[Congressman Billybob]

I apologize to all for having anything to do with this thread. I read the lead article, and got a whiff of alternate-universe passionate illogic. I made the bad assumption that like most FR treads, an intelligent discussion of the pros and cons would follow.

Boy was I wrong. And I apologize. If you don't want to hear from someone who's won a case or two in the Supreme Court, that's okay. And I will take the occasional insults for what they are worth.

John / Billybob

[Ron Jeremy]

It has nothing to do with that. You posted that driving was a privilege and not a right. You are correct, from a legal standpoint, and everyone knows you are a smart guy and a valuable freeper. We are asserting, however, that the standard which you point out exists should NOT be the standard.

That the government should not be allowed to stop you for no reason at all, and detain you without letting you call a lawyer.

But I guess that is an alternate-universe passing logic.

[Mojave]

I read the lead article, and got a whiff of alternate-universe passionate illogic.

With a big dollop of welfare recipient mentality. The taxpayers owes 'em a public road system that they can use however they want.

[buccaneer81]

If you don't want to hear from someone who's won a case or two in the Supreme Court, that's okay.

You are so full of yourself. Typical lawyer and wannabe commissar.

Get lost.

[NonLinear]

Boy was I wrong. And I apologize. If you don't want to hear from someone who's won a case or two in the Supreme Court, that's okay. And I will take the occasional insults for what they are worth.

Apology accepted.

The original point was that citizens are being denied any expectation of probable cause, due process, presumption of innocence, and legal representation. This may be followed by a faulty analysis using improper protocol, where the test relies upon politically determined, nonscientific, almost randomized parameters.

The net result can be the unwarranted loss of liberty, property, stature, employment and general diminution of happiness. This can happen WITHOUT THE PERSON BEING INTOXICATED (caps provided for those who seem to insist that this is a thread supporting drunk driving.)

Additionally, the point is made that the laws have been corrupted to the point that they no longer have any direct relevance to the ability to operate a motor vehicle, but rather failure to properly operate a breatholyzer instrument.

For instance, a citizen who is a non-drinker has a cold, takes a teaspoon of cough syrup at the doctor's office, leaves in their vehicle, arrives at a check point, is tested without probable cause and blows a borderline reading due to the errors listed in the article. They have violated no law, but find themselves in legal hell. Some of us believe that this resembles a police state, not a free republic. The protections of the Constitution have been erased by fiat.

THAT, my FRiend is the point.