Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

My argument would be that random searches of peoples homes would reduce crime, too. But, I don't think we should do that either.

excon

---

Homes are private property, roads are public property. So there is a difference.

It is allowed in my state (TN) and I have been stopped, I drink, but at home PERIOD.

Working off and on in the ER (when L&D is slow) I see the effects of drinking and driving quite frequently. If it cuts down on the deaths of innocent people, (you do know that it is usually the person(s) in the other car who have not been drinking are the ones injured/dead rather than the drunk, don't you?), then I am all for it.

Yeah in my county bars are going out of business like crazy.
You can drive down a long street with 5 bars and three have For Sale signs in them for the third time in two years. All because people are drinking at home more so they don't get fines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

Homes are private property, roads are public property. So there is a difference.

---

Hello J:

I'd have no problem with the cop searching the road then. But, MY CAR is mine, just like my home is.

And, I might as well attack the other argument IN SUPPORT OF ILLEGAL SEARCHES!! Some of you have said that driving is a privilege, I suppose meaning that in order to drive, you give up your Constitutional rights. What?? I'm sorry fellow drivers - you do NOT!

excon

PS> (edited) My support for the Constitution does NOT mean that I support drunk drivers any more than I support murderers. There's no question in my mind that our streets would be safer if we allowed the cops to search our cars any time the mood strikes them... That's called a POLICE STATE, and I'm not for it.

Now, where I live, Ex, the cop does not have the right to search the vehicle without probable cause. However, we do get stopped and asked for license and registration. If the copper smells alcohol, then he has probable cause. The driver is then asked to pull over and he/she is questioned and asked if a search would be allowed.

You see, they don't search for no reason. We get in line, pull up, hand over license, registration and proof of insurance. If the license is suspended/expired, there are consequences... if there is no proof of insurance, there are consequences... if one is drunk/stoned, there are consequences.

Where I live a sobriety checkpoint does not allow for a search unless there is probable cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

Where I live a sobriety checkpoint does not allow for a search unless there is probable cause.

---

Hello again, J:

Actually, the stop itself, IS the search. And, it's illegal because there was no probable cause to stop you in the first place.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, J:

Actually, the stop itself, IS the search. And, it's illegal because there was no probable cause to stop you in the first place.

excon

---

Good point Ex. However, wouldn't the search be looking through the car, trunk, etc without you being in the car?

The cops haul in as many people with suspended licences and no insurance as they do drunk people.

Hello again, J:

Nope. The stop IS the search - plain and simple. According the law, he MUST have probable cause to stop you. That IS established law throughout the country - period!

And, THAT is why I question why the law doesn't apply when the police chief gets a hair up his butt.

excon

They definitely need to go back and define probable cause because like in one of my posts I asked why police are now allowed to stop you for no reason and make up a reason no matter how faulty it is.
My boyfriend got stopped because he is black and has dreadlocks. They claimed it was because he had his high beams on. It was a dark road with no other traffic on it and the police pulled up behind him and stopped him after they turned off the side road. The second cop even knew it was an illegal stop. The cop even searched his car without asking and then impounded his car.
The attitude of his lawyer was 'So what. There is nothing you can do. Of course you can take it downtown and fight it but who do you think the other courts are going to side with you or the cop?'

I have been hearing many stories about how cops are stopping people for NO reason. It is going to be common for them to stop with no probable cause because we have been letting the legal system get away with too much and allowing them to pass new laws to infringe on our freedoms and nobody gets it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, J:

Nope. The stop IS the search - plain and simple.

---

Ex, my dear, I'm not arguing with you hear, just learning... How is the stop the search? This is one of the areas of the law I am not really versed in.

Where I live we have roadblocks. We stop, get in line, and as we pull up we provide our info. Then we are either waived off or asked to pull over if we don't provide the info or if we smell funny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

How is the stop the search?

---

Hello again, J:

Without getting into court decisions and stuff, you should know that in a free country (this one), you are allowed to go about your business WITHOUT interference from the police.

THAT is a given. It is just so. It IS written in stone into the Fourth Amendment. It's the FIRST fact to consider when having a discussion such as this.

Any powers given to the police must be consistent with that fact. Toward that end, our framers made certain that if the cops ARE going to interfere with you at all, and in any manner, they MUST have probable cause for doing so.

They may NOT interfere with you in order to LOOK for probable cause. They must have it to begin with.

Now, if one wanted to say that it's just another Constitutional right that we have to give up in order to be safe, I'd understand that argument. It's certainly the one used when we gave Bush the power to read our email and listen to our phone calls. But, at least we copped out that it WAS a Constitutional violation. Or at least, some of us have.

excon

They have stopped calling them 'sobriety' check points in Dixon Ill.Now they are called 'Safety' check points, nice wording.

