Good Example of How To Fight Tyranny

page: 4
20
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   
This is just a screening process....a screening process is aimed to identify a mass amount of problems. I'm not sure this is the best way to address tyranny. I work in the Emergency Services Field...I wish there was more of this. The officers were polite and direct. I have lost count of the number of families that have been destroyed because of drunk driving.




posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   
My take on this, having had one of my best friends die from a drunk driver but also being a firm beleiver in civil liberties.. I think both parties played it well in this video. Both stayed within their rights, man responded to police pull over, man excercised right not to talk, cop excercised a reasonable non invasive interaction. Cops did not detain citizen without cause.

I see nothing wrong with this picture. If the man was dead drunk the cop would probably have been able to smell alcohol. He was only detained for a minute and a half, could have been less but not a problem with me.



Canadians have ALOT of DUI check points and let me say, that going through their checkpoints made me feel safe and not invaded at all.
Basic question was "how you guys doing?"
Reply "Good oficer"
Canadian cop" have a nice night"

whole interaction takes less than 10 seconds, and from what i caught in canada almost NO ONE DRUNK DRIVES!!!!

I don't know how much you guys like to get out and party but cars and alcohol is the biggest killer of people under 35, then it switches to heart attack/stroke.

This is the cops actually being useful for once, as long as they stay within their rights which is clearly evidenced in this video.

I know in america we have a fear of cops due to their readiness to escalate situations, general unfriendliness and ticket books of fines for victimimless crimes. I think this is more the problem than the actual DUI checkpoint as evidenced from my canadian experience with DUI checkpoints

P.s. This is america, you are free to drink and drive on your own property, roads are owned by the government and the government can regulate their roads based on laws enacted by citizen elected politicians. If you disagree make your own roads.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   

An average drunk driver has driven drunk 80 times before first arrest.

Centers for Disease Control. “Vital Signs: Alcohol-Impaired Driving Among Adults — United States, 2010.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. October 4, 2011. www.cdc.gov...

MADD serves a victim or survivor of drunk driving every nine minutes.

(MADD data, 2010)

This year, 10,839 people will die in drunk-driving crashes - one every 50 minutes.

(NHTSA, 2009) Full cite: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. ?2008 Traffic Safety Annual Assessment ? Highlights? DOT 811 172. Washington DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2009. www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov...

One in three people will be involved in an alcohol-related crash in their lifetime.

(NHTSA, 2001; NHTSA FARS data) Full cite: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. ?The Traffic Stop and You: Improving Communications between Citizens and Law Enforcement.? National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, March 2001, DOT HS 809 212. www.nhtsa.dot.gov...&%20You%20HTML/TrafficStop_index.htm

One in three 8th graders drinks alcohol.

MADD has saved 27,000 young lives through passage of groundbreaking public health laws.

(NHTSA, 2009) Full cite: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. ?Traffic Safety Facts 2008: Young Drivers?. DOT 811 169. Washington DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2009. www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov...

One in three will be involved in an alcohol-related crash in their lifetime.

(NHTSA, 2001; NHTSA FARS data) Full cite: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. ?The Traffic Stop and You: Improving Communications between Citizens and Law Enforcement.? National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, March 2001, DOT HS 809 212. www.nhtsa.dot.gov...&%20You%20HTML/TrafficStop_index.htm.

Source: www.madd.org...


I spoke with my brother in law again this afternoon (Works directly under the Attorney General for the state I live in), he said, "If you are driving without a valid driver's license - you will be put in the back of a squad car, driven to jail, held in jail until you have someone bail you out, issued a ticket and have to go to court. Your car will be impounded and you will have a criminal record.

Driving a motorized vehicle is not a right, it is legally a privilege."

Try it, get pulled over.

Now as far as drinking and driving, again please don't - again, I have put too many dead fellow human beings in a morgue drawer due to stupid people who could not, would not police themself.

People argue over this.................but not over the TSA scanning us naked, messing up our DNA and groping us.

Do you know why they now have check points for driving safety?

The ten top accidental deaths in America and guess which is #1 - car wrecks.

Source here: www.soyouwanna.com...

Today out driving I came across 21 drivers that were not obeying the rules, driving erratically and not able to stay within the lines and turn corners smoothly.

www.listosaur.com...

sanantonio.injuryboard.com...

Personally, I want a cop to stop each and every one of you and make sure you are deemed fit by the state to drive, not drunk, can see properly and are wearing your seat belt...............don't put me and my loved ones in jeopardy.

If you have nothing to hide as far as your driving, you have nothing to fear.

Driving is a serious responsibility.

Would you want the pilot that pilots your plane not having to have a license? How about your bus driver?

Come on, this is clearly baiting - illogical and immature.
edit on 19-2-2012 by ofhumandescent because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Yet once again you quote no LAW that says in black and white that driving is a privilege. I SHOWED many court cases / case law that clearly says that driving is an unalienable right as the state cannot stop you from traveling using the common conveyance of the day.

You brother in law is a tyrant who clearly states that people will be arrested and PROSECUTED for something that is a right.

PLEASE ask your brother in law (once again) to show the LAW that says that driving is a privilege.

Now, drinking a driving, I agree with you.

A driver has NO RIGHT to hurt and trample over other people's right.

You have READ everything I showed as proof that driving is a right, when you reply please do so with real law instead of just another government tyrant's OPINION.




posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Yes please continue to fight tyranny that way. It draws TPTB's attention to you and away from those who actually know how to fight tyrany while operating in a hostile environment.

A quick lesson: Imagine you are an American spy in Moscow. You are stopped by the FSB at a roadblock and asked if you've had anything to drink. What do you do? Simple: You say 'no' because you haven't had anything to drink. You have nothing on your person or in your car that would raise suspicion. You do nothing that draws attention to yourself or causes them to remember you.

They're called 'Moscow Rules' and they are not just a product of a spy novelist's mind. Learn them. Some day you may need then to survive here our own country.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I have to say that I agree with the principle idea of these checkpoints, that being to stop inebriated drivers from doing harm, but it is somewhat of an extreme measure and IMO, its the first step down a slippery slope. And on top of that, the more common these checkpoints become, the more it instills in the common man an idea that government entities peeking into your day to day activities is a necessary evil, or worse yet, it may get them thinking that it is actually good.

I think a better solution to drunk drivers would be to take all the officers it takes to run a checkpoint and post them outside of the busiest bars in their jurisdiction. Just having them sitting in the parking lot would cause most people to make sure they had a DD. Do a two-man checkpoint right there at the bar by blocking the lots exit with some light weight barrier, or a spike strip.

That seems like a far simpler, far cheaper policy than these checkpoints. The only thing you really lose out on is the conditioning factor in regards to government harassment.



posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   
I have to say all this talk of 'tyranny'....nuts. So now a lawyer is a 'tyrant', and cops trying to catch drunk drivers is tyranny? Semantics kiddies, childish semantics.



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by My.mind.is.mine
reply to post by Cancerwarrior
 


I haven't dialed 911 since I was a child and did it for fun.....

Try me again...

I live in one of the poorest neighborhoods in Atlanta, police wouldn't show up if we called them anyway. So don't tell me how we might need them. Murders are common, and the police don't show up until the body is rotting.


That does not mean they are like that all over the country. Just because you don't "need" them in Atlanta does not mean that one day you won't find yourself in a place where you do. I can break it down for how it is here. I honestly believe Louisiana has too many cops. They always all seem to be well-funded and driving new police cars. the city cops are kinda a joke. they're all fat and act like billy-badasses but will generally let you off if you don't make them feel threatened. The sheriffs office cops are a little more hard-core and you are much more likely to get a ticket with them. The state troopers are not to be f----d with period. They have no problem taking you to jail. I've had stupid run-ins with stupid cops acting like cartman in southpark and I've talked to good ones that were willing to help me out when something went wrong. Painting everything as being the same everywhere is a lttle close-minded don't you think? Maybe DUI checkpoints aren't needed where you're at but they are where I am.
edit on 20-2-2012 by Cancerwarrior because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by RatoAstuto

I think a better solution to drunk drivers would be to take all the officers it takes to run a checkpoint and post them outside of the busiest bars in their jurisdiction. Just having them sitting in the parking lot would cause most people to make sure they had a DD. Do a two-man checkpoint right there at the bar by blocking the lots exit with some light weight barrier, or a spike strip.


Not a bad idea except then you would have all the small business owners losing business because theres cops hanging around outside his bar. I know I'm not going to a bar where theres cops hanging out at. I guess the next best thing to do would just be to outlaw bars.



posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 08:09 AM
link   
As far as the people involved - ALL DID EXCELLENT! GOOD COPS! Good citizens! and a Good (appropriate) result.

The only thing that's really sad is that the cops involved are being ordered to inflict tyranny onto others - via checkpoints like the NAZIs.



posted on Feb, 22 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Cancerwarrior
 

I thought of that as well. My grandmother ran a diner for awhile and wouldn't allow a cop to sit in the lot for that very reason. Thing is, the bars will still make money. Especially if the police dept. did the thing randomly and people didn't come to expect it each time they headed out.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ssupp
 


A traffic stop without probable cause to suspect YOU of a crime is unconstitutional.
There is an exception to this: If you are reasonably thought to have witnessed a crime. This is not called an "arrest" but a "detention."
Of course with the motor vehicle and highway laws as they are most of us are in violation of one or more laws at any given moment on the road.
1) Going OVER the posted speed limit = infraction
2) Going UNDER the posted speed limit = impeding flow of traffic = infraction
3) Weaving = not staying perfectly centered between the lines. All motor vehicles, pedal cycles, horsedrawn vehicles, horses, pedestrians weave. Motorcycles and pedal cycles must weave to keep from falling over. = infraction [Railroad vehicles weave. The flanges are 4'-8" apart and the rails are 4'-8½" apart, or on high speed straight track 4'-8¼" apart, so the wheelsets oscillate from side to side.]
4) Obstructed windshield = Dirt, crack, junk on dashboard, sticker not required by law, or not in exactly the spot prescribed - even if it blocks only your view of the hood. = infraction
5) Obstructed registration plate = dirt, plate frames that cover part of the plate, clear cover, shaded cover = infraction
6) Excessive noise = infraction
7) Rear window obscured = sticker or lettering not required by law, nodding bear on filler panel, junk on filler panel = infraction
8) Failing to come to a complete stop at a traffic control device when required = misdemeanor
9) Going past stop sign or stop line without coming to a complete stop = misdemeanor
10) Inoperative required lighting = infraction
11) Failure to pay rights tax before exercising constitutionally guaranteed right to drive a motor vehicle on the public roads = misdemeanor - never mind even the US Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that rights cannot be taxed: we are the police and we don't give a damn what the damn Supreme Court says;they're 2,000 miles from here.
12-378) many more things we can stop you for if we even care about justifying it: we are the police and the road is ours. = infractions, misdemeanors and felonies



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Great post, and very informative. Keep up the great work, OP!





new topics
top topics
 
20
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join