Florida about to have "no refusal" checkpoints, page 2

reply to post by getreadyalready

---

Considering that the public roads, ( in agreement with you ) are funded by tax dollars, which would further suggest,
" we " own the roads, the state instruments of the elite appear to be pushing the " police state " agenda to the next level.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Whereweheaded

---

They will claim "driving on public roads" is a "privilege" and not a right, .

This is true; this is the first line of EVERY driver's manual I have EVER READ!!!! DRIVING IS A PRIVELEGE NOT A RIGHT!!!! MY children and I have the right not for our lives to be put in DANGER!!!!! And yes you do have the right to move freely over our lands, you can walk, ride a bike, take a bus, a cab, a train, a plane, or ask a friend who has no BAC to drive you or a horse IDGAF, you are free to move as long as you don't do it recklessly and put other's lives in danger! AND FOLLOW THE LAWS!!!!!

The fact they can take away your license for driving infractions is proof enough.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by willie9696

---

Do you understand the term "slippery slope" at all? How about "precedent"? Turn off the TV for awhile and look at what is really going on around us.

It seems like we are standing in a very deep mud-hole, speaking of slippery slopes. The PTB have conned so many people into giving up their liberties for a very false sense of security.

They will be penned up like livestock before they realize what is wrong with the picture.

reply to post by ldyserenity

---

It's individuals like you that make me sick. You are part of the problem, allowing the " police state " gain momentum. You should be ashamed of yourself. And you call yourself an American?

reply to post by ldyserenity

---

The world does not revolve around your children.

Everyones Constitutional rights take priority over your little snowflake.

reply to post by ldyserenity

---

So...you would allow your 15 year old daughter to be fondled by TSA to fly, or send her out alone on horseback or bicycle among us 90% deviants that you live amongst in Florida? You would allow some perverted cop to take her 15 year old body out of a car, bend her over the hood, spread her legs, pat her down while grinning to his buddies, watch her "blow" into the tester a few times until his buddies have sufficient mental memory of it to satisfy themselves later, and then possibly penetrate her body and take a portion of her life-giving blood, just to make her "safer."

This doesn't seem "safer" to me?

reply to post by Whereweheaded

---

This is totally different, The TSA BS is just that BS, but when you're talking roads that other people have to share, putting others at risk because YOU are under the influence, then there is a good reason to be doing this, I drive down here, I could have been killed by an idiot who most likely was drunk, who ran a red light and THANK GOD I saw the dumb B**** was not going to stop or I'd be dead now she would have t boned my car on my side. ALSO my very dear friend's daughter was killed by a drunk driver they either need to start cracking down on them or outlawing the stuff altogether, which I would certainly not like to see, I would think we all know how that ended up. Anyway, the point is, this does not fall under the same kind of thing As a "police state"... remember until people start taking personal responsibility, there is necessary evils of point checks it's a sad fact... Or we could all just let it be and see how well it works out, it may be you or your children that pay the price by being killed by a drunk driver, I'd rather that not happen. If the roads were travelled only by those who would drink and drive, then I have no problem with letting them be, the problem is, it is shared by others who do value their own lives and that of their fellow man.

reply to post by ldyserenity

---

I could have been killed by an idiot who most likely was drunk, who ran a red light and THANK GOD I saw the dumb B**** was not going to stop or I'd be dead now she would have t boned my car on my side.

So the B**** was obviously drunk, because you have never in your life been distracted and not seen a redlight, or a stop sign. I suppose you have never switched lanes and inadvertently made someone else swerve?

I ride a motorcycle about 90% of the time. I don't have the luxury of "fender-benders" and I can tell you that many a sober woman with a chattering 15 year old daughter has run me off the road and almost killed me.

Just talking with your daughter on the way to school is probably more dangerous than having a .08 BAC. Now I am entirely against "drunk driving," but 0.08 is not "drunk" and I refuse to be fondled, penetrated, or suck on some phallic machine just for the privilege to drive on the roads that I continually pay for!

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by ldyserenity

---

So...you would allow your 15 year old daughter to be fondled by TSA to fly, or send her out alone on horseback or bicycle among us 90% deviants that you live amongst in Florida? You would allow some perverted cop to take her 15 year old body out of a car, bend her over the hood, spread her legs, pat her down while grinning to his buddies, watch her "blow" into the tester a few times until his buddies have sufficient mental memory of it to satisfy themselves later, and then possibly penetrate her body and take a portion of her life-giving blood, just to make her "safer."

This doesn't seem "safer" to me?

You're not breathing heavy as you're typing are you?
And why is it that the 'violation of our constitutional rights' types have these Keyboard Kommando avatars?

I give the police they permission to do random stops for drunk drivers on the basis that they cannot search for anything else...no need to know what's in the trunk.

reply to post by ldyserenity

---

Refusing a breathalyzer at a roadside checkpoint does not fulfill the probable cause requirement of the 4th Amendment.

Its actually frightening that people like you have the ability to vote.

Originally posted by ldyserenity

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Whereweheaded

---

They will claim "driving on public roads" is a "privilege" and not a right, .

This is true; this is the first line of EVERY driver's manual I have EVER READ!!!! DRIVING IS A PRIVELEGE NOT A RIGHT!!!! MY children and I have the right not for our lives to be put in DANGER!!!!! And yes you do have the right to move freely over our lands, you can walk, ride a bike, take a bus, a cab, a train, a plane, or ask a friend who has no BAC to drive you or a horse IDGAF, you are free to move as long as you don't do it recklessly and put other's lives in danger! AND FOLLOW THE LAWS!!!!!

The fact they can take away your license for driving infractions is proof enough.

edit on 30-12-2010 by ldyserenity because: (no reason given)

Rights are exactly what we are brave enough to claim as our rights.

In Pennsylvania, some years ago, they threatened to take away the 'privilege' of driving from anyone that did not pay into their uninsured motorists medical fund. When they figured out that only ten percent of the drivers were willing to pay it anymore, they abolished the fund. When enough people opt to break a law in order to claim something as a right, it will be just that, their right.

Think about it, if for some whacky reason the government said they were going to suspend everyones driving 'privileges', do you think everyone would listen to them? I think not. I think we would claim our right to drive a car, just like any law-breaking LEO would.

Please do not construe any of this as supporting driving while impaired in any form. I am against impaired driving and support constitutional methods of keeping it in check.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by ldyserenity

---

So...you would allow your 15 year old daughter to be fondled by TSA to fly, or send her out alone on horseback or bicycle among us 90% deviants that you live amongst in Florida? You would allow some perverted cop to take her 15 year old body out of a car, bend her over the hood, spread her legs, pat her down while grinning to his buddies, watch her "blow" into the tester a few times until his buddies have sufficient mental memory of it to satisfy themselves later, and then possibly penetrate her body and take a portion of her life-giving blood, just to make her "safer."

This doesn't seem "safer" to me?

edit on 30-12-2010 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)

No I don't fly for that reason, and they would not need to test her for alcohol, as she is 15 and would have to be in the vehicle with a licensed driver as she only has a permit. And they never do pat downs at their checkpoints, I been through several here they only make you blow if they "Smell" alcohol on your breath. And IF you're not diabetic or drunk, there would be no reason for you to smell like alcohol (diabetics sometimes give off a smell of fruity alcohol type when they haven't had their injection). I know in this state it isn't at all what you're trying to make it out to be. The police here know how to do their job. And furthermore, they would not test a fifteen yr old as they aren't even old enough to get served. lol. I know there are some derelicts whom would let their child drink well especially down here, but the officer would be able to smell it instantly, they never do a blow test without probable cause because they are good officers.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

---

Luckily I don't have a daughter, but I do have a lot of LEO buddies, and they are as perverted as any other male on the planet. They are not immune to getting a little enjoyment out of their jobs, no matter how "accidental" it is. On a 2 a.m. on a 20 degree night after arguing with inconvienced motorists all night and arresting the occasional drunk, you don't think it is quite a relief to find a cute little 16 or 17 year old in her "party attire" to pat down and watch blow? Of course it is, no matter how "professional" they attempt to be.

"Routine" traffic stops are not legal. They have to have probable cause to pull you over. They have to have probable cause to make you exit the vehicle. And, in my humble opinion, there is absolutely never a reason to take your breath or your blood! What about the 5th Amendment? Surely my very lifeforce of blood qualifies as "self-incrimination" which I am constitutionally protected from doing!

reply to post by ldyserenity

---

They "won't" or they "can't?" Because the law does not say that they won't search a 15 year old. She won't need a chaperone next year when she is 16. 16 year olds are often a little bit mouthy, maybe she will say something to get the cop to give her a hard time? Maybe she just happens to get that one cop that is a jerk or a pervert?

If we give them the authority to do exactly what I put in that post, then we cannot depend on their "professionalism" that they just won't do it, because they are nice guys!

How would you react if it did happen? You wouldn't have any legal right to hold them accountable for it, and if you tried to sue, your posts in this thread would prove that you supported their actions.

I dated a girl once in Mountain Home, Ark that had a policeman stalker. I got roughed up leaving her house a couple of times. It happens. I'm glad you can assume that all the cops are robots, because I thought some of them were just human.

reply to post by getreadyalready

---

I agree and disagree .08 may not be drunk for some and then again it may be totally plastered for some(I didn't know it was that low?). It is a low number in my opinion, too arbitrary, the best policy, for me is the field sobriety tests if your coordination is off then your reaction time is way low, that would be more accurate, I do agree with you there. I mean how much better would it be to only have to walk the straight line, stand on one foot and touch your nose, and whatever else the feild sobriety test does? It certainly would be a lot less infringing. I see your point here. Good answer.

reply to post by ldyserenity

---

So with your logic, because of your kids, and your friends daughter's death, that makes it ok to infringe on the rest of public by forcing a blood test? Tell me your kidding?


So you wouldn't be offended if your precious lil 15 year, was say 16, and was fine, and yet was searched, frisked, and the like. Knowing the " groping " methods, you'd be ok with that?

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by ldyserenity

---

They "won't" or they "can't?" Because the law does not say that they won't search a 15 year old. She won't need a chaperone next year when she is 16. 16 year olds are often a little bit mouthy, maybe she will say something to get the cop to give her a hard time? Maybe she just happens to get that one cop that is a jerk or a pervert?

If we give them the authority to do exactly what I put in that post, then we cannot depend on their "professionalism" that they just won't do it, because they are nice guys!

How would you react if it did happen? You wouldn't have any legal right to hold them accountable for it, and if you tried to sue, your posts in this thread would prove that you supported their actions.

I dated a girl once in Mountain Home, Ark that had a policeman stalker. I got roughed up leaving her house a couple of times. It happens. I'm glad you can assume that all the cops are robots, because I thought some of them were just human.

I am talking about the ones I have dealt with in Florida, I'm sure there are exceptions, but if they really did that, as my daughter actually looks twelve, then eventually they can be snared for child porn, or even if she looked fifteen eventually they all get found out those pervs.Or they could even be targetted by that nightline perv catcher HAHAHA!!!!
Just saying I have dealt with them down here and most are upstanding, not to say there aren't any bad apples I just haven't found any...and usually I am a magnet for them, lol.

reply to post by BigTimeCheater

---

You are part of the problem.

Ever heard of the 4th Amendment?

Unfortunately most people do not care any more, and I am afraid that very soon they will get what they deserve.

"Any people that would give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

Dumbing down reality
  Posted 5 days ago with 103 member flags

The 800 Pound Gorilla Everyone Ignores
  Posted 16 days ago with 67 member flags

Organic food hit piece to coincide with California proposition 37.
  Posted 2 days ago with 67 member flags

The Illusion of Choice and Truth
  Posted 10 days ago with 52 member flags

The catch all mental health disorder... Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD)
  Posted 15 days ago with 42 member flags

A chronical of the BANKSTER WARS
  Posted 7 days ago with 42 member flags

Conspiracy Theory:The Lost Episode
  Posted 4 days ago with 39 member flags

666, NWO, Aliens and You!
  Posted 13 days ago with 36 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: