Unconstitutional but for the better good?

[amcardon]

Interesting. List of DUI checkpoint laws by state: http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/checkpoint_laws.html

Ha! CA at 2500+ annually!

 

[turkeyrun]

As told to me by the woman (57yo) driving alone, headed home from work, after dark.

4th in a string of 5 vehicles. Doing 60 in a 65, KNOWN harassment area just south of Lawton.
JBT pulls out and follows the last car. Passes and pulls up dangerously close behind her.
Hits the lights and she pulls over.
JBT comes up and stands at the window looking in.
She asks why she was stopped. He asks for license and insurance.
She again asks why. He asks for license and ins.
She says no, why was I stopped?
He goes back to his car and sits.
She calls her husband to tell him why, where and what.
He calls Sheriff's Dept. to try and find out what is happening. Cotton county sheriff, even though she is still in Comanche county.
JBT sits for 30 minutes and then comes up to her truck.
She asks again why she was stopped?
He says, you can go.
She asks again, why?
He says, because I can. Do you want to argue or leave?

Name and badge number turned into OSBI.

This is not an isolated case. The harassments have been happening for the past 6 months.

 

[CHenry]

As told to me by the woman (57yo) driving alone, headed home from work, after dark.

4th in a string of 5 vehicles. Doing 60 in a 65, KNOWN harassment area just south of Lawton.
JBT pulls out and follows the last car. Passes and pulls up dangerously close behind her.
Hits the lights and she pulls over.
JBT comes up and stands at the window looking in.
She asks why she was stopped. He asks for license and insurance.
She again asks why. He asks for license and ins.
She says no, why was I stopped?
He goes back to his car and sits.
She calls her husband to tell him why, where and what.
He calls Sheriff's Dept. to try and find out what is happening. Cotton county sheriff, even though she is still in Comanche county.
JBT sits for 30 minutes and then comes up to her truck.
She asks again why she was stopped?
He says, you can go.
She asks again, why?
He says, because I can. Do you want to argue or leave?

Name and badge number turned into OSBI.

This is not an isolated case. The harassments have been happening for the past 6 months.

wow!!

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

There is no such thing as "for the better good". The better good of what? Regardless, if it isn't in the Constitution, or is prohibited by the Constitution, there is neither need nor power for the government to get involved.

Woody

 

[twoguns?]

'This is not an isolated case. The harassments have been happening for the past 6 months."

Oh its been going on a Lot longer than that....I can remember back in High School...no we werent riding horses...8)
but its been a While

 

[farmerbyron]

My mistake. I was always under the impression that entrapment required the entrapped person to actually commit a crime, not just be investigated.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?

BS.

 

[farmerbyron]

dont drive fcked up...

I agree to that but are you fcked up at .09? According to the law you are but in reality there is no difference between a legal .08 and a .09-.12 as far as likelihood of impairment. It's crap that if you get a couple drinks with dinner that you should have to worry about a 10k plus event in fines and criminal record. The states have a cash cow by having a legal limit but making it so far below the actual threshold for impairment that thousands of not drunk drivers are being prosecuted. If it really were in the name of safety then they would bar any alcohol at all and be done with it. It's very telling how govts approach this issue.

I'm with CHenry on the texting while driving being ignored until they can find a way to make money on it. Haven't looked up the data but I would bet that texting may have already surpassed DUI for collisions.

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not condoning getting hammered and driving. If someone gets caught $hitfaced behind the wheel then throw the book at them but it would be nice if the law mirrored actual data of impairment with graduated scales of punishment.

Here is a graph from govt compiled data. I can't believe I did not save the actual source link but anyways.

 

[Gabriel42]

Here is a graph from govt compiled data. I can't believe I did not save the actual source link but anyways.

Here ya go.

 

[nofearfactor]

dont drive fcked up...

I agree to that but are you fcked up at .09? According to the law you are but in reality there is no difference between a legal .08 and a .09-.12 as far as likelihood of impairment. It's crap that if you get a couple drinks with dinner that you should have to worry about a 10k plus event in fines and criminal record. The states have a cash cow by having a legal limit but making it so far below the actual threshold for impairment that thousands of not drunk drivers are being prosecuted. If it really were in the name of safety then they would bar any alcohol at all and be done with it. It's very telling how govts approach this issue.

Should have read a little of what I posted at post #54 then:

Today, twenty five years after my first kid was born, I now own an interest within a group of friends' bar management company but I still wont drink when Im there. I dont drink wine or even have one beer any more when Im outside my own house any where any more.... I just dont have a very good record with setting limits, so its best that I wait until Im home and have a soda or three. That one drink every hour thing confuses me anyways. I dont know what it takes to go past .08% for a 5'10"x 260lb dude. 265 on weekends. I just dont feel I should take my chances.

 

[colb]

"The government of today has no right to tell us how to run our lives, because the government of 200 years ago already did."