Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: B Knotts

Obviously you have not had anyone in your family killed by a drunken driver.


10 posted on 12/29/2010 9:27:41 AM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: La Lydia

I have been in an accident caused by a drunk before, but I think our country should be run constitutionally, and not on the basis of emotion.

When we stray from the principles on which our country was founded, we give others an opportunity to push ahead with the destruction of our liberty.

Hard cases make bad law.


13 posted on 12/29/2010 9:32:13 AM PST by B Knotts (Just another Tenther)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: La Lydia

Furthermore, this is the worst sort of government rent-seeking behavior.

The tools necessary to control this problem are already available. Deport the illegal aliens.

But government would rather enrich itself than concern itself with proper enforcement of laws.


15 posted on 12/29/2010 9:36:02 AM PST by B Knotts (Just another Tenther)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: La Lydia

I have, a very close relative as a matter of fact. That does not mean I am in favor of checkpoints (DUI, Insurance, Seatbelt, etc).

Being stopped just because I might be breaking the law goes against everything I believe in.


20 posted on 12/29/2010 9:39:46 AM PST by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: La Lydia

Those who are willing to forfeit freedom for security are doomed to find neither.

Freedom of movement and from unreasonable search and seizure (DUI checkpoints, where you are guilty until you can prove innocence).

The “security “ of booxe-free drivers only on the road will NEVER happen!

That you suffered a personal loss is tragic, and you have my most sincere condolences. There is a LOT more to the DUI/BAC story than you are alluding to, however. I’ll tell you one little factoid below.

You are aware that the BAC of “legally impaired” has been artificially lowered every so often, aren’t you?

It started off at the discretion of the cop at the traffic stop. Then the AMA was asked and after some research was done a BAC level of 0.15% was drawn up as the national standard for legally impaired.

Lots of arrests later, most folks got the message and DD arrests fell off dramatically. Governments lost a relatively minor revenue stream, and groups including MADD started agitating that there wasn’t enough action on DUI.

The politicians ARBITRARILY lowered the “acceptable” BAC level (by ONE THIRD, to 0.10%), and lo and behold a HUGE spike in the DUI stats, and commensurate rise in revenue.

The public once again “got the message”, and DUI levels dropped, so the politicians lowered the bar once again, now to 0.08 in most states. Wow, another “spate of DUI drivers”.

Up here in BC, the gov’t recently and arbitrarily lowered the “warning” BAC level to 0.05%. That means if *I* (200 lb male) have 2 beers in an hour and am lucky enough to run into one of those rolling booby traps, I will have my car impounded and a $150 fine for the first “offense”. It also goes on my driving record for 5 years, even though I have BROKEN NO LAW, since this is a simple administrative penalty!

Do yourself and others a HUGE favor and research the funding and motivations of groups like MADD, which is nothing but the latest incarnation of the WCTU nutjobs.

Stop carrying the water for the control freaks. They love having the misinformed cheering the chains being placed on the public.


34 posted on 12/29/2010 9:57:49 AM PST by Don W (I keep some folks' numbers in my 'phone just so I know NOT to answer when they call...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson