From: Jim Yanik
Subject: Re: Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks - Big Brother at his best!
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 19:23:47 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Friends of Lummox
References: <3E16A0FA.F0D9DFBE@sympatico.ca> <5jwR9.94251$hK4.firstname.lastname@example.org>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 19:23:47 +0000 (UTC)
"Michael Painter" wrote in
> "Gerry Schneider" wrote in message
>> There you go - a (flawed!) device whose "data" (including
>> false positives) is used to judge you without recourse to a
>> fair hearing, which *requires* you to either blow into a
>> tube while driving (ridiculous!) or pull over before the
>> horn and lights go off (dangerous!), and which is set to
>> absurdly low levels (watch out for mouthwash and
>> liqueur-filled chocolates!). And when does the punishment
>> end? When they say so! OK, sure, the guy may have deserved
>> to get nailed for drunk driving, but doesn't anybody besides
>> me (and Fred) worry about where this is going? Or have you
>> Americans been so brainwashed by the War on Drugs, War on
>> Terrorism etc. that you don't care anymore?
> Hopefully it is going to reduce the number of drinking and drunk
> drivers on the road. Maybe you are part of the culture that thinks
> it's OK. Until very recent times in the USA, drinking and driving was
> not taken seriously. A wink and "haven't you ever had a few and drove
> home" got millions off.
> I have been on three accidents in the last year that may not have
> involved drinking. One for sure, the other two, the people were gone
> before we got there.
> Ever watch a kid die because his drinking dad put him on the tank of a
> motorcycle and broke a telephone pole with it.
> Dad lived because the kid served as an air bag.
> I'd have a lot less to do if there was no drinking and driving.
> I don't care what they do. You drive with the consent of the
> government and it is not a right.
So,one should give up Constitutionally protected rights,such as 4th
Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure,personal
privacy,like one does for DUI roadblocks?
"Then right of the people to be secure in their persons,houses,papers,and
effects,against unreasonable searches and seizures,Shall not be
violated,and no warrants shall issue,but upon probable cause,supported by
oath or affirmation,and particularly describing the place to be
searched,and the persons or things to be seized."
It should not matter what mode of travel one uses.If drug checkpoints are
unconstitutional,as was recently ruled by the USSC,then DUI roadblocks are
just as unconstitutional.
Jim Yanik,NRA member
remove X to contact me