Title: Police Celebrate 4th Of July With Nationwide No Refusal Checkpoints and Forced Blood Draws Source:
Free Thought Project URL Source:http://thefreethoughtproject.com/po ... ationwide-refusal-checkpoints/ Published:Jul 4, 2015 Author:John Vibes Post Date:2015-07-04 10:46:33 by Deckard Keywords:None Views:68569 Comments:141
Happy 4th of July, the day where Americans celebrate imaginary freedom, and police departments nationwide make millions of dollars violating the rights of nonviolent individuals.
Under the pretense of catching drunk drivers, police will be patrolling the streets and setting up checkpoints all over the country this weekend. In some cases they will arrest drunk drivers, in others they will search and arrest nonviolent drug offenders, while other people may get citations for problems with their vehicle or registration.
Especially for people who havent even done anything wrong, these checkpoints are a gross violation of privacy and other natural born rights. Free people should not be stopped and searched or questioned in any way if they are attempting to travel freely. However, we sadly now live in a world where rights like traveling are seen as privileges, to be given and taken by government.
As it stands right now, the way that the state deals with drunk driving is tyrannical and infringes upon everyones rights, even people like myself, who hardly ever drink. Economist Jeffrey Tucker wrote an article on this subject and discussed the problems with the status quo while offering some solutions as well.
Laws against drunk driving have vastly expanded police power and done nothing to stop the practice. The best prevention against unsafe driving from drinking has been provided privately: friends, services offered by bars and restaurants, community interest groups, etc. This is the humane and rational way societies deal with social risks. The police have only messed up this process by adding a coercive element that targets liberty rather than crime.
And we can see where this is heading. Texting is now illegal in most places. So is talking on the phone. Maybe talking itself should be illegal. Some communities are talking about banning eating. All of this is a distraction from the real issue.
If our ultimate goals are to reduce driver impairment and maximize highway safety, we should be punishing reckless driving. It shouldnt matter if its caused by alcohol, sleep deprivation, prescription medication, text messaging, or road rage. If lawmakers want to stick it to dangerous drivers who threaten everyone else on the road, they can dial up the civil and criminal liability for reckless driving, especially in cases that result in injury or property damage.
Doing away with the specific charge of drunk driving sounds radical at first blush, but it would put the focus back on impairment, where it belongs. It might repair some of the civil-liberties damage done by the invasive powers the government says it needs to catch and convict drunk drivers. If the offense were reckless driving rather than drunk driving, for example, repeated swerving over the median line would be enough to justify the charge. There would be no need for a cop to jam a needle in your arm alongside a busy highway.
Scrapping the DWI offense in favor of better enforcement of reckless driving laws would also bring some logical consistency to our laws, which treat a driver with a BAC of 0.08 much more harshly than, say, a driver distracted by his kids or a cell phone call, despite similar levels of impairment. The punishable act should be violating road rules or causing an accident, not the factors that led to those offenses. Singling out alcohol impairment for extra punishment isnt about making the roads safer. Its about a lingering hostility toward demon rum.
There is no doubt that drunk driving should be discouraged and that solutions to prevent people from driving drunk should be explored. However, it is entirely possible to do this without violating anyones rights in the process.
Meanwhile, in police state USA, it is business as usual.
John Vibes is an author, researcher and investigative journalist who takes a special interest in the counter culture and the drug war. In addition to his writing and activist work he organizes a number of large events including the Free Your Mind Conference, which features top caliber speakers and whistle-blowers from all over the world. You can contact him and stay connected to his work at his Facebook page. You can find his 65 chapter Book entitled Alchemy of the Timeless Renaissance at bookpatch.com.
Former Illinois State trooper Matt Mitchell was driving at 126 mph on Interstate 64 while emailing/texting his girlfriend on his phone. In his state, he crossed over the median and crashed head-on to another car, killing sisters Kelli and Jessica Uhl and injuring Kelly and Christine Marler, of Fayetteville. Mitchell sustained severe injuries to his leg.
Mitchell was suspended with pay for two years on his $68,000 annual salary. After pleading guilty to criminal charges, Mitchell resigned from the state police. His guilty plea landed him 30 months probation.
Now Mitchell is filing for worker's compensation, which could result in him receiving tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars, which are non-taxable.
Meanwhile, in police state USA, it is business as usual.
Meanwhile, in the USA, there is no news in any media source that confirms a 4th Of July Nationwide No Refusal Checkpoints and Forced Blood Draws.
Only thing in the news are the routine checkpoints conducted each 4th of July. The locations and times of those are published in the local media .always have been.
But wait, Deckard .you say we are supposed to believe a concocted story by this guy:
#32. To: Gatlin, organized, routine scheduled crime, OK? (#28)
Only thing in the news are the routine checkpoints conducted each 4th of July.
Routine crime is no more legal than spontaneous crime. "Checkpoints" are a 4th amendment violation. Crimes by government officials are no less of a crime either.
You've achieved independence from the rule of law. Enjoy your 4th of July crime spree!
Whether we like it or not, we cannot make that decision, only SCOTUS can. The Supreme Court has determined that DUI checkpoints do not constitute an unreasonable search and seizure. I would really like to know where in the constitution the Supreme Court gets these powers. Could you quote it for me? Please? I'll marry a fag if you can find it for me in the constitution. Ok I won't marry a fag but you can't because it isn't there.
I never said it was in the Constitution, I said: Whether we like it or not, we cannot make that decision, only SCOTUS can (decide if checkpoints are illegal).
Now, my turn. If SCOTUS doesnt decide .then who does?
If SCOTUS doesnt decide .then who does? The constitution and a dictionary. I know it would require honest people. So all liberals would be disqualified.
So under your concept, a cop and a perp will argue it out at the DUI check point. Is that what you are saying? I hope not, because we know who will always win that argument.