Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 10/31/2004 2:57:05 AM EST
Well, it happened again. The state police here set up another driver's license checkpoint and I had to spar with them again (if these were "random" would it happen to me twice in a month?). This time it was "sir, the law says we have the right to see your license."

I complied, but politely told him having a law "doesn't make it right." I stated that I vehemently object to being subjected to police scrutiny and intimidation despite there being no cause for them to delay me. They acted kind of incredulous that anyone would object to their demands, as if it is somehow my duty. When he handed my license back, he held onto it firmly like he wanted to see if I would yank it out of his hand or something. I just looked him dead in the eye and waited until he let go of it. More games from wanna-be tough guy tyrants. So disturbing. Give a man a badge and a gun and he turns into a bully.

Yup, I know what the Supreme Court said about this. I still think it is wrong to impede the law abiding just so you can catch people who didn't have time to renew their registration or inspection or license the very second it was due. SC be damned! That morning, I had just waited over an hour at a state inspection station so I could get a sticker for that very car. No one can say I don't do my part.

I'm not writing a letter (for all the good that it will do). I feel I have to vent somehow, sure as hell voting isn't going to change anything because my fellow citizens are too ignorant to realize what is taking place. A woman behind us in line even got out of her car to get her purse from the trunk--she knew what the checkpoint was for and had a conditioned response to automatically comply. I'm sure she was pleasant and smiley to the officers as well. If only I could go through life like that!

Does anyone think it was a coincidence that this checkpoint was set up at the exit where people would be getting off to go do their early voting in the county?
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 3:03:37 AM EST
When they have them around here they pretty much tell you when it is going to be, and it is always on the same road. I think they quit having them since the mexicans started crying about being singled out.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 3:13:06 AM EST
Never seen one down here.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 3:17:28 AM EST
Driving isn't a right, its a priviledge.


I still think it is wrong to impede the law abiding just so you can catch people who didn't have time to renew their registration or inspection or license the very second it was due.


1) You have one year from a prior inspection to figure out when your next one is due.
2) You have 5-20 years, PLUS mailed notices to tell you when your license expires.
3) You have atleast a year, mostly two to determine when your registration is expired.
4) If you can't "find the time" to comply with the above, then I guess you'd forget your insurance too, right?

Where I am, there's an epidemic of unlicensed drivers. I'll take the inconvenience of a road block over these shitbags driving the roads. But I guess your bitching comes with your name, right?
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 3:24:27 AM EST
I wish they had them where I live !
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 3:24:44 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/31/2004 3:25:46 AM EST by TomJefferson]
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 4:45:25 AM EST
Last time I got stopped in a roadblock, I had to unsnap my seatbelt (the officer saw me do this) to get my wallet. Then he made a crack about ticketing me for driving without a seatbelt.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 4:52:48 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:03:20 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/31/2004 5:08:20 AM EST by nationwide]

Originally Posted By TomJefferson:
Oh lets not go there. The constitution doesn't gurarntee you the right to breathe so I guess its a privalage too.

License checks are simply the lazy cops way of getting revenue. Wouldn't want them out there catching badguys and maybe getting shot now would we?

Show me your papers, ya?

Tj



Uh, TJ... IIRC the whole "...Life, Liberty, Pursuit of happieness..." part covers breathing!!!

Speaking as an enlightened indivdual (and yes, a former JBT) this is my take:

1) Driving on Gov't roads is indeed a privilige.
2) Various jurisdictions have various interpretations of your 4A protections.
3) Depending on the intent of the road block, the benefit to a community can greatly outweigh the burden. Example: DUI checkpoints are good. Revenue/License/Insurance checkpoints are bad.

Your papers please, indeed. It is a troublesome time we live in gents. Indeed.

ETA: I was recently involved in a "situation" in which I stood on my rights and what I knew and could cite as law, chapter and verse.

The Black female in charge, about 20 years my senior, said she didn't understand my problem, that I should be like everyone else and "go with the program".

I told her the program was wrong, and at the point I was directed to do something I knew violated Federal regulations, I would NOT. I was polite but firm, as only a trained JBT can

Again, she insisted I "go with the program" to wit I replied, "Go with the program? You mean like the blacks did during slavery? Or the way the Jews did in Europe during World War II?"

