It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Florida about to have "no refusal" checkpoints

page: 24
54
<< 21  22  23    25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by vkturbo
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Are you sure you don't share the same amount of I.Q as your avatar there as that would have to be the most rediculous thing i have heard so once again the majority gets screwed by the minority I personally believe that when the majority of people agree they should publicly back it especially if there are minorities against it.

I know thats what has to start happening over here but people can't see anything over here as they believe everything will be great due to China they can't see who is attached to who and which way the dominoes will fall.


The majority is not being screwed by the minority. If you stop every car at a checkpoint, that is screwing the majority.

Personally? I am for unfettered liberty. You do not have a right to total safety. But if we are going to impose some level of tyranny, lets keep it only to people who are at bars. Don't let them have parking lots.

That makes FAR more sense than stopping cars at checkpoints, demanding innocent people submit to some test.

BTW, do not question intelligence. It is bad form. You have all but negated anything of value you might say by using insults.




posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Unfettered? No guarantee of absolute safety at all times despite your own bad decision making? I am appalled! (sarcasm) You mean the government is not supposed to hold our hand 24 hours per day and guarantee our own safety from ourselves?

You mean we shouldn't sue a resort because a shark attacked your wife in the Pacific Ocean and claim the government should have rescued us?


Nahid Davoodabadi, honeymooning in Hawaii in 1999, disappeared while kayaking. Her husband, Manouchehr Monazzami-Taghadomi, said she was killed by a shark, and set about suing the kayak rental company, Extreme Sports Hawaii, for the accident and the federal government for failing to rescue him.
.
.
.
It appears Extreme settled the case for some unknown amount rather than go through the expense of litigating the appeal.


And WINNING?!?!?!?!?!?

Or how about being sued for getting robbed?


'In 1997, Larry Harris of Illinois broke into a bar owned by Jessie Ingram. Ingram, the victim of several break-ins, had recently set a trap around his windows to deter potential burglars. Harris, 37, who was under the influence of both alcohol and drugs, must have missed the warning sign prominently displayed in the window. He set off the trap as he entered the window, electrocuting himself. The police refused to file murder charges. Harris’s family saw it differently, however, and filed a civil suit against Ingram. A jury originally awarded the Harris family $150,000. Later, the award was reduced to $75,000 when it was decided Harris should share at least half of the blame.


OR being too drunk to unseatbelt yourself when you drive drunk off into the water, and the jury finds it is Honda's fault for making the seatbelt too difficult to unbuckle while drunk?


It seems that the automaker may in fact be responsible for a woman getting very drunk, driving very drunk (almost 2x the legal dui limit). Driving her car into a lake while drunk and drowning because she could not undo her seatbelt wasted, under water. Yep, it seems Honda is the culprit here, NOT the woman driving drunk, NOT the state for having seat belt laws to begin with. Now it does surprise me that these people did not go after the state for the seat belt law, had the law not been in place, she would not have had a seat belt on and would have flown out the windshield to begin with… having never drowened! WTF.

Amazingly, a jury found that Honda was 75% responsible by not anticipating that a drunk driver sitting under water at the bottom of a lake needs an “auto” release button that they can operate while intoxicated… maybe something with flashing lights.

In 1992, 23-year old Karen Norman accidentally backed her car into Galveston Bay after a night of drinking. Norman couldn’t operate her seat belt and drowned. Her passenger managed to disengage herself and make it to shore. Norman ’s parents sued Honda for making a seat belt their drunken daughter (her blood alcohol level was .17 – nearly twice the legal limit) couldn’t open underwater. A jury found Honda seventy-five percent responsible for Karen’s death and awarded the Norman family $65 million. An appeals court threw out the case.


Yes, courts, lawyers, laws, litigations, and lawmaking have gone off the deep end. Why does every Congress and every elected lawmaker feel it is necessary to continually make more and more laws? It is not a necessary component of their job. Maybe they should concentrate on repealing some laws, or maybe updating some laws, or maybe combing through 10s of 1000s of pages of existing laws and trying to make it sensible.
edit on 2-1-2011 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Yeah mate you hit the nail on the head we all need to start taking responsibility for our self otherwise the government will do it instead. This is what i mean by the minority screwing the majority by not using their heads. Unfortunately there are alot of people who shouldn't breed but because the government sees them as money it is encouraged in stead of stopped or incentives to stop.

Also the fact that there are so many lawyers in our societies is also a bad thing as they screw with the law for people they know who are at fault or did do the crime. Some may say well good on them well to those eople this is why you are going to be screwed more by your government.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 
Florida is #1 in the nation regarding pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities.

