You just love to derail discussions with your apples to oranges comparisons....sad that you can't see reality! Not even close to being comparable! On top of all that, your interpretations are ridiculous...but then you know that but just enjoy doing it!!!
No..it's apples to apples. You support that EVERYBODY can be detained at anytime to prove they are sober. All in the name of preventing an accident. Is that not your position?
No..it's apples to apples. You support that EVERYBODY can be detained at anytime to prove they are sober. All in the name of preventing an accident. Is that not your position?
I support that anyone can be stopped at anytime if they are suspected of being under the influence. I also support DUI checkpoints, intended to identify those potential drivers under the influence. I find neither to be a violation of my rights, but rather that they protect my rights and the rights of you and everyone else. The law is applied equally under both scenarios in my opinion, and I'm sure stats would show they have reduced accidents by those under the influence.
I know you disagree and would expect nothing less. I live in reality....you live in Sissy world.
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
I support that anyone can be stopped at anytime if they are suspected of being under the influence. I also support DUI checkpoints, intended to identify those potential drivers under the influence. I find neither to be a violation of my rights, but rather that they protect my rights and the rights of you and everyone else. The law is applied equally under both scenarios in my opinion, and I'm sure stats would show they have reduced accidents by those under the influence.
I know you disagree and would expect nothing less. I live in reality....you live in Sissy world.
That's an awful lot of words just to say "yes, I support innocent travelers being detained and required to prove to an agent of the state that they are sober."
That's an awful lot of words just to say "yes, I support innocent travelers being detained and required to prove to an agent of the state that they are sober."
Well I guess it was too many words for you to comprehend, because I didn't say what you are quoting! Those are your words, your spin and not mine!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Cicero is a FAUX PHILOSOPHER. He will respond to anything and everything. He gets off on that and that alone. its a form of mental masturbation.
I dont think he ever intends to be taken seriously. When people respond - he gets stimulated
Philosopher? It's a pretty simple and straight forward position. Do you believe that the state can stop you and require you to prove your innocence as in the case of a DWI checkpoint or as in NYC and the "stop and frisk" policy. It's not a very philosophical or complex topic.
Philosopher? It's a pretty simple and straight forward position. Do you believe that the state can stop you and require you to prove your innocence as in the case of a DWI checkpoint or as in NYC and the "stop and frisk" policy. It's not a very philosophical or complex topic.
A DUI checkpoint does not require you to prove your innocence. Unless the officer suspects you are under the influence, you are free to continue on your way without issue. If you are suspected to be under the influence, you are asked to pull over and are further evaluated. It's a pretty simple and straight forward.
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Philosopher? It's a pretty simple and straight forward position. Do you believe that the state can stop you and require you to prove your innocence as in the case of a DWI checkpoint or as in NYC and the "stop and frisk" policy. It's not a very philosophical or complex topic.
See what I mean Joe- This is not what he is really saying ! The premise of all Cicero's arguments are that 'we would be better off if we go back to the Garden of Eden' . or at least be able to go back into our mother womb.
A DUI checkpoint does not require you to prove your innocence. Unless the officer suspects you are under the influence, you are free to continue on your way without issue. If you are suspected to be under the influence, you are asked to pull over and are further evaluated. It's a pretty simple and straight forward.
An officer cannot evaluate whether one is under the influence without observation. Observation is made by detaining people at DWI checkpoints. There is no probable cause for detainment. Probable cause requires suspicion that a crime was committed or about to be committed.
Believe me, I understand a lot of people(especially in your age group) that no longer believe probable cause is required to detain people. From DUI checkpoints, to stop and frisk, and even droning citizens overseas....Due process and probable cause are unnecessary. People's right to travel freely is just a privilege.
See what I mean Joe- This is not what he is really saying ! The premise of all Cicero's arguments are that 'we would be better off if we go back to the Garden of Eden' . or at least be able to go back into our mother womb.
No...the premise of the argument is the state requires probable cause to detain you. They can't detain you for no cause, and then look for evidence to see if you are committing a crime.
What does the garden of Eden have to do with probable cause?
We don't live in a 'preventative' world....nor should we.
PREVENT means PREVENT rights for EVERYONE.....not just the small percentage of the 'bad guys'.
And we r talking 'rights'....'freedom'.
Look....sh!t happens....people make mistakes....use poor judgment....blah blah blah.....and yes, sadly, people even DIE!!
ya can't make folks 'mistake proof' nor can legislate 'good judgment.
Just look at the legislation on illegal drugs.........decades and decades....millions and millions of $$$$.....IT DON'T WORK!!!
i'm sure we all remember the dimwit who spilled hot coffee on her lap and sued AND WON!!!!!!
YA CAN'T MAKE A LAW NOR CAN YOU CURE STUPIDITY!!!!!
and guess what.....i'm not gonna have my rights taken away or infringed on because of idiot dimwits!!
even Obamacare CAN'T CURE STUPID....nor PREVENT IT!!!
people need to get a grip on reality....or go and live 'under the dome'!
idiot
I agree 100%.
These nitwits have no idea what they are doing when they attempt to take away the rights of Americans.
They claim to be taking rights for our protection.
They support killing or incarcerating any who won't surrender their God Given rights to the government.
The price of freedom has always had the option to go postal.
The problem is they are creating more homicidal maniacs with every attack on people's rights.
Keep trying to take people's rights, but don't complain when they shoot your associates while pumping gas.
The war on American's rights is in full all out attack mode, and it is being done for our protection from unknown threats.
Just once I would love to walk into an airport and just go on an enjoyable trip, instead of being molested, x rayed and searched under the assumption that I am a potential terrorist.
These paranoid fear mongering extremists need to be removed from power.
No..it's apples to apples. You support that EVERYBODY can be detained at anytime to prove they are sober. All in the name of preventing an accident. Is that not your position?
That is exactly his position.
Comrade Box fully supports taking away precious American rights for which people have died to preserve, in the name of public safety, as determined and interpreted by the paranoid delusional homicidal extremists.
I also support DUI checkpoints, intended to identify those potential drivers under the influence.
If DUI checkpoints were intended to find drunk people, they should be surrounding all the downtown bars where all the drunks drive home from every day, not at the Thruway exits where people have just traveled long distances successfully and without hurting anyone. Those checkpoints are fishing expeditions looking for evidence of other activities that can be used against those they stop.
Reasonable suspicion was forever the standard for detainment.
Now they detain everyone, search them and interrogate them.
Again you and box favor taking other people's rights for your own cowardly protection.
The fact remains that no checkpoint has ever protected either of you 2 cowards from harm.
I support that anyone can be stopped at anytime if they are suspected of being under the influence. I also support DUI checkpoints, intended to identify those potential drivers under the influence. I find neither to be a violation of my rights, but rather that they protect my rights and the rights of you and everyone else. The law is applied equally under both scenarios in my opinion, and I'm sure stats would show they have reduced accidents by those under the influence.
I know you disagree and would expect nothing less. I live in reality....you live in Sissy world.
so you believe your rights only come from the government?
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
so you believe your rights only come from the government?
Another clueless person that wants to put words in my mouth... here, let me explain...UNLESS THOSE ARE THE WORDS I ACTUALLY USED THEN THEY ARE NOT MY WORDS! GOT IT! I don't need you to misinterpret my words and play Sissy games, thank you! If that's what you want to believe, then please, by all means, have a good time!!!!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Logged