They then take the information and do a scrutiny of the exterior of the vehicle.Lights,plates,etc..

If your clean,you leave,no harm,no foul.

My 'right' to drive safely on a public road,according to the laws applied by this state,and accepted by the people who drive as the privileged few,I for one,have no problem with this behavior,on the other hand,I have nothing to be worried about,I haven't broken any laws,and I am responsible to the point of having what the law requires of me to be allowed to drive on their roads.

They haven't done any safety checks on my house for the past 12 years or so,I do them,I am responsible to see that my home is safe from problems,has reliable brake pads,new tires,oil in the furnace room... OH yeah,no pedophiles in the closet.

I am telling you it is a part of their making laws to take away are freedoms. They saw they could make all these laws because people accepted them as 'for our own good/safety now they are overstepping and have no boundaries. They make the laws, they break the laws... they do whatever they want and it is going to get worse. No smoking in public places or even private bars, now they are trying to ban bar b quing in your own back yard, overweight people from eating in restaurants. So yeah illegal stop search and seizure fits right into that.

But it is still better than living in some communist/socialist/police state,we can at least FIGHT with our rights,not get shot for stating this exact argument on any public forum,much less whisper it in the non-smoking bars.

Hello KBC:

It's true, the glass is still half full... But, the Constitution promises us a FULL glass. And, I'm not going to stop until that promise is fulfilled.

Yes, I want it all - and I want it NOW!

excon

I have been subjected to these stops since 1982, what makes it so different from then until now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

I have been subjected to these stops since 1982, what makes it so different from then until now?

---

Only that it is getting worse and effecting more people.
People don't necessarily complain until they are the ones directly effected by it.
They are for the smoking ban because they do not smoke. Then the law is passed they can't eat in restaurants because they are six lbs overweight then they are effected,

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
And there was no one left to speak out for me.

These check points are one of the things people take as 'for our safety' so they get away with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello KBC:

It's true, the glass is still half full.... But, the Constitution promises us a FULL glass. And, I'm not gonna stop until that promise is fulfilled.

Yes, I want it all - and I want it NOW!

excon

---

:)Hey,I totally agree,I would like the system to play by their own rules too.Unfortunately,they have so many who can slick their way through the system.I see the authorities adjusting their tactics,slicking their way through the slicksters,and being questioned by the rest of us as to their behavior/actions.

A conformist ,A non conformist,who can say who is right.The law is blind(looking at the statue of justice)( OK rather it is blindfolded)

I don't agree with all the systems actions,but I will accept their shortcomings as long as I am not violated.As long as I do what they require,nothing more,nothing less,I seem to live a less chaotic lifestyle.Sound like I am a pacifist,maybe I am,I am also a conformist to a point,only till I am forced into non conformity.

That forcing into non conformity hasn't happened since I accepted that some things are not going to change no matter how much I don't like them.The masses have to make the system change,because 'WE' are supposed to be that systems representation.

More conforming,more the non conformer's gripe for their way.

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.I wonder how this thought fits in to this topic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

Only that it is getting worse and effecting more people.

---

Back up for a moment if you will. In the past 25 or so years since I went through my first checkpoint there are more people on the road (effecting more people as you say) and the drunk driving rates are higher than they were 25 years ago.

So, basically your point is moot. It's not effecting more people since we have more people. How can it get worse if we have a higher census than we did that many years ago?

We have to keep up with the times. Census goes up, checkpoints go up. It's a system of checks and balances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

I have been subjected to these stops since 1982, what makes it so different from then until now?

---

Hello again, J:

I don't know. Look, the cops will always try to step over the line. If they're not challenged when they do it, what they do becomes the norm.

Kind of like inserting the words "under God" into the Pledge of Allegiance in the 50's. It's unconstitutional. It should have been challenged then. It wasn't. Now it's the norm.

Or, it might have to do with you living in a red state. Civil rights seem to take a back seat in some of them.

Or, it might be that the issue WAS decided by the highest court in YOUR state and found to be legal. That argument, of course, doesn't move me. LOTS of state courts say their rules are constitutional when they're clearly not.

excon

But what are you suppose to do? Not conform and run through these checkpoints?

I agree with Ex.

Why can't the cops do what they do with speeders.

One is close to where likely violations are to occur - say in the vivinity of a drinking establishment, videotaping [ I don't know if that is constitutional or legal ] and any suspicious driving that is probable cause for a stop, gets radioed to other cops. They pull over that particular driver over and leaves the rest of us alone?





G&P