Sobriety check point tonight

[kgain673]

Good answer.. I thought you cop-types liked case law?

And you sobering citizen types hate authority figures and rules of any kind

 

[Bigdtc]

Just like its been said before just because you say something three times in a row does not does not make it so. No matter what you think say or do, cry bitch or post will not change that you are subject to something that you don't like. We learn this at a young age. And there will always be someone out there to make sure your in compliance with the law.

Agreed, just like MSP and the 2013 FSA..but I think the violation of checkpoints of any kind will eventually be challenged enough to alleviate us law abiding citizens of the problem. Until then, we will bitch about that and all the other infringements as well..

 

[Bigdtc]

And you sobering citizen types hate authority figures and rules of any kind

It's not the authority I hate, I don't hate anyone.. it's the enforcement of bad policy and infringement of my right to go about my business unfettered that I don't care for.
Great, now I am a cop hater.. lol.. I think that's played out a bit around here by now. It's always the final answer when you get worn down and can no longer defend your position...

 

[Name Taken]

Agreed, just like MSP and the 2013 FSA..but I think the violation of checkpoints of any kind will eventually be challenged enough to alleviate us law abiding citizens of the problem. Until then, we will bitch about that and all the other infringements as well..

SCOTUS has ruled on several check points already.

Check points to check for witnesses to a serious crime with certain restrictions: OK

Check points in a "bad neighborhood" to look for drugs: NOT OK

"DUI Check Points": OK

Airport Check points (doesn't that impede your right to travel?): Ok

Check points at train stations like in NY: OK (wait doesn't that impede your travel right?)

The courts have ruled and for the most part ruled they are okay outside a few ones that were a little much to begin with.

 

[kgain673]

Another question is what are general law abiding sovereign citizen types doing to to insure the safety of their own communities? Well since the government/MVA/police is the problem. What have you done lately to make your roads/community safe from drunk drivers.....well thats even if you care? How about you run for local office or join the police, or pick up the phone when you see something wrong. Be a part of the solution and get some skin in the game.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

Can't have those bad neighborhood drug check-points. Can't check where the drugs actually are.

Can't have that.

Someone will scream profiling profiling profiling.

So let's just randomly search for drunk drivers in an affluent neighborhood.

Profiling the those outside city limits is just fine and dandy I suppose.

I have a novel idea, let's set up check-points on the border between our sovereign soil and Mexico.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

Another question is what are general law abiding sovereign citizen types doing to to insure the safety of their own communities? Well since the government/MVA/police is the problem. What have you done lately to make your roads/community safe from drunk drivers.....well thats even if you care? How about you run for local office or join the police, or pick up the phone when you see something wrong. Be a part of the solution and get some skin in the game.

I'll tell you what I did to make our roads safer.

I didn't drive drunk on the roads.

Maybe all you Bobby Breathalyzers and Charlie Checkpoints and Cindy Citizens can get together and follow people leaving the bars at 2am and leave all of us Sober Sams and Sober Suzies alone.

Geeze!

PS: And none of this aimed at the LE population. LEOs only do what they are required to do. Our beef is not with them or you if you are LE. It's with the law itself.

 

[2AHokie]

SCOTUS has ruled on several check points already.

Check points to check for witnesses to a serious crime with certain restrictions: OK

Check points in a "bad neighborhood" to look for drugs: NOT OK

"DUI Check Points": OK

Airport Check points (doesn't that impede your right to travel?): Ok

Check points at train stations like in NY: OK (wait doesn't that impede your travel right?)

The courts have ruled and for the most part ruled they are okay outside a few ones that were a little much to begin with.

And those decisions are almost all completely wrong. SCOTUS has way too much faith in law enforcement and gives way too much deference to legislatures.

All of those decisions (just like we are doing for 2A) will be challenged again and again until they finally get it right and restore the protections of the 4th Amendment or the country devolves far enough into tyranny that revolution becomes palatable.

 

[Bigdtc]

Another question is what are general law abiding sovereign citizen types doing to to insure the safety of their own communities? Well since the government/MVA/police is the problem. What have you done lately to make your roads/community safe from drunk drivers.....well thats even if you care? How about you run for local office or join the police, or pick up the phone when you see something wrong. Be a part of the solution and get some skin in the game.

Call 911 when I see anyone driving in an unsafe manner. What have you done for the cause of un-just laws.. that's even if you care?
..And you can quit with the "sovereign citizen" label too.. Labeling is just a deflection from an argument and a simple progressive Alinsky tactic..

 

[Bigdtc]

SCOTUS has ruled on several check points already.

Check points to check for witnesses to a serious crime with certain restrictions: OK

Check points in a "bad neighborhood" to look for drugs: NOT OK

"DUI Check Points": OK

Airport Check points (doesn't that impede your right to travel?): Ok

Check points at train stations like in NY: OK (wait doesn't that impede your travel right?)

The courts have ruled and for the most part ruled they are okay outside a few ones that were a little much to begin with.

