- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: So what do the resident legal eagles think -- No-refusal DUI checkpoints .....
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:29 am to Choirboy
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:29 am to Choirboy
quote:
How long before we hear a story about a 100% sober individual that is forced to adhere to testing? If you think a cop will not abuse this scenario you're kidding yourself.
I see this happening as well.
You're deluding yourself if you don't think that following situations will (or already have) occurred.
-"Have you been drinking tonight sir?"
-"No officer, I'm getting off work late."
-"Your eyes look pretty bloodshot."
-"I haven't slept in 20 hours."
-"......Step out of the car please."
This post was edited on 2/20/14 at 8:31 am
1
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:32 am to UGATiger26
Great on 2 counts. We staff nurses. 2) Anything that stops drunk driving can save lives
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:33 am to accnodefense
quote:
Don't like it, build your own private roads and you can do whatever the hell you want on it
You can get a DWI on your private property.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:37 am to JEAUXBLEAUX
quote:
Anything that stops drunk driving can save lives
Well, that settles it. Anything to save a life.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:39 am to MrCarton
Including wearing safety belts front and back, no cell phones while driving. Are these the laws everywhere?
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:45 am to JEAUXBLEAUX
Seat belts have been made into a prime cause for stopping a car. Now that the cop has you stopped he can ask for permission to search your car. Did you forget about the roach in your ashtray? Does the cop being refused to do so call for a drug dog while you are being "detained" which really means arrested in the English language if you bother to look at a dictionary.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:50 am to JEAUXBLEAUX
quote:
Including wearing safety belts front and back, no cell phones while driving. Are these the laws everywhere?
Yep, all in the name of preserving life. Saving life should be the end-state of all laws and statutes. We must save life, even at the expense of the quality of said life. Can there be a greater purpose for government?
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:52 am to CITWTT
quote:
Seat belts have been made into a prime cause for stopping a car. Now that the cop has you stopped he can ask for permission to search your car. Did you forget about the roach in your ashtray? Does the cop being refused to do so call for a drug dog while you are being "detained" which really means arrested in the English language if you bother to look at a dictionary.
If they don't stop your car, then they can't make sure you aren't participating in any other life threatening behaviors. So, seat belt laws make sense. The goal is to legislate death out of existence. How can you not be on board with this? Don't you hate death?
Posted on 2/20/14 at 8:58 am to Newbomb Turk
Well, we wanted it, we gotted it Toyota.
We voted for this big authoritarian government by our actions and in looking to government for everything under the sun that ails man, and here it is. Seems like a no brainer to me. They're doing exactly what the mindless public wants. No stopping no, full speed ahead.
We voted for this big authoritarian government by our actions and in looking to government for everything under the sun that ails man, and here it is. Seems like a no brainer to me. They're doing exactly what the mindless public wants. No stopping no, full speed ahead.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 9:16 am to Mike da Tigah
Well Bennie Franklin said it long ago that we don't deserve independence. Elections have consequences and the last two have come with chains of bondage to show for them.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 10:06 am to CITWTT
I used to be against checkpoints but I heard Mark Levin make a good case for them as to why they are constitutional
I'll take the word of a successful constitutional lawyer over people butthurt that they can't drive drunk
I'll take the word of a successful constitutional lawyer over people butthurt that they can't drive drunk
Posted on 2/20/14 at 10:12 am to goldennugget
The system is akin to a monofilament fish net in that anyone is considered guilty before anyone has been proven to be a criminal or reasonable suspicion being indicated.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 12:17 pm to Newbomb Turk
Saw this thread for the first time and I haven't read any of it, but I have an interesting idea to throw everyone's way that is relevant to getting pulled over for DUI:
This story came from a friend, whose friend is a cop that this happened to. So you're driving under the influence (which you shouldn't ever), and you get pulled over. You KNOW you're fricked. You didn't have two beers, you're hammered. Keep an unopened bottle of booze in your car. When you get pulled over, turn the car off, throw the keys out the window, open the bottle and start chugging. At this moment, you aren't driving, and you won't be after you're done chugging. Chugging the bottle will drastically f up any breathalyzer test, so there's no way of knowing if you were sober prior to opening the bottle or not. This situation makes sense, would you ever be ballsy enough to to try something like this?
This story came from a friend, whose friend is a cop that this happened to. So you're driving under the influence (which you shouldn't ever), and you get pulled over. You KNOW you're fricked. You didn't have two beers, you're hammered. Keep an unopened bottle of booze in your car. When you get pulled over, turn the car off, throw the keys out the window, open the bottle and start chugging. At this moment, you aren't driving, and you won't be after you're done chugging. Chugging the bottle will drastically f up any breathalyzer test, so there's no way of knowing if you were sober prior to opening the bottle or not. This situation makes sense, would you ever be ballsy enough to to try something like this?
This post was edited on 2/20/14 at 12:18 pm
Posted on 2/20/14 at 12:22 pm to Newbomb Turk
Check points have no probable cause
It is an illegal search
It's not even debatable
It is an illegal search
It's not even debatable
Posted on 2/20/14 at 12:30 pm to JEAUXBLEAUX
quote:
Anything that stops drunk driving can save lives
This quote (attributed to Ben Franklin) never gets old:
"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Posted on 2/20/14 at 9:47 pm to BayouBlitz
quote:
Drinking and driving is not illegal.
Wrong.
LRS 32:300. Possession of alcoholic beverages in motor vehicles
A. It shall be unlawful for the operator of a motor vehicle or the passenger in or on a motor vehicle, while the motor vehicle is operated on a public highway or right-of-way, to possess an open alcoholic beverage container, or to consume an alcoholic beverage, in the passenger area of a motor vehicle.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 9:53 pm to MrCarton
quote:
I personally find the entire DUI process to be entirely criminal. Unless the evidence is collected after the commission of an actual crime against person or property, then simply being "drunk" based the number you blow into a breathalyzer isn't enough to put someone in the slammer IMO.
Would you apply this logic to an airline pilot and if not, would you fly on a plane being flown by a pilot on may be "drunk based on the number"?
ETA: I just finished reading the thread. I think I can predict your reply.
This post was edited on 2/20/14 at 10:00 pm
Posted on 2/20/14 at 10:03 pm to Sal Minella
quote:
Would you apply this logic to an airline pilot and if not, would you fly on a plane being flown by a pilot on may be "drunk based on the number"?
Yes. I am fairly certain airlines prohibit drinking and flying. They can enforce that through voluntary contractual agreement without violating constitutional amendments.
What is your point?
Posted on 2/20/14 at 10:04 pm to Sal Minella
quote:
ETA: I just finished reading the thread. I think I can predict your reply.
Okey doke.
Posted on 2/20/14 at 10:15 pm to MrCarton
quote:
Yes. I am fairly certain airlines prohibit drinking and flying. They can enforce that through voluntary contractual agreement without violating constitutional amendments.
What is your point?
My point is that you called all DUI laws bullshite because there was no crime against a person or property. I was wondering if you'd have the courage of your convictions to put yourself at risk with a pilot flying a plane at 30,000 feet that would be legally drunk.
As far as the airlines prohibiting drinking and flying, so does every state in the US, as well as drinking and driving. The voluntary contractual agreement you speak of exists with the issuance of every driver's license in every state in the Union. Don't get a driver's license and you aren't exposed to that implied consent.
And I didn't clarify this earlier, but I think DUI checkpoints are inefficient waste of resources but have no problem with enforcement of DUI laws through old fashion police work.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News