Dui Checkpoint Refusal

[Winchester]

There's knowing your rights, and there's being a complete tool.

 

The person in these videos (because they sound like the same person) is being a complete tool.

The people setting up a checkpoint are criminals. 

[havok579257]

The people setting up a checkpoint are criminals. 

 

 

by law they are not.

[Semper Catholic]

Why do Phishy people stay on Phatmass?

I don't get it. Too much time on your hands so you need to cause drama on an orthodox Catholic website?

it was not my decision to be labled "phishy" but it is a scarlett letter I am forced to bare.

as for staying on this site to me being catholic is the cultural group I identify with amd I enjoy the banter and discussion.

[r2Dtoo]

LOL. "They never bother me so I'm ok with it"

 

Let me guess you're a middle aged white guy who drives a volvo or suv and has a religious bumper sticker? Sorry bud the cops probably aren't going to waste to much time on you

 

Actually, I'm 27 (I was 20 back then), and I drove a Saturn Ion with no bumper stickers.  Continue to live in your fantasy world, bud.

 

Also, why would I have religious bumper stickers on my car in the first place?  Did you notice below my avatar where it says "Cordial Non-Catholic"?  What makes you think I'm religious at all?

[CrossCuT]

You know what, even if their efforts don't result in 137% DUI stops I think it's worth it even if they only stopped one. Thats one less drunk driver to kill your loved one on the road.

[Winchester]

by law they are not.

Oh, is there as state in the union that permits general warrants?

 

And if there is, that would merely be "legislation", not law.

Edited September 27, 2013 by Winchester

[Anastasia13]

Question: what the heck is a peace officer?

An officer of the law, someone whose duty it is to serve the public peace, such a a sheriff or police officer.

[Anastasia13]

The "privilege vs right" argument is one of the worst strawmen out there.

 

As was stated earlier these DUI checkpoints don't really stop DUI's, they are an excuse for COPS to raise money and make quotas.

 

I'm sorry, but no one forced me to become legally permitted to drive. I did not automatically get permission to drive just because I am human/a citizen/over 18/etc. I earned it. I accepted the legal requirements set for me, and I signed a legal form acknowledging them.  What's next, having to have insurance for yourself/your car when you drive is a violation of economic freedom?  Are we going to have some of the same argument against that as we do against the Obamacare insurance obligation?

[Winchester]

I'm sorry, but no one forced me to become legally permitted to drive. I did not automatically get permission to drive just because I am human/a citizen/over 18/etc. I earned it. I accepted the legal requirements set for me, and I signed a legal form acknowledging them.  What's next, having to have insurance for yourself/your car when you drive is a violation of economic freedom?  Are we going to have some of the same argument against that as we do against the Obamacare insurance obligation?

You're assuming legitimacy of the government's claims.

[Anastasia13]

 

A simple google search brings up a plethora of quantifiable data showing the statistical insignificance of checkpoints

 

Pennsylvania

Geisler says that in Pennsylvania, 220,000 drivers passed through DUI checkpoints during the same time period, and 1% of drivers were charged with DUI, and another 2.5% of drivers received a citation of some other type.

 

Virginia and California:

 

• A handful of studies have confirmed that checkpoints are not as efficient as simple roving patrols are. In 2009, officers in the great state of California stopped nearly 1.8 million drivers at DUI checkpoints. Just over 5,000 individuals were arrested, meaning there was a success rate of around .45 percent. That’s not 45 percent – it’s .45 percent. In the same state during the same calendar year, roving patrols had a 14.7 percent rate in finding drunk drivers, as over 5,800 drunk drivers were arrested after roving patrols checked out nearly 40,000 vehicles.

• In 2007, the Commonwealth of Virginia had a .33 percent checkpoint success rate. When it came to the roving patrol units, there was an 8.1 percent success rate in 2007.

 

 

Arguing that DUI checkpoints are not sufficiently effective and resources would be better spent on another method of reducing drunk driving is more respectable than going, "Boohoo! Someone is asking me to do something I agreed to be willing to do when I earned and filled out legal paperwork to be able to drive and being asked to do that now violates some rights I won't site the source of and already signed away."

[Anastasia13]

You're assuming legitimacy of the government's claims.

 

No. I am assuming that the illegitimate government claims are statistically insignificant. Would like to present me with evidence to the contrary?

[Semper Catholic]

You know what, even if their efforts don't result in 137% DUI stops I think it's worth it even if they only stopped one. Thats one less drunk driver to kill your loved one on the road.

even when statistics prove that roving patrols are more effective?

Flawed logic

[havok579257]

even when statistics prove that roving patrols are more effective?

Flawed logic

 

 

roving patrols waste tax payer money and infringe on our rights to not be looked at by police as we drive our vehicles.  by police looking at us, its a form of intimidation.

[Semper Catholic]

roving patrols waste tax payer money and infringe on our rights to not be looked at by police as we drive our vehicles. by police looking at us, its a form of intimidation.

I see what youre trying to do here and its completely wrong.

Roving patrols=police doing their job. Looking for people committing traffic violations or driving erratic. Camping out and forcing law abiding citizens to amswer questions without prbable cause is a violation of the law.

[havok579257]

You're assuming legitimacy of the government's claims.

 

I think its correct to say driving a vehicle is not a right in the eyes of this country and never was.  it was a privilege.  roads are public, not private and are put in place by the government with tax payer money.  laws are in place you have to abide to drive on these roads.  I would say sensible laws such as you need to know the rules of the road to be a better and safer driver.  you need to be able to see the road.  you need to be willing to drive without being impaired that could kill someone.  if your claiming this is an undue burdon on a person, I think its up to you to prove exactly how this is unfair and wrong.