Sobriety Checkpoints

[zsdersw]

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

What do you think?

 

[surfsatwerk]

Driving a car isn't a right of citizens.

 

[zsdersw]

Driving a car isn't a right of citizens.

Privacy and freedom of movement are rights.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Privacy and freedom of movement are rights.

They aren't stopping people walking down the street. Driving is a privilege the government regulates.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Ya, good luck with your argument in court.

 

[Amused]

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

What do you think?

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]

They aren't stopping people walking down the street. Driving is a privilege the government regulates.

It can regulate it without violating the 4th amendment. It did just fine for 200 or so years.

 

[PeshakJang]

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.

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.

 

[surfsatwerk]

It can regulate it without violating the 4th amendment. It did just fine for 200 or so years.

I'm not a good devil's advocate, I got nothing.

 

[zsdersw]

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.

Indeed.

 

[zsdersw]

Ya, good luck with your argument in court.

I don't particularly care if the court accepts it, as I'm never going to go through one. Its unconstitutionality remains a fact.. and that's what we're talking about.

 

[PeshakJang]

Indeed.

I'm glad that people can finally admit that profiling is the only remaining, effective means of stopping crime.

 

[PeshakJang]

I don't particularly care if the court accepts it
...
Its unconstitutionality remains a fact

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.

 

[zsdersw]

I'm glad that people can finally admit that profiling is the only remaining, effective means of stopping crime.

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.

 

[EagleKeeper]

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.

 

[zsdersw]

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.

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.

 

[zsdersw]

Driving is a privildge granted to you by the government.

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.

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.

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.

 

[alkemyst]

They aren't stopping people walking down the street. Driving is a privilege the government regulates.

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.

 

[PeshakJang]

Behavior profiling is much better than racial, religious, gender, or sexual orientation profiling because it's a lot more effective

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?

 

[TanisHalfElven]

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.

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

 

[zsdersw]

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?

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.

 

[Darwin333]

Driving a car isn't a right of citizens.

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.

 

[Darwin333]

No, because the Caucasian homegrown terrorist that actually has the bomb and was recruited to board the plane will more easily slip by.

How many of those have we had in the last decade?

 

[yllus]

I completely agree.

 

[Darwin333]

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.

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.