Motorized recliner pulled, relisted on eBay

Thee B.
Superior, WI     11/03/2009 9:53 PM

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Report a Violation

Jennifer B.
Duluth, MN     11/03/2009 9:19 PM

The original owner of the motorized chair is selling the seat cushion and pics of himself with the seat on ebay to help with the DWI bills.

Report a Violation

K D.
Duluth, MN     11/03/2009 9:06 PM

Hey, Whats with the seat cushion on ebay? I thought that was thrown away And the person standing behind the seat cushion? How come it just appeared out of now where on Ebay? Wonder if the person behind the seat cushion had it the whole time? Hmmmm, someone else trying to cash in?

Report a Violation

Steven W.
Duluth, MN     11/03/2009 8:26 PM

Z~~ I never expected you of all people to understand what meant by using common sense with application of the law and so you don't get point, no surprise.....it would take critical thinking to separate that the law on drunk drivers is to protect themselves and others...and that Anderson wasn't a big threat to anyone including himself. It also would take some critical thinking to realize comparing a lounge chair to a 3,000 pound car that can do 100MPH or an ATV that can do 60MPH where great harm could come to the drivers and others, isn't the same thing as a reclining chair doing 15MPH. I already stated if was driving a car, well alright then but he wasn't and isn't the same thing nor fitting the intent of the seizure law. I'm not disputing that there is a law governing this, it was using that umbrella under these circumstances shows a heavy handed and lack of common sense on the Polices part. I for one think the world would be far safer place if everyone leaving a bar were driving home in a lounge chair that goes 15MPH. "Common sense is the knack of seeing things as they are, and doing things as they ought to be done. " C. E. Stowe

Report a Violation

Lexi c.
Duluth, MN     11/03/2009 7:48 PM

I hope PPD doesn't get a dime. And they end up being sued for false advertisement.

Report a Violation

David S.
Duluth, MN     11/03/2009 5:26 PM

I wonder how people would feel if he had ran into their car or injured someone in their family. Always a minor offense as long as it is someone else's property or family.

Report a Violation

P H.
Woodbury, MN     11/03/2009 4:35 PM

Shame on the police chief. He should already be embarrassed by this whole incident and the disrespect his department earned by unfairly giving this man a DWI. If you ask me, it sounds responsible to not drive a car home from a bar. Instead, the man drove a decorated lawn mower that my five year old son could out race on his bicycle. Where are the balanced scales of justice? Now the man has a DWI on his record that will cost thousands. This article is about the police chief is pissing and moaning that his city will lose revenue because of his own EBay screw up. Perhaps the chief should worry less about revenue and more about fairness and understanding. The city has not lost anything except some of their pride. Personally, I'm always scared when I hear police talking about revenue. Revenue is not their job. Period. I remember the TV 20/20 article back in the 1990s about police raiding a private home in the middle of the night on a drug bust. They shoot and killed the owner. The 20/20 article pointed out that the police chief pumped up his deputies by focusing on how much revenue his department would earn by taking the house and land. They found no marijuana, drugs or anything else. They just killed an innocent man because they were too excited about the property seizure.

Report a Violation

David W.
Duluth, MN     11/03/2009 3:50 PM

Steven W - You are missing the point. It isn't the fact that he had an accident, it's the fact that he was driving a vehicle while drunk. The amount of damage is irrelevant. If I drive my car home while drunk, but don't hit anything, it's NOT OKAY. It is illegal to drive ANY motorized vehicle while intoxicated... cars, boats, lawnmowers, snowmobiles and even chairs!

Report a Violation

Steven W.
Duluth, MN     11/03/2009 2:19 PM

Those citing the law are missing that the law's intent was not for confiscating lounge chairs, hello?. I feel the Police excercised poor judgement void of common sense in confiscating the chair. We all know the chair hit a parked car but nobody is pointing out that there appears to be zero damage to the chair, nada, not even a tear in the cushions. So regardless how fast it was moving, exactly how much damage was done to a parked car that the Police were brought in? Exactly how much damage could be done to a parked car with cushions? Any car rolling into a parked car at 5MPH would show some damage, but the chair shows none. I think all the circumstances including incurred damage should weigh in on this. This is NOT the same thing as drunk and plowing into a parked squad car and totally it. Yes, if it was a car regardless of damage he should have lost it but stay on point people, it wasn't a car, it was a motorized chair and apparently most folks like the police are incapable of seperating a chair that does 15MPH from a car and the intent of a law to the foul of this crime.. Andersons owned right up to his responsibility in it, great, so he got the 2 years probabtion but does confiscating the chair on top of that justify the real "crime" in this case? I don't think all the circumstances meet the intent of the law or show common sense on polices part and that is what feel many are defending Anderson not having chair taken but maybe am wrong and it's just that we're all bleeding heart liberals.....LMAO.

Report a Violation

John A.
Duluth, MN     11/03/2009 1:10 PM

Are we over this yet? NEXT!

Report a Violation