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
AssHatZombie said:
cause has to be specific to the individual. roadblocks are individually causeless, hence, unconstitutional. don't get cutesy with your bullshit.
Click to expand...

Drunk driving is an individual thing. I can't be stopped for drunk driving if you're driving drunk.

Not trying to be cute only show that, while you claim you don't believe people should be able to drive drunk without it being addressed, your opinions prove otherwise.
 
CFM said:
Drunk driving is an individual thing. I can't be stopped for drunk driving if you're driving drunk.

Not trying to be cute only show that, while you claim you don't believe people should be able to drive drunk without it being addressed, your opinions prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

again, coward, you're obviously avoiding your pitfall of the checkpoint............i'm glad it doesn't cause you pain to be that stupid
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so you're too much of a coward to answer the question. i understand. you hate being shown you're a dumbfuck failed american.
Click to expand...

Seems you hate being shown you're a dishonorably discharged drunkard.

Funny how you demand answer yet refuse to do the same. Typical leftist.
 
CFM said:
Seems you hate being shown you're a dishonorably discharged drunkard.
Click to expand...
here we go, the fallback failure of someone who is wrong but can't admit it.

CFM said:
Funny how you demand answer yet refuse to do the same. Typical leftist.
Click to expand...

i asked you the question first, you were obviously too cowardly to answer, knowing you are wrong. and leftist???? ROFL, you're so not a conservative BWAHAHAHAHA
 
SmarterthanYou said:
again, coward, you're obviously avoiding your pitfall of the checkpoint............i'm glad it doesn't cause you pain to be that stupid
Click to expand...

Again, boy, you're quite clearly too much of a pussy to admit you believe your personal choice to drive drunk is OK.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
here we go, the fallback failure of someone who is wrong but can't admit it.



i asked you the question first, you were obviously too cowardly to answer, knowing you are wrong. and leftist???? ROFL, you're so not a conservative BWAHAHAHAHA
Click to expand...

Your failure is you won't admit you believe driving drunk is OK although you believe it. A real man would if he believed the personal choice to do so was more important than someone else's right to life.

You wouldn't want me catching you driving drunk, son.
 
CFM said:
Again, boy, you're quite clearly too much of a pussy to admit you believe your personal choice to drive drunk is OK.
Click to expand...

again, spoiled infant, you failed to read where i said it wasn't ok, but that its unconstitutional to have checkpoints. you're a failed american idiot
 
SmarterthanYou said:
here we go, the fallback failure of someone who is wrong but can't admit it.



i asked you the question first, you were obviously too cowardly to answer, knowing you are wrong. and leftist???? ROFL, you're so not a conservative BWAHAHAHAHA
Click to expand...

Unlike you, I'm not an anarchist that thinks the personal choice to drive drunk is OK. Don't let me catch you driving drunk.
 
CFM said:
Drunk driving is an individual thing. I can't be stopped for drunk driving if you're driving drunk.

Not trying to be cute only show that, while you claim you don't believe people should be able to drive drunk without it being addressed, your opinions prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

process and protection of rights matters. it's the foundation of our system, ya nutbag.
 
CFM said:
Your failure is you won't admit you believe driving drunk is OK although you believe it. A real man would if he believed the personal choice to do so was more important than someone else's right to life.

You wouldn't want me catching you driving drunk, son.
Click to expand...

you wouldn't know what a real man is, but i guarantee you if you tried any shit with me, you'd find out real quick when i stomp your dumbass in the ground
 
SmarterthanYou said:
again, spoiled infant, you failed to read where i said it wasn't ok, but that its unconstitutional to have checkpoints. you're a failed american idiot
Click to expand...

Yet you say personal choices, which driving drunk is, is more important than an innocent person being killed by your kind.
 
CFM said:
Unlike you, I'm not an anarchist that thinks the personal choice to drive drunk is OK. Don't let me catch you driving drunk.
Click to expand...

you're a statist loving government worshipper who needs the government to tell him what he can and cannot do. i dare you to try something with me, coward.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you wouldn't know what a real man is, but i guarantee you if you tried any shit with me, you'd find out real quick when i stomp your dumbass in the ground
Click to expand...

You couldn't stomp your own ass in the ground. You wouldn't get a chance to try with me. I'd hurt you before you knew what happened.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you're a statist loving government worshipper who needs the government to tell him what he can and cannot do. i dare you to try something with me, coward.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be a try, boy. I'd hurt you before you knew what happened and your wife would have to tell others what occurred.
 
AssHatZombie said:
that's not what he said. he said unconstitutional stops are unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

He said personal choices come before safety. That means he believes drunk driving, a personal choice, is on a higher level than an innocent person losing their life because of that choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top