Your guess would be wrong. I do, and I know that there is a big difference between a terrorist and 75% of the people driving home from tigerstadium on Saturday nights. And I don’t believe that the drunk 16 year old that killed my friend in highschool, nor the drunk girl that cause a truck to hit my friend's dad was terrorists. By that definition, YOU have the "capacity" to kill every time you step in a car to drive. SIGH...see all my previous post on the subject. I refuse to bore people be repeating myself in an attempt to drive a nail into your hardhead.
Damn dude, you don't have to take arguing on the internet so personally. I am bored at work and enjoy a good debate; hopefully when you are in court you won't call everyone that disagrees with you "hard headed" or their points "bullchite/absurd". DWI checkpoints are meant to deter drunk people from driving drunk and potentially killing/injuring others. Private property (car) is searched on property that is not private (road). Metal detectors are meant to deter people form bringing weapons and potentially killing/injuring others (Usually called terrorists). Private property (my body) is searched on property that is not private (airport). In both cases, I have the privilege to drive (License) or to fly (Plane ticket), and they have no probable cause. No one is forcing me to do either, and by accepting that privilege I also accept their rules/laws and how they enforce them. I really don't see why this is such an absurd comparison to you, and how one can be unconstitutional but the other isn't. Of course you have the capacity to kill when you drive. That is why you are required to have a license and obey the laws that are meant to mitigate the chances of you actually hurting someone. I asked tirk where he draws the line on checkpoints; he responded that the line is when it comes to national security, which I'm guessing makes only border crossing checkpoints constitutionally legal in his book (I apologize if that is incorrect). So I ask again, where do you draw the line? (Apologies if I missed that earlier) And quit acting like every person that leaves tiger stadium or gets a DWI has had 2-3 beers. I would be willing to bet just as many are so drunk they can't see straight. If a DWI checkpoint gets one of those people of the road and potentially saves someones life, I really couldn't care less if 100 "innocent" people that have had 2-3 beers get DWI's. As you already mentioned, if you refuse they really can't do anything. Even if you get one, enough cash and/or a good lawyer will get you out of it.
Meh, my blood sugar was low and I needed lunch. Like I said in one of my previous posts: It is that easy.
Anyone can walk down the road, it isn't a privilege. I didn't get tested, issued a license, or agree to follow any rules/laws like I did when I bought a plane ticket or accepted my license. I must still be confused on how a DWI checkpoint works. In my head I am picturing a line of cars, a cop walks up, talks to a person through the window, if they suspect they have been drinking they test them, if not they wave them through. Is that how it works? How is that random?
tsk tsk You really need some situational awareness classes. The correct way to phrase this is "you sit on a floatie" You saying noodle between your legs in this place is like pouring blood into a pool of sharks This ridiculous excuse for music will NEVER, and I mean NEVER reverberate from the speakers on my boat as long as I am the GD Captian. NEVER, I hate this sh!t with a passion, maybe more than I hate obama ..... well close. But NEVER. I will rip the damn radio from the dash and throw it into the lake if you try it. no No and NO!!! We clear?
Not in that lake, pearch love nipples. Aggresive little rascals too. Piercings? Better take that stuff out, thats like the dinner bell, I've seen people bleed.
Well, its not a good comparison. Roads are too ubiquitous to presume a search without cause to be legitimately protecting anything (like a courtroom or an airplane from a bomb). Simply pulling people over in the random chance of finding a criminal is unconstitutional and illegal. People do not have a choice of whether to use the roads, use is inherent in America and everywhere roads exist. We require only a license and liability insurance to drive the roads. Cops have no authority to demand more than that from you . . . unless you give them cause by your actions. Probable Cause and Reasonable Suspicion are important principles in a free society or we become a third world nation where the police can do anything they wish.
Nowhere did you surrender your Constitutional rights against unlawful search and seizure when doing this. I have few problems with sobriety checkpoints if conducted properly. They are not random, and it is a legitimate highway safety issue. What I have issue with is the pulling over of of profiled, random, or "funny looking" cars in the expectation that 10% percent of them will have contraband, illegal aliens, or outstanding warrants. That is illegal search and seizure if there is no probable cause to suspect a crime has been committed.
Agree 100%, searches of any kind without consent (Metal detector at an airport) or probable cause is unconstitutional. But we are talking DWI checkpoints; was your first post referring to checkpoints or random stops?
