Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Last paragraph:

"We do not want a police state," Colins wrote in his dissent. "It seems we are on the precipice of becoming one, in the name of DUI."

1 posted on 09/01/2006 8:37:34 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: CSM; VRing; JTN; Gabz; inneroutlaw; freepatriot32

Ping.


2 posted on 09/01/2006 8:38:39 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: elkfersupper

Love it love it love it.

Take cover from the incoming fireballs from DUI zealots.


3 posted on 09/01/2006 8:41:17 PM PDT by relictele
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: elkfersupper
I'm glad to see this happen, The whole DUI issue is a gateway to destroy the rights and privacy of citizens. Tonight I was on the way home from dinner and got behind 7 police cars on the way to setting up a "Sobriety Checkpoint" where they stop everyone who comes down the road whether they have done anything wong or not.

Most likely the revenuers will not catch any drunk drivers, but the local operating budget of the police will be padded somewhat from tail lights being out, and tires not having enough tread. I recall hoping that the revenuers had to sit there through heavy rain that was happening in the area.
6 posted on 09/01/2006 8:59:45 PM PDT by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: elkfersupper

It's good to know there are still judges following the law..


7 posted on 09/01/2006 9:03:02 PM PDT by Experiment 6-2-6 (Admn Mods: tiny, malicious things that glare and gibber from dark corners.They have pins and dolls..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: elkfersupper
This ruling surprises me for two reasons.
First, there are numerous rulings that if the officer begins to pursue someone, or observe an offense in his jurisdiction, then the officer can pursue the offender and make a stop outside of the jurisdiction.

Second, there was a ruling in the New Jersey state courts some years ago about jurisdiction. Some people might not like it, but when you think about it, it is absolute common sense.

In the case, a local police officer observed an offense outside of his town and stopped the car. The accused was convicted and appealled based on the fact that the offense did not happen in the officer's town, and the stop was not made in the officer's town, therefore the officer had no jurisdiction to make a stop.

The state argued that police officers in New Jersey are sworn to uphold the laws of the State of New Jersey. Since moving violations are part of the state laws, title 39, the court ruled that the officer was in fact upholding the laws of the State of New Jersey and was doing exactly what he was sworn to do.

And they are right. The oath and the laws authorizing police officers in new Jersey say nothing about the particluar town that swears the officer. If you're a cop in New Jersey, you're a cop in all of New Jersey. I wonder why other states have not followed this ruling.

10 posted on 09/01/2006 9:25:14 PM PDT by sig226 (There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: elkfersupper
I don't know. I have mixed opinions on this one. Here is the simple fact: Most people pulled over for drunken driving are drunk. I was one of these people.

People who drink should not operate a vehicle for no less than 24 hours after their lips last touch a bottle. These are the rules I obey now.

Granted, far too much of DUI laws have been dictated by the neo-prohibitionist MADD. Nonetheless, I want to keep drunks off the road.

Go home. Grab a twelver and rent a movie or three from Blockbuster. Get F'ed-up in your home. Stay off the roads.

12 posted on 09/01/2006 9:48:04 PM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: elkfersupper

We already became a police state for the War on Drugs... then it was aimed at cigarettes... now at alcohol... when will it stop?


16 posted on 09/01/2006 10:40:17 PM PDT by thoughtomator (There is no "Islamofascism" - there is only Islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: elkfersupper

Great decision by the judge.


19 posted on 09/02/2006 5:34:15 AM PDT by Mrs.Nooseman (Proud supporter of our Troops and President GW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson