TexasCHLforum.com

I'm not sure what connection 9/11 has to drunk driving but the redcoats were big fans of warrantless stops and searches to deal with troublesome colonists.

THIS

bayouhazard wrote:I'm not sure what connection 9/11 has to drunk driving but the redcoats were big fans of warrantless stops and searches to deal with troublesome colonists.

It's the principle. People get scared, horrified, or jittery about something and then are ok in giving up their rights in the name of "security" or "safety".
I was making the point that being horrified by drunk driving and its damages (and understandably so!), then using that reason to be ok with warrantless stops and searches without cause, etc. is the equivalent of those who are ok with the government doing everything from wiretaps to unwarranted searches in the name of 'security' or 'safety' from terrorism.

speedsix wrote:...I don't feel like it's an infringement on my rights to submit to a checkpoint for alcohol(or insurance, for that matter) which only takes me a coupla minutes...especially one entered into as professionally and politely as on the video...but, then, I've seen a head hanging by a shred, cars torn in two and grown people crying and screaming...smashed and broken...and watched them die...seen parents find their babies dead...all because of mixing gasoline and alcohol...I guess I've been de-sensitized...

... I don't feel like it's an infringement on my rights to have all of my weapons confinscated because the government doesn't want me to have them. It only takes me a coupla minutes for them to search my house... especially when the LEO's searching are professional and polite as they were on the video... but, then, I've seen bodies riddled with bullets and grown people crying and screaming...shot and broken...and watched them die...seen parents find their babies dead... all because of one person who decided that the law wasn't important to them...I guess I've been de-sensitized...

...well, I'll have to respect your right to feel that way...but I won't be leavin' any of my stuff at YOUR house...

speedsix wrote:...I totally agree...but the example remains...thousands of (gasp-even Texans) surrender their 4th amendment rights to get into a ballgame...or a concert...and we disarm to go into this place or that...we pick and choose what we'll get upset over...and all of us draw our personal lines in the sand...based on our life experiences/values...

Buying a ticket to a ballpark usually subjects you to the terms written on that ticket, which include the search, even if the event is held in a publicly funded facility. Driving on a public right-of-way, that I helped to pay for, is not the same thing.

I could argue both sides of this one, but, my heart and head both come down on DUI stops being a violation of the 4th Amendment.

...and, in Texas, you're in the majority...but the majority of the nation feels differently...
...drivers' licence and insurance and registration checks serve double duty...until/unless the Legislature changes the law...

Their time would be better spent making sure no illegal aliens or dead people vote...but the Obama administration blocked Texas from preventing voter fraud...I wonder why...

steveincowtown wrote:

Scott in Houston wrote:

speedsix wrote:...I don't feel like it's an infringement on my rights to submit to a checkpoint for alcohol(or insurance, for that matter) which only takes me a coupla minutes...especially one entered into as professionally and politely as on the video...but, then, I've seen a head hanging by a shred, cars torn in two and grown people crying and screaming...smashed and broken...and watched them die...seen parents find their babies dead...all because of mixing gasoline and alcohol...I guess I've been de-sensitized...

We all watched two buildings fall and 3000+ people die, but I'm not willing to waive constitutional rights as a result of it. Don't mix the horror and emotions of drunk driving with the act of giving up liberties to prevent it. The progressives love to use 'security' and 'safety' as an excuse to grow government power and its intrusion into your life. Emotion is the key to that argument.

Exactly....

+1

Even though I knew in my heart it was a violation of the 4th I have complied for the most part with this type of stop, but our local PD started setting up roadblocks asking for driver's licenses. They had traffic backed up three blocks. I told the officer I disagreed with the stop and he told me they're stopping everybody as if that made it all right. I was in a hurry so I showed my DL and went on my way. Apparently someone put a stop to it and I've never seen one again. I have reconsidered and these days I would not cooperate with any information. Just subtitute - Do you have any weapons, have you fired any weapons today, do you have any ammunition, do you have a large sum of cash, do you have a Bible (substitute any other theological/religious text) or any questionable literature with you?

CrimsonSoul wrote:

speedsix wrote:...I don't feel like it's an infringement on my rights to submit to a checkpoint for alcohol(or insurance, for that matter) which only takes me a coupla minutes...especially one entered into as professionally and politely as on the video...but, then, I've seen a head hanging by a shred, cars torn in two and grown people crying and screaming...smashed and broken...and watched them die...seen parents find their babies dead...all because of mixing gasoline and alcohol...I guess I've been de-sensitized...

... I don't feel like it's an infringement on my rights to have all of my weapons confinscated because the government doesn't want me to have them. It only takes me a coupla minutes for them to search my house... especially when the LEO's searching are professional and polite as they were on the video... but, then, I've seen bodies riddled with bullets and grown people crying and screaming...shot and broken...and watched them die...seen parents find their babies dead... all because of one person who decided that the law wasn't important to them...I guess I've been de-sensitized...

My sarcasm detector pegged on this one.

puma guy wrote:Just subtitute - Do you have any weapons, have you fired any weapons today, do you have any ammunition, do you have a large sum of cash, do you have a Bible (substitute any other theological/religious text) or any questionable literature with you?

Well done.

That is EXACTLY the issue. It's NOT about drunks on the road. That's what they want you to think!
It's about liberty and government intrusion.

puma guy wrote:Even though I knew in my heart it was a violation of the 4th I have complied for the most part with this type of stop, but our local PD started setting up roadblocks asking for driver's licenses. They had traffic backed up three blocks. I told the officer I disagreed with the stop and he told me they're stopping everybody as if that made it all right. I was in a hurry so I showed my DL and went on my way. Apparently someone put a stop to it and I've never seen one again. I have reconsidered and these days I would not cooperate with any information. Just subtitute - Do you have any weapons, have you fired any weapons today, do you have any ammunition, do you have a large sum of cash, do you have a Bible (substitute any other theological/religious text) or any questionable literature with you?

...in Texas, they LEGALLY can have checkpoints for regulatory items...Dr. Lic, Ins., Registration, Inspection...but not for possible criminal violations...so we must by law comply with those...unless We the People unite and get the law changed...

speedsix wrote:...I totally agree...but the example remains...thousands of (gasp-even Texans) surrender their 4th amendment rights to get into a ballgame...or a concert...and we disarm to go into this place or that...we pick and choose what we'll get upset over...and all of us draw our personal lines in the sand...based on our life experiences/values...

You should know better than that! The "ballgame" is not a government agency. There is no 4th amendment (or any other amendment) involved in attending a ballgame, or any of the security measures they may implement. If you don't like their rules, your options are to not attend.

The constitution ONLY protects people's rights against GOVERNMENT transgressions -- not private individuals or companies.

speedsix wrote:...
...I don't suppose that most here would miss a football game because they refused the security at the ballpark a peek in their coolers...I don't see a DUI Checkpoint as any more of an "infringement"...if the activity is legally allowed and backed by the law(passed by We, the People)...it doesn't bother me in the least...

There's a big part of the problem..."backed by the law (passed by WE, The People)"...none of US actually voted to pass the legislation...it was done for us, by our elected representatives, and they didn't go out and ask us our opinion beforehand. When a bill pertaining to tougher, stricter law enforcement is put forward, the politicians (even if they don't agree with the legislation) are afraid to speak out or vote against it, for fear that in the next election, their opponent will use it to plaster ads all over, claiming it's proof that he is "weak on crime" and voted "against making our streets safer". Once legislation like this is passed, it's almost impossible to remove it for the very same reason. How many of you believe that any of the broadened powers allowed under the Homeland Security Act will EVER be taken away from the government now that they are in place?