Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-29-2016, 02:52 PM
 
25,798 posts, read 16,447,729 times
Reputation: 15991

Advertisements

I personally have never had any expectation of privacy in my vehicle while driving on a public roadway. A DNR official has the right to search your boat on public waters at any time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-29-2016, 03:24 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,399,675 times
Reputation: 4190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Please DO NOT defend my right to drive drunk. It's STUPID. The Supreme Court has ruled on this, and I am sorry you don't like their ruling, but it is perfectly Constitutional, and their authority is Constitutional, so it is you who is not respecting the Constitution.

It's constitutional in limited circumstances. The issue is that at least half of the roadblocks don't meet those requirements. The police are counting on sheep to just ignore the constitution in the name of public safety.

I'm pretty sure we get get the crime right close to zero if we just suspended due process, a speedy trial, habeus corpus, the 5th amendment, and that pesky little blurb that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.

How far are you willing to go in the name of public safety?


The constitution isn't supposed to be enforced inconsistently. You don't get to pick and choose. The courts have ruled that your car is an extension of your home. Simple as that. Stopping everyone without probable cause is a problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 03:47 PM
 
Location: Sun City West, Arizona
50,439 posts, read 24,032,774 times
Reputation: 32768
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicalDiscord View Post
Wikipedia is not reliable at all. In fact, it has been involved in many scandals over the years with people specifically editing the content for political motive. It is not simply an issue of the source not being up to top standards, rather it is the fact that the source is completely untrustworthy, a cesspool of propaganda for lairs and manipulators.

Now if I go on to claim something and provide sources, I will do so directly to primary sources of information or such where the reader can directly verify the validity of my statement.

Someone popping in to drop a link to such a worthless source and not even entering the discussion deserves no consideration to their comment. That is exactly what that poster did.

Maybe you should stick to white knighting issues you have a chance of defending ok? I think we have enough SJWs mouthing off these days, don't you?
Do you also attack the many right wing nutty websites that people are constantly referencing on this forum?

It just depends on what you want to call a legitimate source. With about 14 million hits per day, I guess quite a few people think Wikipedia is legit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 04:10 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,399,675 times
Reputation: 4190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
How about a cavity search? If you don't have anything illegal up your butt, no problem, right?

Sadly the liberal sheep are almost there. I'm sick of the "if you didn't do anything wrong" crap. The government ignores millions of illegals at the same time they are implementing even more military-style troops at the airport. We flew to New Mexico recently and they had so-called "viper" teams well before the checkpoints. The average soldier in Vietnam wasn't as armed as those guys. We have gone astray.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 04:24 PM
 
Location: Florida
77,013 posts, read 47,474,520 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Not true. Just because the Supremes rule on something does not make it right. It only makes it legal. Lots of examples of their rulings on the legality of slavery should tell you that.
The Constitution gives the Supreme Court their authority, and you apparently do not respect the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 04:25 PM
 
58,738 posts, read 27,070,082 times
Reputation: 14185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
The thread is not about the Supreme Court's bad decision.
I KNOW you agree with EVERY other decision they have made though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 05:16 PM
 
Location: Texas
37,937 posts, read 17,802,494 times
Reputation: 10366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Statz2k10 View Post
Check points save lives. I've seen tens of people pulled over through the years & I'd be willing to bet at least one of those would have ended up in an accident. Factor that out among the thousands of cities in this country you can be sure lives have been saved.
Police should go into houses and monitor what everyone is eating. Overweight people should be fined and if that doesn't work throw them in jail.
See what I did there.

People should never, ever have to prove their innocence when they haven't be accused of something. Again we fought a revolutionary war over things like this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 05:17 PM
 
Location: Texas
37,937 posts, read 17,802,494 times
Reputation: 10366
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
If the public doesn't support checkpoints, they will be abolished.
I'll go you one better, if the Constitution doesn't support checkpoints, they will be abolished.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 05:19 PM
 
Location: Texas
37,937 posts, read 17,802,494 times
Reputation: 10366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
I can't believe the mods have NOT closed this ridiculous post.

It has been shown that the Supreme Court has ALLOWED sobriety checks, so why is this thread STILL going on?

As the left keeps saying, "It is the law of the land"!.
Yes an it's constitutional to refuse to answer questions at these check points and go on your way unencumbered. So why bother with check points.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 05:21 PM
 
19,707 posts, read 10,051,883 times
Reputation: 13064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
The Constitution gives the Supreme Court their authority, and you apparently do not respect the Constitution.
The court twists the constitution to suit themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top