Is it really against the law???

[macville]

This is a crazy story. The fact that a very obviously adult was in the car with the AC running and this was the second cops reaction is disconcerting. Heck, why would anyone report this in the first place?

[DaveTN]

10 hours ago, macville said:

Heck, why would anyone report this in the first place?

You’d be surprised what people will call the Police about. However, I’m sure they didn’t tell the dispatcher there was an adult in the car and the air was running. With there constantly being a case in the news of a kid dying from being left in a car; they all have to be checked...quickly.

Who knows why the second Officer seemed pizzed; we would have to ask him and see what he said.

[pop pop]

Yes, people will report anything. My daughter and grandson was mowing my yard, last week, and my grandson was weed eating beside the road when a deputy pulled up, with his lights flashing, and said someone called in a report that there was 3" of grass covering the road, which was a total untruth. The Deputy wanted to know if they were going to blow the road off when they were finished.  Go figure!

My daughter said a newer marron dodge truck drove by 2 times then parked in the driveway, just down the street, then left when the cruiser pulled up. It had an Illinois tag on it. "Yankies," how'd they ever get here in TN? 

 

Edited August 14, 2019 by pop pop

[peejman]

13 hours ago, DaveTN said:

Yes.

You are in physical of the car if its running and you are the only one in it.

I had a friend get charged with DUI while sleeping it off in the back seat of his car one rainy night.  Judge dropped the charges after pleading his case at his hearing. 

Also was in a car being driven home by a sober person and we all got threatened with DUI and PD.  The officer hassled us for quite a while since the car belonged to one of the drunks in the back seat. I still don't understand what difference that makes.  Maybe he was just bored.  

Both of those were learning experiences.  I learned it's better to stay where you are and keep drinking than it is to try and do something responsible when it's time to go home. 

[E4 No More]

Just a guess but I would imagine the 2nd cop was pissed because he was required to check on the same vehicle that the first cop had to check. They get a call about children locked in a car they have to respond. He was probably trying to get them to go into the store to prevent other cops from wasting their time on another call.

For the drunk in control of the vehicle, where I was a cop the keys had to be in the vehicle and the drunk in the front seat to be considered in control. Keys are obvious, but if the drunk was in the front seat of a car with a manual transmission he could inadvertently knock it out of gear. 

Edited August 14, 2019 by E4 No More

[DaveTN]

9 minutes ago, peejman said:

I had a friend get charged with DUI while sleeping it off in the back seat of his car one rainy night.  Judge dropped the charges after pleading his case at his hearing. 

Also was in a car being driven home by a sober person and we all got threatened with DUI and PD.  The officer hassled us for quite a while since the car belonged to one of the drunks in the back seat. I still don't understand what difference that makes.  Maybe he was just bored.  

Both of those were learning experiences.  I learned it's better to stay where you are and keep drinking than it is to try and do something responsible when it's time to go home. 

I used to drink and drive. Now I don’t; not one beer ever. I always have a driver or a ride.

I couldn’t believe it when I came to Tennessee that if you and I are out drunk in my vehicle and I’m too drunk to drive; but you think you are okay, and we get stopped, if you get arrested for DUI; so can I. That’s wild. But just goes to show; no one cares about you if you get arrested for DUI.

But about the physical control…

When I first started as a cop in the late 70’s to be arrested for DUI, you had to be in the car with it running. So if a drunk was trying to drive, we had to wait until they started the car.

We got a call to a popular bar one night, the bouncers were having trouble with a drunk at the door. When we got there they said the guy was too drunk, hadn’t been drinking there and they weren’t letting him in. He wanted to give us a speech about his rights. We explained to him that he had to leave or he would be arrested for trespass. We didn’t have any public intox laws. He climbed into a car sitting at the curb in front of the bar. Another Officer was having a discussion with him, that if he started that car he was under arrest for DUI. But at the time we couldn’t do anything until he started the car. He started the car and tried to take off, as he did the Officer standing at his window tried to grab the keys by sticking his arm in the car. When he did the suspect rolled his arm up in the window and started dragging him down the street. I was running along side the car, gun drawn and getting ready to shoot the driver when another of our cars turned the corner blocking his path. I was one second from killing him.

That wasn’t the first time people almost died from cops having to wait for a drunk to start the car and it wouldn’t be the last. Eventually there was court rulings and laws were changed (in most states I assume) to allow Officers to arrest people when they are drunk and in physical control of a vehicle.

It made it so cops could stop these people before they drove. But it also made it so that if a person pulls over, or goes out and gets in their car to sleep it off; they are subject to arrest for DUI. The test? For our courts it was could the person start the vehicle and drive off without exiting the vehicle. That was physical control.

That changed over 30 years ago and many people today don’t know that you can be arrested without driving. Many also don’t know you can be arrested on private property, including your own driveway for DUI.

[bersaguy]

Thanks for all the replies to my post. I had drawn the same conclusion as a couple of yall did and that was the 2nd officer did what he did to prevent more people from calling in the same report causing yet more officers to respond to the hot car issue. I do totally do understand the response by the officers because there has been so many children die from being left in a hot car. In one way I think any parent that does that should be prosecuted but then on the other hand the person has to be heart broken at what they did and the loss of the child would be a punishment far worse then being arrested. I could not imagine how I would feel if I was to lose a child in that manner and know it was all my fault for not thinking!!! I think the auto industry should begin working on ways that would remind a person that their child is in the back seat. Some type of warning on the dashboard that would alert the driver when they turn off the ignition that the child is in the car. They have been able to come up with all kinds of other things far less important to make your cars so smart, let them come up with one that is important!!!!

[E4 No More]

22 minutes ago, bersaguy said:

Thanks for all the replies to my post. I had drawn the same conclusion as a couple of yall did and that was the 2nd officer did what he did to prevent more people from calling in the same report causing yet more officers to respond to the hot car issue. I do totally do understand the response by the officers because there has been so many children die from being left in a hot car. In one way I think any parent that does that should be prosecuted but then on the other hand the person has to be heart broken at what they did and the loss of the child would be a punishment far worse then being arrested. I could not imagine how I would feel if I was to lose a child in that manner and know it was all my fault for not thinking!!! I think the auto industry should begin working on ways that would remind a person that their child is in the back seat. Some type of warning on the dashboard that would alert the driver when they turn off the ignition that the child is in the car. They have been able to come up with all kinds of other things far less important to make your cars so smart, let them come up with one that is important!!!!

There is. Both my GMC truck and my wife's Cadillac have back seat reminders that chime and show a warning on the console when you shut-off the engine. You have to go into the system settings to turn them off. 

[Trekbike]

41 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

There is. Both my GMC truck and my wife's Cadillac have back seat reminders that chime and show a warning on the console when you shut-off the engine. You have to go into the system settings to turn them off. 

Do they do this all the time, or only if weight is detected in the back seat?

[E4 No More]

1 hour ago, Trekbike said:

Do they do this all the time, or only if weight is detected in the back seat?

It's a static reminder every time you turn off the engine unless you shut it off in the system configuration for the vehicle. My wife and I don't have any young kids, (we're grandparents), so we've shut it off in both of our vehicles.

[beebee233]

6 hours ago, bersaguy said:

I think the auto industry should begin working on ways that would remind a person that their child is in the back seat

This is SO sad....

[TomInMN]

4 hours ago, beebee233 said:

This is SO sad....

Why? We have reminders for headlights and seatbelts. Those are both pretty dang obvious, much more so than a little person asleep in the back seat.

I think it's a good idea, and I'm glad some companies are offering the feature.

[Pain103]

55-10-803. Offense of leaving child unattended in motor vehicle -- Penalty.

(a)  It is an offense for a person responsible for a child younger than seven (7) years of age to knowingly leave that child in a motor vehicle located on public property or while on the premises of any shopping center, trailer park, or any apartment house complex, or any other premises that is generally frequented by the public at large without being supervised in the motor vehicle by a person who is at least thirteen (13) years of age, if:

(1)  The conditions present a risk to the child's health or safety;

(2)  The engine of the motor vehicle is running; or

(3)  The keys to the motor vehicle are located anywhere inside the passenger compartment of the vehicle.

(b)  A violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable only by a fine of two hundred dollars ($200) for the first offense.

(c)  A second or subsequent violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable only by a fine of five hundred dollars ($500).

 

If the adult was present and children were in no danger he was an idiot.

Edited August 15, 2019 by Pain103

[Wingshooter]

I’m pretty sure I would have laughed in his face believing that he was joking. That’s stupid. What an idiot. I bet they were hotter walking into the store than just sitting in the car’s A/C. Was she in a parking space?

I might have just driven around the parking lot at 0.1mph just for fun, lol.

This is another one of the reason’s I have really dark windows on my truck. I hate it when other people try to mind my own business.

[peejman]

10 hours ago, TomInMN said:

Why? We have reminders for headlights and seatbelts. Those are both pretty dang obvious, much more so than a little person asleep in the back seat.

I think it's a good idea, and I'm glad some companies are offering the feature.

Leaving your headlights on is more obvious than your kids in the back seat?  That's incomprehensible.  

Having kids should fundamentally change how a person thinks and acts.  People need to put down the damn phone, quit being so self absorbed and accept the idea that their needs are no longer the most important thing.  

Edited August 15, 2019 by peejman

[chances R]

Having kids; the most important thing one can do.  Has a tremendous effect on society.  No training or license required.

[DaveTN]

Parents failure to love their kids, teach their kids and give their kids a good home is why we have mass shootings; not guns.

[bersaguy]

12 hours ago, Pain103 said:

55-10-803. Offense of leaving child unattended in motor vehicle -- Penalty.

(a)  It is an offense for a person responsible for a child younger than seven (7) years of age to knowingly leave that child in a motor vehicle located on public property or while on the premises of any shopping center, trailer park, or any apartment house complex, or any other premises that is generally frequented by the public at large without being supervised in the motor vehicle by a person who is at least thirteen (13) years of age, if:

(1)  The conditions present a risk to the child's health or safety;

(2)  The engine of the motor vehicle is running; or

(3)  The keys to the motor vehicle are located anywhere inside the passenger compartment of the vehicle.

(b)  A violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable only by a fine of two hundred dollars ($200) for the first offense.

(c)  A second or subsequent violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable only by a fine of five hundred dollars ($500).

 

If the adult was present and children were in no danger he was an idiot.

The children were not unattended. Their mother was in the car with them while their grandmother went in to Walmart to pick up a few things.

[bersaguy]

37 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

Parents failure to love their kids, teach their kids and give their kids a good home is why we have mass shootings; not guns.

I agree 100% that parents don't spend the time necessary to actually teach their children and in most case show the children the Love they should and most of all provide them a good home. We did not have all the high tech toys kids have today and when they began to show up my kids did not get them until they could buy their own. Then there was rules in my home when and where they could be used. My boys were taught right from wrong until they left home as adults and from watching my Son Ronnie with his boys he raised them in pretty much the same manor he was raised in.

[beebee233]

14 hours ago, TomInMN said:

Why? We have reminders for headlights and seatbelts. Those are both pretty dang obvious, much more so than a little person asleep in the back seat.

I think it's a good idea, and I'm glad some companies are offering the feature.

If you need a reminder that your child is in the back seat of your car your child should be taken from you for their safety's sake.

Edited August 15, 2019 by beebee233

[gregintenn]

1 hour ago, beebee233 said:

If you need a reminder that your child is in the back seat of your car your child should be taken from you for their safety's sake.

It is a shame there cannot be a test one has to pass in order to reproduce.

[gregintenn]

3 hours ago, DaveTN said:

Parents failure to love their kids, teach their kids and give their kids a good home is why we have mass shootings; not guns.

Being a parent is a tough job.....but the interview is pretty cool!

[DaveTN]

59 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

It is a shame there cannot be a test one has to pass in order to reproduce.

or vote.

[TomInMN]

7 hours ago, peejman said:

Leaving your headlights on is more obvious than your kids in the back seat?  That's incomprehensible.  

Having kids should fundamentally change how a person thinks and acts.  People need to put down the damn phone, quit being so self absorbed and accept the idea that their needs are no longer the most important thing.  

Incomprehensible? Really? Look at the switch, where's the indicator pointing? Better yet, if it's not bright out, look out the front of your car and see if there are any bright spots. Most people will be able to comprehend how those processes are easier than remembering to turn and look behind them at what they think it's an empty back seat.

My wife and I have two little guys right now. I agree that having kids should (and I'd say for most people it generally does) fundamentally change your world view. I'd also say that, on a day-to-day or hour-to-hour basis, my mind is probably not operating at 100% of its potential. Also, I'm human, and self aware enough to know that I'm not perfect.

There's a chance I'll forget something at some point, and I hope to god that my children aren't harmed as a result. If an alarm could possibly help, I'm glad to have it.

The kids of the people I'm assuming you're addressing with your "put down the phone, focus beyond yourself" statement may not be helped by that alarm, and the people who make a conscious decision to leave their kids in the car certainly won't. But a "check the back seat" alarm might help one kid not die, and I think that's pretty good. In the same vein, I'm a careful driver, but wear my seatbelt anyway.

[TomInMN]

2 hours ago, gregintenn said:

It is a shame there cannot be a test one has to pass in order to reproduce.

Well, there is. It's just that lots of the proctors are much to easily fooled...