Florida about to have "no refusal" checkpoints

Originally posted by ararisq

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
Interestingly enough, the idiot woman from MADD who came up with this idea is also an employee of the local sheriffs office.

I feel safer just reading this article. This will completely stop people from drinking and driving. The danger of wrecking a car and being killed due to intoxication is not enough to prevent people from drinking and driving. A mandatory blood test, citation, and fine is what is needed. If the threat of death won't do it then the threat of fine and jail time will.

There already is a fine and jail time for DUI. There is already DUI checkpoints. That has done nothing to stop people from drinking and driving. If anything, it has raised new questions. How many people have been arrested so far for a non accident related DUI and said, "I only had 2 beers I thought I would be ok to drive"? It is something that is heard all the time and yet, people still drink and drive. Not everyone who is arrested for DUI is smashed and falling down all over themselves. Do you ever go to dinner and maybe have a single glass of wine with that dinner? Does a single glass of wine mean you can not drive?

This is designed to make more people criminals. If you have a glass of wine with dinner, get stopped at a check point and blood is drawn, you will be now be arrested for DUI. You have not hurt anyone, you may be fine to drive, but you will still be arrested.

Going even farther... this is going to be enforced by whom? The police? The same police who have brought us...





Jacksonville Police Officer wrecks car, gets 4 week suspension, and charged with "careless driving"

One drunk police officer, one wild night, one dead pedestrian

Another cop charged with DUI after crashing vechicle.

And these are the same people who enforce the current DUI laws? I feel sorry for you if this really makes you "feel safer", you clearly are missing the bigger picture.

reply to post by Magoo002

Yavul heir Feurer, I guess the Nazis that escaped Germany after WW11 are really at work in this country. Just like everything else, they get their foot in the door and keep on pushing. Next we'll probably need to produce our papers just to by groceries.

Actually it is a lot worse. Imbedded RFID tags to get medical care.....

You didn't REALLY think Obamacare was for OUR benefit now did you?

New Jersey Hospital to Implant Microchips in Patients' Arms - July 2006
In a new test program, Horizon Blue Cross and Blue Shield of New Jersey plans to implant patients suffering from chronic diseases with a microchip that will give emergency room staff access to their medical information and help avoid costly or serious medical errors, the insurer said on Friday.

Horizon plans to announce on Monday that it is teaming up with Hackensack University Medical Center in a pilot program where 280 patients regularly treated at the hospital will be implanted with a chip containing a code.

The chip would allow emergency room personnel to retrieve a patient's medical record if the individual can't communicate.

The rice-sized microchip is implanted in a patient's right arm above the elbow and can be detected using equipment at the hospital....

And more recently....

VeriChip Markets Its Implantable RFID Tags and Services Direct to Consumers

The company has launched a three-month advertising campaign for its newly rebranded Health Link system, and hopes to convince 1,000 South Floridians to get injected with rice-grain-sized transponders linked to health records.
By Claire Swedberg

April 28, 2008—VeriChip has launched a direct-to-consumer initiative known as Health Link, making its RFID system—previously branded as VeriMed—available to customers in South Florida's tri-county area. For $149, a consumer can have a passive 134 kHz RFID chip, compliant with the ISO 11784 and 11785 standards, implanted in his or her arm, with the transponder's unique 16-digit ID number linked to a database containing that individual's medical records and, if they so choose, a living will.

VeriChip is partnering with hearing care provider HearUSA to make the chips available. With the system, consumers can call an 800 number for additional information. HearUSA telemarketing personnel will answer questions about the system and direct interested parties to HEARx stores in their area. Customers can visit one of HearUSA's eight HEARx locations in Florida's Palm Springs, Martin and St. Lucie counties, and have a VeriChip-licensed nurse implant the transponder there in the store. Consumers need not be HearUSA or HEARx customers to have the chip implanted....

NOTE: the LIVING WILL,

Originally posted by GovtFlu
reply to post by mydarkpassenger

 

"To draw blood, do they need a release holding the hospital in question where the blood is drawn harmless from damages should an infection or other damage result to the suspect? I doubt they'd have a phlebotomist at every checkpoint. Same with the judges. Does a judge have to be on-site to issue a warrant or can they do it over the telephone? "

Some phlebotomist refuse to force blood, others don't. I don't know about Florida, but my experience in Ca.. we had a mean RN, former Navy Corpsmen, who rather enjoyed the challenge of drawing blood from resisters. He had zero qualms about puncturing people several times... and normally there would either be 3 or 4 cops pinning the person down.. or they were engineered into 5 point restraints... sometimes hog tied.

We had no judge on site, we sent a brief signed pre-written "statement of facts" via facsimile to some judges house.. a few minutes later we got back a signed warrant.

Side note: one evening the fax machine took a crap & we had to drive these forms to his honors house 10 min away.. dude was 3 sheets to the wind.. lol.. the irony was biting. He was also in the presence of a female of ill repute (hooker) we recognized..

Back in Virginia in the 90's, for blood tests the suspect was taken to an emergency room. Hospitals routinely had to have a consent form signed before they could draw blood. So what's the deal here in Florida?

reply to post by crimvelvet


I told you that NJ was FACIST!!!! HA glad I got out of there. LOL!

That's crazy RFID chips in patients? That is just really ludicrous.

reply to post by ararisq

Your illogical rationalizations never cease to amaze me Chadwickus. By this same logic a checkpoint at malls to search everyone for whatever the crime de jour is completely justified.

Yes of course, because as we all know being at a mall is exactly the same as driving on the road, those shopping trolleys are deadly, deadly weapons, with a death toll reaching into the hundreds every year!

Same goes for businesses, I hear the rate of paper cuts have drastically risen in the past 12 months, perhaps we do need checkpoints there too, to ensure people aren't photocopying under the influence.

Thanks for the strawman argument, I enjoy a good strawman first thing in the morning!

Originally posted by ldyserenity
GOOD!!! Now if only they did drug tests too!!!

Hey why stop there? Surely there must be more they can do to a person to make a few people feel safe during the little time they have left in the realm of the living. Why not a strip-search, blood test, breathe test, drug test, semen sample, brain scan, retina scan, finger printing, a three page questionnaire with a signed declaration of innocence?

Bunch of weak-minded, soulless nazi control freaks… Most will be stone cold dead in the not too distant future.

Originally posted by angelwrangler
I think it will be OK if we have checkpoints for DUI of anything not just alcohol. I have done teen and women's intervention work for drugs and alcohol. You cannot imagine the pain of an alcoholic/drug addict who has killed someone while driving under the influence. And you cannot imagine the gratitude of same shown to their arresting officer who took them off the streets before they did harm.

It's going to be OK.

Horse puckey. I've been around the block quite a few years, and I have seen a lot and don't have to imagine too much.

"Probable Cause" that's the key; not some conveyor-belt sweep of everyone "Just Cause" some neo-Hitler thinks it's a good idea.

My sister had to go through a road block early this last spring and I'd given her some rosemary from my garden.

It was in the passenger's seat. Now Rosemary doesn't look a thing like pot.
www.greek-islands.us...

...but the officer decided it was pot and was in the process of arresting her after having searched her and the trunk when finally another officer came over with the rather bored drug dog looking for MORE POT and set him straight.

reply to post by Schaden

Wrong.

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

Really? 2 glasses of wine at dinner is "too much?"

I can easily drink a 6 pack of beer, or two mixed drinks with zero impairment.

Nobody should be driving drunk, but 0.08 is certainly not drunk, 0.10 in some states is questionable, and 0.12 is probably a fair cut off point.

Many studies have shown that getting less than 8 hours sleep is more impairing than a .08 BAC. I have personally witnessed and been guilty of "distracted" driving, and it is far, far worse than a 6 pack of beer.

My wife weighs 90 lbs, and she can have two mixed drinks without any impairment, but the first sip or two probably makes her illegal.

Originally posted by MrWendal
If you have a glass of wine with dinner, get stopped at a check point and blood is drawn, you will be now be arrested for DUI. You have not hurt anyone, you may be fine to drive, but you will still be arrested..

You are misinformed.
The .08 BAC level allows a fair amount of leeway. Nobody who has a single glass of wine at dinner has a .08 BAC.

Check any BAC estimator. Even a 100lbs female can have a drink over the course of an hour and be comfortably under the legal limit.

Originally posted by getreadyalready


I can easily drink a 6 pack of beer, or two mixed drinks with zero impairment.

Nobody should be driving drunk, but 0.08 is certainly not drunk, 0.10 in some states is questionable, and 0.12 is probably a fair cut off point.

FYI a 6 pack of beer is not the equivalent to 2 mixed drinks. 1 beer = 1 mixed drink.
You're off your rocker if you think you have "zero impairment" after drinking a six pack of beer.
.08 may not be "drunk", but it is certainly impaired enough that you have no business driving.

Originally posted by Schaden

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

Unless you weigh 100lbs, .08 is more than 1 drink.

I assume that you know this due to your extensive background in biochemistry? Perhaps you could explain exactly what the .08 means, how it is derived, and what research shows significant impairment at this level?

You should not be driving if you're had more than one beer.

Says who? Is that one beer in 5 minutes? In 2 hours? With a heavy meal? What qualifies you to make pronouncements?

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.

Really? So it has nothing to do with wanting to defend your civil liberties before they all finally disappear?

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.

So in addition to your Biochem degree, you also have a JD?

If you don't drink and drive, you have nothing to worry about PERIOD.

This is such a scary statement. Do you really understand what you are saying here? Do you not understand that the government is seizing and abusing powers that the Constitution does not give them? Do you not understand the danger inherent in such actions? Perhaps you would just be happier as a slave?

Don't give me that police state nonsense.

Wow. You consider attempting to hold to the few remaining scraps of freedom we have left to be nonsense?

Drunk drivers are POS criminals and belong in jail.

That is your opinion? In my opinion, people like you should not be allowed to vote.

reply to post by GovtFlu

I PROMISE YOU, the local gendarme could give a fecal loaf about you, your kids or your safety.. the police have no duty to protect you (look it up).. guess what we got from an asset seizure thanks to $50 worth of coke?.. a brand new $120k motor home the dept turned into a mobile command post... that was used primarily for what?.. run more sobriety checkpoints.. yup. Guilt / innocence doesn't matter re: drug related asset seizures, your property can be legally taken away based on a preponderance of the evidence..

I do not think people are aware of the Civil Asset Forfeiture laws.

Incredible as it sounds, civil asset forfeiture laws allow the government to seize property without charging anyone with a crime.

Under civil asset forfeiture laws, the simple possession of cash, with no drugs or other contraband, can be considered evidence of criminal activity.

"Civil asset forfeiture has allowed police to view all of America as some giant national K-Mart, where prices are not just lower, but non-existent — a sort of law enforcement 'pick-and-don't-pay.'"
—U.S. Representative Henry Hyde,

.... Seized property was presumed guilty and could be forfeited based upon mere hearsay—even a tip supplied by by an informant who stood to gain up to 25% of the forfeited assets. Owners were forced into the untenable situation of trying to prove a negative—that something never happened, even though no proof of any illegal act had been offered at trial...

Eighty percent of property forfeited to the US during the previous decade was seized from owners who were never even charged with a crime! Over $7 billion has been forfeited to the federal government since 1985. ... www.fear.org...

This set of laws alone is a very good reason to stay far far away from the cops.

The people who advocate for this are going to wonder what in the hell happened to their freedom at some point in the near future. It doesn't end here - this is only the beginning. But just remember, it's for your safety.

Check a BAC calculator genius.

.08 is a reasonable limit.

Nobody blows a .08 from having a glass of wine at dinner, as someone erroneously suggested.
I weigh 200 lbs. I can drink 4 beers in one hour and still be under the legal limit. However I wouldn't even think of driving after having 4 beers. If you have a .08 BAC you should not be driving.

ITT: Alcoholics pretend like their civil liberties are under assault.

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)

Don't like the way I drive stay the hell off the side walk!!!!

Originally posted by kozmo
The people who advocate for this are going to wonder what in the hell happened to their freedom at some point in the near future. It doesn't end here - this is only the beginning. But just remember, it's for your safety.

Yeah next thing you know we're all on the train to Auschwitz.

Deny ignorance.

reply to post by sonofliberty1776


Drunk driving is a crime so yes drunk drivers are criminals. That is no opinion that is a fact.

There is no civil liberty that guarantees a person the right to drive. There is no civil liberty that allows someone the right to do whatever they want in public spaces under intoxication and by the nature of doing so endanger the safety of others.

Sonsoflibery1776 makes me think you appreciate natural law. How is the operation of a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol a part of natural law? A car isn't terribly natural after all.

Originally posted by GovtFlu


We spent most of our time on checkpoint writing chickencrap cites & impounding vehicles from unlicensed un-impaired drivers..

Good. No license ? What the hell are they doing on the road. ?

Originally posted by Schaden

Originally posted by kozmo
The people who advocate for this are going to wonder what in the hell happened to their freedom at some point in the near future. It doesn't end here - this is only the beginning. But just remember, it's for your safety.

Yeah next thing you know we're all on the train to Auschwitz.

Deny ignorance.

Ever consider taking your own advice? I've denied ignorance, and the ignorant, for my entire life. Apprently you haven't been paying attention to the ever evolving police state in this country. You'd do well to take a remedial class on the Bill of Rights. Oh yeah, and a history lesson as well.