DWI checkpoints

[Triton X2]

Rafe Hollister said:
Well, in the post earlier this morning you didn't call me an idiot, just a dumbass.

As I just stated a few minutes ago, if there's something you post that I disagree with, I'll point it out. Then you'll tell me I should just ignore you. However, in this latest post of yours, you say how disagreement and discussion is a good thing and how boring it would be if we all agreed with one another all the time. *cough* missouriwhitetails *cough* So it seems that when you post something to disagree with others, it's about having fun to overcome boredom. When I do the same to you, I need to get a clue. BTW, just because I may post something that contrasts with your viewpoint doesn't mean I want you to change your mind just to agree with me, although it would certainly be in your best interest to do so.

Rafe, that line about MOwhitetail made me spew coffee all the way to the ceiling.

Speaking of that, where is Big John?

[Outdoorsfool]

Generally you seem increasingly agitated at every post I make, regardless of what it is. My suggestion about hitting ignore was to cut your stress level. Sheesh dude, you really do need to get a grip, before you lose it entirely.
Hope things work out for you.

[PoisonSnake]

That "grouphug" bunch over there never cease to amaze me. Every now and again I have to go over there and grace them with my presence. Somehow logic and common sense doesn't quite fit in while they are singing Kum-by-yah.



Truthfully, there are a good bunch of fellows over there. But, for once I would like for someone to state their true feelings when someone posts up a picture of a sammich buck that just came back from the taxidermist. Instead, you get 900 posts saying "that is a dandy", "looks like a good one to me", etc..., etc... Not once have I ever seen a "WTF did you shoot that one for?" like I constantly get from you guys.

[Outdoorsfool]

Amen to that! Boards that try to lock everyone down to warm, fuzzy feelings or ban you at random make me want to

[Triton X2]

PoisonSnake said:
That "grouphug" bunch over there never cease to amaze me. Every now and again I have to go over there and grace them with my presence. Somehow logic and common sense doesn't quite fit in while they are singing Kum-by-yah.

Truthfully, there are a good bunch of fellows over there. But, for once I would like for someone to state their true feelings when someone posts up a picture of a sammich buck that just came back from the taxidermist. Instead, you get 900 posts saying "that is a dandy", "looks like a good one to me", etc..., etc... Not once have I ever seen a "WTF did you shoot that one for?" like I constantly get from you guys.

It is kind of a vanilla thing isnt it? Just think who MoCraig could piss off by correcting spelling and grammar over there.

[Tigerhaze]

I think I still have a MWT account; it's been years since I used it and maybe have one or two posts total on there. It might be time to dust it off. If I can annoy you all, I could do wonders over there.

[Big John]

I am around, we just got a lot of chit going on. My son re-enlisted and was given the word, Iraq in about 3 weeks so my nerves are a bit fried.

[Outdoorsfool]

Big John - Give your son a pat on the back and tell him the good ole US of A is proud of him for his service!



Several more reports out on checkpoints, with similar results, but I won't post them up to protect certain individual's fragile state(s) of mind.



On a somewhat related note though...isn't it interesting we can inconvenience 99% of legal drivers to arrest 1% of those that are intoxicated. However, 19% of all fatalities in Missouri involve a driver between 16 and 20 years old and nobody seems real concerned with ways to curb these deaths.

[Outdoorsfool]

How do I figure what? That people are more concerned about the 1% OR LESS of intoxicated drivers out there but aren't concerned about the 19% of fatalities that involve 16-20 year olds? Easy...checkpoints continue even though statistics show they almost always net less than 1% of those stopped. However, a bill that would require driver's education for all students...a class that is proven to improve safety and reduce fatalities...did not even make it to a floor vote this past legislative season.



Here's a thought...have a glass of STFU until you know what you are talking about or you actually have the balls to show up and meet a few folks in person. Maybe then...and only MAYBE....will you have an inkling of how stupid your ramblings are. Until then...oh poopoo, who am I kidding, even if you do that your opinion still won't mean squat to me.

[Tigerhaze]

I am not concerned about the enforcement of safety laws, but rather the gradual erosion of our civil liberties. If checkpoints are simply about determining if someone has been drinking and driving, why do the go the additional step of running licenses for warrants, checking insurance coverage, seatbelt use, etc. etc. etc.? LEOs use sobriety checkpoints as a "fishing expedition" that I believe is against the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, even if the Supreme Court rules that the safety aspect outweighs the infringement of our liberties. ODF's point (I think) is that the statistics don't support the assertion that sobriety checkpoints are finding safety hazards that outweigh our liberties.



I know you'll probably say that law-abiding citizens shouldn't worry about being checked by officers (and I am not concerned when I am legitimately pulled over), but what if additional gun restrictions were instituted in this country on "high powered" hunting rifles and sobriety checkpoints are used as a "fishing expedition" to enforce laws against them (which would be yet another violation of our Constitutional rights (i.e. 2nd Amendment))?



Apparently MDC is already instituting "game checkpoints" near MDC areas and using them as "fishing expeditions" for other violations as well, even if the stopped party wasn't hunting.



Keep on the slippery slope of "safety vs. freedom" and soon all of us will be stopped at checkpoints in every town looking for "terrorists" or "illegal immigrants". While I don't mind aggressive law enforcement and investigation for those issues, the rights of the average law-abiding citizen should be respected as per the law of the land (i.e Constitution).



It's ironic that we are talking about the curtailing of our freedom so close to our nation's Independence Day.

[Tigerhaze]

MOCraig said:
If you want to see how large my balls are, you could have just asked.

We already know you don't have balls since you "crawdadded" after calling Dabs out on this board.

[Tigerhaze]

I outgrew fighting in high school about 20 years ago; I won more than I lost but it just caused me too much trouble with the powers that be and wasn't getting me to my life goals. I'm not about to go to someone else's neighborhood so I can pick up an assault charge. "Crawdadding" would be when you agree to something and then back out; in this case I never agreed to anything.



Sorry if I offended you, but you left yourself open with that quote and I just had to take it. I don't think anyone on here can blame me for that. I'll be nice and stop though.



Back to the checkpoints, your comment about game checkpoints illustrates my point that erosion of our liberties has already occurred. Just because it has been commonly done in other jurisdictions doesn't mean it isn't against the framer's intent of the Constitution or that we should accept it without debate. What "safety" issue is being addressed by the MDC checkpoints? Seems to me they could be discontinued with the right case and an ACLU lawyer in Federal court.



BTW, I like your new location tag.

[Tigerhaze]

Rafe I would add that use of cell phones while driving and drowsy driving have also shown to be large contributors to accidents. I don't have the statistics handy but they were significant causes. Federal installations (military bases, etc.) have already banned use of cell phones while driving except for "hands free", and I would suspect other jurisdictions to follow suit. I know personally that drowsy driving is a problem, as I have had to stop at rest stops during long trips when I have gotten drowsy.



Enforcement of cell phone use seems easy enough through targeted enforcement; drowsy driving would be a little harder although the driving characteristics mimic drunk driving and could be spotted that way. I don't see how checkpoints would solve either of those issues, or the young driver issue.

[Warmouth]

Anyone else you want to name?

Anyway, the food at these things is terrific, plus good stories, and I'd go to more, if I had enough time to do it.

Anyway Tiger has this pegged. It is getting to the point that searches over private property are being accepted as commonplace, moreso than they should be imo. Anymore I don't have chit to hide. In my youth, I'd party and get away with it, knowing full well that I was in the wrong. I don't think that gives the law across the board opportunities to stop everyone though for what a very few may be doing.

The country didn't fight Brittian to be safe, they fought to be free.

[Warmouth]

Dam I'm a convincing s.o.b.