TexasCHLforum.com

I am 100% against drinking and driving, but also 100% a DUI checkpoints and illegal/unwarranted searches.

Saying that we should give ino checkpoint for the greater good is saying we need:

"Commons Sense Search and Seizure Laws That Limit the 4th Ammendment"

Wait...I have heard something like that before.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar ... on-se.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Our forefathers would roll over in there graves if they knew how easily we have given up some of the rights that they fought so hard for.

Fangs wrote: I personally believe that they would decrease the amount of drunk drivers. Just based on my experiences, not necessarily on "facts". Of course they could also end up being horribly abused, as most government programs tend to be.

In an average day what do you encounter more? Distracted drivers (tired, cell phones, kids, eating, etc.) or clearly drunk drivers. I would say I encounter distracted drivers 20x times more than any I would supsect of drinking. A DUI checkpoint doesn't pull these people off the road, and doesn't prevent the thousands of accidents and deaths they cause each year.

My point being is instead of having 20 LEO's at a little check point for 4 hours trying to catch those only who are drunk how about we get them on the road and have them enforce laws that already exist. If this was done in the correct manner I would be willing to bet they would no only catch drunk drivers, but a bunch of other drivers that needed to be off the road.

Exactly and thanks.

gigag04 wrote:

steveincowtown wrote:I am not willing to give up my 4A rights, no matter whether is comes in the form of sweet mothers pushing illegal searches or LEO's showing up to my door and asking to come in and check things out. No matter what face you put on it, it is wrong. Lets enforce the laws we have, instead of creating new ones.

What exactly is this in response to? Slightly confused...

Some folks (in this thread and elsewhere) claim that random "inspections" of those traveling by car would be for the better good. I don't agree with this and feel like stopping someone on the road, for no reason, without probable cause is not OK.

Whether those wanting to push stops/searches/etc. are sweet mothers (MADD) or LEO's randomly showing up and wanting to inspect my house (think Germany) I want nothing to do with either.

I am not willing to give up my 4A rights, no matter whether is comes in the form of sweet mothers pushing illegal searches or LEO's showing up to my door and asking to come in and check things out. No matter what face you put on it, it is wrong. Lets enforce the laws we have, instead of creating new ones.

gigag04 wrote:Driving is a privilege.

It most certainly is, however not being subject to illegal search or seizure is a right. I have the right to say no, and the gov’t presumably has the right to then take away a privilege.

gigag04 wrote:I see what you're saying but in execution it's no different than if you refuse me entry in your home and a judge cuts a search warrant. The warrant is the game changer (if I'm following your post about the discrepancy correctly).

No disrespect, but following that logic, you would not have any issues if they do a "no refusal" weekend for searching your house?

No refusal equals a blankets warrant in my mind as well. I agree 100% that if their is evidence of a DUI (dash cam video, a recording of slurred speech, etc.) that a LEO should be able to take this to a Judge as evidence, but to simply say that a reason Judge can issue a warrant simply because I was pulled over is no good in my book. If I get pulled over, I most certainly have the right to remain silent and not incriminate myself.