for more officers so that someone covers shifts to allow for that training). Being a good cop is hard. I have a son at the USMA and a son who is a police officer. People thank my son at the military academy for his service all the time (he doesn't remotely feel he has earned that). Hardly anyone ever just randomly thanks my police officer son. So thank your husband for me! Cops like the one in this story don't help.

     

    With respect to the issue of continuing to detain people during a traffic stop, the Supreme Court recently clarified this. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-9972_p8k0.pdf

    • Like 1

  21. I think he's using the technical, legal definition for our area. I agree that they are not what would be called "arrested" in the common vernacular, but police aren't allowed to just "detain" anyone they want without probable cause. If an officer pulls over a car without probable cause, they are acting outside the law (unless it is part of a sweep where every car, or every third car, etc is being stopped.)

    Police officers can detain upon reasonable suspicion - that is a different standard from probable cause needed for an arrest. A Terry stop is not an arrest. It is a detention. Different standards, different constitutional protection. The Supreme Court distinguishes between detention and arrest too - it's not just a 'vernacular' distinction.

    • Like 3

  22. without your seeing it?

     

    We have bought one house where I picked it out and DH hadn't seen it. It turned out to be more work than we thought BUT it also netted us the most equity overall.

     

    I am wondering if I would trust DH to buy a house without me or my input. Maybe if he sent video of him walking through it.......I just don't know.

    If it were a choice based on finances, yes. I would trust him to buy a house we intended to flip - or even we were going to live in it for a couple of years, fix up, and sell.

     

    If we were buying a home to live in with our family and make a life in, no. If it's more than a matter of a good investment, both of us would need to see it and feel good about it. It's not a matter of trust. Both people need to really like and want a house they will live in and make a home in. I think it would be unfair to the "picker" to make that large of a financial decision which is also loaded with a lot of personal presences that are not about quantifiable potential for resale. I wouldn't want to choose and then have him regret it, and he wouldn't either. We would need to spread the blame:)

    • Like 4

  23. Based on what my dh says, and this may be different in different jurisdictions, any time the police keep you somewhere and you are not allowed to leave, you are technically under arrest. So not when they are asking you questions and you are allowed to walk away if you want, but when you get pulled over for speeding, you've technically been arrested and released on a signature bond.

    I think your husband is confusing 'arresting' and 'detaining.' An officer can detain someone with "reasonable suspicion." The person is not free to leave, but the encounter isn't necessarily an arrest. When you get a speeding ticket, you are detained but not arrested. Refusing to sign the ticket, however, can result in an arrest. An arrest requires probable cause.

    • Like 8
×
×
  • Create New...