"The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse-drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." -Slusher v. Safety Coach Transit Co., 229 Ky 731, 17 SW2d 1012, affirmed by the Supreme Court in Thompson v. Smith 154 S.E. 579
Yeah, SCOTUS does that a lot..

 

[PO2012]

And you sobering citizen types hate authority figures and rules of any kind

There are many other groups besides self proclaimed Sovereign Citizens who oppose checkpoints aimed at citing drivers for not wearing a seat belt or operating a motor vehicle while impaired.

It's very easy as a Police Officer to lose the ability to put yourself in the position of the person on the other end of the stop. Most people who are stopped at seat belt and sobriety checkpoints are either infuriated or cowed by the experience. They don't feel protected, they don't remark on the fine job done by the personnel manning the checkpoint and they don't think to themselves "Why don't we have more of these?" Too many Police Officers live in a bubble, some willfully others by accident. Checkpoints breed contempt for the law and those who enforce it. Anyone who doesn't realize this simply isn't paying attention. MADD no more represents the majority of Americans than PETA does or the NRA for that matter. There is no easier way to turn the public against you than to stop a person or a group of people without probable cause or reasonable articulable suspicion. Doing so often makes that person or that group hostile to you forever. Is the mere possibility of taking an impaired driver off the street worth those long term consequences? I don't think so. The gap between the Police and the community grows wider by the day and these types of tactics don't help matters. I've been to plenty of fatal wrecks that were the result of impaired driving. I've seen people decapitated, dismembered, pulverized and burned, the innocent and the guilty alike. I've also seen plenty of people die by shooting and stabbing yet I wouldn't advocate stopping every tenth pedestrian to conduct a terry frisk even if the Supreme Court were to authorize such behavior.

Living in a free country means accepting a certain amount of crime and disorder and recognizing that sometimes how you get something done is just as important as getting it done.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

What the man above me just said.

And it's refreshing to hear it come from a Police Officer.

Thank you for your service, Sir.

 

[Bigdtc]

There are many other groups besides self proclaimed Sovereign Citizens who oppose checkpoints aimed at citing drivers for not wearing a seat belt or operating a motor vehicle while impaired.

It's very easy as a Police Officer to lose the ability to put yourself in the position of the person on the other end of the stop. Most people who are stopped at seat belt and sobriety checkpoints are either infuriated or cowed by the experience. They don't feel protected, they don't remark on the fine job done by the personnel manning the checkpoint and they don't think to themselves "Why don't we have more of these?" Too many Police Officers live in a bubble, some willfully others by accident. Checkpoints breed contempt for the law and those who enforce it. Anyone who doesn't realize this simply isn't paying attention. MADD no more represents the majority of Americans than PETA does or the NRA for that matter. There is no easier way to turn the public against you than to stop a person or a group of people without probable cause or reasonable articulable suspicion. Doing so often makes that person or that group hostile to you forever. Is the mere possibility of taking an impaired driver off the street worth those long term consequences? I don't think so. The gap between the Police and the community grows wider by the day and these types of tactics don't help matters. I've been to plenty of fatal wrecks that were the result of impaired driving. I've seen people decapitated, dismembered, pulverized and burned, the innocent and the guilty alike. I've also seen plenty of people die by shooting and stabbing yet I wouldn't advocate stopping every tenth pedestrian to conduct a terry frisk even if the Supreme Court were to authorize such behavior.

Living in a free country means accepting a certain amount of crime and disorder and recognizing that sometimes how you get something done is just as important as getting it done.

What the man above me just said.

And it's refreshing to hear it come from a Police Officer.

Thank you for your service, Sir.

Another refreshing, insightful post by PO2012. One of those that "get it" and the reason for keeping the faith in LE.
Well done!! .. Again!

..And, yes.. Thank you for your service.

 

[alucard0822]

There are many other groups besides self proclaimed Sovereign Citizens who oppose checkpoints aimed at citing drivers for not wearing a seat belt or operating a motor vehicle while impaired.

It's very easy as a Police Officer to lose the ability to put yourself in the position of the person on the other end of the stop. Most people who are stopped at seat belt and sobriety checkpoints are either infuriated or cowed by the experience. They don't feel protected, they don't remark on the fine job done by the personnel manning the checkpoint and they don't think to themselves "Why don't we have more of these?" Too many Police Officers live in a bubble, some willfully others by accident. Checkpoints breed contempt for the law and those who enforce it. Anyone who doesn't realize this simply isn't paying attention. MADD no more represents the majority of Americans than PETA does or the NRA for that matter. There is no easier way to turn the public against you than to stop a person or a group of people without probable cause or reasonable articulable suspicion. Doing so often makes that person or that group hostile to you forever. Is the mere possibility of taking an impaired driver off the street worth those long term consequences? I don't think so. The gap between the Police and the community grows wider by the day and these types of tactics don't help matters. I've been to plenty of fatal wrecks that were the result of impaired driving. I've seen people decapitated, dismembered, pulverized and burned, the innocent and the guilty alike. I've also seen plenty of people die by shooting and stabbing yet I wouldn't advocate stopping every tenth pedestrian to conduct a terry frisk even if the Supreme Court were to authorize such behavior.

Living in a free country means accepting a certain amount of crime and disorder and recognizing that sometimes how you get something done is just as important as getting it done.

 

[eruby]

Can't have those bad neighborhood drug check-points. Can't check where the drugs actually are.

Can't have that.

Someone will scream profiling profiling profiling.

So let's just randomly search for drunk drivers in an affluent neighborhood.

Profiling the those outside city limits is just fine and dandy I suppose.

I have a novel idea, let's set up check-points on the border between our sovereign soil and Mexico.

I'll tell you what I did to make our roads safer.

I didn't drive drunk on the roads.

Maybe all you Bobby Breathalyzers and Charlie Checkpoints and Cindy Citizens can get together and follow people leaving the bars at 2am and leave all of us Sober Sams and Sober Suzies alone.

Geeze!

PS: And none of this aimed at the LE population. LEOs only do what they are required to do. Our beef is not with them or you if you are LE. It's with the law itself.

If iH8DemLibz were running for office, he would get my vote.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Nobody said to not arrest and punish drunk drivers. By all means do so . The old fashioned way, with probable cause.

Before the decisions allowing checkpoints , plenty of drunken drivers were arrested , both by general patrol ofc , and by specialists.

It's the checkpoints per se that are the issue.

 

[Brooklyn]

A breathalyzer machine to start a car costs a couple hundred dollars. They cost that much because they are rarely used. It's pretty effective. If they were required, standard equipment on all cars, it would cost pennies on the dollar to install.


Now, why wouldn't the government require automakers to install them knowing it would be difficult for a drunk person to start the car alone?

Because they can hot wire a car just like any 14 y.o.

Because its stupid.
Because it makes it difficult for the entire f..k population of god damn country.

On a related note just how much bs do you think a free people should put up with? Is there any limit at all?

 

[Sirex]

There are many other groups besides self proclaimed Sovereign Citizens who oppose checkpoints aimed at citing drivers for not wearing a seat belt or operating a motor vehicle while impaired.

It's very easy as a Police Officer to lose the ability to put yourself in the position of the person on the other end of the stop. Most people who are stopped at seat belt and sobriety checkpoints are either infuriated or cowed by the experience. They don't feel protected, they don't remark on the fine job done by the personnel manning the checkpoint and they don't think to themselves "Why don't we have more of these?" Too many Police Officers live in a bubble, some willfully others by accident. Checkpoints breed contempt for the law and those who enforce it. Anyone who doesn't realize this simply isn't paying attention. MADD no more represents the majority of Americans than PETA does or the NRA for that matter. There is no easier way to turn the public against you than to stop a person or a group of people without probable cause or reasonable articulable suspicion. Doing so often makes that person or that group hostile to you forever. Is the mere possibility of taking an impaired driver off the street worth those long term consequences? I don't think so. The gap between the Police and the community grows wider by the day and these types of tactics don't help matters. I've been to plenty of fatal wrecks that were the result of impaired driving. I've seen people decapitated, dismembered, pulverized and burned, the innocent and the guilty alike. I've also seen plenty of people die by shooting and stabbing yet I wouldn't advocate stopping every tenth pedestrian to conduct a terry frisk even if the Supreme Court were to authorize such behavior.

Living in a free country means accepting a certain amount of crime and disorder and recognizing that sometimes how you get something done is just as important as getting it done.

Good Post.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

If iH8DemLibz were running for office, he would get my vote.

That makes two of us.

Hardly a landslide though.

 

[willy]

"Prison Industrial Complex" (PIC) is a term we use to describe the overlapping interests of government and industry that use surveillance, policing, and imprisonment as solutions to what are, in actuality, economic, social, and political "problems."

makes ya feel good

Some people believe that prisons, policing, and surveillance make us safer, that the more people we lock up, the more closely we watch "suspicious" people, the safer we become, despite repeated findings that show no clear link between the numbers of people locked in cages and the "crime" rate.2 Others, many of them critics of the prison industrial complex, say that "our criminal justice system is broken" and needs repair. In fact, the opposite is true. It is my belief that the prison industrial complex does exactly what it is designed to do: disappear and kill precisely those people who present the greatest threats to State power (people of color, the poor, social and political dissenters, non-citizens, and youth). 3

Many people would like to see quick, easy solutions to our current crisis. Starving the prison industrial complex of its power and material resources will require much more than a quick fix, however. It will mean trying to resolve conflicts without involving the cops, or opening our own homes as safe havens for our friends and family members in need, or creating job and housing opportunities for people coming home from jails and prisons rather than shutting doors to them, or making it economically impossible for corporations to invest in prison construction or labor. Unfortunately there is no single answer that meets the needs of all our communities. What seems certain is that we need to begin to believe that a world beyond surveillance, policing and imprisonment is possible and turn those beliefs into reality. The reforms for which many have worked so tirelessly have not lessened the negative impacts of the prison industrial complex. In fact, many reforms have only made the prison industrial complex stronger and more durable.23