I didn't pick up the cell phone when it rang the first time, I was busy.
On the second ring, I answered.
It was my wife Lori, who told me she had just been hit by an SUV that ran a red light at an intersection near our house.
My heart skipped a beat.
Our son Michael was with her.
They were meeting some people from her restaurant to do some Christmas shopping for a needy family that they had adopted for the holiday.
She told me everyone was OK, but Michael was shaken up a bit.
I jumped in the car and began driving through the fog to reach the intersection.
Despite the increased heart rate, I drove as safely as possible through the thick fog.
The stop lights were hard to see until you were about 50 yards from the intersection, but I had driven this road a million times. I knew where the lights were and the four-way stops.
The driver of the SUV that caused the accident had driven through the red light, smashing into a car next to Lori's, before careening into my wife's front passenger door.
Michael was sitting on the driver's side behind her.
It was his first accident.
I gave everyone a quick hug, checked on the other drivers. Everyone was fine.
Then, I turned my attention to what happened.
I've covered so many crashes, minor and deadly, as a reporter over the years the questions started pouring out of me.
What happened? Where was the other driver? Did you see the SUV coming before it hit you, and so on.
I began to get angry.
How many times have I seen people driving like idiots, watched close calls and dialed 911 to report someone weaving all over the road.
The anger gave way to relief that no one was hurt.
The only serious accident I was ever involved in happened on Christmas Eve in Arizona when I was 18.
The other driver was turning left and smashed into my driver's door as I was coming through the intersection.
I woke up on the sidewalk with my sister and an off-duty nurse looking down at me.
I had a concussion. Some bruises to my left side.
The driver crushed the outer door up to the frame, which was buckled up under the driver's seat.
My head hit the top of the door. The window was down or I probably would have hit that instead.
It was a clear, beautiful Arizona winter day, but today, it was the first real day of morning fog in west Bakersfield near our house.
I wanted to know what the other driver was doing. Why didn't she see the red light? Was she driving to fast for the conditions?
The police believe some kind of distraction was involved.
Talking on the cell phone, changing the music, who knows.
I've been driving in Bakersfield fog for about 16 years now, and I've come out unscathed. (knock on wood)
Something happens to me, and I'm sure to other people as well, when the fog rolls in.
I turn off, or down, the music. Leave the cell phone in the glove box. Slow down to about a 1/3rd of my normal speed.
I even flick my brights on and off briefly when I come up on intersections, so someone trying to pull out might see me a little better.
There's no scientific proof that it works, but it makes me more attentive.
I'm grateful that no one was hurt. I'm adding it to my list of things to be thankful for this year.
I wonder if it's too late to ask Santa for a new passenger side door and mirror for my wife's Toyota Avalon?
**A quick reminder to give all your attention to the road in front of you, now that the Tule Fog has officially arrived for 2007-2008.**
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Don't Blame The Dog
I'm a big fan of police K-9's.
They do a dirty job, putting themselves in harm's way to protect their human partners.
They are trained to search out suspects, drugs and a number of other tasks.
But they are dogs.
If you resist, they will bite.
If you attack them, they will bite.
If you hide under a blanket, after officers have given you the option of exiting a house that is about to be searched, chances are, they will bite.
Basically, if police have to use the dog, a bite is probably a foregone conclusion.
A local mom has taken the first step towards filing suit against the BPD, after a K-9 bit her teenage son during the search of her home on the night of December 17th.
Police were at the home looking for suspects in an armed robbery at a Fastrip, where the suspects brandished a knife, all to steal some beer.
Witnesses traced the men to the woman's house on Gary Place.
Police ordered everyone out, key word in this sentence "everyone".
The woman and two sons exited the house, as another person ran out the back into the arms of waiting officers.
After awhile, another teenage son came outside.
The mom, through her attorney, said she told officers her 15-yr old son was inside sleeping.
Apparently he didn't hear the commotion outside.
The police department's press release said before the K-9 entered the home, they confirmed with the mom that everyone was accounted for.
The teen supposedly didn't hear the K-9 and his handler entering the home to do a sweep, announcing their presence before they entered, after they entered and during the entire sweep.
The dog reportedly lunged at the covers on a bed inside a room that hadn't been searched and ended up biting the teenager.
The teen suffered a laceration across his forehead, puncture below his right eyebrow and a cut above his ear.
The mother's attorney said the woman believes if her son's robbed the store they should pay, but if the police committed a crime, they should pay.
What crime?
And who's really at fault?
If your son really is sleeping inside the house, with police swarming all over the place and a K-9 unit preparing to go in, wouldn't you tell police EXACTLY where he was in the house.
A couple of your sons (according to the release) were just involved in the ARMED robbery of a store with a weapon.
Police say the teenager who was bit, was not involved with the robbery.
Is someone at fault?
Yes, I'd begin with the mother.
They do a dirty job, putting themselves in harm's way to protect their human partners.
They are trained to search out suspects, drugs and a number of other tasks.
But they are dogs.
If you resist, they will bite.
If you attack them, they will bite.
If you hide under a blanket, after officers have given you the option of exiting a house that is about to be searched, chances are, they will bite.
Basically, if police have to use the dog, a bite is probably a foregone conclusion.
A local mom has taken the first step towards filing suit against the BPD, after a K-9 bit her teenage son during the search of her home on the night of December 17th.
Police were at the home looking for suspects in an armed robbery at a Fastrip, where the suspects brandished a knife, all to steal some beer.
Witnesses traced the men to the woman's house on Gary Place.
Police ordered everyone out, key word in this sentence "everyone".
The woman and two sons exited the house, as another person ran out the back into the arms of waiting officers.
After awhile, another teenage son came outside.
The mom, through her attorney, said she told officers her 15-yr old son was inside sleeping.
Apparently he didn't hear the commotion outside.
The police department's press release said before the K-9 entered the home, they confirmed with the mom that everyone was accounted for.
The teen supposedly didn't hear the K-9 and his handler entering the home to do a sweep, announcing their presence before they entered, after they entered and during the entire sweep.
The dog reportedly lunged at the covers on a bed inside a room that hadn't been searched and ended up biting the teenager.
The teen suffered a laceration across his forehead, puncture below his right eyebrow and a cut above his ear.
The mother's attorney said the woman believes if her son's robbed the store they should pay, but if the police committed a crime, they should pay.
What crime?
And who's really at fault?
If your son really is sleeping inside the house, with police swarming all over the place and a K-9 unit preparing to go in, wouldn't you tell police EXACTLY where he was in the house.
A couple of your sons (according to the release) were just involved in the ARMED robbery of a store with a weapon.
Police say the teenager who was bit, was not involved with the robbery.
Is someone at fault?
Yes, I'd begin with the mother.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
The Price Of Murder
Is it just me, or does $500 seem like a bargain to kill someone and firebomb their home?
When the investigation into the murder-for-hire scheme revealed the suspects in this case were hired for anywhere from $500 to $1,000 to kill the intended victim, I was stunned.
This was not a Hollywood movie, where a mysterious individual pulls into a dark parking garage and hands over a bag of money to a hit man to snuff out a person that's proven to be expendable.
No, a local business owner ALLEGEDLY asked a younger subordinate (and family member) to find some guys and rub out a man who ALLEGEDLY had a former relationship with his current wife.
The go-between knew some "guys" who could do this, arranged the hit (complete with code words and all) and waited for it to be carried out.
All this for $500?
Even the getaway driver was reportedly promised $100.
Are you serious?
Does this concern anyone else but me?
Are there people in this town willing to end someones life over the price of a video game console or iPhone?
Come on, hold out for more money, after all we're talking about a crime that carries a pretty hefty sentence if you're caught.
For the man hired to carry out the hit, he was killed.
Put a price on that.
When the investigation into the murder-for-hire scheme revealed the suspects in this case were hired for anywhere from $500 to $1,000 to kill the intended victim, I was stunned.
This was not a Hollywood movie, where a mysterious individual pulls into a dark parking garage and hands over a bag of money to a hit man to snuff out a person that's proven to be expendable.
No, a local business owner ALLEGEDLY asked a younger subordinate (and family member) to find some guys and rub out a man who ALLEGEDLY had a former relationship with his current wife.
The go-between knew some "guys" who could do this, arranged the hit (complete with code words and all) and waited for it to be carried out.
