DUI checkpoints and 'no refusal' weekends

mandatory blood draws, are they constitutional?

  • No, it violates my rights as a person

    Votes: 24 88.9%

  • yes, they are clearly constitutional

    Votes: 3 11.1%
  • Total voters
    27
domer76 said:
Stops are constitutional. Reasonable searches. 1990 SCOTUS. 6-3. Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990)

SCOTUS, you fucking idiot.

Dumbfuck moron.
Click to expand...

Well, how many DUI checkpoints have you been stopped at, dickhead? Surely it had to have been at least a few since you drove to the "many hundreds" of trials you've testified at? :laugh:
 
CFM said:
You absolutely have to be there.
Click to expand...
Nope. Not at all.
CFM said:
Without being there, you can't determine whether RB is telling you the truth or the typical drunk driver lying his ass off.
Click to expand...
Strawman fallacy. It turns out it doesn't matter whether the story is fiction or not. YOU don't get to change his story. The story, as given, describes a sober driver (legal) and a drunk passenger (legal).
CFM said:
You also have to be there in order to determine whether his "somewhat shitface" friend could make the determination he made.
Click to expand...
He can. Unless a drunk is passed out, they can indeed get angry at rude cops. Indeed, because of the effects of alcohol and the way it shuts down parts of the brain, he'll probably get angry quicker! One of the first parts inhibited by alcohol is the nerve bundle connecting the frontal lobe to the hippocampus of the brain, leaving the person less able to control their emotions. Alcohol works its way essentially from the outside in, shutting down larger sections of the brain. The last to shut down (causing death) is the medulla and pons. A conscious drunk is emotional, and can easily get pissed off at a rude cop.

I do not have to see it to know his story is true or not. It doesn't matter.
 
gfm7175 said:
One time many years ago, a cop pulled me over while coming home from work a bit after 9pm because I was supposedly "weaving". I was not weaving at all. He just wanted to see if I was drinking and driving.
Click to expand...

Heh. The 'weaving' might even be lane hunting for semi-automated driving systems in cars these days! Some of them do that. Ya gotta watch them things!
 
Into the Night said:
Nope. Not at all.

Strawman fallacy. It turns out it doesn't matter whether the story is fiction or not. YOU don't get to change his story. The story, as given, describes a sober driver (legal) and a drunk passenger (legal).

He can. Unless a drunk is passed out, they can indeed get angry at rude cops. Indeed, because of the effects of alcohol and the way it shuts down parts of the brain, he'll probably get angry quicker! One of the first parts inhibited by alcohol is the nerve bundle connecting the frontal lobe to the hippocampus of the brain, leaving the person less able to control their emotions. Alcohol works its way essentially from the outside in, shutting down larger sections of the brain. The last to shut down (causing death) is the medulla and pons. A conscious drunk is emotional, and can easily get pissed off at a rude cop.

I do not have to see it to know his story is true or not. It doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

CFM wasn't there. He doesn't know shit about the situation or my friend. My friend never said a word all the time we were stopped and I was talking to the cop. He didn't say anything until we were on our way. Like I said, the cop was pissed because he "claimed" to smell alcohol and I wasn't drinking and driving. Also, there was a line of cars there, the tournament just left out. The whole thing lasted about 15 minutes from the time I stopped, was harassed and was back on my way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top