Florida about to have "no refusal" checkpoints

Originally posted by george_gaz

Are you honestly telling me, sat there in your chair, that you would prefer to have drunk drivers on the roads than have a NON-INTRUSIVE test carried out on them? If so, then you, sir or madam, are clearly drunk.

Actually, it is all those Sirs and Madames who disagree with me that are drunk.

Good decent people who are reasonable don't believe in checkpoints.

reply to post by Exuberant1


What is your solution then?

How do you propose that we curtail drink driving?

A checkpoint with a breath test to try to prevent idiot drink drivers endangering others is not all bad.

reply to post by groingrinder

There should be a citizens patrol that stops LEO's and tests them for steroid use. No refusal or you lose your law enforcement certs permanently.

Good Idea given "Roid Rage" A LEO on steroids with a beefed up body and a really short temper, does things like Taser A Teen With Broken Back 19 Times for Not Standing Up When Ordered

However TPTB owns all the certified Labs and controls all the testing. Unfortunately the precedent is being set that citizens have no "right" to test. Given what has happened recently and the fact that testing is not infallible. (I have been asked to falsify tests often enough and gotten fired for not being a "Team Player")

I would not trust to being proven innocent by a government who is after my money or has a grudge.

US Government and Testing

Court: US can block mad cow testing By MATT APUZZO ; Associated Press Writer Published:

-- The Bush administration can prohibit meat packers from testing their animals for mad cow disease, a federal appeals court said Friday. The dispute pits the Agriculture Department, which tests about 1 percent of cows for the potentially deadly disease, against a Kansas meat packer that wants to test all its animals....

A federal judge ruled last year that Creekstone must be allowed to conduct the test because the Agriculture Department can only regulate disease "treatment." Since there is no cure for mad cow disease and the test is performed on dead animals, the judge ruled, the test is not a treatment.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned that ruling, saying diagnosis can be considered part of treatment.

"And we owe USDA a considerable degree of deference in its interpretation of the term," Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote.... madcowtesting.blogspot.com...

...In July 2000, USDA officials claimed in our court hearing that, “The farmers have no rights. No right to be heard before the court, no right to independent testing, and no right to question the USDA....

My husband, Dr. Larry Faillace, and I worked with the USDA for years to import purebred European dairy and meat sheep. When the animals arrived in Vermont in 1996, they were the first to be enrolled in USDA's “Voluntary Scrapie Flock Certification Program (VSFCP).” Scrapie is a disease of sheep from the same family of diseases as BSE, has been documented for more than 200 years, and is endemic in the United States. Once animals had been monitored for five years without any signs of the disease, a flock was certified “free” of scrapie. However, when we completed all the requirements, instead of giving us our certification, the USDA put our farm under quarantine, machinated false test data in an attempt to justify seizing our animals, stole our entire flock seventeen days before our scheduled Second Circuit Court hearing, killed every single animal, and then illegally quarantined our farm for five years—for a disease which does not exist....
Linda Faillace: www.vtcommons.org...

...Actually, the Henshaws have nothing but praise for the game wardens. But they have a different opinion of the USDA agents who slaughtered their herd.

"The USDA guys wouldn't talk to me," complains Cindi. "We hadn't gotten test results, and they were killing our animals. No one would tell me anything. I was sitting in my house not knowing what the hell was going on, and I was trying to understand what we had done wrong."


Government-only

The Henshaws are astounded that they were not allowed to take blood samples from their own hogs before the animals were hauled away for incineration. Cindi says an attorney told her that of the 79 killed, 42 were tested, and 15 came back positive for pseudorabies.

In the hog killing case there were absolutely no clinical signs of the disease. The USDA agents could not kill the piglets with shotguns because they were too fast.

“Pseudorabies is a viral disease most prevalent in swine, often causing newborn piglets to die... Infected cattle and sheep can first show signs of pseudorabies by scratching and biting themselves. In dogs and cats, pseudorabies can cause sudden death. The virus does not cause illness in humans.”

The disease is caused by pseudorabies virus (PRV), an extremely contagious herpes virus that causes reproductive problems, including abortion, stillbirths, and even occasional death losses in breeding and finishing hogs.”

“Currently, all 50 States are considered free of PRV... nonais.org...

May I respectfully suggest that if you are stopped then you hand the officer a statement of your rights and then your fee schedule for the time for which you are to be detained and forced to part with your blood.

I'd be looking at making that officer personally liable for your charges.

You my American friends are about to lose your liberty and become enslaved just like here in England.

Guns are dangerous, they will take them from you at these checkpoints and when they decide that it's dangerous to stop people that might have guns on them, they will ban guns.

It's like everything that BigGov does...
They find an issue that the public is in agreement with to institute an invasion of privacy.
Then later they use that as a reason to broaden their invasion of citizen's rights.
Support this and soon you could be submitting to a strip search to enter a sporting event.

reply to post by romanmel


In the UK (same for US? not sure) a mandatory blood test has always been in effect but only if you are suspected of being over the limit and you refuse a breath test or if you are adamant that the breath test is incorrect in its finding.

This is barely an invasion in any way shape or form. It is simply eliminating due-process by having the judge on hand.

The checkpoints aspect of the invasion is something that has been in place for a while, no?

Would you argue against a police checkpoint on the border for illegal immigrants entering the country? Or a checkpoint against a murderer in the county and police are checking vehicles for the suspect? But people are arguing against a checkpoint to catch drink driver because it is proactive in its approach and not reactive.

Well it is not really that proactive seeing as drink driving is a crime anyway it is simply proactive in that it is trying to prevent the idiot crashing into and killing an innocent victim.

Originally posted by george_gaz
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

What is your solution then?

How do you propose that we curtail drink driving?

A checkpoint with a breath test to try to prevent idiot drink drivers endangering others is not all bad.

Wrong.

You ASSUME that all are guilty.

Stop those who a guilty of driving recklessly and test them.

reply to post by romanmel


Ok, according to your logic, let the terrorists in, then arrest them after they have blown up a few million people?

There is no logic here.

Originally posted by romanmel

Stop those who a guilty of driving recklessly and test them.

That's a better way to do it.

And if they test as being drunk, then they should get the maximum allowable penalty for their reckless driving charge.

This will help deter others.

Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
reply to post by romanmel

 

Ok, according to your logic, let the terrorists in, then arrest them after they have blown up a few million people?

There is no logic here.

I agree, there is no logic there.

Which country is this that let's known terrorists in? That would be an illogical thing for a country to do.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by romanmel

Stop those who a guilty of driving recklessly and test them.

That's a better way to do it.

And if they test as being drunk, then they should get the maximum allowable penalty for their reckless driving charge.

This will help deter others.

Agreed!

The principle some seem not to get is this:

Everyone is entitled to his right to move about without assumption that they are suspect.

Innocent till PROVED guilty.

OK,

We all move about in freedom.

Then we blow up the twin towers.

I think you guys need to wake up, or come down or whatever. What I know you have to do, is come to terms with reality.

At the surface, this procedure appears just another measure of big brother doing what they can to make things safer for us. In reality it is just another step in breaking us down and getting us used to more and more government control. TSA and invasive public searches, refusing a breath test and having several jack booted state troopers hold you down while they extract blood. I am sure they will be highly trained and have a delicate touch. I agree with a previous poster, once they set precedent that they can forcefully exploit you without proper judicial proceedings, we will have lost our freedom. Truth be told, we have lost many of them already.

reply to post by romanmel


But but but won't some people feel so much safer with these checkpoints?

Sure the police could be doing other things and not infringing on people rights, but this really makes some people feel safe, you know - in the cockles of their hearts.

reply to post by Exuberant1


I am sure this will make them feel safe and protected. I just can't wait to see the warm smile on their faces as they are loaded into boxcars and are headed to the vacation camps!

reply to post by Exuberant1


Yeah,

Keep the so-called freedom.

Cry afterwards.

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by romanmel

 

But but but won't some people feel so much safer with these checkpoints?

Sure the police could be doing other things and not infringing on people rights, but this really makes some people feel safe, you know - in the cockles of their hearts.

Ben Franklin said it best,
Those who would trade a little freedom for safety, deserve neither.

Originally posted by sentinel007
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

I am sure this will make them feel safe and protected. I just can't wait to see the warm smile on their faces as they are loaded into boxcars and are headed to the vacation camps!

They will finally feel truly safe.

Behind the razor wire and surrounded by guard towers, they will be comforted knowing that no harm will come to them. They will admire the guards for the great sacrifices that they make.

reply to post by Exuberant1


I think we will see the wheels start to come off the first month of January. The US and world banks will not be able to sustain the huge debts. Once the major banks failm the secondary market will come down all to quickly. Don't look for any temporary bank holidays. One the doors shut that will be it. Then comes reset mode. Have food and water at the ready. Oh yeah, a shotgun or two might not be such a bad idea. The S*&^t is about to hit the fan.

reply to post by sentinel007


No,

Just not going to happen.

Spreading fear is not helping.

Get out there and face whatever life throws at you. Like everyone has to.