They would do better to use that stimulus money to build alternate routes to protect the vulnerable.

It's #ing ridiculous here.

And they used the stimulus money for something that will make it worse.

It's not just about drunk drivers,look at the statistics,do the math.

It is just #ing ridiculous!.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 
The Powers That Be are having loads of fun on our dime in every way one could imagine.

Really!..



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SSimon
 
The point is,did he hurt anyone?.

Read and try as you may with your limited reading skills,to understand the constitution.


edit on 2-1-2011 by chiponbothshoulders because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   
The real problem is,that there are 50 cars lined up in a row at a checkpoint,and 49 of the people there just sit and watch while their rights go a little further down the drain.

Acceptance for value.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by chiponbothshoulders

Florida is #1 in the nation regarding pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities.

They would do better to use that stimulus money to build alternate routes to protect the vulnerable.



That probably won't happen. There is no money to be made from those who ride bicycles. No tax from gasoline, vehicle insurance, auto repairs. No transportation-related taxes from cyclists, so---no revenue to build any "alternate route" for them to ride.

But the biggest windfall of all for revenue is the chance that a driver will screw up with some infraction that will land him in jail. Then, he may eventually become a part of the bonded work system. Prison bonds are big business.

Many people do not realize when they are asked to produce certain documents to obtain a driver's license, those items are used as a pledge collateral. It's called bailment. When you present your birth cert. you are putting your self up as human collateral. When you present proof of your address, your home or your apt. serves as collateral. These are things you are offering in exchange for the privilege of driving on Caesar's highways.

In some cases, checkpoints might be a very good thing and a safety factor for everyone. But knowing how things really work, we have to ask if this is merely being used to beat the bushes for revenue.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 
I already know all of this.

So what do we do with this knowledge?.

Nothing,unless you wanna be beat down.

I know this from experience.

I fall down,But I get up again............


edit on 2-1-2011 by chiponbothshoulders because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-1-2011 by chiponbothshoulders because: (no reason given)
www.youtube.com...
edit on 2-1-2011 by chiponbothshoulders because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Schaden

Originally posted by getreadyalready
I guarantee that driving at a 0.08 BAC level is barely noticeable


Wrong.

Unless you weigh 100lbs, .08 is more than 1 drink.
You should not be driving if you're had more than one beer.

All this no refusal does is prevent drunks from scamming the system by refusing a breathalyzer, stalling, waiting for their BAC to come down below legal levels. DUI lawyers are telling people to refuse, because it takes a few hours for them to be taken down to the station and get a blood test.

If you don't drink and drive, you have nothing to worry about PERIOD.
Don't give me that police state nonsense. Drunk drivers are POS criminals and belong in jail.


Completely Aside from the legal argument.

I hate to be "Mary f***'in Poppins" here: but I agree no matter what your built up tolerances are; one drink or beer any alcohol in your system: you ARE in someway impaired. If the 4 year old doesn't ride his bicycle out between parked cars in the street in front of you; you may navigate from the bar to home without incident. If you need all 10 tenths of your reaction time . you don't have it at your command..same can be said for g**damn cellphones.

I think its ridiculous folks can drive to a bar spend the afternoon pounding beers, getup and drive home. I do like my daily fosters beer(s); and Mr Daniels and I are well acquainted but I'll sit in my livingroom and pound 'em away.
The constitutionalist in my head tells me theres' "slippery slope" issues here; and my heart goes out to families ravaged by testosterone laden idiots("ladies" included) proving they can drink their wing men under the table, then jumping right in the silverado and throwing gravel out of the parkinglot....



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 
Most people are impaired in some way.

It is only a matter of time before only the wealthy will be able to drive a motor vehicle.

I scenarioed this in high school,in 78.

Just watch.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   
these check points have nothing what so ever to do with getting drunks off the road, and everything to do with making money!

more checkpoints = more tickets = more money plane and simple.

If the check points were really about drunk driving, then they would be far more spread out, and placing themselves in places where it would be easier to catch a driver who is being reckless.


Cities and States are broke people, they are now pulling out all the stops to get money!

I wonder how many illegal searches and seizures went on, without probable cause!



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by thewholepicture
 
Yes!.

Consider the prescription drug use,then note how many are.......

In error because they cannot produce the prescription,if they are stupid enough to allow a search.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 


Of course alot of it is for revenue your budget over there for the entire country is going down the toilet seeing though your budget couldn't be covered if you were all taxed 100%.

So expect more ways to screw you big time for money or reasons for other ideas to save state money as the states are in the same boat as the country.

Until people show common sense the government will always intervine to make sure you do what you should be doing in the first place.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   
This is why I have a valid DL,but ride a bicycle.

With lights at night,of course.

TPTB absolutely despise freedom.

Freedom Is Not Free.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by chiponbothshoulders
reply to post by thewholepicture
 
Yes!.

Consider the prescription drug use,then note how many are.......

In error because they cannot produce the prescription,if they are stupid enough to allow a search.



Totally agree!

The problem in this situation, is that a judge is available to give warrants for the cops to search the car permission or not. I doubt the "judge" really cares about due process, evidence, or probable cause when they are pulling so many people over at once.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by saabster5
 


There are judges on call woken at home 24/7 for court orders...They arent floating around. They are summoned in their kitchens at 4:00am or whatever, sign the writ and there you go.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ldyserenity

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
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?
edit on 30-12-2010 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)


Like I said down here they do take probable cause seriously, they have to smell it first, however that's not saying some officers will do it without probable cause. It would be more efficient if they did field sobriety tests and I think most people who knew they could still do them & pass would do them without issue...those who would refuse would be subject to arrest/blood testing etc...because it would be obvious that they would not have the coordination, meaning they know that they are beyond controlling their vehicle as well, more people refuse the breathalizer I would assume because they may have had just one drink and it show that they are over the limit, but may be in full faculties. I can sort of understand that. It used to be before the tech of breathalizers that field sobriety was all that was used. I think sometimes people rely too much on technology when older ways may be more accurate and less infrigning. I don't know, I do feel safer that they are cracking down on it, can't change that. I do beleive though here, they take probable cause very seriously and most people they will just pass through because they don't smell alcohol...at least this has been my experience. And I don't have all the answers, I am not saying that, but something does need to be doe especially in this state. If you drove down here you would understand. It's scary and I have driven in Philadelphia and All Down the coast, but the scariest by far are the drivers down here. It's like playing russian roulette, but not only with yourself but everyone else in the vehicle.


I'm a little late at reading this, but let me chime in with a past story dealing with this issue and two Florida State Cops.

About 5 years ago, I was caught in a checkpoint while goind down to FL to visit my mother for a holiday. My wife and I are in the car with my dog in the back seat. Pull up to the trooper, give him my license, registration, and insurance. I was in the Air Force so I had my home of record license (Maryland), insurance from my duty station (South Carolina), and was waiting on South Carolina plates so still had my old duty station plates on (Mississippi). The trooper looks at my paperwork walks to the back of the car to check the plates against the registration I guess. He then asks me if I'd been drinking. I'd been driving for 8 hours or more from SC... my reply was "Nope". He asks... mind blowing in here... my reply "yes I do as a matter of fact... I've been on the highway for a while, no way I could have been drinking". Step out of the car... no reason for me to step out sir, I'm just trying to visit my mother for the holiday. Calls another troop over, who draws his weapon. We need you to step out of the vehicle... ok... fine... thinking "Can't believe I'm about to go to jail for this BS". They pat me down etc... then handcuff me and tell me to stand against the car for a minute. They run my stuff then one comes back to talk to my wife who's now sitting behind the car on the curb. She mentions that I'm military so they take the cuffs off and say they thought something was fishy because of the three state documents. So really... my probable cause to blow was conflicting documentation that was in fact legal because of my situation. Now they pick with me wasting my time while they don't know the facts. All while they're using illegal tactics to both pull people over as well as infringe on my personal information. Anyone else want this stuff happening to them?



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by thewholepicture
 



Totally agree!

The problem in this situation, is that a judge is available to give warrants for the cops to search the car permission or not. I doubt the "judge" really cares about due process, evidence, or probable cause when they are pulling so many people over at once.


I'm against the whole procedure, but I have to assume that the Judge's ONLY real care, is due process, evidence, and probable cause! That is is sole purpose as a Judge. If he isn't worried about those things, then what is the point? Plus, how long would he remain a judge if several defense attorneys claimed simultaneously that he was not fulfilling that very basic duty of his bench?

No, I think the Judges are concerned with doing a decent job, I even think the LEOs are concerned with doing a decent job, I even think the lawmakers are concerned with doing a decent job.

The problem is compartmentalization. The combination of all the entities doing a bit more than they should be authorized to do, and the cumulative effect is erosion of our rights. The "conspiracy" part is whether or not this compartmentalization is intentional or not, and whether or not there is some central authority orchestrating this erosion?!?!?



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


And that is it. Where the rubber meets the road, you usually have people who believe they are doing the right thing.

The higher up you go, the only thing that changes is the type of lies used to manipulate them.




top topics



 
54
<< 21  22  23    25  26 >>

log in

join