View Poll Results: mandatory blood draws, are they constitutional?

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, it violates my rights as a person

    25 92.59%
  • yes, they are clearly constitutional

    2 7.41%
Page 3 of 70 FirstFirst 12345671353 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 1050

Thread: DUI checkpoints and 'no refusal' weekends

  1. #31 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Detroit, AKA HEAVEN
    Posts
    31,403
    Thanks
    11,769
    Thanked 10,865 Times in 7,323 Posts
    Groans
    642
    Groaned 785 Times in 732 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Threedee View Post
    So, they have ridiculous caps on the pertentage of alcohol in beer in MI?
    If no cap is a ridiculous cap, then yes we do. Standard beer is 5.2%. Beers you and I like are around 6% or higher.
    WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund Freud View Post
    The fields of mediocre chicken sandwiches shall be sowed with salt, so that nothing may ever grow there again.
    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

  2. #32 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

  3. #33 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Detroit, AKA HEAVEN
    Posts
    31,403
    Thanks
    11,769
    Thanked 10,865 Times in 7,323 Posts
    Groans
    642
    Groaned 785 Times in 732 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Threedee View Post
    I guess I'm just not sure what the big deal is with 3.2%, since its weakass shite.
    The big deal is that's the only beer they're typically allowed to sell.
    WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund Freud View Post
    The fields of mediocre chicken sandwiches shall be sowed with salt, so that nothing may ever grow there again.
    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

  4. #34 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

  5. #35 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Detroit, AKA HEAVEN
    Posts
    31,403
    Thanks
    11,769
    Thanked 10,865 Times in 7,323 Posts
    Groans
    642
    Groaned 785 Times in 732 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Threedee View Post
    So Michigan places caps on the alcohol level in beers that stores are allowed to sell? That's what I was asking you about earlier when I said "ridiculous caps."
    No, we don't, Montana does. So does Utah, and a few other states. Michigan is a drinking paradise.
    WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund Freud View Post
    The fields of mediocre chicken sandwiches shall be sowed with salt, so that nothing may ever grow there again.
    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

  6. #36 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Federal Way, WA
    Posts
    68,352
    Thanks
    18,375
    Thanked 18,674 Times in 14,047 Posts
    Groans
    628
    Groaned 1,136 Times in 1,080 Posts

  7. #37 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,470
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 125 Times in 84 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 33 Times in 24 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yurt View Post
    i don't have a problem with dui check points...there is no invasion of privacy and no denial of any right
    Bullshit.

    First, this isn't about privacy, it is about unreasonable search and seizure. Previous cases have upheld that stopping a person on public roads and highways without the justification of reasonable suspicion constitutes unreasonable seizure. Whether you are stopped your legal activities by a roving patrol car, or at a checkpoint, you are involuntarily stopped from your legal activity. That is seizure of person, regardless of how brief that seizure may be.

    Even SCOTUS acknowledges that the 4th Amendment applies to any type of random stops, which includes checkpoints. But, according to them now, it doesn't apply enough.

    What their decisions says (and I still can't think about this without getting seriously pissed off) is the violation is "minimal" and therefore, in "balancing the needs of the state" then the state takes precedence.

    This is quite possibly one of the most dangerous precedents in allowing government to do whatever the hell it wants to do, because the "balance" of the "intrusion on rights" is subjugated to the "needs of the state" because those needs "take precedence"

    Utter totalitarian nonsense, no matter what the good intentions may be.

  8. #38 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,470
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 125 Times in 84 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 33 Times in 24 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Toki Wartooth View Post
    No, we don't, Montana does. So does Utah, and a few other states. Michigan is a drinking paradise.
    No, Montana does not. We did, but repealed it back in the mid 80s when microbreweries (which almost invariably produce beers exceeding 3.2) were all the rage.

  9. #39 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Detroit, AKA HEAVEN
    Posts
    31,403
    Thanks
    11,769
    Thanked 10,865 Times in 7,323 Posts
    Groans
    642
    Groaned 785 Times in 732 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Threedee View Post
    I'm still confused. Does Michigan have legislation relating to 3.2 or does it not?
    No we don't.
    WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund Freud View Post
    The fields of mediocre chicken sandwiches shall be sowed with salt, so that nothing may ever grow there again.
    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

  10. #40 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Detroit, AKA HEAVEN
    Posts
    31,403
    Thanks
    11,769
    Thanked 10,865 Times in 7,323 Posts
    Groans
    642
    Groaned 785 Times in 732 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Good Luck View Post
    No, Montana does not. We did, but repealed it back in the mid 80s when microbreweries (which almost invariably produce beers exceeding 3.2) were all the rage.
    Well then I appear to be in error. My bad.
    WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund Freud View Post
    The fields of mediocre chicken sandwiches shall be sowed with salt, so that nothing may ever grow there again.
    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

  11. #41 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,470
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 125 Times in 84 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 33 Times in 24 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Toki Wartooth View Post
    Well then I appear to be in error. My bad.
    That's OK. It's not like I keep up on Michigan law.

    But the old 3.2 law was a pain in the ass - I had to go to a friggin liquor store to buy Guinness. Now it's in the grocers, alongside the popular crap. So is wine. But hard stuff (anything distilled) is still relegated to licensed liquor distributors, which kinda sucks. And, with Montana being 3rd worst state for per-capita highway accidents involving alcohol, I do not anticipate seeing our laws loosening any more for a long time to come.

    But (each to his own) I'll take our mountains, low population density (our largest "city" barely tops 100K), local politics of keeping government at minimum, where even many of our democrats classify as conservative (including Governor Schweitzer), and many other aspects of Montana, over being able to find Jack Daniels at the grocer.

  12. #42 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    55,018
    Thanks
    15,249
    Thanked 19,001 Times in 13,040 Posts
    Groans
    307
    Groaned 1,147 Times in 1,092 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Threedee View Post
    I guess I'm just not sure what the big deal is with 3.2%, since its weakass shite.
    When I was 18 here in Ohio we had a hi and low age limits for drinking. You had to be 18 to drink 3.2 beer and you had to be 21 to drink anything stronger. They changed that to 21 drinking age when I was 19 but I was grandfathered into the legal drinking age.
    You're Never Alone With A Schizophrenic!

  13. #43 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    55,018
    Thanks
    15,249
    Thanked 19,001 Times in 13,040 Posts
    Groans
    307
    Groaned 1,147 Times in 1,092 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yurt View Post
    i don't have a problem with dui check points...there is no invasion of privacy and no denial of any right
    Not to mention that LE has dramatically reduced the numbers of drunk driving fatalities by being hard asses about DUI.
    You're Never Alone With A Schizophrenic!

  14. #44 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,491
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mott the Hoople View Post
    Not to mention that LE has dramatically reduced the numbers of drunk driving fatalities by being hard asses about DUI.
    so you're saying that we SHOULD give up liberty for safety.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  15. #45 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Las Cruces New Mexico
    Posts
    10,656
    Thanks
    260
    Thanked 1,630 Times in 874 Posts
    Groans
    8
    Groaned 39 Times in 33 Posts

    Default

    Driving is NOT a right. It is a privilege. In NM when we sign for our license, there is a statement above your signature that tells you that by signing your license you are willing to abide by NM's implied consent law. That law says that when you are stopped for DWI or at a check point your consent, as a licensed driver, to a breath test is implied. If you refuse, then you will be charged with aggravated DWI which carries stricter penalties and mandatory minimums.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-30-2013, 05:17 PM
  2. JPP Weekends
    By Cancel 2016.11 in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 06-11-2013, 03:04 PM
  3. This place sucks on the weekends.
    By /MSG/ in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-08-2011, 11:57 AM
  4. drug checkpoints vs dui checkpoints
    By SmarterthanYou in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-26-2011, 07:32 PM
  5. In two weekends...
    By Damocles in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-09-2007, 11:22 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •