5:00 mark

WTF does that have to do with giving some fucking goof ball cop the right to do that, it should be a straight up guilty if you refuse to blow like it is here, that kind of shit is wrong.

why are they even defending it?

either stupid or troll? :upsidedow

haha, yeah, I would like to see you test that theory; I would not advise it though.

Since you do not live here, the suggestion that you do something to change the laws would be a waste of time. As you do not live here, this really is none of your business. :2 cents:

you don't live in the state either

means it's none of your business by your logic

umm, that shit is fucking hilarious, the whole fucking thing! :thumbsup :1orglaugh




you can't arrest me, i'm blind.

well, that's neither here nor there.



gold right there.

I tend to agree that's the best approach, and in fact in many US states this is exactly how it's handled.

The rationale against it is that in many many cases defendants who refuse a test are able to get off in court due to lack of evidence, so much so that in certain jurisdictions without an actual test the case was often not even prosecuted.

i suspect it boils down to a constitutional matter and how evidence is used and such, haven't researched it but based on what i posted earlier from findlaw. but as it layed out, drunk drivers can avoid a dui otherwise.

p.s. richard, i am not advocating holding people down and jabbing them with syringes, i am simply sharing what may be the roadblock on why a refusal to get checked is not a straight up guilty.

For as long as I have to travel there, it is my business.

There is nothing to test. A foreign drivers license is not property of any US state or the US government. They can't take it. Even if some testosterone driven dick with a gun snatched it because he didn't know the law, I get a new one as soon as I come home. My license can not be revoked in the USA, for any reason. They simply don't have the authority.

Hmmm, how about terrorism? You would think with the amount of resources spent and liberties removed that it's way up there. What is it, 3 this year? Oh, I know - they're doing such a great job "protecting" us that it's been eradicated.

yeah, they always say: "We haven't been hit since 9-11"

What they leave out is: We weren't "hit" for 200 years before that either and we didn't have to give up our freedom.

And the next time a handful of crazy fucks decide to do something...none of this bullshit will stop them anyway.

The thing about being a successful terrorist is, you have do something unexpected. And that is exactly why when it happens again, no one will be ready for it. I'm not talking about the coaxed FBI nonsense where they walk someone through a bombing and arrest them beforehand. I mean a real attack that no one sees coming and are not prepared for. Or perhaps luck would be on their side and drills would be staged that day, again.

+1

It's all reactionary and window-dressing.

hands-on works, maybe not our method, nevertheless.

El Al, the national airline of Israel, has been the target of terrorist threats for decades. However, despite an ongoing climate of tension, the airline hasn’t dealt with an immediate incident since a failed hijacking in 1970.

In part, because they use profiling - it works.

Yup, that is the aim of terrorism - to elicit a disproportionate response to the actual damage caused.

And I'm with you on the collective freak-outs about any scattered incidents that might be related to "terrorism", compared to the routine thousands of deaths each year due to drunk drivers, cancer, etc. If 1/4 the amount spent on the "War On Terror" the past decade had been diverted to cancer research, we'd have saved a lot more lives.

That being said, part of the reason we haven't had a major attack since 9/11 is indeed the fact that the West (spearheaded by the USA) did systematically destroy al-Qaeda's ample funding sources around the world. That more than any military action rendered them impotent as an organization even before Osama's death, it's pretty fascinating to read about how they did it in detail. And by "al-Qaeda" I mean the established entity & infrastructure that made 9/11 happen, not the 100 amateur-league extremist groups like the ones in Syria/Iraq/etc that tack on that name in hopes of getting clout & recognition. Those groups have little-to-no connection to the organization built by bin Laden & Al-zawahiri.

it does?

:1orglaugh

you want machine gun nests and 'we are gonna search you now, cause we don't like you'

aye, there's the rub.

our constitution says stop right there

I was thinking more along these lines, in context of airline security:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...air-passengers

Not sure why you bother Richard.

All he does is take an opposing view to stir up shit. Time and time again, there are a few einstein types like that on here...

I don't know your citizenship status, but I know when I drive in a foreign country I have to play by their rules.

As far as the second part I was not suggesting they can revoke your Thai license but they can for sure revoke your permission to drive here.

Yep, that is a problem.

Agreed. but the alternative shouldn't be a watered-down security policy that is window-dressing at best. Since 2005, in the NYC subway system, there are tables set up at various stations manned by police officers doing "random" searches - like every 5th person has their backpack searched. You can refuse the search - but then you can't ride the train - at that moment. You are free to leave, unsearched and unimpeded. Of couse, if you're a terrorist, you can just cross the street and enter the station from the other side. Guess how many terrorists have been caught using this method - in place since 2005? Zero.

ummm, all I was doing was explaining the legality of it; I was not trying to tell them what they should or should not do. It is pretty easy to take an opposing view here since there are at least two in every discussion. :2 cents:

I obviously still have to follow the rules of the road. What I'm saying is, if I did do something that could otherwise result in my US license being revoked (which I don't have anymore), they can not take my Thai one. So I no longer have a US license, thus there is nothing to take or forbid me from driving.

