Trooper update

Recall the mindless robot trooper from Mass? Here’s a little more information on the situation…not to mention his name – Trooper Michael Galluccio

Jennifer Davis was stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic on Nov. 18, her contractions just 3 minutes apart. Her husband, John, was trying to appear calm for his wife’s sake, driving in the breakdown lane of Route 2. They pulled up behind a state trooper to ask whether they could continue using the lane to reach the next exit, near Alewife Station.

Not only did the trooper say no, he gave them a $100 citation for driving in the breakdown lane, made them wait for their citation while he finished writing someone else’s ticket, and even seemed to ask for proof of pregnancy, Jennifer Davis said.

First of all, it should be pointed out that the first two officers, as mentioned in my first post and the above link, should have either stopped the couple and called for an ambulance or they should have given an escort. Second, the third trooper – Michael Galluccio should have done the same, but since he’s a mindless robot, he should be suspended for delaying transport to a hospital in a serious medical situation. He isn’t simply heartless. He violated the law, his duties, and all common sense.

About these ads

2 Responses

  1. Yeah that is aweful! You should read my blog about what happened to me with a Mass State trooper.

    Just check Mass State trooper it was published on Dec 18th 2008. Read that and ask yourself what kind of idiots are they hiring?

  2. [...] Rule internalization is a horrible scourge throughout the world. It is utilizing a rule with only the rule itself in mind. Say a mother tells her daughter not to throw toys. Her daughter later throws a ball around while outside. Her mother then punishes her for breaking one of her rules. This is, of course, an absurd scenario. It is clear the reasons for the rule were that throwing toys can result in damage to the toys, hurt people in the process, and cause damage to furniture/items in the house. However, because the rule was stated more broadly than that, it technically applied to all scenarios, even throwing a ball outside. The girl violated the rule, but not the reason for the rule. This brings me to my main point. This week, prosecutors in Greensburg, Pennsylvania charged six teens ranging in age from 14 to 17 with creating, distributing and possessing child pornography, after three girls were found to have taken photos of themselves in the nude or partially nude and e-mailed them to friends, including three boys who are among the defendants. [...]

Can I haz commentz?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 198 other followers

%d bloggers like this: