A sergeant with the Seattle Police Department’s gang unit was suspended for four days over his daytime DUI arrest last September, according to a disciplinary report released last Friday.

all 17 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [S] 25 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Blowing a 0.116 is wild -- bro was going for the high score

According to the police report, Page’s truck did not move through “several” cycles of the traffic light, so the officer got out to check on him. He contacted Monroe police after seeing the open container in Page’s vehicle.

Page admitted to drinking at the golf course earlier and blew a 0.116 on the portable breathalyzer test. He was arrested for physical control. The court later dropped that charge, and Page pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of negligent driving. His sentence was suspended for two years, but he was ordered to submit to monitoring, attend alcohol classes and a DUI victim’s panel, and undergo an evaluation for alcoholism.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

    0.116 isn't crazy. It's above the legal limit, but not high compared to being blackout drunk.

    Edit: More numbers after the decimal doesn't mean much. It rounds up to 0.12 which is just drunk, but not blackout drunk or anywhere near a record.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago*

    Its 3-4 drinks in, at least. The open white claw and vodka bottle in the car also not a good sign, as is the fact that he was passed put at the wheel.

    Thats enough to now not get behind the wheel in a fucking car.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    Shows that unions work, even shitty evil ones.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -20 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    The whole point of unions is to support the worst workers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    The whole point is to collectively bargain for favorable terms of employment. Supporting the worst workers is the same as applying laws equally in a country: even violent criminals have basic rights that must be respected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    It seems yours is the politer version of the same sentiment.

    "The worst workers" are criminals, like DUI people, like this cop. The union had his back, because even "the worst workers" deserve a competent defense in court and in employment action.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Sure, but that's only one portion of the deal. I don't want to minimize other benefits that unions fight for, like fair wages and medical coverage and vacation days and proper PPE supplies and training.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    You get all of it in one. Pretending anything in politics has no downsides is silly at best.

    Because the balance of the Pros and Cons of unions is better than it isn't, I'm pro-union.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Dude I was simply pushing back against "The whole point of unions is to support the worst workers." Because that's not the whole point. What you're saying has nothing to do with what I was saying. I certainly wasn't implying that supporting the worst workers was a bad thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    I’ve seen union reps immediately help escort bad workers offsite when they find out what the worker did. The worst workers cause issues for good workers and the union looks after the good of the majority of members.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago

    Gonna need ignition interlock devices on all SPD cars just in case

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    This the same Seattle pd who's chief lives in Chicago?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment