Now they want to control what apps you can have

[sandorski]

It is likely Illegal to notify others of such things already, I'll assume it is anyway for the sake of Argument. In that case, you're objection should be against the Original Law, not in the "spread" of it to new Technologies. I quote Spread, because it is a misnomer as these Lawmakers are not doing anything New, but merely enforcing existing Law. IOWs/In summation/Coles Notes, New Technology isn't above the Law.

Again, this whole Post has been made based upon the Assumption in the first sentence.

 

[wuliheron]

Just figure it out now? No, not by any means. I'm just always taken aback by how many people are oblivious to this shit. They think the government is out to help them.

The government is there to help people get away with whatever they can afford. If you can't afford anything then you'd better start fighting over the scraps son.

 

[bamacre]

http://www.dailytech.com/Democratic...s+Ban+Apps+Only+RIM+Complies/article21221.htm



Really? Like really really? I don't see any fucking issue with this app what so ever. These asshole Senators want to control our flow of information and freedom of speech. Fuck them saying we can't have these applications to share our knowledge. Before anyone comes in here and starts calling me a drunk driver or in support of drunk drivers, that isn't true at all. I just don't like the government telling us what we can and cannot do with our own property. fuck them.

This is eerily similar to 3rd-world countries cutting off internet access so protesters can't get information. :thumbsdown::thumbsdown:

If people want to get rid of DUI checkpoints they should refuse to elect politicians who support the idea they are constitutional.

 

[bfdd]

It is likely Illegal to notify others of such things already, I'll assume it is anyway for the sake of Argument. In that case, you're objection should be against the Original Law, not in the "spread" of it to new Technologies. I quote Spread, because it is a misnomer as these Lawmakers are not doing anything New, but merely enforcing existing Law. IOWs/In summation/Coles Notes, New Technology isn't above the Law.

Again, this whole Post has been made based upon the Assumption in the first sentence.

Uh... there isn't any law that says you can't tell other people there are DUI check points. What fucking kind of shit would that be and how would it even be enforceable?

Bamacre, I agree it is similar to that although not as extreme.

 

[bfdd]

The government is there to help people get away with whatever they can afford. If you can't afford anything then you'd better start fighting over the scraps son.

Again, tell me something I don't already know

 

[sandorski]

Uh... there isn't any law that says you can't tell other people there are DUI check points. What fucking kind of shit would that be and how would it even be enforceable?

Bamacre, I agree it is similar to that although not as extreme.

Some Jurisdictions have Laws about warning Motorists of Speed Traps. DUI Checkpoints are likely included.

 

[HomerJS]

Some Jurisdictions have Laws about warning Motorists of Speed Traps. DUI Checkpoints are likely included.

Well let them make it illegal to use the app in those jurisdictions (like radar detectors in VA) and let them try to inforce it.

Dems are way off base on this one.

 

[bfdd]

Some Jurisdictions have Laws about warning Motorists of Speed Traps. DUI Checkpoints are likely included.

Wouldn't such laws trample all over freedom of speech? You can't even use the excuse of "well it's for the public safety" because that's assuming everyones guilty before they even get to the speed trap. Not to mention such things are only for revenue generation anyways and we should NOT allow that.

 

[sandorski]

Wouldn't such laws trample all over freedom of speech? You can't even use the excuse of "well it's for the public safety" because that's assuming everyones guilty before they even get to the speed trap. Not to mention such things are only for revenue generation anyways and we should NOT allow that.

I think Evasion of the Law or other principles would over ride Free Speech in these cases. The Laws exist, so I doubt they are Free Speech issues.

 

[bfdd]

I think Evasion of the Law or other principles would over ride Free Speech in these cases. The Laws exist, so I doubt they are Free Speech issues.

I don't know that sounds absolutely ridiculous to me. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't get how that wouldn't be against the freedom of speech. It's nothing like screaming fire in a movie theater and in no way represents a threat to the safety of others for them to know that there's a speed trap. In fact I would say you are a fucking asshole and a shitty American if you didn't tell other people where the speed traps were.

 

[sandorski]

I don't know that sounds absolutely ridiculous to me. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't get how that wouldn't be against the freedom of speech. It's nothing like screaming fire in a movie theater and in no way represents a threat to the safety of others for them to know that there's a speed trap. In fact I would say you are a fucking asshole and a shitty American if you didn't tell other people where the speed traps were.

There are laws against Aiding and Abetting Criminals(this is the example I should have noted in previous post). Warning people of Traffic enforcement would be, potentially, doing that. Similarly, you don't have Freedom of Speech to lie on the Witness Stand.

 

[bfdd]

There are laws against Aiding and Abetting Criminals(this is the example I should have noted in previous post). Warning people of Traffic enforcement would be, potentially, doing that. Similarly, you don't have Freedom of Speech to lie on the Witness Stand.

That would assume they are guilty until proven innocent. Another thing that doesn't exactly fly here. Also, I understand the need to not allow lying on the witness stand. That can actually have a direct effect on someone elses rights, which would not fly with the "your rights end where mine begin".

btw I'm not trying to argue with you over this, I'm just trying to get more informed about it because it doesn't exactly make sense to me on how that would be illegal. same with radar detectors.

 

[dfuze]

It is likely Illegal to notify others of such things already, I'll assume it is anyway for the sake of Argument. In that case, you're objection should be against the Original Law, not in the "spread" of it to new Technologies. I quote Spread, because it is a misnomer as these Lawmakers are not doing anything New, but merely enforcing existing Law. IOWs/In summation/Coles Notes, New Technology isn't above the Law.

Again, this whole Post has been made based upon the Assumption in the first sentence.

It's hardly illegal to notify others. Hell, here in CT it's quite common to read about it in the newspapers, with the info coming directly from the police themselves. To be honest, I never understood why you'd give a heads up, but figure if people are going to drink and drive they wouldn't be of "sound mind" at the time to remember anyway.

Here is just one example of a posting: link

 

[rudder]

Public roads, we can report whatever the hell we want.

Hell, they should look at it like this. Have cops or informants report checkpoints on the major road so all the drunks take the side roads and in reality you setup the checkpoints there.

It's hardly illegal to notify others. Hell, here in CT it's quite common to read about it in the newspapers, with the info coming directly from the police themselves. To be honest, I never understood why you'd give a heads up, but figure if people are going to drink and drive they wouldn't be of "sound mind" at the time to remember anyway.

The cops have to announce checkpoints or basically it is an illegal search. Any citation from an unannounced checkpoint will get thrown out in court.

 

[Atreus21]

Socialism doesn't require totalitarian control over our lives.

Uh, it doesn't?

Don't most socialist states in history exercise exactly that?

Elaborating on the OP, this is not far different than laws against fuzzbusters.

 

[airdata]

honestly,

I think if somebody is aware enough to whip out their iphone to use an app like this, they're not too drunk.

 

[Broheim]

Socialism doesn't require totalitarian control over our lives.

wow.. someone who gets it O.O Conservatism = Government is a good thing, Liberalism = Government is a necessary evil that should be kept to a minimum, socialism = Government is a necessary evil till the day the people don't need it anymore (vague, I know)...

anyways, I can understand apps that warn you about speed cameras, seeing as they make you slow down, if only for a short while.
But apps warning you about DUI checkpoints aren't really going to make you instantly sober... all they do is allow fucktards to evade the police and kill someone, maybe not today or tomorrow but someday.

 

[classy]

Looks like one more step towards socialism.

How do you view this as socialism, ?
On one hand I agree that they should spend their time on much more important things then the apps that people use. But in fairness, I can see their point when it comes to apps to avoid things like DUI checkpoints. I am not in agreement, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the validity of the argument.

 

[OCGuy]

I think Evasion of the Law or other principles would over ride Free Speech in these cases. The Laws exist, so I doubt they are Free Speech issues.

No....just, no. Just.....stop.

Maybe the Queen made such a decree for Canukistan, but we are citizens, not subjects.

 

[jonks]

Looks like one more step towards socialism.

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or have absolutely no idea what socialism is.

 

[IGBT]

if your using "their" app's they are controlling you.

 

[bradley]

i have to agree. they have a duopoly on our political system. we need to break it up.

In total agreement. I'm often stunned by the many who still support either party.

There is no use taking either side with gangsters who represent the same mob. They have perverted/distorted the meaning behind our democracy republic and sovereignty, true capitalism, liberalism, conservatism, all in the name of unadulterated greed. In erasing any dialog from dead center, they have slowly squeezed the middle class from either side -- leaving them to fight like animals over the remaining crumbs.

 

[xj0hnx]

There are laws against Aiding and Abetting Criminals(this is the example I should have noted in previous post). Warning people of Traffic enforcement would be, potentially, doing that. Similarly, you don't have Freedom of Speech to lie on the Witness Stand.

You don't swear in when you get in you car to go to the store. We still use the old headlight flash to warn oncoming motorist of sitting cops or checkpoints here. The only problem is that the two main places they do DUI check points are at the end of long causeways, so there's really no way to avoid them if you need to get to that part of "town". They aren't really DUI check points though, they are more DUI/drug fishing expedition check points.

 

[xj0hnx]

But apps warning you about DUI checkpoints aren't really going to make you instantly sober... all they do is allow fucktards to evade the police and kill someone, maybe not today or tomorrow but someday.

Irrelevant since you can't stop people from drinking and driving 24/7/365. Hell it might even be a good thing since it will get them off a busy main road and lost in some neighborhood going 10 mph to figure out where they are.

 

[Pulsar]

honestly,

I think if somebody is aware enough to whip out their iphone to use an app like this, they're not too drunk.

Honestly?

You'll have to help us all out. How drunk IS 'too drunk' then? Just a little? Is that like just a little pregnant, or just a little high?

On another note, it's partisian hackery to point out these folks are 'D's unless you're going to talk about abortion and "R"s. They both have rights they don't wish us to have. Wake up people. It's both sides, not just one. (Bah, do I actually expect Spidey to listen? LOL).

However, your comment pretty much takes the cake today. "Not too drunk". Ha.