Posted on 11/25/2013 6:58:33 AM PST by Kaslin
Thats where they do the colonoscopy.
Hell Nay.
Police are a neutral thing; they can be used for bad or good purposes.
Anyhow, if we are foggy on good and evil, we will be foggy on how we deal with them.
just an fyi - you are under no obligation to answer anything - including your name
“I do not consent to a search of my vehicle or person, am I free to go?”
Remember everything you say may very well be recorded for future posterity...Be cooler than they are, be polite, but firm...
You may have nothing to hide, but you damn well have everything to protect!!!
I’m not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night...
And my attorney is on speed dial...
We do have search and seizure laws, check points became a major erosion of our right to go from A to B, break no laws of the road and be unmolested by the state!
Hey now.....I’m of Italian descent and I resemble that remark.
:)
CC
Well hey while they are making new laws they can make it apply equally to the police.
And that often tends to be to bow down to liberals. Conservatives usually have wiser ideas of what good policing will be, usually to stay unobtrusive until a trouble situation becomes clear.
NAY!
On “stop and frisk” though, I fortunately do not live in a high crime neighborhood and a cop stopping and frisking ANYONE out here not involved in suspicious activity would cause a riot. (Central Texas)
I just have to imagine though that if I was unfortunate enough to live in a neighborhood like the fifth ward in Houston or Oak Cliff in Dallas that I would be more than happy for the cops to be stopping suspicious characters and frisking them. If I ended up enduring one too, so be it. So, I think “neighborhood” has something to do with stopping and frisking. The NYC experience of stopping and frisking in high crime neighborhoods statistically proves my point, I think.
As long as government rather than God is regarded as the bastion of virtue, that’s unlikely.
It’s a vicious circle though. High crime is often marked by high dependence on worldly government. One could say those neighborhoods are only being what they already are.
I am okay with getting drunk drivers off the road or passing laws against dangerous driving habits like yakking on a cell phone while maneuvering one-handed through congested traffic, a habit which is in many cases more dangerous than driving buzzed.
If you are a limo driver, real estate agent, whatever (i.e. much of your work is in a vehicle and you have to take and receive calls), it just isn't that expensive to be set up with a hands free device.
My mother was T-Boned and crippled by a nimrod driving one-handed with a cell phone.
“Probable Cause Being Necessary”!No,I do NOT agree with”RANDOM CHECKS”!!The”LEFT”ALWAYS uses the excuse that”Even If One Life Is Saved”!!!Sorry,I want my LIBERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Absolutely no, never, no way.
The Constitution seems to go out the window when many, including dear FReepers, invoke some emotionally-charged anecdote but that doesn’t change the myriad problems with such suspicionless, warrantless stops, beginning with what should be the deal-killer in the first place: the 4th and 5th Amendments.
On a practical level, the arrest and conviction rate is abysmal, technology allows the skirting of the checkpoints, and stopping (nearly) every single vehicle on a busy road is obviously disruptive.
On government/PR level, it’s an overtime mill, often paid with federal, not state, tax dollars, thus further blurring the lines of jurisdiction and state sovereignty, it’s yet another chance for police to ‘strut’ and make a show of power to the citizens who pay their salaries and most of whom have never and will never break any law in their lives, and it is meant to distract from the other problems that don’t garner headlines but are more problematic, from drugs to property crimes to murders. Cowards love a defenseless enemy and DUI has few friends, which is why they keep lowering an already low/arbitrary BAC standard and coming up with nonsensical terms like ‘aggravated DUI.’
The fact that DUI offenders are rarely kept off the roads for any significant length of time reveals that it’s become a nice little earner for local and state government via fines, those insipid ‘traffic schools,’ and increased insurance premiums that are kicked back as campaign donations. But a driver kept at home doesn’t buy gas (taxes), doesn’t earn as much (more taxes), and doesn’t spend as much at the store (more taxes).
The courts have proved useless in upholding basic freedoms, which means the legislature needs to get involved again and/or ballot referenda (where applicable) should be pursued.
I’ve come to the realization that most people don’t pay any attention to their state legislatures and that’s where things like checkpoints are born.
Sometimes I think legislatures legislate just to bury bad things they do under a mountain of legislation.
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.