Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

City Will Arrest High Water Barricade Violators
WOAI-TV—San Antonio, TX ^ | 25 Aug. 2005 | WOAI-TV—San Antonio, TX

Posted on 08/25/2005 9:32:59 AM PDT by Sarajevo

San Antonio, TX. The city is about to get tough with people who drive around barricades erected to prevent motorists from driving through high water. A new state law that takes effect September first will allow police to handcuff the drivers, arrest them, and throw them in jail, 1200 WOAI news reported today.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: highwater; needlesslegislature
It's punishable by a fine of up to $2,000, 180 days in jail, or both which makes it a Class B misdemeanor to 'drive around a barricade where a warning sign or barricade has been placed because water is over any portion of a road, street or highway.

This is ridiculous. It essentially makes criminals out of drivers who have only demonstrated their personal stupidity by driving around a safety barrier. It isn't the same as someone who drives through a railroad barrier in front of a moving locomotive. It only involves personal safety and a modicum of common sense not to ignore safety barriers. This should be addressed by the issuance of a standard traffic ticket.

If you get stuck in high water and have to be rescued, each adult in the vehicle will also have to pay a $400 per person rescue fee.

This item also brings forth issues such as: Why pay more for a service which has alreay been budgeted for, using equipment already paid for? A different, yet similar analogy would be to charge extra for our military when they start their vehicles, or are alerted for war.

I think our politicians don't have enough to keep themselves occupied

1 posted on 08/25/2005 9:32:59 AM PDT by Sarajevo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo
It only involves personal safety and a modicum of common sense not to ignore safety barriers.

No, it also involves the lives and safety of the people - officers and public - who try to rescue the idiots. Do you think that if the police let one of these dingbats sit on the roof of his car yelling, "Help!" until he was swept away, that his heirs wouldn't sue the city for a FReeping fortune, and win?

2 posted on 08/25/2005 9:38:52 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Oklahoma is the cultural center of the universe ... take me back to Tulsa!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo

Swept away vehicles require a high risk rescue. I know, I know, thats what they get paid for, but....

Every time somebody drives through a posted area they are running the risk of requiring a rescue. That pulls resources that could be better used elsewhere.

My vote would be to say "Hey, stupid, swim your own way out."


3 posted on 08/25/2005 9:40:54 AM PDT by PeteB570
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo
Frankly, given the nanny state we have (apparently because people want it that way), I'm glad to see the penalties.

Why pay more for a service which has alreay been budgeted for, using equipment already paid for?

It's called a user fee. Passing the cost onto the people who benefit from the service and equipment is rarely a bad thing.

4 posted on 08/25/2005 9:42:48 AM PDT by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo

They're putting in a rescue fee in my native city, as well. It's called "the city needs money."

No one there is really hiding the ball on this: the city is broke and that's one of the ways it is going to generate more revenue. The city passed that along with a number of other revenue enhancing devices.


5 posted on 08/25/2005 9:43:56 AM PDT by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo

I once got a $50 dollar ticket for not having a light on my bike. I wanted to strangle the cop.


6 posted on 08/25/2005 9:44:04 AM PDT by TBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo

It sounds reasonable to me. Every year, and it's usually a women with kids, gets herself and her kids either caught in high water or drowned. You have to pay a price for ignoring laws or being stupid.


7 posted on 08/25/2005 9:45:26 AM PDT by caver (Yes, I did crawl out of a hole in the ground.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo
OK, this article made a lot more sense once I looked back at the title and realized that the last word wasn't 'Vibrators.'
8 posted on 08/25/2005 9:45:54 AM PDT by Sloth (Archaeologists test for intelligent design all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeteB570

"My vote would be to say "Hey, stupid, swim your own way out.""

Seconded.


9 posted on 08/25/2005 9:56:15 AM PDT by tfecw (It's for the children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo
It isn't the same as someone who drives through a railroad barrier in front of a moving locomotive.

They are both public safety barriers and it is illegal to go around either one.

It only involves personal safety and a modicum of common sense not to ignore safety barriers.

Wrong...it puts the rescuers at risk.

Why pay more for a service which has alreay been budgeted for, using equipment already paid for?

Having to bring out the boats to rescue idiots that go around the barriers costs money. Having to bring in additional personnel familiar with this particular rescue equipment to rescue these idiots costs money. If you think they use the existing manpower on that particular shift, you are mistaken, fires and crimes don't stop when it rains.

10 posted on 08/25/2005 10:05:40 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo
I think our politicians don't have enough to keep themselves occupied

Blame the voters in addition to the politicians. Maybe if there wasn't such a huge incumbent re-election rate some of this nonsense would go away. Also, you're right, there's no need for a year long legislature. Part time the legislature and send the pols home to their constituents the rest of the time. Show the lawmakers that you're watching them.

11 posted on 08/25/2005 10:23:02 AM PDT by hattend (Alaska....in a time warp all it's own!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: caver

Then make it a ticket offense and charge them the rescue fees. Making it a class B misdemenor? please.


12 posted on 08/25/2005 10:24:45 AM PDT by hattend (Alaska....in a time warp all it's own!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PeteB570

unfortunately stupid people have their children in the car with them. I know from my work on the malibu search and rescue team.


13 posted on 08/25/2005 10:24:46 AM PDT by Walkingfeather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sarajevo

It's a pretty big fine here in Phoenix... They have to pay rescue fees and if a helicopter is used, can be really expensive!! I think minimums are well over $500... They call it the "stupid driver law". While I agree with our laws that the idiots pay instead of the taxpayers, I dont think it should be criminal and drag them off to jail. I am not sure but I dont think it has to be barracaded here... everybody is continually told dont drive through a running wash!


14 posted on 08/25/2005 10:40:10 AM PDT by AzNASCARfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson