• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sobriety Checkpoints

zsdersw

zsdersw

Lifer
... are unconstitutional. There is no justification for detaining everyone because probable cause has not been established.

What do you think?
 
zsdersw said:
... are unconstitutional. There is no justification for detaining everyone because probable cause has not been established.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree.

Though the authoritarians will tell you driving a car is a privilege and not a right, freedom of movement and the 4th amendments ARE rights. The right to be secure in my person AND property against unreasonable search and seizure is a right, no matter WHERE I am or what I'm doing. The thought that I have to give up my 4th Amendment rights to share public roads is absurd.
 
Amused said:
Absolutely agree.

Though the authoritarians will tell you driving a car is a privilege and not a right, freedom of movement and the 4th amendments ARE rights. The right to be secure in my person AND property against unreasonable search and seizure is a right, no matter WHERE I am or what I'm doing. The thought that I have to give up my 4th Amendment rights to share public roads is absurd.
Click to expand...

I guess it's also unconstitutional then to have security at an airport. They have no probable cause to detain me before getting on a plane.
 
zsdersw said:
I don't particularly care if the court accepts it
...
Its unconstitutionality remains a fact
Click to expand...

Can you see how conflicting those two statements are?

I don't care if the court says something is constitutional, it's unconstitutionality remains a fact.

I don't care if the court says I have to pay taxes, I say I don't.
 
PeshakJang said:
I'm glad that people can finally admit that profiling is the only remaining, effective means of stopping crime.
Click to expand...

Behavior profiling is much better than racial, religious, gender, or sexual orientation profiling because it's a lot more effective and a lot less shaky from a legal/constitutional perspective.
 
Driving is a privildge granted to you by the government. As a result; you also accept that the government can ensure that you are obeying the rules.

One is free to get smashed and walk around as long as you do not cause dmage to others.
 
PeshakJang said:
Can you see how conflicting those two statements are?

I don't care if the court says something is constitutional, it's unconstitutionality remains a fact.

I don't care if the court says I have to pay taxes, I say I don't.
Click to expand...

No, they're not conflicting at all. Some things are absolute.. and the unconstitutionality of sobriety checkpoints is one of them, whether the court sees it as such or not.

Taxes are constitutional, so I don't have a problem with them existing.
 
Common Courtesy said:
Driving is a privildge granted to you by the government.
Click to expand...

Granted by the government? How so? Freedom of movement is inherent in each of us, not rationed or provided by government.

As a result; you also accept that the government can ensure that you are obeying the rules.
Click to expand...

The government doesn't get to violate its constitution.

One is free to get smashed and walk around as long as you do not cause dmage to others.
Click to expand...

Yes, just as one is free to get drive until and unless damage is caused to someone else. Sobriety checkpoints assume everyone is guilty without probable cause.. and that is where they fail the constitutionality test.
 
surfsatwerk said:
They aren't stopping people walking down the street. Driving is a privilege the government regulates.
Click to expand...

Really? What about one's passengers?

sobriety checkpoints are pure revenue generators. If someone can navigate a chain of stop and go traffic, cones and flashlights for 20 mins; the only way they are going to kill someone is the retard that decides to jaywalk without looking first.
 
zsdersw said:
Behavior profiling is much better than racial, religious, gender, or sexual orientation profiling because it's a lot more effective
Click to expand...

Really? If airports are screening for people who might blow up the plane, looking at people from the middle-east more closely isn't going to be effective?
 
Common Courtesy said:
Driving is a privildge granted to you by the government. As a result; you also accept that the government can ensure that you are obeying the rules.

One is free to get smashed and walk around as long as you do not cause dmage to others.
Click to expand...

LOL. Ever heard of public Intoxication.
Next you'll be telling me walking is a privilage and should be regulated.
Then it'll be getting out of the house
Then breathing
Then life

See the slippery slope here
 
PeshakJang said:
Really? If airports are screening for people who might blow up the plane, looking at people from the middle-east more closely isn't going to be effective?
Click to expand...

No, because the Caucasian homegrown terrorist that actually has the bomb and was recruited to board the plane will more easily slip by. The Israelis do it best.. and we should model our airport security on their behavior profiling approach.
 
surfsatwerk said:
Driving a car isn't a right of citizens.
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with being "granted" the privilege of driving, the state has already done that by issuing a drivers license.

So with that out of the way, what part of the following do you not understand?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Click to expand...
 
Common Courtesy said:
Driving is a privildge granted to you by the government. As a result; you also accept that the government can ensure that you are obeying the rules.

One is free to get smashed and walk around as long as you do not cause dmage to others.
Click to expand...

No you are not. Public drunkenness is a crime almost everywhere that I am familiar with and you do not have to damage anyone or anything to be arrested and convicted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top