Posted on 12/28/2009 6:33:55 AM PST by relictele
"Silly Putty" is what it is... something you mold into whatever you want it to be.
If they were referring to deaths, they'd say "deaths". They want the numbers to be bigger so they can scare the public and justify their police-state enforcement tactics. Hence, the intentionally vague "alcohol related crashes".
And making this about drunk driving only works if the majority of the fines they write at these blockades are for drunk-driving. They're not... and it's not even close. They'll hit you for whatever they can find. These blockades are catch-alls, not "DUI checkpoints".
“Driving is as much a privilege as riding a horse was in the past. For most it is absolutely vital. It is interesting how quickly we lovers of freedom tow the statest propaganda line whenever emotional subject matter is involved. “
Well stated. Like it or not, when you have tons of steel and glass moving at 100 feet per second, people will die. As someone else pointed out, these checkpoints are simply cash-cows for the cities, given the 0.08 standard (even lower if they can come up with other evidence). They are also easy work for the police, much easier than, say patrolling an area and trying to find criminals. As to saving lives, I have a HELL OF A LOT MORE FEAR of some young women driving and texting at the same time when I’m just trying to get home from work (which I see WAY too much of now, and always BLAST my horn at them every time), than some testosterone-teen driving with a 0.08 at 1 AM on a Friday night...but guess who’s getting their lives ruined, and guess who’s ruining other lives.
Conservatives like to think that they’re rational, but once the (orchestrated, in many cases) tugs at the heartstrings start, they typically buckle like most others.
Congrats on being such a good person
Your analogy doesn't hold up, unfortunately. Fishermen may go to the fish but if cops wanted to catch drunks they would sit outside every tavern and bar in town - which they don't. Instead, they stage their dog-and-pony show with no strobe light left unlit on main thoroughfares.
Your categorical statement that society wants a cop on every corner is unprovable therefore invalid. For the record, I certainly don't want a cop on every corner. The fewer the better and I had better see every violent and property crime solved before they get on with the important business of randomly violating the 4th Amendment. In addition these checkpoints are frequently in suburban areas where the car is a necessity and where, by sheer coincidence I'm sure, the local residents have the ability to pay the fines.
Finally, if it's about DUI then not a single ticket should be written for burnt-out taillights, seat belt use, or other revenue-raising 'violation.'
I’ll drink to that!
You didn’t address the random stops at all.
They don’t set up nearly enough!
There ought to be several every day of the week!
Not only drunks but to confiscate cars from anyone without a license or insurance, especially illegal aliens!!!!
The law requires the police publish the locations of the checkpoints. (per USSC)
I have even heard them publicised BY THE POLICE on the radio as to specific locations.
it still holds true...A policeman’s job is easy in a police state.
Yes and my original post said as much.
agreed.
So then why are the police complaining? Is it because the checkpoints are being avoided or
checkpoints are a cushy job and easy work or
checkpoints may be cancelled because people now avoid them as a matter of right or
checkpoint income is reduced or
the checkpoints are all near donut shops...
Farding, not good...but at least the babe (I think) is has her head pointed the right way (rather than down).
Yes such as the right not to incriminate yourself. I think that is the 5th amendment. Here it is called implied consent.
Florida. Implied consent you waive the 5th amendment. You know self incrimination and such mundane things. Watch and learn.
You agree to take the test that may incriminate you. You are penalized for not doing so. In fact you go to jail for not taking the test.
yes implied consent does state by having a license it IMPLIES you have waived any objections to blood or breath tests.
However here we have police complaining about people using tech to just avoid the issue entirely.
Remember these “checkpoints” all have chase vehicles to catch those who make a u turn to avoid the hassle of the checkpoint. The police ASSUME guilt. In theory you are supposed to be able to select not to go through, in practice the police don’t care.
Read the fine print. By signing the liscense you agree to be subjected to incriminating tests. BA level, sobriety etc.
The 5th amendment prohibits self incrimination and testifying against yourself last I checked. Amazing how few people realize it.
When you work on classified black projects you do the same thing.
Some even say that signing up for Social Security is a waiver of Constitutional Rights.
Ignorance is rampant.
And the government quickly concocted schemes, forcing those that need to drive to survive, to register their vehicles over and over and over and over...instead of when he vehicle changed ownership.
What a corrupt scam!
If you refuse you are subjected to criminal penalties including incarceration.
you don’t go to jail.
it is an automatic one year suspension.
if there is any question then refuse EVERYTHING.
Do not consent to the roadside exercises. (they have only a 65% accuracy anyways)
Do not conset to the breath or demand a blood test
THEN
GO TO THE DMV and demand a formal review and HIRE A LAWYER to represent you and subpoena the officers to that quasi judicial administrative hearing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.