
California Man Arrested for Leaving His Car Idling in Parking Lot - ourmandave
http://www.thedrive.com/news/20726/california-man-arrested-for-leaving-his-car-idling-in-parking-lot
======
kup0
I'm certainly not one to always come to the defense of law enforcement, but
this headline is false. He was not arrested for leaving his car idling. He was
arrested for refusing to cooperate when being ticketed for leaving his car
idling.

~~~
dragonwriter
> I'm certainly not one to always come to the defense of law enforcement, but
> this headline is false.

The headline is entirely accurate, though phrased in a way that people
unfamiliar with the domain are likely to misintrepret the meaning.

> He was not arrested for leaving his car idling.

Yes, he was. Specifically, he was subjected to a _non-custodial_ arrest for
that.

> He was arrested for refusing to cooperate when being ticketed for leaving
> his car idling.

Yes, he was _subsequently_ subjected to a _custodial_ arrest for the offense
of “resisting arrest” with regard to the preceding non-custodial arrest. Were
the prior event not an arrest, the subsequent arrest would have no basis,
since there would be no arrest to resist.

See, e.g., [https://www.bayerandblack.com/library/difference-between-
a-c...](https://www.bayerandblack.com/library/difference-between-a-custodial-
and-non-custodial-arrest.cfm)

~~~
modbait
> non-custodial arrest

While technically true (the best kind), this is not what 99% of English
speakers understand the word "arrest" to mean. The headline is in letter
accurate, but in spirit a lie.

~~~
dragonwriter
It's true in the strict sense, and also true in a loose sense in that it
conveys both the key outcome and the triggering event accurately, though you
have to read the article to get the intermediate chain.