Lo and behold... in a time much shorter than anticipated, my business was concluded in a professional manner, an the lady appologized to ME, and begged forgiveness for having had a really bad day, of course, I cut her major slack and thanked her for her understanding.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:08:41 AM EST

Originally Posted By nationwide:
1) Driving on Gov't roads is indeed a privilige.



Those are public roads paid for by the public.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:10:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By Palo_Duro:

Originally Posted By nationwide:
1) Driving on Gov't roads is indeed a privilige.



Those are public roads paid for by the public.



negative Palo_Duro. Those roads are paid for by the trucking industry.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:10:56 AM EST
Tell them to pound sand, turn around and drive off.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:16:40 AM EST

Originally Posted By nationwide:

Originally Posted By TomJefferson:
Oh lets not go there. The constitution doesn't gurarntee you the right to breathe so I guess its a privalage too.

License checks are simply the lazy cops way of getting revenue. Wouldn't want them out there catching badguys and maybe getting shot now would we?

Show me your papers, ya?

Tj



Uh, TJ... IIRC the whole "...Life, Liberty, Pursuit of happieness..." part covers breathing!!!

Speaking as an enlightened indivdual (and yes, a former JBT) this is my take:

1) Driving on Gov't roads is indeed a privilige.
2) Various jurisdictions have various interpretations of your 4A protections.
3) Depending on the intent of the road block, the benefit to a community can greatly outweigh the burden. Example: DUI checkpoints are good. Revenue/License/Insurance checkpoints are bad.

Your papers please, indeed. It is a troublesome time we live in gents. Indeed.

ETA: I was recently involved in a "situation" in which I stood on my rights and what I knew and could cite as law, chapter and verse.

The Black female in charge, about 20 years my senior, said she didn't understand my problem, that I should be like everyone else and "go with the program".

I told her the program was wrong, and at the point I was directed to do something I knew violated Federal regulations, I would NOT. I was polite but firm, as only a trained JBT can

Again, she insisted I "go with the program" to wit I replied, "Go with the program? You mean like the blacks did during slavery? Or the way the Jews did in Europe during World War II?"

Lo and behold... in a time much shorter than anticipated, my business was concluded in a professional manner, an the lady appologized to ME, and begged forgiveness for having had a really bad day, of course, I cut her major slack and thanked her for her understanding.



Look man, I agree with you...

but where in the Constitution is "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" mentioned?

Basd on thet first statement, how are we supposed to take your supposed knowledge of "federal regulations."

In the past day we have had kids posting about Bin Laden being in the US - and US LETTING HIM GO, and about DEFCON 4 being a high readiness state. With all of the morons out here - I just recommend you be careful about how you word things - it is easy for us to just ignore the rest of a post when the first few words make no sense.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:17:12 AM EST
Good thing your dog was not there, or he would have been shot......
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:24:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By thelibertarian:
Well, it happened again. The state police here set up another driver's license checkpoint and I had to spar with them again (if these were "random" would it happen to me twice in a month?). This time it was "sir, the law says we have the right to see your license."

I complied, but politely told him having a law "doesn't make it right." I stated that I vehemently object to being subjected to police scrutiny and intimidation despite there being no cause for them to delay me. They acted kind of incredulous that anyone would object to their demands, as if it is somehow my duty. When he handed my license back, he held onto it firmly like he wanted to see if I would yank it out of his hand or something. I just looked him dead in the eye and waited until he let go of it. More games from wanna-be tough guy tyrants. So disturbing. Give a man a badge and a gun and he turns into a bully.

Yup, I know what the Supreme Court said about this. I still think it is wrong to impede the law abiding just so you can catch people who didn't have time to renew their registration or inspection or license the very second it was due. SC be damned! That morning, I had just waited over an hour at a state inspection station so I could get a sticker for that very car. No one can say I don't do my part.

I'm not writing a letter (for all the good that it will do). I feel I have to vent somehow, sure as hell voting isn't going to change anything because my fellow citizens are too ignorant to realize what is taking place. A woman behind us in line even got out of her car to get her purse from the trunk--she knew what the checkpoint was for and had a conditioned response to automatically comply. I'm sure she was pleasant and smiley to the officers as well. If only I could go through life like that!

Does anyone think it was a coincidence that this checkpoint was set up at the exit where people would be getting off to go do their early voting in the county?



