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

TELL THE FEDS TO BUTT OUT. This is what happens when states accepted 'Revenue Sharing'.
1 posted on 01/15/2016 6:57:30 AM PST by Cheerio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Cheerio

oh, that is gonna be easy to prove.


2 posted on 01/15/2016 6:58:40 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

Eliminate the TSA as well as most of the other ABC blood-sucking agencies.

Let the states decide on most everything. Then we can decide if we want to live in them.


3 posted on 01/15/2016 7:04:44 AM PST by HomerBohn (Liberals and slinkies: they're good for nothing, but you smile as you shove them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

The states will tell the Feds, you want to enforce 0.05 & no cellphone use, fine. Send in the Federal Interstate Highway Patrol to enforce it because we won’t.


5 posted on 01/15/2016 7:06:25 AM PST by elcid1970 ("The Second Amendment is more important than Islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

Sigh ...

If only everything could be perfectly perfect, everything would be perfect.

< / gov speak>


6 posted on 01/15/2016 7:08:23 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

Why stop at cell phones. Why not ban radios, windshield wipers controls, gear shifters, bowls of cereal, books, makeup, shaving, and anything else that distracts drivers.


10 posted on 01/15/2016 7:10:21 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio
Feds Want to...

Who are the "Feds"?

Maybe referring to the "Nats" (ie, the Nationals)...

12 posted on 01/15/2016 7:11:54 AM PST by C210N (Supporting the Constitutional Conservative in the race. Constitutional Conservative Cruz.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

I think an average driver who had 2 drinks with dinner is probably safer than most drivers. She knows she is close to the limo and will drive so as not to get stopped. Moot point for me as I don’t drink when I carry so when iknow I am going to be drinking I have a ride.


13 posted on 01/15/2016 7:12:50 AM PST by bravo whiskey (Never bring a liberal gun law to a gun fight,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio
Might not be bad, if it were stringently applied & enforced to ALL politicians, to include foreign politicians in the U S.
15 posted on 01/15/2016 7:13:38 AM PST by SandRat (Duty - Honor - Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

All CDL holders are currently to a .04 BAC limit (even in a personal vehicle. Ant trace of alcohol in your system (.01 -.03) will get you ticket for consuming within 4 hours of operating a commercial motor vehicle. Automatic license suspension and proof of drug / alcohol rehab successfully before reinstatement.

My feelings - if you want to drink and drive go to jail. Make the rules the same for all drivers......red


16 posted on 01/15/2016 7:15:16 AM PST by rednek ("Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio
Feds Want to Lower Legal Driving Limit to One Drink

And how can "drunk driving" be addressed as a Federal issue? Aren't they supposed to focus on stuff like disputes between states, or defense of the nation? You know, this thing called "Federalism"?

17 posted on 01/15/2016 7:19:54 AM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio
A 0.05 BAC level would reduce the number of drinks an average-weight man of 180 pounds could have to two, according to Blood Alcohol Calculator.

Women could only have one drink before they exceeded the limit. A 100-pound woman reaches .05 BAC with just one drink, but two drinks would put any woman under 220 pounds at or above the government’s desired limit.

Looks like discrimination to me, violation of Fourteenth Amendment!

18 posted on 01/15/2016 7:20:31 AM PST by Lockbox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio
The agency released its most wanted list on Wednesday, a laundry list of policies it would like implemented nationally. The list includes recommendations to reduce the current 0.08 blood alcohol content limit and outlaw all cell phone use while driving, even hands-free technology.

What is the government doing about weed and other drug induced causes of wrecks?

Maybe the government should just compile and release statistics to the states for their action.

19 posted on 01/15/2016 7:24:14 AM PST by olezip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio
"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

21 posted on 01/15/2016 7:29:26 AM PST by Lou L (Health "insurance" is NOT the same as health "care")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

Agencies making law is unconstitutional. Just like SCOTUS.


22 posted on 01/15/2016 7:30:45 AM PST by LoneStar42 (Turn right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

The nanny state and neo-prohibitionists never give up.


24 posted on 01/15/2016 7:56:49 AM PST by zeugma (Want to know what freedom smells like? Hoppes #9.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

Looks like a Democrat “pinch bill” move to scare the bejeezus out of the liquor and hospitality industries so they open up the wallets at campaign time.

Just sayin’.


25 posted on 01/15/2016 7:57:50 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

If alcohol is so dangerous, it needs to be outlawed.

If you’re not willing to ban it then STHU.


27 posted on 01/15/2016 8:05:19 AM PST by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio

Does that mean the Kennedy’s won’t be able to drive anymore?


28 posted on 01/15/2016 8:38:35 AM PST by Roman_War_Criminal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cheerio
Want to see how it works in practice. Google “Britsh Columbia Impaired driving” Toughest DUI laws in Canada.

Pretty draconian. In practice it works out with multiple check points. With 0.05 - 0.08 your car goes away, big fines, you are entered into a database, insurance rates skyrocket and if you get caught a 2nd or even a 3rd time its incarceration time.

When they first rolled out the program it was not odd to go through 2 or more checkpoints on any given evening. They have loosened up somewhat due to manpower concerns but basically if you travel to Vancouver and rent a car don't drink its not worth it.

http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/osmv/road-safety/impaired-driving.htm#overview

31 posted on 01/15/2016 9:53:08 AM PST by Polynikes ( Hakkaa palle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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