Don't blow for the po-po

[GeauxLSU]

Something about Straw Man comes to mind.

Umm.... Fat Albert is the one that brought up the 2A (multiple times). I agree, the two have nothing to do with each other and he definitely loves him a good straw man.

"Don't blow for the po-po" I keep hearing to the tune of "insane in the membrane" for some reason...

 

[Bulldog Man]

All this s#%t is funny as hell HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[Ken Ford]

The king of misdirection strikes again. Gaux I'm completely ok with driver being forced, through a warrant of course, to blow into a machine or blood test if and only if there is reasonable suspicion or probable cause to believe they were driving impaired.

The fourth protects against UNREASONABLE search or seizure. Not ALL search or seizure.
If you want to quote and have others uphold the constitution get it right.
Now explain how it would be reasonable to obtain a warrant for a person on the side of the road when the PC needed to get the warrant is evident and the person is not under arrest. Be aware that in most cases a warrant would take hours to obtain.

Sorry for your friend, that was wrong and I think he will beat it and I hope he gets some restitution.

But to equate the vast majority of legitimate DUI Inforsement with his case is absurd.

. Again, I am not for random road blocks.

 

[GeauxLSU]

The fourth protects against UNREASONABLE search or seizure. Not ALL search or seizure.
If you want to quote and have others uphold the constitution get it right.

Some people are reasonable and others are not. I think you've pretty succinctly identified the issue.

 

[Ken Ford]

Violating the obviously true intent of the 4th Amendment is a form of tyranny. I don't think anyone in this thread is condoning drunk driving or the fact that police should go after impaired drivers. We all a agree on that.

Have RS/PC to make your stops and get a court order or warrant to get your evidence as opposed to forcing people to incriminate themselves in order to retain their drivers license. All for it. Lock em up.

I would have no problems with the warran for blood draws. But the breath test would REASONABLE IMO.

 

[Indirect Fire]

The fourth protects against UNREASONABLE search or seizure.

Most people I know think road blocks (of the random kind, I agree that there are certain emergencies in which they might be needed) and self incrimination without due process are just that "UNREASONABLE".

SCOTUS has been pretty unresonable over the centuries and I hope they are able to correct it.

If you pulled over the Founding Fathers riding down the "King's Highway" to look at their papers (you know because it was the Kings property) I'm betting their sentiment would be very clear and they would have worded things far better.

I really am for locking up dangerous drivers so it's hard to argue sometimes but I err on the side of the BoR.

 

[mkdhotrod]

Never ever submit to roadside dui checks.

 

[georgia357]

I believe that they should have roadblocks all the time and make everybody take a breath analyzer test. Even better, put alcohol detectors in every car and if it goes off, it should automatically issue a DUI ticket. Then they could put black boxes in every car that can be scanned after every accident to see exactly what happened. How about a bright red light on top of the car that goes off if anybody in the car is not wearing their seat belt. This crap reminds me of the way they cook lobsters, turn up the heat a little bit at a time and the lobster never knows it.

 

[Ken Ford]

Most people I know think road blocks (of the random kind, I agree that there are certain emergencies in which they might be needed) and self incrimination without due process are just that "UNREASONABLE".

SCOTUS has been pretty unresonable over the centuries and I hope they are able to correct it.

If you pulled over the Founding Fathers riding down the "King's Highway" to look at their papers (you know because it was the Kings property) I'm betting their sentiment would be very clear and they would have worded things far better.

I really am for locking up dangerous drivers so it's hard to argue sometimes but I err on the side of the BoR.

I agree, that is why I put at the end of my post "I don't agree with random road blocks"

 

[Fatal_Bert]

The fourth protects against UNREASONABLE search or seizure. Not ALL search or seizure.
If you want to quote and have others uphold the constitution get it right.
Now explain how it would be reasonable to obtain a warrant for a person on the side of the road when the PC needed to get the warrant is evident and the person is not under arrest. Be aware that in most cases a warrant would take hours to obtain.

Sorry for your friend, that was wrong and I think he will beat it and I hope he gets some restitution.

But to equate the vast majority of legitimate DUI Inforsement with his case is absurd.

. Again, I am not for random road blocks.

Ken random roadblocks are unreasonable. When looking at the constitution the founders intent is everything. Do you really believe the would have approved of the sate having armed men randomly set up safety checks on the streets of their day?

To your second question if the police have PC to stop someone for impaired driving I'm absolutely fine with that. If upon contact they have reasonable suspicion of drinking I'm fine with them asking the driver to preform sobriety test including the breathalyzer(asking not forcing) . If the driver refuses and the officer has the necessary PC to make an arrest I'm absolutely ok with that. Now that the arrest has been made the officer can electronically submit his findings and request a warrant to get the blood test or intoxalizer. And I'm absolutely fine with that too. I'm absolutely fine with every single tactic the police do to get drunk driver's off the road even lying to them if that's what it takes. But I'm not ok with them doing it at the expense of the constitution. Random roadblocks are that expense. And avoiding the warrant procedure by threatening administrative punishment if the suspect doesn't give consent is also at the expenditure of our constitution.

And it wasn't my friend who was arrested that was another member.