Dui checkpoints: How to proceed when the gistapo ask for your paperz

NoDrama said:
Missed it, completely. Lazy, not Dull.


Probable cause? You mean engaged in a completely legal activity? When did driving on a road become probable cause? There is a reason states have found it unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

In today's day an age driving on a road past 6PM almost has become probably cause in regards to drunk driving. There is a reason they catch so many drunks around, and beyond this time :).
 
sync0s said:
Cop arrests quiet teenager whom he thinks could commit Columbine 2.0 = potential life or lives saved.
Click to expand...

do they just think that? or is there evidence, like written plans to carry out a mass murder and access to many firearms?

because when they take a drunk off the road, they know that person is drunk. they have breath and blood to prove it beyond any reasonable doubt.
 
Mellowman2112 said:
locomotion is a right not a priveledge dude. In a free country the people dont get priveledges thats for Cuba and the soviet union of the past. We have a consititutional right to move about freely in this country. Unless we let them usurp it like they did 3/4 of the Consititution and Bill of Rights with their patriot act and NDAA bullshit.
Click to expand...

You have a free right to travel, you don't have a free right to use an automobile on a public road, that is made of any size, material, condition, or quality, while driving under the influence of any drug you please, at any speed you please, however you please... all while jeopardizing everyone else around you. The fact that it's intentional is why it's not a right to jeopardize my life, because one decides to drive a rusted pile of shit, high on smack, after downing a half of liquor.

You don't have the right to directly threaten my life. This is why it's not one's right to "do as they please" while conducting travel on a public road.
 
beardo said:
What if I feel most free when I'm traveling in a mechanical buggy on a public byway listening to jethro tull jam out on the flute while i'm sipping a fine single malt scotch? Is that not within my rights? Am I not allowed to pursue happiness?
Click to expand...

Your right to pursue happiness does not over ride one's right to life. Their right to preserve their life, over rides your right to endanger their live via your pursuit of happiness. Got it?
 
InCognition said:
You have a free right to travel, you don't have a free right to use an automobile on a public road, that is made of any size, material, condition, or quality, while driving under the influence of any drug you please, at any speed you please, however you please... all while jeopardizing everyone else around you. The fact that it's intentional is why it's not a right to jeopardize my life, because one decides to drive a rusted pile of shit, high on smack, after downing a half of liquor.

You don't have the right to directly threaten my life. This is why it's not one's right to "do as they please" while conducting travel on a public road.
Click to expand...

So I'm assuming you have to agree that it is excessive when people get DWI's while sleeping in their car, right?
 
beardo said:
It is unconstitutional to interfere with your right to travel.
By blocking the road they are interfering with travel and ensuring unobstructed travel is one of the few things they should be doing, they should have patrols out looking for road blocks and check points and toll booths, they should focus on busting those setting up and operating such illegal obstructions.
Click to expand...

Likewise it's much more so unconstitutional to interfere with one's right to life.

By driving on the road intoxicated, one is interfering with people's right to life, and not interfering with one's life is one of the few things they (the intoxicated) should be doing. They should have patrols out looking for drunks, they should focus on busting those driving and operating automobiles illegally.
 
NoDrama said:
In other words you can't prove anything.

Stopping people in the middle of the road to check their sobriety is no different than stopping people coming out of the Wal-Mart parking lot and checking their groceries for cleaning chemicals. Both are justified by "Saving lives".
Click to expand...

There is much more probable cause in stopping someone at a roadblock at 2:00 am on a Saturday, that stopping any one person walking out of a Walmart, at any time of day, for cleaning chemicals.

Your point doesn't make very much sense regarding the topic at hand.
 
sync0s said:
So I'm assuming you have to agree that it is excessive when people get DWI's while sleeping in their car, right?
Click to expand...

my friend had that happen to him in AZ. got into a fight with his old lady after having a few, went out to sleep in the car. cops came and woke him up then gave him a DUI.

can't happen in every state though. the law there is "intoxicated to the slightest degree" and "in control of the vehicle". even though he wasn't driving, he was in control of the vehicle. he could have left the keys in the backyard or the bushes and gotten off without a DUI.

know your laws, people!
 
deprave said:
Libertarians simply see the reality....One of the many myths most people don't realize is that police don't protect people, something libertarians see and others don't, You call us crazy but you guys are the ones living in the comic book world where jack bauer and superman are out there on the streets saving lives and good prevails over evil. This is just not the reality of the situation, government does not give a fuck about you, giant mega corporations do not give a fuck about you, they don't even give a fuck about their own employees. I get kind of get sick of repeating these things but I must repeat it until every human being wakes up: The two great evils in this world are government and mega corporations. These entities work not in the interest of the people but in the interest of themselves and for their rooted power and sustainability... which is money and our very monetary system, thus money is indeed the root of all evils.
Click to expand...

Yes we understand that police don't mysteriously appear in front of you to stop a swerving car from hitting you and such. That is not the point being made in this thread. You're completely off topic with that rant you just posted.

No one is calling you crazy for your beliefs on the government institution. A lot of people understand the reality and truth in the rant you just posted, but like I said that's completely off topic and has little to do with what we are discussing. You're not smarter than anyone else in regards to what you just posted.

You're actually just making yourself look incredibly ignorant stating your general beliefs that one should have the right to travel on public roads in any way they please, regardless of their physical or mental state, or the state in which their automobile is in.



I'm a libertarian, but I don't let a piece of paper give me an end-all-be-all ultimatum, when there is a situation such as DUI checkpoints, that have a very realistic approach in aiding a problem across America. I have no problem waiting a few minutes while the police arrest dozens of people for irresponsibly driving while they are intoxicated. You can say they aren't saving lives all you want, you would just be ignorant in making such a claim. You'll never seen an accident from one who was arrested while DUI, prior to committing an DUI accident, now would you?
 
Mindmelted said:
Insurance should be changed to IF SHIT HAPPENS!!!!
Well guess what shit has not happened for 25+ years!!!!
The insurance companies are nothing but legalized robbery on the citizens of the united states.
Click to expand...

No one makes you drive on the road, so if you don't want to drive then don't get insurance.

If you decide to drive on the road while high as shit, and driving a pile of trash, don't expect that you should be able to ram me at 100mph and just call it a day.
 
unohu69 said:
When i was in New Hampshire, they do not require mandatory insurance UNLESS, you have a DUI, or an accident that is your fault. Makes sense to me.

I got T-boned on my way to the mall one day, no real damage just dented my front fender a little. The guy had no insurance. I didnt sue him, he was poor all ready anyway. I just drew a big yellow smiley face over the dent. on a big white Buick it was quite the symbol.
Click to expand...

So you basically took it in the ass for that guy in regards to a lesser resale value for your vehicle. Sounds great if you like paying for other people's mistakes...

I don't like paying for other's mistakes. I definitely don't like taking people to court to make them pay for their mistakes. What's your point?
 
beardo said:
Anyone think it strange to pay someone to impede your right to travel, block the routes of travel you pay to maintain and question and search you?
Click to expand...

Anyone think it's strange to pay a lawyer to force someone to pay your medical bills and car repairs, while you travel the routes where other drivers harmed you via irresponsibility?
 
NoDrama said:
A vast MAJORITY of the people they pull over have had imbibed NO ALCOHOL. In fact less than 1% of the people stopped are getting a DUI. How do you figure probable cause when only a tiny portion would possibly be guilty?

Please do not use the "But drunks kill people in accidents" justification, because that justification can be used for anyone. Do we have $5000 fines, suspension of license and jail time for people who are caught talking on the cell phone?
Click to expand...

You fail to recognize the other half of the equation. DUI checkpoints and the general fact of DUI penalties draws a fear among people who do not wish to ever be caught while DUI. This in return prevents a lot of DUI's whether you want to realize it or not.

On the cell phone subject, there should be a $10,000 minimum, 1 year minimum, mandatory jail sentence for those who text while driving in the state of New York. As far as I'm concerned texting while driving is just as dangerous, if not more dangerous than DUI. Of course this depends on the individual. You're talking about "talking" on the phone... sure there should be heavier penalties, but talking is nowhere near as dangerous as taking your eyes off what you're doing, and texting.
 
UncleBuck said:
my friend had that happen to him in AZ. got into a fight with his old lady after having a few, went out to sleep in the car. cops came and woke him up then gave him a DUI.

can't happen in every state though. the law there is "intoxicated to the slightest degree" and "in control of the vehicle". even though he wasn't driving, he was in control of the vehicle. he could have left the keys in the backyard or the bushes and gotten off without a DUI.

know your laws, people!
Click to expand...

Don't leave your door open!

811.490¹
Improper opening or leaving open of vehicle door
• penalty

(1)
A person commits the offense of improper opening or leaving open a vehicle door if the person does any of the following:

(a)
Opens any door of a vehicle unless and until it is reasonably safe to do so and it can be done without interference with the movement of traffic, or with pedestrians and bicycles on sidewalks or shoulders.

(b)
Leaves a door open on the side of a vehicle available to traffic, or to pedestrians or bicycles on sidewalks or shoulders for a period of time longer than necessary to load or unload passengers.

(2)
The offense described in this section, improper opening or leaving open a vehicle door, is a Class D traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §655; 1985 c.16 §320]
Click to expand...

Especially if you have an open container of ice cream in your car on a Sunday! :dunce:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top