All this for $500?
Even the getaway driver was reportedly promised $100.
Are you serious?
Does this concern anyone else but me?
Are there people in this town willing to end someones life over the price of a video game console or iPhone?
Come on, hold out for more money, after all we're talking about a crime that carries a pretty hefty sentence if you're caught.
For the man hired to carry out the hit, he was killed.
Put a price on that.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Road Rage Rules
It's not that difficult.
In fact, most of the rules are right there in the DMV handbook.
You know, the book that you're suppose to read and know before getting your license.
I'm talking about traffic and speed.
One of the biggest triggers, when it comes to road rage, is the flow.
Someone messing up the flow.
A self-appointed speed monitor who pulls into the No. 1 lane and becomes a pace car.
The monitor refuses to give way to other drivers and will not move into a slower lane when approached by a faster motorist.
This person is a catalyst for rage.
I was returning from Anaheim on Tuesday, with traffic moving fairly well.
There were the usual congestion points, like downtown, but all in all, it was a bearable commute.
Once traffic freed up and started to move, the monitors came out.
After witnessing more than two dozen close calls, obscene gestures and slingshot lane changes, I was glad to be back in Bakersfield.
But the home town is not immune to this disease.
Speed kills, but also ignites a rage greater than someone who won't make a right turn on red or doesn't realize that there are TWO left turn lanes and nearly drifts into you.
I'm not sure if it's ignorance or indignation that fuels the speed monitor, but it's a danger to everyone on the road.
Slow drivers in the fast lane (or insanity lane as I like to call it) forces the quicker current into the slow lanes, causing all kinds of potential problems.
I've heard the excuses:
"It's not your road, it's all of ours."
"If you don't like it go around."
"I'm driving the speed limit, you're breaking the law."
Say whatever you want, you are endangering the public.
Take it from a guy who drives in the lane next to the fast lane, and occasionally ventures into the No. 1 lane.
There will always be someone faster than you, no matter how fast you drive.
A simple lane change to allow the faster cars to move on, will not only create less frustration than being tailgated for several miles, but keep 'that' traffic where it belongs.
And don't try to enforce speeding laws yourself, unless you plan on making a citizen's arrest.
Road rage is a condition that we don't need to agitate any further, and it will never be cured.
Unfortunately, sooner or later, it usually ends in tragedy.
In fact, most of the rules are right there in the DMV handbook.
You know, the book that you're suppose to read and know before getting your license.
I'm talking about traffic and speed.
One of the biggest triggers, when it comes to road rage, is the flow.
Someone messing up the flow.
A self-appointed speed monitor who pulls into the No. 1 lane and becomes a pace car.
The monitor refuses to give way to other drivers and will not move into a slower lane when approached by a faster motorist.
This person is a catalyst for rage.
I was returning from Anaheim on Tuesday, with traffic moving fairly well.
There were the usual congestion points, like downtown, but all in all, it was a bearable commute.
Once traffic freed up and started to move, the monitors came out.
After witnessing more than two dozen close calls, obscene gestures and slingshot lane changes, I was glad to be back in Bakersfield.
But the home town is not immune to this disease.
Speed kills, but also ignites a rage greater than someone who won't make a right turn on red or doesn't realize that there are TWO left turn lanes and nearly drifts into you.
I'm not sure if it's ignorance or indignation that fuels the speed monitor, but it's a danger to everyone on the road.
Slow drivers in the fast lane (or insanity lane as I like to call it) forces the quicker current into the slow lanes, causing all kinds of potential problems.
I've heard the excuses:
"It's not your road, it's all of ours."
"If you don't like it go around."
"I'm driving the speed limit, you're breaking the law."
Say whatever you want, you are endangering the public.
Take it from a guy who drives in the lane next to the fast lane, and occasionally ventures into the No. 1 lane.
There will always be someone faster than you, no matter how fast you drive.
A simple lane change to allow the faster cars to move on, will not only create less frustration than being tailgated for several miles, but keep 'that' traffic where it belongs.
And don't try to enforce speeding laws yourself, unless you plan on making a citizen's arrest.
Road rage is a condition that we don't need to agitate any further, and it will never be cured.
Unfortunately, sooner or later, it usually ends in tragedy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
