DHS now going after Drunk Drivers - YAY

[Quantum Windbag]

TSA (Thieving and Stealing Agency) has no jurisdiction. If they stop you for any reason don't cooperate, just say:

"What is your Probable Cause for stopping me?"
"What is your badge number? Who is your Supervisor?"

"Ever had a Personal Lawsuit slapped on you?"

If they're smart they'll just let you go. Problem is, most of them aren't, they're just Too Stupid for Fast Food.

You people better start learning what your rights are. Not what the TV says, but what they actually are.

So now the libertarian kooks think they have the right to drive drunk and kill others? Get help please.

How is pointing out that we have the right to drive down the street without being stopped by feds wrong?

 

[Mad Scientist]

TSA (Thieving and Stealing Agency) has no jurisdiction. If they stop you for any reason don't cooperate, just say:

"What is your Probable Cause for stopping me?"
"What is your badge number? Who is your Supervisor?"

"Ever had a Personal Lawsuit slapped on you?"

If they're smart they'll just let you go. Problem is, most of them aren't, they're just Too Stupid for Fast Food.

You people better start learning what your rights are. Not what the TV says, but what they actually are.

So now the libertarian kooks think they have the right to drive drunk and kill others? Get help please.

No one has the "Right" to drive drunk.

The Police Officer is bound by the Law which states:

He/She must have either Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion that a driver (or anyone else for that matter) has committed an Offense (broken the law) before they can stop you.

If a Police Officer sees a car weaving then that's Reasonable Suspicion. When he pulls you over and smells alcohol now it's Probable Cause that you're DUI. He then does whatever procedure that has been outlined by his Department for suspect DUI cases.

Tell us ShootSpeeders, where is the Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion for Highway Checkpoints? (Within the United States)

 

[RetiredGySgt]

TSA (Thieving and Stealing Agency) has no jurisdiction. If they stop you for any reason don't cooperate, just say:

"What is your Probable Cause for stopping me?"
"What is your badge number? Who is your Supervisor?"

"Ever had a Personal Lawsuit slapped on you?"

If they're smart they'll just let you go. Problem is, most of them aren't, they're just Too Stupid for Fast Food.

You people better start learning what your rights are. Not what the TV says, but what they actually are.

So now the libertarian kooks think they have the right to drive drunk and kill others? Get help please.

No one has the "Right" to drive drunk.

The Police Officer is bound by the Law which states:

He/She must have either Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion that a driver (or anyone else for that matter) has committed an Offense (broken the law) before they can stop you.

If a Police Officer sees a car weaving then that's Reasonable Suspicion. When he pulls you over and smells alcohol now it's Probable Cause that you're DUI. He then does whatever procedure that has been outlined by his Department for suspect DUI cases.

Tell us ShootSpeeders, where is the Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion for Highway Checkpoints? (Within the United States)

The Supreme Court has said they are legal within certain guide lines.

However the feds have no police power within a State. DHS has no authority to run mundane check points. I am not sure that it is even legal if the State asks them to except via a declaration of some kind of emergency.

 

[Mad Scientist]

So now the libertarian kooks think they have the right to drive drunk and kill others? Get help please.

No one has the "Right" to drive drunk.

The Police Officer is bound by the Law which states:

He/She must have either Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion that a driver (or anyone else for that matter) has committed an Offense (broken the law) before they can stop you.

If a Police Officer sees a car weaving then that's Reasonable Suspicion. When he pulls you over and smells alcohol now it's Probable Cause that you're DUI. He then does whatever procedure that has been outlined by his Department for suspect DUI cases.

Tell us ShootSpeeders, where is the Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion for Highway Checkpoints? (Within the United States)

The Supreme Court has said they are legal within certain guide lines.

However the feds have no police power within a State. DHS has no authority to run mundane check points. I am not sure that it is even legal if the State asks them to except via a declaration of some kind of emergency.

When the President declares a State of Emergency (Martial Law) THEN troops can be used.
When the Governor of a State declares a State of Emergency (Martial Law) THEN the troops can be used.

Some Gov't asshole merely saying that troops can be used to help local Law Enforcement don't make it so.

I can't wait for a TSA Klown to stop me.

 

[Jackson]

Doesn't the DHS have enough on its plate looking for terrorists? Let local police take care of the drunks!

 

[Mad Scientist]

Doesn't the DHS have enough on its plate looking for terrorists? Let local police take care of the drunks!

Hint: They (DHS) think that "Returning Veterans", "Sovereign Citizens" (Me) and those who speak of "Constitutional Issues" (Me) are the REAL terrorists.

The whole DHS System was made and set up to be used on The American Citizen. Make no mistake about it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No one has the "Right" to drive drunk.

The Police Officer is bound by the Law which states:

He/She must have either Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion that a driver (or anyone else for that matter) has committed an Offense (broken the law) before they can stop you.

If a Police Officer sees a car weaving then that's Reasonable Suspicion. When he pulls you over and smells alcohol now it's Probable Cause that you're DUI. He then does whatever procedure that has been outlined by his Department for suspect DUI cases.

Tell us ShootSpeeders, where is the Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion for Highway Checkpoints? (Within the United States)

The Supreme Court has said they are legal within certain guide lines.

However the feds have no police power within a State. DHS has no authority to run mundane check points. I am not sure that it is even legal if the State asks them to except via a declaration of some kind of emergency.

When the President declares a State of Emergency (Martial Law) THEN troops can be used.
When the Governor of a State declares a State of Emergency (Martial Law) THEN the troops can be used.

Some Gov't asshole merely saying that troops can be used to help local Law Enforcement don't make it so.

I can't wait for a TSA Klown to stop me.

