DHS now going after Drunk Drivers - YAY

[Synthaholic]

Did you miss the part where federal law prohibits the feds from enforcing state law? Why do you think Congress went to all the trouble of writing a bunch of laws to make things federal crimes?

So this post...

You like the idea of the federal government making up laws they can enforce?

...really has nothing to do with the OP, right?

Even as a standalone statement it doesn't make sense. Of course the Federal government makes laws they can enforce. That's part of their job!

It was more about the poster than the actual post.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That was funny.

So you believe driving is a right?

I know the right to travel exists, and is recognized as a fundamental right under constitutional law. I am pretty sure that driving is a method of travel. I will let you figure it out for yourself.

Which part of the Constitution recognizes travel as a right?

Funny, I could have sworn I said constitutional law.

US v Guest noted that "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In Shapiro v Thompson Justice Stewart said that the right to travel is "broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."

If you don't like it feel free to take it up with the Supreme Court.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So this post...



...really has nothing to do with the OP, right?

Even as a standalone statement it doesn't make sense. Of course the Federal government makes laws they can enforce. That's part of their job!

It was more about the poster than the actual post.

Did you miss the word like?

That said, there is no federal law against drunk driving, and DHS cannot enforce state laws. That means they made up laws they can enforce, even if you want to pretend otherwise.

 

[jillian]

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.

G-d protects drunks and fools.

You were both.

 

[Synthaholic]

I know the right to travel exists, and is recognized as a fundamental right under constitutional law. I am pretty sure that driving is a method of travel. I will let you figure it out for yourself.

Which part of the Constitution recognizes travel as a right?

Funny, I could have sworn I said constitutional law.

US v Guest noted that "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In Shapiro v Thompson Justice Stewart said that the right to travel is "broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."

If you don't like it feel free to take it up with the Supreme Court.

None of that even implies that driving is a right, not a privilege.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

I know the right to travel exists, and is recognized as a fundamental right under constitutional law.

You're the only one who thinks the "right to travel" is in the constitution.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Which part of the Constitution recognizes travel as a right?

Funny, I could have sworn I said constitutional law.

US v Guest noted that "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In Shapiro v Thompson Justice Stewart said that the right to travel is "broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."

Now you're changing your story. Yes - the right to travel is not in the constitution. The judges just invented it like they invented the right to abortion and the right of illegals to use our schools.

All federal judges belong in prison.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Which part of the Constitution recognizes travel as a right?

Funny, I could have sworn I said constitutional law.

US v Guest noted that "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In Shapiro v Thompson Justice Stewart said that the right to travel is "broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."

If you don't like it feel free to take it up with the Supreme Court.

None of that even implies that driving is a right, not a privilege.

Keep telling yourself that.

By the way, we have a right to vote, but we have to register before they let us. We also have a right to keep and bear arms, yet we need a permit to actually bear them. A license does not restrict the right to drive, nor does it change it from a right to a privilege.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I know the right to travel exists, and is recognized as a fundamental right under constitutional law.

You're the only one who thinks the "right to travel" is in the constitution.

Since I never said that, you must be confused. As usual.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Which part of the Constitution recognizes travel as a right?

Funny, I could have sworn I said constitutional law.

US v Guest noted that "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In Shapiro v Thompson Justice Stewart said that the right to travel is "broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all."

Now you're changing your story. Yes - the right to travel is not in the constitution. The judges just invented it like they invented the right to abortion and the right of illegals to use our schools.

All federal judges belong in prison.

Why don't you go back and show me where I changed my story?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Why don't you go back and show me where I changed my story?

My mistake. I thought i was addressing an adult.

 

[whitehall]

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. .

So why is it routine to force all criminal suspects to give fingerprints?

Don't ask me.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I know the right to travel exists, and is recognized as a fundamental right under constitutional law.

You're the only one who thinks the "right to travel" is in the constitution.

He never said it was IN the Constitution, he cited FEDERAL Constitutional LAW. The Courts have said it is a right, or perhaps you can provide for us where in the Constitution it says abortion is a private matter?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why don't you go back and show me where I changed my story?

My mistake. I thought i was addressing an adult.

Me challenging you to show where I said something I know I didn't makes me immature?

Gotta love idiots.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

He never said it was IN the Constitution, he cited FEDERAL Constitutional LAW. The Courts have said it is a right, or perhaps you can provide for us where in the Constitution it says abortion is a private matter?

Abortion is never mentioned in the C so that makes it a state matter. The federal judges who legalized it in 1973 should have been removed from office.

 

[Full-Auto]

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.

Standard libertarian hogwash - I should be allowed to do anything i want until i actually harm someone.

In your loony land, everyone would be allowed to buy tons of dynamite at wal mart.

Is this a new brand of stupidity...Or did you borrow it?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

He never said it was IN the Constitution, he cited FEDERAL Constitutional LAW. The Courts have said it is a right, or perhaps you can provide for us where in the Constitution it says abortion is a private matter?

Abortion is never mentioned in the C so that makes it a state matter. The federal judges who legalized it in 1973 should have been removed from office.

Which has zero to do with Constitutional law and the rulings of the Court on the issue. Once again he never said it was IN the Constitution.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

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.”

On the surface it looks good, but DHS is extending itself everyday in the lives of Americans, it's dumbing Americans too the point that it will not bother them when they only see DHS check points every where and the days of the city cop are gone.

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

They'll probably just beat the hell out of you and plant some meth and a gun in the car. Contempt of cop is sometimes a capital offense!

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

Standard libertarian hogwash - I should be allowed to do anything i want until i actually harm someone.

In your loony land, everyone would be allowed to buy tons of dynamite at wal mart.

Is this a new brand of stupidity...Or did you borrow it?

I think he is absolutely serious.

And nuttier than a sack of cashews.