Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the way to end these subriety and DUI check points is social media. If one is found in opperation, there would need to be 100 or so drivers willing to clog the system. the first ten would have to be willing to be detained and or arrested. the leaders of the group would announce that all 100 drivers were willing to go to jail.
the way to end these subriety and DUI check points is social media. If one is found in opperation, there would need to be 100 or so drivers willing to clog the system. the first ten would have to be willing to be detained and or arrested. the leaders of the group would announce that all 100 drivers were willing to go to jail.
Constitutions and donuts always seem to work well. Acting friendly and WANTING to talk to the police also seems to make police nervous. If you're going to do it, have fun with it.
I have never had an alcoholic beverage in my life but some counties in America need to be driven around is my thought on this. Don't drive there. When their economy dumps, they may rethink their methods. Or maybe their streets will be so safe without drunk drivers that we will all want to be there.
There is the standard of reasonable suspicion here. They are going to a court and getting a search warrant. So far I don't have a problem.
What I don't understand is if simply get pulled over and you are suspected of drunk driving and refuse a breathalyzer you automatically lose your license. So what is the point of drawing blood?
Now maybe there are valid arguments where there are injuries or deaths as the result and there are possible addition charges.
if you want to end DUI check points in this country, you have to do it on a state by state basis, through the legislature or the ballot box. get a ballot initiative set up to where the law is changed to make DUI check points illegal in your state. if you want things to stop you have to do it right, and legally. if you fight the system, you only get yourself in trouble as the system will beat you down. if you work with in the system however, you stand a good chance of beating the system at their own game. unfortunately far too many people think the can beat the system by fighting it, and find out later to their own shame/pain that they are wrong.
Although Driving is a priviledge, you don't suspend your civil liberties and constitional rights.
Actually you are by signing the contract to get your driver's license. Driving is a privilege and not a right. By signing over your rights, you are allowed the privilege of being able to drive.
Driving is a privilege. If you choose to participate in that activity, which is regulated by state and local law, then you have agreed to the conditions placed on that participation, in the form of you applying for and the state issuing a driver license.
Yes, it's Constitutional. Why wouldn't it be? You have no right to a driver license or to drive on public roads. If you don't want to be subject to the laws and conditions of doing that, don't get a driver license and don't drive. Simple.
You are positively wrong, and many court cases have already established what educated americans already knew. The ability to travel freely is a constitutional right, and not a "privilege".
The American Citizens and Lawmen Association in conjunction with The U.S. Federal Law Research Center are presently involved in studies in several areas involving questions on constitutional law. One of the many areas under review is the area of "Citizens right to travel." In an interview a spokesmen stated: "Upon researching this subject over many months, substantial case law has presented itself that completely substantiates the position that the "right to travel unrestricted upon the nations highways" is and has always been a fundamental right of every Citizen."
With this truth established, a person cannot be required or compelled to wave one fundamental right in order to exercise another. And I think most reasonable people would deem the forced extraction of blood against a person's will to be "unreasonable search and seizure" for which the constitution specifically addresses as a protected right.
Now, I can understand how people can become confused about rights and privileges, particularly since government authorities have worked tirelessly to convince the masses that rights really don't exist, and that anything you do is deemed a privilege .... I do not understand the mindset of those who insist on defending the destruction of their own rights. To me, that is the epitome of stupidity and cattle-like mentality.
I have never had an alcoholic beverage in my life but some counties in America need to be driven around is my thought on this. Don't drive there. When their economy dumps, they may rethink their methods. Or maybe their streets will be so safe without drunk drivers that we will all want to be there.
If you have a few beers, and hop on a bus - can they nail you for public intoxication?
Actually you are by signing the contract to get your driver's license. Driving is a privilege and not a right. By signing over your rights, you are allowed the privilege of being able to drive.
NO. You cannot sign away your Constitutional rights, period.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
