Slashdot Mirror
A Tesla on Autopilot Crashed Into a Parked Police Car (fortune.com)
An anonymous reader quotes Fortune:
A Tesla vehicle in Autopilot mode collided with a parked police cruiser in California, authorities said. The Tesla sedan was driving outbound when it struck a parked Laguna Beach police car, the Laguna Beach police department said Tuesday. According to police, the driver in the Tesla sustained minor injuries. The police cruiser was empty of officers at the time of the crash. Laguna Polic1e Sgt. Jim Cota told the Los Angeles Times the police car "is totaled."
The police sergeant also told the Times that it was the same area where a Tesla crashed into a semi-truck last year, adding "Why do these vehicles keep doing that? We're just lucky that people aren't getting injured."
"Tesla has always been clear that Autopilot doesn't make the car impervious to all accidents," Tesla responded in a statement, "and before a driver can use Autopilot, they must accept a dialogue box which states that 'Autopilot is designed for use on highways that have a center divider and clear lane markings.'"
Record producer Zedd also responded to the news by sharing on Twitter what he calls "the other side": I once fell asleep driving home late at night on the highway (w/ autopilot on) and got woken up by it beeping + turning off music to wake me up. Would have prob been dead without it... I didn't touch the steering wheel for a couple minutes and then it turned off the music and started beeping. Elon Musk responded to the tweet, "Glad you're ok!"
The police sergeant also told the Times that it was the same area where a Tesla crashed into a semi-truck last year, adding "Why do these vehicles keep doing that? We're just lucky that people aren't getting injured."
"Tesla has always been clear that Autopilot doesn't make the car impervious to all accidents," Tesla responded in a statement, "and before a driver can use Autopilot, they must accept a dialogue box which states that 'Autopilot is designed for use on highways that have a center divider and clear lane markings.'"
Record producer Zedd also responded to the news by sharing on Twitter what he calls "the other side": I once fell asleep driving home late at night on the highway (w/ autopilot on) and got woken up by it beeping + turning off music to wake me up. Would have prob been dead without it... I didn't touch the steering wheel for a couple minutes and then it turned off the music and started beeping. Elon Musk responded to the tweet, "Glad you're ok!"
Drop the autopilot name and call it drive assist. The first implies it drives by itself, the second clearly means you still need to be at least holding the steering wheel.
if auotpilots aren't advanced enough to sense road boundaries, center lane line, parking spot markers (which this road had), then they aren't advanced enough to drive a car
At least it stopped automatically for the cops.
This happened over a week ago!
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
What percentage of humans did these things versus percentage of autopilots?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
The autopilot refused to take a field sobriety test.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
An airplane's autopilot can crash the plane. Either by flying into the side of a mountain, running out of fuel, running into another plane, or into weather conditions the plane can't handle. All possible and even likely if the human pilot does not take responsibility.
And the collection of devices is still called "Autopilot" and have been for more than a half century. Nobody claims that the respective manufacturers have oversold their product and/or delivered defective product.
I mention this because I pointed out this obvious fact when this story popped up on a popular liberal political blog. I was roundly denounced as I was "blaming the victim." Then referred to breitbart.com where apparently that is considered acceptable. Stupid me for expecting better.
So I guess the noisy media circus that goes on any time Tesla is mentioned isn't going to abate anytime soon.
Fords have killed tens of people today and do every day. On any typical day, more than 100 people die in the U.S. from auto accidents while riding in brands other than Tesla. In contrast, a handful of people have died in Teslas.
While the NTSB is interested in batteries and self-driving systems, their announcements of investigations create a false impression that Teslas are more dangerous than other vehicles. The opposite is most likely the case, since a self-driving system, properly used, has the collision-avoiding attention of the driver and of a computer too.
So, why so much bad news about Tesla?
Tesla is also the most shorted stock at present, with short positions covering more than a quarter of all outstanding shares and perhaps as much as one third. That means a great many investors are desperate to see Tesla's stock reach a much lower price soon, or they'll be forced to buy it at its present price in order to fulfill their short positions, potentially bankrupting many of them and sending some out of the windows of Wall Street skyscrapers. These investors are desperately seeding, feeding, and writing negative stories about Tesla in the hope of depressing the stock price. Musk recently taunted them by buying another 10 Million dollars in stock, making it even more likely that there won't be enough stock in the market to cover short positions. If that's the case, short-sellers could end up in debt for thousands of dollars per shorted share -- as the price balloons until enough stockholders are persuaded to sell. Will short-sellers do anything to give Tesla bad press? You bet.
And of course there's the interest of the gasoline industry, which will go out of business given the proliferation of fully-electric vehicles that are actually good enough to compete with gasoline ones, a position that only Tesla holds so far. Entrenched automotive manufacturers also have every reason to seed and feed bad press while they fail to build their own battery manufacturing plants. Before Tesla, one could see the obvious activities of these powers in seeding bad news about the Prius.
Then there's the fact that Tesla does not advertise. Given the queue of Model 3 reservations, Tesla already has all of the sales they need for their next three years of their factory's production, before they might have any economic reason to advertise. This can't be comfortable for the press, and no doubt makes them more willing to carry stories seeded by those who would harm Tesla.
Bruce Perens.
Fortunately for pilots, there are no police cars or concrete dividers in the sky. Unfortunately for Tesla drivers, they are plentiful on the ground.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
"Autopilot is designed for use on highways that have a center divider and clear lane markings."
The GPS knows where the car is, and just about every mapping software knows what kind of road you're on.
So how hard would it be to have the Tesla's computer not even turn on the autopilot if they're not on a road with center divider and clear lane markings? Or better yet, the autopilot only runs on roads that have been certified "not screwed up".
In this case he was on Laguna Canyon Road, which has a median in some places and a middle "suicide lane" in others, and varies from one to two lanes from place to place.
Fortunately for pilots, there are no police cars or concrete dividers in the sky.
Sir, are you unfamiliar with the documentary film The Fifth Element?
#DeleteChrome
It's going to kill a cop or first responder in some completely moronic way soon ... don't own Tesla stock.
But there are mountains. And tall buildings.
How many humans crashed into parked cars on Tuesday?
How many human drivers safety passed that cop car without ramming into it?
"Autopilot" is a poor name for Tesla's driver-assist technology because most people associate the word autopilot with "totally autonomous" and aren't bothered by the nuances of the technology as applied to aircraft. To most folks, autopilot means exactly what it sounds like, and it's pretty clear that there are a number of Tesla drivers treating it as such.
The comparison to an aircraft's autopilot, while technically correct, is irrelevant to the discussion. A remarkably minuscule percentage of the human population will ever see a cockpit, let alone operate the controls. Autopilot means George Jetson era autopilot and that's that.
Beware of the Leopard.
You know, ones that worked on the safety systems in aerospace industry for the last several decades, using technologies that aren't cool in 21st century. Guess what you get with toddler engineers.
I bet if they would use the ol' guys just as consultants the number of catastrophic failures would be near 0. Just like it is in the aerospace when you ignore the human factor.
You can let a plane or a boat follow a heading and most of the time everything is fine. Autopilot simply keeps you from drifting off course due to winds or currents.
What Tesla is selling clearly isn't autopilot in anything like that sense. They're using 'autopilot' as a 'high tech' marketing term and letting people believe the car can do things it really can't. To make matters worst, Tesla is also letting 'drivers' not pay attention to what's going on for long periods of time, reinforcing the idea that the car do more than it really can. So as far as this specific crash is concerned, it likely wouldn't have happened if not for Tesla's negligence.
I would imagine most objects encountered in the sky weren't there the last time.
Since Musk can send an OtA update to adjust brake usage, he can send a command to disable auto pilot on all Teslas in the wild.
With that problem taken care of, he and his engineers can spend their time working on reworking and/or improving their "auto pilot" so it doesn't run into parked vehicles. Or anything else.
"Autopilot" is a poor name for Tesla's driver-assist technology because most people associate the word autopilot with "totally autonomous" and aren't bothered by the nuances of the technology as applied to aircraft. To most folks, autopilot means exactly what it sounds like, and it's pretty clear that there are a number of Tesla drivers treating it as such.
The comparison to an aircraft's autopilot, while technically correct, is irrelevant to the discussion. A remarkably minuscule percentage of the human population will ever see a cockpit, let alone operate the controls. Autopilot means George Jetson era autopilot and that's that.
Actually Autopilot is the perfect name for the technology, at least from a marketing perspective. It implies hands-off driving to those that haven't been trained to fly airplanes, i.e., just about everyone, and therefore drives sales. At the same time plausible deniability exists because there is some logical explanation that makes sense to some set of individuals.
I didnt realize pilots used autopilot to fly low through mountain valleys, which would be compatable to a highway.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
No, you're confused. That was the Star Wars Holiday Special.