As hard as this is to believe, the USA has no mechanism in place to even know my foreign license is legit or not. No DB or anything. So long as my license is valid from another country, they can not revoke anything, or stop me from driving there. They can't say, "DWB, you drive like a dick head, you're no longer allowed to drive here." Because there is no system in place to add foreigners to that forbids them from driving in the USA if they are on a legal license from elsewhere. But even better, it could be fake and they wouldn't even know. A global DB of licensed drivers does not exist yet. I'm sure someday such a thing will happen, and then things may change, but until then... Foreigners are hell on wheels.

What a pesky rag that thing is. :upsidedow

Spend nine years looking after a husband left disabled due to a drunk driver and then bury him for complications related to that accident and then talk to me about how bad it is to lower the level.

Libertarians don't believe in laws or the need for them.

my god what a joke

That's just ignorant.

And sorry for your loss Sarah Jayne.

I'm assuming the person that did that was WAY over whatever made-up limits the govt. imposes.

My view is that pulling over people who have had a couple of drinks and declaring them "DUI" and destroying them financially is bullshit and has nothing to do with safety.
Just my opinion.

The ironic part of it is this: cops that get pulled over drunk do not get tickets or DUI's. They get a warning and sent on their way. Even ex-cops get that courtesy.

And when I lived in S.C. we had an office in the downtown section. Everyone in town knew we were a porn company but it was a "secret" if you know what I mean.
So we donated all kinds of money to the city for various projects to keep things "friendly".

And I also wrote a ten grand a year check to the police dept.
That got me and my partner and our wives little stickers that we put on our bumpers of our vehicles.
The cops called it the "get out of jail" sticker.

With that sticker you never got a speeding ticket or any problems like DUI (because they would just wave you past).

As I said...it's a money scam.
Does setting such a low blood/alcohol level save some lives? I don't know. I'm unfamiliar with the stats on people whose blood/alcohol level is right on the line of .008
I know for a fact people have blown that after doing nothing more than gargling with Listerine within a few minutes of a breathalzyer.

My guess is that drunk driving is a problem when it actually IS drunk driving. Not when it's a couple coming home from dinner after sharing a bottle of wine with their meal.

Drunks are drunks. They have addiction problems and are often nailed for DUI over and over and over again. They don't give a shit. They don't even care about having a drivers license.

And sometimes normal people go out and get wasted and try to drive home and cause death and misery.

Most times not. (thank God)

If the authorities were actually worried about our "safety" (and not making money off of people)...then they would simply make it illegal to drive an automobile to any place of business that serves alcohol.

But they don't.

It would be so simple for these local politicians to handle. Put that law in place and then have public transportation running.

Instead...public transportation shuts down in the evening. Even here in Vegas.

I live in the N.W.
There is a nice bus that runs from down the street and goes right to the strip.
Last bus runs at 11 p.m.
WTF???

So...people drive.

It's all about money. The older I get, the more I realize that EVERYTHING is about money. Religion = Money. Laws = Money. Death = Money. Prisons = Money. :(

Even tho you have been acclimated by fabricated CNN:

You are correct, Driving is a privilege.
Driving is legally defined as using a vehicle to conduct commerce.

However; Driving to travel is defined as moving from point A to point B for private or leisurely purposes.

Driving on American Roads is a Constitutional Right, not a State-Granted 'Privilege'

If you are traveling in your vehicle on vacation or just farting around on a joy ride. It is your right... No privilege intended.

Driving is not a right, it is a privilege.
If some drunk idiot refuses to obey the law his license should be revoked on the spot and he should be thrown in jail for 30 days. And he should be slapped around a bit for the hell of it and be forced to watch reruns of Paula Deen's cooking show.

You're right. I guess your perspective would change if you didn't have that 'right' right?

Traveling is a right. You are not a driver unless driving for commerce.

You do have to have a license recognized by the state you are driving in.

Of course, if you're driving for commerce.

Okay, step away from the pipe and try making some sense.

You are a driver if you get in a car and drive it, genius.

that simply means you have the right to use the highways and byways for TRAVEL, it has nothing to do with the priviledge of driving an auto.


here's a sample state's sc ruling
cut & dry.

I'd like some of whatever you are smoking please.

I hear all of these arguments, and the bottom line is that although driving is not a right, the right to personal dignity and unwarranted search and seizure and not having cops strap you down against you're will is suppost to be a right last time I checked... Imho, the end does not justify the means at all.

And where does it end? Do you really think the forefathers had this shit in mind? I seriously doubt it! Come on...

i lold at "what country is this?"

c'mon you drink and drive , on top of that you refuse to blow, then expect this.

Actually, this is where states rights come into play; it would be out of the forefather's hands, as they desired.

Who cares there? :thumbsup

Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt,
Wenn es stets zu Schutz und Trutze
Brüderlich zusammenhält,
Von der Maas bis an die Memel,
Von der Etsch bis an den Belt -
Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt.