Posted on 06/10/2013 3:32:45 PM PDT by Bodleian_Girl
See the question mark? That indicated a question.
when there is a compelling public safety rationale.
Who sets the standard for "compelling public safety rational"? The court, the sheriff, chief of police, town constable?
you don't actually want to discuss the merits or legality or morality of this particular roadblock..
Have the courts ever found roadblocks to be immoral? Can state legislatures decide which roadblocks are legal in the face of the US Constitution?
I actually think we are uniting against it. If it seeks to dissuade or divide, it is a failure.
Not sure if it was this thread or maybe it was another where we clashed.
Really, the way i see it for good reason.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3011194/posts?q=1&;page=94
I’d like to think you’re actually a pretty decent fella but, it seems whenever we meet, friction ensues.
.
* * * ASH ALERT* * *
Answered above. For all your defense of these practices, I'm disappointed you don't know it is case law that controls here.
Have the courts ever found roadblocks to be immoral?
Nobody here said they would or should. But we can talk about whether we think it is moral, and we can provide supporting evidence for our position. I think this is what you are trying to stop, for some reason.
Can state legislatures decide which roadblocks are legal in the face of the US Constitution?
Nope.
In my younger days I was driving with expired tags and as I rounded a bend I spotted a police roadblock. I attempted a turnaround but one of the cops spotted me. I saw him run to his car, turn on the lights and siren and before I knew it he was alongside my car and ordering me out of the car.
In this instance, all I got was a stern lecture about trying to avoid roadblocks. I could have been charged with any number of serious violations.
Alaska Wolf might be smug with his experiences, but past performances don't guarantee future results.
So law enforcement is required to have a court decision on whether a particular reason for a roadblock is legal, or does the court just set some general parameters for law enforcement interpretation?
For crying out loud, I'm attempting to stop nothing. I'm not the one posting TROLL in capital letters or fouling the thread with inane profanities.
The body of case law carves out the exemptions to Constitutional guarantees such as the right to travel from place to place unmolested, or the right to be secure in your person or papers.
There have been numerous cases of law enforcement using checkpoints for a variety of reasons. The federal circuits and the US Supreme Court have all issued decisions explaining when a roadblock/checkpoint can and cannot be used.
For all of you law-enforcement-can-do-no-wrong types:
Grow up for crying out loud.
bfl
I'll even give you an example. Before I retired from DC, we had a rash of violent crime (even worse than normal) in a particular neighborhood called Trinidad. Our Chief decided to throw up roadblocks on the streets leading into Trinidad, and we were to stop every vehicle and check their driver's license. This was supposed to "take back the neighborhood".
I immediately recognized this as unconstitutional. Even though the Chief had articulated what she felt was a "compelling public safety interest", the checkpoint was found to be illegal in court, because the people entering and exiting the neighborhood have a right to travel freely absent some immediate public safety exception.
“and now WE are infighting”
No, we are on the same page. The zot will eventually happen, seen it happen over and over and I help that happen every chance I get. I have even been awarded the kitty shield for zots. I searched out trolls during the election cycle and earned that kitty shield.
So how did we end up with the TSA? Why is it still in existence? Who is defending "these practices" as you allege?
Not really directed to you, sorry.
Alaska;
I want your bona fides:
These are simple yes or no questions and you need to answer then all.
Do you own a gun and/or do you support the 2nd amendment as it was written to challenge the authority of government ?
Do you wear a helmet when riding your bicycle ?
Do you have free will ?
Do you think that people need to be TOLD or manipulated to think the right way ?
Do you think you are smarter than most people ?
Do you trust or want to trust authority ?
Are you GAY ?
What do you know that is true ?
I’m beginning to think you’re in the minority of those that read past the title of the article.
I don’t have a problem with voluntary blood and DNA sampling. But it should have been advertised like a car wash, well off the roadway.
Non-police related road blocks are not normal in my experience. So coupled with the DNA sampling, this particular road block is a lightning rod to the libertarian mindset, and for good reason... despite the drama.
Exactly what was it that I posted that you took offense?
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.