I don't blame you for feeling that way, however.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
And airplane autopilot has been a contributing factor in a number of airline crashes. However those are usually blamed on the human who failed to use them properly.
Zedd's not dead.
In auto-pilot or not the driver is responsible for what the car does since the Tesla Auto-Pilot is not a level 5 autonomous control unit. So far I've only seen statements from the Police to the press stating that the driver _said_ it was in auto-pilot. Either way, the driver drove into the back of the patrol car, end of story. But it is not so this is just more of the negative press machine against Tesla and nothing more. Could be funded by Delco-Remy or any of the other antique auto industry players.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
I bet the cop got pretty pissed when he figured out there was no one he could run in.
I think clearly people are misunderstanding the system and over confident in its abilities. The name Auto Pilot doesn't help matters and I think that was a mistake to market the system with that name. Although a airliner has a auto pilot system too, that many pilots use when cruising at altitude. Of course they don't have nearly the obstacles and hazards in the air as automobiles do. Even so a pilot would generally turn off auto pilot in any condition that would warrant more attentive control. Seems to me were asking cars auto pilot to do way more then auto pilot in aircraft?
Record producer Zedd also responded to the news by sharing a self-centered canard, saying, "I once fell asleep driving home late at night..." implying that Tesla's autopilot is a life saver.
His tweet is in no way connected to the latest Tesla Autopilot crash, he was merely attention whoring like most parasites upon society.
So what he's really saying there is, "I was driving once, I fell asleep because I was too stupid and self-centered to care about others safety or my own, and the Tesla saved me from my stupidity".
You just gotta love our media, using that inane quote as a critical headline, fucking idiots.
Sierra had a game called Driver's Ed. Whenever I ran into a cop car in the game, the instructor would exclaim "I'm sure the police would be interested to hear YOUR side of the story,...".
You are ignoring Tesla's own claims.
"Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars. All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver"
See? Claim as understood by normal reasonable person is that the thing is superior to humans in driving a car.
Oh? that's not true? they lied and exaggerated with marketing hype? Oh noes!
Accidents don’t get reported in the news? You’re joking, right?
Considering the training that humans have to go though before they get to a point where they would use an aircraft autopilot, not unreasonable at all.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
How many human drivers safety passed that cop car without ramming into it?
How many of those human drivers were also asleep?
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
The autopilot in a plane also requires all pilots to be trained and aware of not just its abilities but also its well defined limitations. Are you suggesting Tesla drivers should all require a separate training and certification process to be able to use autopilot?
Tesla responded in a statement, "and before a driver can use Autopilot, they must accept a dialogue box which states that 'Autopilot is designed for use on highways that have a center divider and clear lane markings.'"
If only the vehicle had some kind of fancy GPS + Computer Vision system that could detect when it was being used in a situation for which it was not designed and either refuse to work, or at least give the user a stern warning.
I once fell asleep driving home late at night on the highway (w/ autopilot on) and got woken up by it beeping + turning off music to wake me up. Would have prob been dead without it... I didn't touch the steering wheel for a couple minutes and then it turned off the music and started beeping.
Possibly, it's also possible that he fell asleep because the Tesla was doing the driving for him.
It should also be noted how ridiculously lucky he is that he wasn't killed when the Tesla woke him up and put his confused half-asleep self back in control of the vehicle. Another Tesla driver was already killed by that exact scenario.
I stole this Sig
Indeed, the Telsa "Autopilot" is an order of magnitude more intelligent than a normal plane AutoPilot. And both can kill for the same reason.
There have been a number of crashes like the Air Asian one at SFO where pilots have set AutoPilot (actually AutoThrottle for nit pickers) to the wrong mode. The pilots then do not monitor basic things like air speed. Until the plane falls out of the sky. The would be probably better off with no Auto anything.
Fix that whole "can't avoid running into stationary objects" thing already. That's the most basic requirement for non-stationary objects with any form of steering.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Requiem for the American Dream
Yep. I'm sure there were no warning signs or flashing lights 200 yards before that barrier that the Tesla driver should have spotted if he'd not been playing candy crush.
Seriously, if you want to pay no attention at all, take a bus.
No sig today...
The evidence of what many of us have believed is finally coming out. This technology isn't what it was promised to be and can't replace humans behind the wheel. The evidence points to the fact, because the technology isn't smart enough you still need a human in the seat monitoring what the car is doing, so the human can take over instantly when the system meets a situation where it finally decides it doesn't know what to do. This was proven in NTSA's crash analysis of the Phoenix fatality where the system finally called for driver control with less than two seconds before the crash. So, if we need a human to constantly monitor the system, what benefit does the system really provide: a false sense of security???
ezbatteryreconditioninginfo.org
If you take away steering controls from the driver, eventually all drivers will suffer from an attention lapse. This is a well studied fact.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
If people wanted to pay attention, why would they buy Autopilot? Many vehicles have simple 'crash avoidance', most way more affordable than a Tesla.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Because they're idiots.
Luckily for us, Tesla is logging the data:
https://jalopnik.com/feds-clos...
So far they've been held blameless in every single incident.
One reason they're logging the data is that people are trying to blame every accident they have on the car:
"It wasn't me, it was the car!"
Yeah, right.
No sig today...
Ok well if they are blameless then their conscience is clear. They shouldn't be complaining about how the media is covering the accidents because they have nothing to hide. Legal doesn't mean moral, and morality is decided by the public. The press should be able to do their worst if this is all ok.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
The link you cite says the crash is still under investigation. He hasn't been cited yet.
Yes, they need to "investigate" that he was driving fast enough to flip his car and that he did not have a license. Oh, wait, they already knew that at the scene.
Nice try at outrage bait though.
Nice try at pathetic excuses, though.
The autopilot in a plane also requires all pilots to be trained and aware of not just its abilities but also its well defined limitations. Are you suggesting Tesla drivers should all require a separate training and certification process to be able to use autopilot?
It is called a drivers license.
Not just Tesla drivers should have one.
It is simply astounding to me how many people are willing to show up on message boards and empathically declare and take the position that is perfectly OK and a statutory right for drivers to operate dangerous vehicles without knowing what they are doing. Yet here we are.
I would bet money that each and every Tesla driver that has wrecked their car has had it told to them both verbally and in writing about the limitations of the "Autopilot" feature. I would be surprised if Tesla even allows them to take delivery of the car without getting the customer to sign off on it. (Maybe they do I haven't checked -- can someone confirm?)
Question: I have a Jeep that was sold as an "All Terrain Vehicle." Well a cliff is "terrain" isn't it? If I drive my Jeep off a cliff what would you think about a lawsuit suing the manufacturer because the LIED about its capability?
Oh yeah, there's lot of those at 35,000 feet.
The Tesla Autopilot doesn't follow a GPS route. If it did, it wouldn't have crashed into a concrete divider.
Tornados (and cruise missiles) do.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
This is a known characteristic of the Tesla "autopilot". I wouldn't even call it a "defect" per se as it is simply operating as it is designed to work.
It won't pick up stationary objects, particularly if there is another vehicle in front of the autopilot vehicle, going about the same speed, and then that vehicles move aside with the stationary object right in the middle of the lane.
This is one reason of many why the Tesla system requires constant supervision by the human driver.
Of course the reason the whole type of system is a really bad idea is because it works great 99.9% of the time. Thus lulling the human driver into a false sense of security and safety. So then the human driver tunes out. Then 2000 miles later (or whatever) the "Autopilot" encounters a situation it can't handle and you wham into the back of a firetruck or whatever.
And no, I'm not making this up:
https://www.wired.com/story/te...
http://www.newsweek.com/tesla-...
https://www.teslarati.com/tesl...
I saw where you can use two oranges stuck in the steering wheel so you don't have to use your hands. Fun City!
Where does it say he was an illegal immigrant?
My GPS once insisted I drive into a car full of longhorn cattle, so I am pretty sure it could tell me to drive through something concrete too. Note, I didn't drive into the field.
If you fall asleep while driving,
The issue is that you AREN'T, the car is.
Hispanic name, unlicensed driver? It's a safe assumption. Kinda like it's a safe assumption that when "Mohamed" goes crazy and kills somebody in public that it's extremely likely to be an act of terrorism. Do you think anybody else would not even be cited for flipping their car, sending 3 police officers to the hospital, and not having a license? This is California we're talking about, here.
Wow, just wow. It's an expensive car, and a young driver, so just as easily a kid taking his dad's car. A friend of mine in the USA has a Hispanic sounding name. That's because his family is from Spain.
Wow, just wow. California is flooded with illegal immigrants. They openly brag about taking over the state. And the useful idiots hold the door open. But you're not racist, right? God forbid a stereotype is actually true.
Do you actually think anybody else would have been allowed to flip his car, crash into a police car, send 3 police into the hospital, all without a license, and not even been cited? Even if by some off-chance he's here legally, the police would have assumed he's an illegal. They can't even inquire about immigration status.
We have a state that's declared itself a "sanctuary" state, with an Oakland mayor who committed obstruction of justice by tipping off a Fed raid, with a cucked citizenry that won't even convict a murderer of manslaughter.
But you aren't racist, right?
Wow, just wow. California is flooded with illegal immigrants./p>
So everyone with a Hispanic name must be an illegal immigrant!
God forbid a stereotype is actually true.
Is my friend with a Hispanic name an illegal immigrant? Generalise much?
Do you actually think anybody else would have been allowed to flip his car, crash into a police car, send 3 police into the hospital, all without a license, and not even been cited?
If you think the police are lenient on illegal immigrants you live in some sort of fantasy world of right-wing talking heads. Maybe, he's from a very wealthy family, and that is the reason why - after all, he was driving an expensive car. If he's an illegal immigrant maybe they are going to not bother with the paperwork of citation and just deport him?
We have a state that's declared itself a "sanctuary" state
You seem to have confused state with a few cities.
So everyone with a Hispanic name must be an illegal immigrant!
So you're from the Cathy Newman school of argument, right? You're pathetic strawman removes all the context.
If you think the police are lenient on illegal immigrants you live in some sort of fantasy world of right-wing talking heads.
You're in Denial World, with blinders on to the current zeitgeist. Whether it's the "sanctuary" state, to the obstruction of justice tip-off mayor, to the cucked citizenry's failure to deliver even a manslaughter verdict.
If he's an illegal immigrant maybe they are going to not bother with the paperwork of citation and just deport him?
Wow, just wow. One, what makes you think they'd even be able to find him again? Two, what makes you think they have any desire to deport him, given the current zeitgeist? Three, if they wanted to deport him, the first step would have been to cite him. Driving without a license is against the law. Getting him into the system would have been the necessary first step to deportation, but only a first step, and hardly a guarantee.
You don't show any proclivity for an honest attempt at dialog, which requires reading, understanding, and acknowledging, but in the off-chance you decide to show some intellectual integrity, here's an article on the reality of deporting illegal immigrants.
You seem to have confused state with a few cities.
You seem to be woefully ignorant. A quick web search would have spared you some embarrassment.
I'm with Google's approach to self-driving cars. Until they're good enough that I can safely take a nap in the back seat without my attention and Google will claim full responsibility in the event of an accident, I'm not trusting a half-implemented system. Humans aren't good at long stretches of nothingness followed by emergency split second reaction. It's not how we're built to react to things and to try to do so is asking for trouble.
So everyone with a Hispanic name must be an illegal immigrant!
So you're from the Cathy Newman school of argument, right? You're pathetic strawman removes all the context.
You are the one that suggested the name was an indicator that the person was likely to be an illegal immigrant. I am merely pointing out that you are over generalising.
I won't respond to the rest of the post at present, but rather let us wait to see whether the person turns out to be an illegal or not.
I see it wasn't a Tesla in this case, but a 2018 Sentra.
I see it wasn't a Tesla in this case, but a 2018 Sentra.
Yes, I was confused by your "expensive car" reference. But of all the problems with your posts, I let that slide. However, since we know stereotypes and generalizations exist for a reason, I too would be very surprised if an illegal immigrant was driving around in a Tesla without a license.
You are the one that suggested the name was an indicator that the person was likely to be an illegal immigrant. I am merely pointing out that you are over generalising.
You are the one over-generalizing by ignoring all the context from my posts, and thinking it's the name only that underlies my beliefs. That's why it's a strawman.
I won't respond to the rest of the post at present
Yes, why would you, when the supplied context and erroneous claims on your part undermines your position?
but rather let us wait to see whether the person turns out to be an illegal or not
In the real world, we have to update our beliefs based on the evidence on hand, not the oracle evidence we would desire. If you didn't have blinders on, you'd acknowledge the pro-illegal immigrant sentiment in California, especially by the politicians and the media, and that the cops can't even inquire about immigration status. In other words, the fact you're looking for is never going to materialize.
The best way to find out if he was illegal was to get him processed into the system with an arrest, or at the minimum a citation. Do you think the average person in the average state would not even be cited while flipping their car, smashing into a police car, and sending three police officers into the hospital, all without a license? It boggles the mind.
Claiming that only 'stupid' people misuse 'autopilot' doesn't reduce Tesla's responsibilities.
Their marketing facilitates the idea that's it's normal to let 'autopilot' steer their car, and the fact that Tesla doesn't sound an alarm or prompt the driver to hold the steering wheel for long periods of time emphasizes Tesla major responsibility in these types of crashes.
"It's exactly autopilot in that sense."
Autopilot was invented because when cruising with locked controls, boats and planes would still slowly drift of course, but the idea of cruising in a car with locked controls doesn't make sense, and adding autopilot to that even less.
Hispanic name, unlicensed driver?
which seems to very much reference the name origin.
You said:
I said his name within the context of:
You reduced this to: "So everyone with a Hispanic name must be an illegal immigrant!"
In addition, you've shown yourself to be woefully (or willfully) ignorant on the facts surrounding illegal immigration in California. Rather than address the issues, you retreat to waiting for facts that will never arrive and defending your strawman. Do you have any intellectual honesty?
If you think the police are lenient on illegal immigrants you live in some sort of fantasy world of right-wing talking heads.
Since he twice referred to people as "cucked" I think that's likely.
I said his name within the context of: the "sanctuary" state of California
Try reading your own link. California has signed a bill which limits some cooperation with Federal border enforcement where no other crime has been committed, but there is no sanctuary from deportation. I might not agree with the new legal framework, but that doesn't mean that mischaracterisation by the use of the word sanctuary, which has a specific meaning of prevention of the discharge of a sentence or other legal action, is appropriate. If there's anything I hate, it's that sort of intellectual dishonesty.
that he was unlicensed
What if he had a 'white' sounding name. Would this be significant? If you feel that this fact is only significant if he has a Hispanic name, then the fact that you are reacting to is his name. To me, however, a significant set of circumstances is new car, young, and unlicensed, which might mean it was stolen, or a parental car 'borrowed'.
the highly unusual circumstances of a flipped car, 3 police officers sent to the hospital, all without a license, and not even a citation
There's a difference between one not having been reported and there having been no sanction, and it is not safe to assume there will be no sanction.
In addition, you've shown yourself to be woefully (or willfully) ignorant on the facts surrounding illegal immigration in California.
Not at all
Rather than address the issues, you retreat to waiting for facts that will never arrive
Rather than jumping to conclusions. Just because they may not be reported to you doesn't make his status change. His status may be reported later. At this point we don't know.
mischaracterisation by the use of the word sanctuary
It's a term in wide public use, chosen by the politicians that enacted their policies.
a specific meaning of prevention of the discharge of a sentence or other legal action
The intent is to prevent illegal immigrants from being deported.
If there's anything I hate, it's that sort of intellectual dishonesty.
Then you must hate yourself, with your strawmanning, spewing ignorance, and avoiding reality.
What if he had a 'white' sounding name. Would this be significant?
Go ahead, then. Find a similar story where a 'white' sounding name driver was not even cited for driving reckless enough on a residential road where they flipped their car and sent 3 police officers to the hospital, all while being unlicensed. If you had any intellectual honesty, you would admit the very idea would have been absurd to you before we got into this argument. But you don't.
Not at all
*snort* Like when you thought it was just the cities, and not the state? Oh, you're going to pretend you were relying on a specific definition of "sanctuary"?
Rather than jumping to conclusions. Just because they may not be reported to you doesn't make his status change. His status may be reported later. At this point we don't know.
Again, ignoring reality. I've already covered this, and you haven't responding to any of my points. More intellectual dishonesty. You must really, really hate yourself:
"In the real world, we have to update our beliefs based on the evidence on hand, not the oracle evidence we would desire. If you didn't have blinders on, you'd acknowledge the pro-illegal immigrant sentiment in California, especially by the politicians and the media, and that the cops can't even inquire about immigration status. In other words, the fact you're looking for is never going to materialize.
The best way to find out if he was illegal was to get him processed into the system with an arrest, or at the minimum a citation. Do you think the average person in the average state would not even be cited while flipping their car, smashing into a police car, and sending three police officers into the hospital, all without a license? It boggles the mind."
I don't even know what "cucked" means. But then I'm stupid, self-hating and intellectually dishonest, so I wouldn't.
The police cruiser was empty of officers at the time of the crash.
Is this implying that it would have been OK if there were people that were not officers inside the cruiser?