Posted on 12/29/2010 9:11:04 AM PST by La Lydia
Those licenses are just really suggestions, don’t you know?
So who do you sue when someone gets a bubble in their blood stream and dies from a heart attack? And what ever happened to the 5th Amendment?
California’s roads may get even worse. The state needs some actual law enforcement.
I think checkpoints are unconstitutional but they are in no way racist. If these idiots don’t want to be stopped and checked they should get their asses back to their home countries, where ever they might be.
They get more shrill, more extreme, more unreasonable, more demanding, more racist each passing year.
In a thread earlier this year, I saw a reference to the unregistered—unlicensed—uninsured vahicles in Calif that get stopped for some sort of infraction or another—not specifically at DUI checkpoints.
It said that 53% of ALL drivers stopped in Calif had 1-2-or all 3 of the lacking items.
Of that 53% stopped & found to be lacking correct documents to drive in California-——49% were also illegal intruders.
Look at your vehicle insurance breakdown—what percentage of that premium is applied to UNINSURED drivers???
It used to cost me $1 a month extra in Calif to have such uninsured morotist coverage. When I left N Calif—in 2004—it was over 38% of my premium.
I have not had any kind of accident since 1966, & that one ws on private property.
I have not had a moving violation since 1980.
In Washington state checkpoints were ruled unconstitutional (state constitution) decades ago and we seem to get along just fine without them.
There are no higher DWI statistics than anywhere else, no carnage on the highways or blood in the streets.
Checkpoints are just another instance of police showing us who’s boss.
Applauding your post...
Ditto, checkpoints are unconstitutional and their benefits do not out weight the bad things. As for illegals if they don’t like it let them leave.
While I agree with some of what you say this is just ignorant. One should not have to have a license from the state in order to buy goods. There are several instances in which I can think of in which someone without a license would want to buy a car other than driving it on the Hwy. One would be owning a ranch or farm in which you would only be driving the vehicle on your own property and no license is needed. Another would be someone buying a loved one a vehicle.
Don't be so quick to give up your freedom. These checkpoints are unconstitutional and seizure of private property before conviction is also unconstitutional. Illegals should be snagged up and deported and fast as they can find them, worrying about whether they have a license or not is minor compared to the crime of simply being here illegally.
However, the DMV should NOT issue a license to anyone who is not a legal resident of the state, nor should anyone with out a license, stopped in a regular traffic stop, be allowed to continue to drive, ditto drunk drivers. I repeat, the price of checkpoints and other government interference isn't worth the benefits.
LOL or how about:
witchdoctors = unlicensed physcians
“While I agree with some of what you say this is just ignorant... There are several instances in which I can think of in which someone without a license would want to buy a car other than driving it on the Hwy.”
What’s “ignorant” is not knowing or at least acknowledging that 99.9999999 percent of the vehicles purchased in CA by persons w/o licenses are by ILLEGAL ALIENS. This is common sense. You don’t make law to accommodate the three farmers in LA County who need tractors; you make law for the safety of the public at large, and you make an exception to the law for the farmer. It’s not hard. Possession of opiates is illegal, with exceptions for cancer patients who need morphine. Again, common sense.
“One should not have to have a license from the state in order to buy goods.”
Why not? If you have to have a license to use it, it makes sense to be licensed before you buy it in the first place. No one would argue that people should be allowed to buy alcohol or guns when they’re not old enough to legally use either. Common sense.
I agree with you about the illegals. Some might call me a hypocrite, to that I say I’m human.
BTW:
In my day we accused our parents of having double standards, something I just admitted to having. Wow, I have become my parents. Scary as hell! :-)
This is a basic truth that any one with a brain and a taste for freedom can recognize yet you have the audacity to ask what ignorance? Yours is apparent. It is ignorant to want to give up your rights in exchange for a dubious "safer" society, if you have to be told that then you are ignorant, not stupid, just ignorant of what comprises free men and what makes a slave. Slaves ask permission, free born men and women do not.
Reread my post. I didn’t suggest that a person of LEGAL AGE should have to ask the government for permission to buy a gun.
I will assert, however, that an illegal alien should never be allowed to buy a gun. That right is reserved for “the people,” and by “people,” the Founders meant Americans. Do you object to checking IDs when purchasing guns to keep them out of the hands of illegal aliens?
I don’t want to give up my freedom; I want to TAKE AWAY THE FREEDOM FROM INVADERS to roam my city and state at will, flouting the law, and forming their own state-within-a-state that is a clear and present danger to my freedom — and yours, too.
Mexico has invaded the United States, and in time of war, the government checks your papers. I don’t like it and I agree that it’s an infringement on citizens. But the disease is worse than the cure. Bring on the checkpoints, and don’t stop at taking their cars away — deport them!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.