You have got to be kidding me. No, we should not be fussing over this; people will work it out as they always have.
It looks to me like some people will get bent out of shape over next to nothing. The extra-wide pedestrians can scoot over and the bicyclists can slow down and go around. Don't worry; you'll both be able to keep moving in a moment.
The existing state laws about yielding right-of-way on roadways are already pretty clear, and should be used as our guideline for handling these situations.
We need bicyclists to use every bit of this area; just as we tend to drive and walk everywhere. We don't need to make another rule, or do anything new. We can handle this by proceeding with confidence.
When people of our city are carrying their wives into the Emergency Room of a hospital, it is the role of the local police to hold the door open. It's not acceptable for them to block it.
I wonder when we're going to see some video of the police officer obstructing access to medical treatment.
The cold reality of this situation is that a man was carrying his one-legged, cancer victim wife into the Emergency Room when his path to get help was blocked by an officer of the law.
It is in the best interest of the police and the people for Law Enforcement Officers to protect life and property. That does not mean stop victims at the door of the Emergency Room and prevent them from going inside.
How much more of a victim does the patient need to be before people realize that this police officer applied some correct ideas so out of order as to make a bad situation worse?
Protect life and property. Keep your traffic citations on the slow side of triage. Thanks.
I suspect that not only should the charges against him been dropped, but that local governments are now behind on paying this man to the tune of about $10,000. The bail alone was reported somewhere as near $7500. I recommend resolving the financial portion of this problem swiftly.
Ignoring that aspect of this is not acceptable, either.
Which means that, thanks to failure to follow procedures on the part of the City, the State of Tennessee now may owe Mister Wright significant reimbursement for all costs assumed as the result of his actions.
Such costs might include:
bail
legal defense (for failing to provide legal defense IAW TN code 58)
basic pay for time on duty (entire span of incident)
compensation for consumed fuel (gas to the hospital)
compensation for counsel to law enforcement (basic pay, per diem)
compensation for counsel and witness to the public (tv interviews, press explanations: basic pay, per diem)
laundry, dry cleaning and ATM fees (common costs for preparing to carry out his duties as a result of the above problems)
a new license plate (enlisted guardsmen)
filing fees for any correcting statements related to explaining this incident to licensing bodies (EMT certifying boards and the like)
basic pay, per diem, for time spent making those explanations
basic pay, per diem, including meals and transportation for any future time devoted to resolving this matter.
Somebody might want to throw in a class on TN Code 58 for local law enforcement to prevent future problems like this one.
Regarding the comments above that Wright might not have had the authority to do what he did, and the request for a reference; I would suggest:
Tennessee Code Annotated 63-6-218 (Good Samaritan)
Tennessee Code Annotated 58-1-227 (National Guard, Relief from Civil and Criminal Liability; particularly paragraph b).
You may notice, under that last one, that Guardsmen like Wright are afforded the same protection from liability while providing aid as is granted to all state employees, just as though they were at their post of duty.
Also, this same law specifies that if charges are brought against this man, he shall be appointed legal counsel; and that all costs of charging him with anything shall be paid out of the state's military budget.
His veteran status is pertinent since so many veterans have been involuntarily deployed and involuntarily recalled to duty by the Governor, on behalf of the people of the State.
Not only should he not have been interfered with, the City should refrain from preventing Soldiers of the State from providing aid to citizens in distress. No exceptions.
I have served in a war with this man, and I believe he is of good character. Considering the strong manner in which he carried out his duties overseas, I think the best course of action would be to support transporting the patient to the hospital, and then to hear him out later. While I don't know all the details in this matter, I am surprised to learn that it ended with arrest. Instead, I would have hoped that it had concluded with safe and effective medical support.
Any monies paid out by him should be returned. It is in the overarching interest of all public servants to safeguard the welfare of the life and property of all people in our state. Thus, minor disputes over the provision of those services should be quietly and amicably resolved without additional payment or penalty.
Hopefully, a gentlemanly resolution of this matter can be achieved without further incident.
Banning bikes?
You have got to be kidding me. No, we should not be fussing over this; people will work it out as they always have.
It looks to me like some people will get bent out of shape over next to nothing. The extra-wide pedestrians can scoot over and the bicyclists can slow down and go around. Don't worry; you'll both be able to keep moving in a moment.
The existing state laws about yielding right-of-way on roadways are already pretty clear, and should be used as our guideline for handling these situations.
We need bicyclists to use every bit of this area; just as we tend to drive and walk everywhere. We don't need to make another rule, or do anything new. We can handle this by proceeding with confidence.
Officer in hospital stop had earlier suspension
When people of our city are carrying their wives into the Emergency Room of a hospital, it is the role of the local police to hold the door open. It's not acceptable for them to block it.
Officer in hospital stop had earlier suspension
I wonder when we're going to see some video of the police officer obstructing access to medical treatment.
The cold reality of this situation is that a man was carrying his one-legged, cancer victim wife into the Emergency Room when his path to get help was blocked by an officer of the law.
It is in the best interest of the police and the people for Law Enforcement Officers to protect life and property. That does not mean stop victims at the door of the Emergency Room and prevent them from going inside.
How much more of a victim does the patient need to be before people realize that this police officer applied some correct ideas so out of order as to make a bad situation worse?
Protect life and property. Keep your traffic citations on the slow side of triage. Thanks.
Husband driver’s charges dropped
Or, a short version of this might be:
Don't just drop the charges, be sure to cover the bills incurred.
Husband driver’s charges dropped
I suspect that not only should the charges against him been dropped, but that local governments are now behind on paying this man to the tune of about $10,000. The bail alone was reported somewhere as near $7500. I recommend resolving the financial portion of this problem swiftly.
Ignoring that aspect of this is not acceptable, either.
Husband driver’s charges dropped
Which means that, thanks to failure to follow procedures on the part of the City, the State of Tennessee now may owe Mister Wright significant reimbursement for all costs assumed as the result of his actions.
Such costs might include: bail legal defense (for failing to provide legal defense IAW TN code 58) basic pay for time on duty (entire span of incident) compensation for consumed fuel (gas to the hospital) compensation for counsel to law enforcement (basic pay, per diem) compensation for counsel and witness to the public (tv interviews, press explanations: basic pay, per diem) laundry, dry cleaning and ATM fees (common costs for preparing to carry out his duties as a result of the above problems) a new license plate (enlisted guardsmen) filing fees for any correcting statements related to explaining this incident to licensing bodies (EMT certifying boards and the like) basic pay, per diem, for time spent making those explanations basic pay, per diem, including meals and transportation for any future time devoted to resolving this matter.
Somebody might want to throw in a class on TN Code 58 for local law enforcement to prevent future problems like this one.
Husband driver’s charges dropped
Regarding the comments above that Wright might not have had the authority to do what he did, and the request for a reference; I would suggest: Tennessee Code Annotated 63-6-218 (Good Samaritan) Tennessee Code Annotated 58-1-227 (National Guard, Relief from Civil and Criminal Liability; particularly paragraph b).
You may notice, under that last one, that Guardsmen like Wright are afforded the same protection from liability while providing aid as is granted to all state employees, just as though they were at their post of duty.
Also, this same law specifies that if charges are brought against this man, he shall be appointed legal counsel; and that all costs of charging him with anything shall be paid out of the state's military budget.
His veteran status is pertinent since so many veterans have been involuntarily deployed and involuntarily recalled to duty by the Governor, on behalf of the people of the State.
Not only should he not have been interfered with, the City should refrain from preventing Soldiers of the State from providing aid to citizens in distress. No exceptions.
Chattanooga: All charges against man rushing wife to hospital dropped
I have served in a war with this man, and I believe he is of good character. Considering the strong manner in which he carried out his duties overseas, I think the best course of action would be to support transporting the patient to the hospital, and then to hear him out later. While I don't know all the details in this matter, I am surprised to learn that it ended with arrest. Instead, I would have hoped that it had concluded with safe and effective medical support.
Any monies paid out by him should be returned. It is in the overarching interest of all public servants to safeguard the welfare of the life and property of all people in our state. Thus, minor disputes over the provision of those services should be quietly and amicably resolved without additional payment or penalty.
Hopefully, a gentlemanly resolution of this matter can be achieved without further incident.