Hobbit
Senior Member
I know some of this has been posted before, but I heard a few more details and updates on the Glenn Beck program, so I thought it needed a revisitation.
Four months ago, a Philidelphia man had his driver's liscence revoked after his doctor filled out a form, signing his name and checking two boxes saying, "alcohol abuse" and "poses a driving hazard." This is in compliance with a new Pennsylvania law saying a doctor may disclose information that could affect a patient's ability to drive. The man had told his doctor he drank a six pack of beer every day. The man drinks the beers after he goes home for the night, and the only mark on his driving record is a DWI 23 years ago. His weight and metabolism mean that if he drinks the beers over 2 hours, he is still under the legal driving limit. He has since stopped drinking beer on weekdays due to a heart condition. A judge recently upheld that decision, and said he would have to get a breathalyser keyed to his ignition in order to get his liscence back. What happened to doctor/patient confidentiality? Will patients start witholding information to keep their liscences?
A divorced woman was recently ordered by a court not to smoke around her children as part of the custody proceedings in the court. While smoking around children is a bad practice, the children have no health conditions that could be stimulated by second hand smoke and a recent 9-year study has shown that second hand smoke only poses a problem to those with pre-existing breathing problems. I don't want the mom smoking around the kids, but I don't want the court enforcing that, either.
A Pennsylvania law states that the police may impound your car when you are arrested, not convicted, but arrested, or a drunk driving charge. If you are found innocent, you have to sue the police department to get your car back.
These judges and stupid laws are infringing on the rights of average Americans. They are unjust and unconstitutional, but what makes me almost as angry is that the ACLU is too busy bulldozing crosses and nativity scenes to care.
Four months ago, a Philidelphia man had his driver's liscence revoked after his doctor filled out a form, signing his name and checking two boxes saying, "alcohol abuse" and "poses a driving hazard." This is in compliance with a new Pennsylvania law saying a doctor may disclose information that could affect a patient's ability to drive. The man had told his doctor he drank a six pack of beer every day. The man drinks the beers after he goes home for the night, and the only mark on his driving record is a DWI 23 years ago. His weight and metabolism mean that if he drinks the beers over 2 hours, he is still under the legal driving limit. He has since stopped drinking beer on weekdays due to a heart condition. A judge recently upheld that decision, and said he would have to get a breathalyser keyed to his ignition in order to get his liscence back. What happened to doctor/patient confidentiality? Will patients start witholding information to keep their liscences?
A divorced woman was recently ordered by a court not to smoke around her children as part of the custody proceedings in the court. While smoking around children is a bad practice, the children have no health conditions that could be stimulated by second hand smoke and a recent 9-year study has shown that second hand smoke only poses a problem to those with pre-existing breathing problems. I don't want the mom smoking around the kids, but I don't want the court enforcing that, either.
A Pennsylvania law states that the police may impound your car when you are arrested, not convicted, but arrested, or a drunk driving charge. If you are found innocent, you have to sue the police department to get your car back.
These judges and stupid laws are infringing on the rights of average Americans. They are unjust and unconstitutional, but what makes me almost as angry is that the ACLU is too busy bulldozing crosses and nativity scenes to care.
