this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024
613 points (97.2% liked)

World News

38533 readers
2196 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Darryl Anderson was drunk behind the wheel of his Audi SUV, had his accelerator pressed to the floor and was barreling toward a car ahead of him when he snapped a photo of his speedometer. The picture showed a car in the foreground, a collision warning light on his dashboard and a speed of 141 mph (227 kph).

An instant later, he slammed into the car in the photo. The driver, Shalorna Warner, was not seriously injured but her 8-month-old son and her sister were killed instantly, authorities said. Evidence showed Anderson never braked. 

Anderson, 38, was sentenced Tuesday to 17 years in prison for the May 31 crash in northern England that killed little Zackary Blades and Karlene Warner. Anderson pleaded guilty last week in Durham Crown Court to two counts of causing death by dangerous driving.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Ok, as long as cops have the same limiters in their vehicles.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

What's the reasoning there?

[–] FireRetardant -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So how would a cop catch up to someone who bypass their limiter? Or respond to hostage situation in a timely manner? Or get to another unit who needs assistance?

I think it would just be better to fire cops who abuse their power.

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife 17 points 2 months ago

So how would a cop catch up to someone who bypass their limiter?

A lot of (sensible) municipalities have banned high-speed chases by police since they're so insanely risky to bystanders. Nothing wrong with cops not being able to speed dangerously, even if it means perps sometime escape (to be caught later anyway since their identities are usually known).

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

So how would a cop catch up to someone who bypass their limiter?

They don't, there's no need. They get the person's plate info and send the fine after the fact. They can also come impound the vehicle, as well. Dangerous chase: avoided.

Or respond to hostage situation in a timely manner?

They can have a special vehicle at the station that doesn't have the limiter for extremely specific situations like that. Only specially trained officers can use it.

Or get to another unit who needs assistance?

Normal speeds. They shouldn't be allowed to endanger people not even near an incident to get somewhere because another cop is """in danger"""

I think it would just be better to fire cops who abuse their power.

I think it would just be better to not give cops the chance to abuse their power in the first place since that injures and kills people

[–] Smokeless7048 -2 points 2 months ago