Northwest Indiana Discussion http://www.northwestindiana.com/discussionforum/ |
|
Drink at home this Friday http://www.northwestindiana.com/discussionforum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=9568 |
Page 1 of 4 |
Author: | -={ARCLIGHT}=- [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 5:19 pm ] |
Post subject: | Drink at home this Friday |
State police to conduct Lake County sobriety checkpoint Friday The Lowell District of the Indiana State Police will be conducting a sobriety checkpoint late Friday in Lake County, officials announced Tuesday. Drivers who encounter a checkpoint will be required to produce a valid license and registration. Motorists that are not impaired can expect only short delays of two to three minutes while passing through the checkpoint, police said. If all information is correct and there is no other reason to be detained, the driver will be released. After the checkpoint, troopers will conduct roving saturation patrols seeking impaired drivers throughout the district. Troopers are encouraging all motorists to dial 911 or the closest Indiana State Police Post when they observe another motorist who may be impaired. Callers should be prepared to give a description of the vehicle, location and direction of travel, police said. |
Author: | freetime [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 5:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
I think police roadblocks are an invasion of privacy and un-American. |
Author: | -={ARCLIGHT}=- [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 5:36 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
freetime wrote: I think police roadblocks are an invasion of privacy and un-American. Fourth Amendment. |
Author: | karent [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 6:41 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
Sounds like staying at home whether or not you drink would be a good idea, free. |
Author: | Mirage [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 12:07 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
-={ARCLIGHT}=- wrote: freetime wrote: I think police roadblocks are an invasion of privacy and un-American. Fourth Amendment. Well to play devil's advocate according to Wiki The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. The amendment specifically also requires search and arrest warrants be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and arrest should be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer, who has sworn by it. Courts may have ruled the roadblocks as reasonable but where is the probable cause? |
Author: | USMarine [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:50 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
The Fourth Amendment does not give you the right to drive drunk. |
Author: | Mirage [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:29 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
USMarine wrote: The Fourth Amendment does not give you the right to drive drunk. It seems you are missing the entire point. Behavior indicating drunk driving IS a probable cause. What is being discussed is basically a checkpoint with no probable cause which essentially is unconstitutional, again despite what the courts have ruled IMO, because it can lead to criminal prosecution without due process which may have nothing to do with driving at all. If you are stopped at such a checkpoint and a cop confiscates what he or the department subjectively claims is a large sum of money what does this have to do with driving drunk? Now before you claim they are confiscating money from suspected drug dealers that is not always the case. I remember before Katrina some Louisiana cops on I-10 used to rob families on route to Florida for vacation using the drug laws as justification. If you are not doing anything wrong and if there is not a matter of safety involved such as an escaped prisoner in the area for example I'm really not sure roadblocks fits the spirit of the Constitutional protection. In fact it's kinda what the law was written to prevent. Just stopping people to search their persons and property seems to get a free pass only because police have to announce them in advance. That justification is a mighty slippery slope. I get that some feel the ends justify the means but the whole purpose of the Constitution is to protect us from the government justifying any and all means. It's no wonder some members of Congress feel the Constitution is pretty much a meaningless inconvenience to have to work around. Some act like they're never even read it once. |
Author: | freetime [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:05 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
Good post, Mirage. I sure do hate roadblocks, and I don't drink and drive. In fact, I drink very little these days. I had to search my brain to remember the last time I had alcohol. It was a half glass of wine last Christmas. But I truly believe like you that these roadblocks violate the Constitution. In her post above, Karen demonstrates an infuriating position on this. "Just stay home all the time." Karen, I and you too also have the right to travel about freely in this country. I'm not willing to just give up my rights! |
Author: | Mirage [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:43 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
I will say it again. I do understand where folks like karent are coming from. The cops nab a few and grab a headline or two about how they made the area a safer place. But what I question is at what cost to our supposedly guaranteed liberties. I don't want drunk drivers on the streets anymore than anyone else does. And it wouldn't bother me if squads were routinely positioned to monitor and apprehend erratic drivers whether under the influence or not. It's the stop everybody and see what we can find tactic that I take issue with. Which reminds me, why aren't bars restricted to selling 2 or 3 drinks per customer? Ah! that would be political suicide. But the bars of today are not supposed to be the old watering hole they were back in the 70s when you had a bar on every corner and didn't have to drive there. It's supposedly about the experience of some form of entertainment and you pay a lot more than liquor store price for the drinks and possibly a cover charge for the privilege. That said bars still count on the revenue from people who drink to excess with few exceptions. If you want to curb drunk driving 99.99% of the people are away from home and will need transportation of some means. And lot's of people today don't even want to walk a block if they can help it! ![]() |
Author: | -={ARCLIGHT}=- [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 11:09 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
Mirage wrote: Which reminds me, why aren't bars restricted to selling 2 or 3 drinks per customer? Freedom of commerce. |
Author: | karent [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:23 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
Free, nowhere did I say all the time - the title is this Friday! |
Author: | freetime [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:12 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
The point is, I shouldn't have to stay inside my home any night to avoid an intrusive government control grab. |
Author: | USMarine [ Wed Sep 29, 2010 5:26 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
The point is that the State of Indiana has allowed local police to use roadblocks in order to keep drunk drivers off the road. That is the law of the land. If you want to come outside of your house at night, don't be drunk and if you are drunk, don't drive. Pretty simple. |
Author: | Moby Grape [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:09 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
Sieg heil. Your papers please.. And remember, don't blame the cops for this. They are just doing their job. Blame the lawmakers for allowing these intrusive nazi tactics. The same ones who want to take away your right to defend your home and family. |
Author: | Moby Grape [ Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:16 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Drink at home this Friday |
karent wrote: Sounds like staying at home whether or not you drink would be a good idea, free. Just curious...how would you feel if the police could just waltz into your house without ANY cause, go through all your things? which they pretty much can now anyway. how many of your rights are you willing to give up to feel safe? do you feel safe? |
Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |