From: "Michael Painter"
References: <3E16A0FA.F0D9DFBE@sympatico.ca> <5jwR9.94251$hK4.firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks - Big Brother at his best!
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 20:26:09 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 20:26:09 GMT
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
> "Michael Painter" wrote in
> 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?
The location, date and time of DUI checks in California are posted in the
paper. There is always an alternative route, usually well within sight of
the checkpoint. You can stop and make a U-turn and they will not pursue you
even if you it is illegal to do so.
You don't have to go through them.
They do not search or seize any property unless you are arrested for drunk
> "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."
Which has nothing to do with the privlidge granted to you of driving on
If you disagree take it up with the courts that have ruled you do *not* have
a right to drive and that getting a license implies that you agree to abide
by the rules of the license.
Protecting people from drunks is no more illegal than protecting them from
any other danger that the individual has no control over.
> 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.
Until there is a supreme court decision on this that is your opinion but is
> Jim Yanik,NRA member
> remove X to contact me