TSA are not troops, but unless they are only used on Federal Highways they have no jurisdiction unless an emergency has been declared. I would advice you obey them but sue afterwards. But knowing our idiot Courts they will allow it.

 

[Dissent]

Welcome to the police state folks. Good thing I don't live in Tn and didn't go driving around this weekend,probably would have ended up in jail. Wonder what kind of fucking traitor judge gives them warrants to do this shit.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

He/She must have either Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion that a driver (or anyone else for that matter) has committed an Offense (broken the law) before they can stop you.

So how do you rationalize the searches routinely conducted on airplane passengers?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He/She must have either Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion that a driver (or anyone else for that matter) has committed an Offense (broken the law) before they can stop you.

So how do you rationalize the searches routinely conducted on airplane passengers?

I don't, I think they should stop.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

So how do you rationalize the searches routinely conducted on airplane passengers?

I don't, I think they should stop.

You're not a judge. Our legal system has said searches of all airplane passengers is legal and that means searching all drivers for DUI must be legal too.

 

[jillian]

On the surface it does seem to be an efficient allocation of resources, seeing how there's nothing going on down at DHS these days. 'Cause Obama got us covered. God bless that lil' nappy headed Prez.

how accomplished do black people have to be before people stop calling them 'nappy headed'?

seems to be endemic among the right.

g-d bless the southern strategy

 

[jillian]

He/She must have either Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion that a driver (or anyone else for that matter) has committed an Offense (broken the law) before they can stop you.

So how do you rationalize the searches routinely conducted on airplane passengers?

I don't, I think they should stop.

yes... government should only enforce your religious views and shouldn't do anything else.

 

[jillian]

So how do you rationalize the searches routinely conducted on airplane passengers?

I don't, I think they should stop.

You're not a judge. Our legal system has said searches of all airplane passengers is legal and that means searching all drivers for DUI must be legal too.

random DUI checkpoints are legal. stopping someone for a reason is legal. that does not mean all 'searches' are legal.

 

[Papageorgio]

He/She must have either Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion that a driver (or anyone else for that matter) has committed an Offense (broken the law) before they can stop you.

So how do you rationalize the searches routinely conducted on airplane passengers?

You don't have to submit to a search, but then you can be denied boarding. You have a choice.

 

[Papageorgio]

So how do you rationalize the searches routinely conducted on airplane passengers?

I don't, I think they should stop.

You're not a judge. Our legal system has said searches of all airplane passengers is legal and that means searching all drivers for DUI must be legal too.

That is quite a jump.

 

[Katzndogz]

That's what they do here but in the Colonies we are blessed or burdened (depending on your personal opinion) with the Constitution. The 5th Amendment prevents forced self incrimination so a drunk or sober driver can decline a breathalizer test and a blood test. Of course the government has that gambit checkmated so a driver that refuses a sobriety test automatically forfeits his license until a hearing where a government official will officially lift his license for refusing a sobriety test.

That's because you don't understand the 5th amendment. Under the 5th amendment you may decline to speak and thereby incriminate yourself. A breathalyzer or blood test doesn't involve speaking so those tests do not have anything to do with self-incrimination. If an officer were to ask "Are you drunk" the person can legally answer that under the 5th Amenment he doesn't have to answer the question.

 

[Katzndogz]

I don't, I think they should stop.

You're not a judge. Our legal system has said searches of all airplane passengers is legal and that means searching all drivers for DUI must be legal too.

That is quite a jump.

It's just another misunderstanding of the laws. Searches of airline passengers is legal because the passengers don't own the plane. Submitting to a search is a function of being able to get on a plane owned by someone else. It get a proper analogy, you would be within your rights to ask a passenger in your car to submit to a search.

 

[PredFan]

About time. Drunk drivers are literally a thousand times bigger threat to you than terrorists. Hope they go after speeders too. Stop coddling these killers

Homeland Security to assist with DWI arrests over Labor Day weekend - National Alex Jones | Examiner.com

August 30, 2012

The Department of Homeland Security is sending out its state watchdogs to arrest drunk drivers and draw their blood over Labor Day weekend.

In Tennessee, suspected drunk drivers will be subject to forced testing for blood alcohol levels. A new law allows police to get warrants and draw blood samples from people who appear to be driving impaired. Additionally, drivers can expect to see more sobriety checkpoints over the Labor Day weekend.

Tennessee has touted itself as the first state in the nation to have Transportation Security Administration (TSA) workers conducting random searches on its streets. Echoing DHS’s “See Something, Say Something” program, drivers are also urged to call authorities if they see something suspicious.

The state's Department of Safety & Homeland Security Commissioner, Bill Gibbons, has said, 'Where is a terrorist more apt to be found? Not these days on an airplane, more likely on the interstate.”

I drive drunk (legally drunk, not actually drunk) at least once a week. I've been doing that ever since I was 16 years old 41 years ago. Never been caught, never killed anyone, never got so much as a speeding ticket. You can piss off, so can the DHS.

 

[PredFan]

TSA (Thieving and Stealing Agency) has no jurisdiction. If they stop you for any reason don't cooperate, just say:

"What is your Probable Cause for stopping me?"
"What is your badge number? Who is your Supervisor?"

"Ever had a Personal Lawsuit slapped on you?"

If they're smart they'll just let you go. Problem is, most of them aren't, they're just Too Stupid for Fast Food.

You people better start learning what your rights are. Not what the TV says, but what they actually are.

So now the libertarian kooks think they have the right to drive drunk and kill others? Get help please.

Back in the day, we used to have these parties called "Progressive Dinners". WE would all get in our cars, drive to a person't house and have drinks, then get back in our cars and drive to the next person's house for appetizers and more drinks, then on to the next for dinner and drinks, then dessert and drinks. All night long. No one ever died.