I pay dearly for license, insurance, and registration. Many do not, and I also pay dearly for that. I don't mind a bit when someone gets a ticket for it. Try saying 'thank you' for at least making an attempt to get everyone legal.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:25:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By Adam_White:


Look man, I agree with you...

but where in the Constitution is "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" mentioned?
Ok, it's in the Preamble to the Declaration of Independance

Basd on thet first statement, how are we supposed to take your supposed knowledge of "federal regulations."
Because I've been trained, son.

In the past day we have had kids posting about Bin Laden being in the US - and US LETTING HIM GO, and about DEFCON 4 being a high readiness state. With all of the morons out here - I just recommend you be careful about how you word things - it is easy for us to just ignore the rest of a post when the first few words make no sense.
My friend, I shall defile myself and those around me with whatever verbage I feel is apropriate at the time. The fact that I am right is enough for me, I do not require your aproval for me to feel good about myself

Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:26:39 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:30:25 AM EST

Originally Posted By captainpooby:
Never seen one down here.



yet...
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:33:45 AM EST

They had them here in Indiana for a while. The state supreme court declared them unconstitutional last year. The JBTs haven't come up with any new tricks yet, but I'm sure they're working on something.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 5:55:17 AM EST
I have a driver's license, says I have passed the test and am able to drive within the laws on PUBLIC roads. It happens to be from Montana and I live in Colorado. When it expires (in 2010) I will go and get another one of whatever state I happen to live in at the time. Because the states recoginize that driver's licenses are valid in each other's state, then I am also recognized as being a driver capable of passing the colorado driver's test.
But of course, if really all they want is to a. tax me and b. get my national ID card so they can track my movements, then it makes plenty more sense that i should be "required" to get a correct state driver's license.

And car registration, let's not even start on that. Why exactly is my car registered? I've already proven I can drive it (see paragraph one above). and Why am I paying HUGE taxes on this car that I already paid sales tax on and gas tax on to build the roads? We don't have safety inspections, so that can't be it (to prove that it needs to be "safe" to be on the roads). No, of course, it's yet again another way for government to assert control and tax the $hit out of you.

It will cost well over 800 dollars THIS YEAR to register my car. A ticket for expired registration is 101 dollars. This seems a little silly to me. Oh yes, then if you try and get a new colorado driver's license they make you sign a form that says "i will register my car in less than 30 days". This makes a what was a misdemenor (the 101 dollar fine) into perjury, which is a felony. No, I'm not signing. has nothing to do with the ability to license people to drive on our PUBLIC roads.

We live in a police state and roadblocks and all this stuff is just more proof
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 6:02:43 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/31/2004 6:06:26 AM EST by legalese77]

Originally Posted By TangoHater:
Driving isn't a right, its a priviledge.


I still think it is wrong to impede the law abiding just so you can catch people who didn't have time to renew their registration or inspection or license the very second it was due.


1) You have one year from a prior inspection to figure out when your next one is due.
2) You have 5-20 years, PLUS mailed notices to tell you when your license expires.
3) You have atleast a year, mostly two to determine when your registration is expired.
4) If you can't "find the time" to comply with the above, then I guess you'd forget your insurance too, right?

Where I am, there's an epidemic of unlicensed drivers. I'll take the inconvenience of a road block over these shitbags driving the roads. But I guess your bitching comes with your name, right?



privilege, not priviledge
I don't see where this guy said he had a right to drive, just that, unless he did something wrong, he has the right to go about his business without being interfered with
I don't think he complained about having to renew registration or insurance, just being hassled for no good reason about it.
The bottom line is that these checkpoints are fishing expeditions that will continue to expand.

"I must see your papers now sir or you will be tased for concompliance with verbal commands, maced for not getting out of the car fast enough, tossed on the asphalt, kneeled on by as many deputies as we can find and then you will be taken to jail and processed like a filthy animal, have a nice day."
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 6:06:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By A_Free_Man:
Last time I got stopped in a roadblock, I had to unsnap my seatbelt (the officer saw me do this) to get my wallet. Then he made a crack about ticketing me for driving without a seatbelt.



Been there... know it all jackasses
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 6:09:59 AM EST
In my opinion they go too far. Around here they sometimes anounce them on the radio so everyone knows to drive around the things.

Ohio had one version that the courts did not like. Now they call it something else and I think the courts oked it.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 6:14:05 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 6:56:35 AM EST

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
what's that little phrase about unreasonable searches...???

those that would give up liberty for security deserve NEITHER.



Outstanding. Exactly right.

Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:06:10 AM EST

Originally Posted By nationwide:

Originally Posted By TomJefferson:
Oh lets not go there. The constitution doesn't gurarntee you the right to breathe so I guess its a privalage too.

License checks are simply the lazy cops way of getting revenue. Wouldn't want them out there catching badguys and maybe getting shot now would we?

Show me your papers, ya?

Tj



Uh, TJ... IIRC the whole "...Life, Liberty, Pursuit of happieness..." part covers breathing!!!



That was the Declaration of Independence..

Even if LL&POH was part of the Constitution, All those folks in prison and on death row would make a good case it is not a right. And we will not even start on slavery....

Bottom line is, YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS. NONE. NADA. ZILCH. Get used to it. Whatever rights you think you have, you do not have the instant Govt. decides they do not want you to have them. What you have are certain freedoms, which you are allowed to exercise until Govt. decides to take them away. Deal with it.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:06:46 AM EST
Just drive thru them like I do.


Sgatr15
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:10:22 AM EST
You would be really surprised at how many DUI, revoked and suspended driving liscense arrests are made at Drivers Liscense Checkpoints. Not mention the open containers and drug busts that are made. The cops are after bad guys NOT YOU.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:11:12 AM EST
next time just tell the cop to his face that you don't appreciate the gestapo tactics of his agency

It's your right to say so.

(now, where did I put the bottle of hickory shampoo?)
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:23:50 AM EST

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
You would be really surprised at how many DUI, revoked and suspended driving liscense arrests are made at Drivers Liscense Checkpoints. Not mention the open containers and drug busts that are made. The cops are after bad guys NOT YOU.



This brings up a whole list of questions, how many beers is enough before your legally intoxicated? should open containers be allowed? the war on drugs, right or wrong? how long before more gun legislation is passed and your considered a "bad guy"? Whos the bad guy changes in the eyes of many people, the bad guy might be some average joe with a dime bag of weed on him or the bad guy could a citizen of CA who realizes he has a god given right to defend his life so he packs a pistol anyways. Catch my drift.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:32:45 AM EST
I'm a L.E.O. and have been stopped two New Year's Eves in a row by roadblocks.

I have no problem with stopping and showing my driver's license and paperwork. I inform the officer, I'm a L.E.O. (in case they see my Glock) and comply with their requests. I don't get a free ride thru the roadblock and don't expect one.

I have my license and paperwork in order. I get through the roadblock in less than a minute.

One minute out of my trip home from work is a small price to pay to catch people that don't have valid licenses, tags, insurance or warrants.

Colt_SBR
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:48:27 AM EST
Knock, knock.

"Excuse me ma'am, sherrif's office. We're here on a random inspection of your home for such evil things as drugs, guns, and money. You don't have any child porno on your computer now do you? Been surfing at any non-approved web sites? Are the shots up to date for your dog? Do your mattresses have all their tags? We'll be done in just a few hours so surry off like a good subject then will ya'?"


No, you left out the part where they handcuff you, but no, you are not under arrest. They are just handcuffing you for your protection (wtf?).
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:53:08 AM EST

Originally Posted By nationwide:

Originally Posted By Palo_Duro:

Originally Posted By nationwide:
1) Driving on Gov't roads is indeed a privilige.



Those are public roads paid for by the public.



negative Palo_Duro. Those roads are paid for by the trucking industry.



And anybody who buys gas or car tags or pays income or sales taxes that underwrite bond issues.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:57:38 AM EST
My parents grew up in Communist Hungary. My father has told me stories about requiring a Travel Permit to go from one village to another. A friend of his had not joined (nor did my father) the Communist Party and was consistently refused a travel permit to visit his parents.

I shouldn't be detained if I haven't done anything wrong. What an earth-shattering concept.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 7:59:03 AM EST

Originally Posted By TomJefferson:
License checks are simply the lazy cops way of getting revenue. Wouldn't want them out there catching badguys and maybe getting shot now would we?




No "badguy" on the planet is worse than the millions of illegals pouring over the border. None of which can legally get a license in my state. PLEASE set up license checkpoints, tow their cars and deport the border jumping terrosist.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 8:03:08 AM EST

Originally Posted By Mmanwitgun:
This brings up a whole list of questions, how many beers is enough before your legally intoxicated? should open containers be allowed? the war on drugs, right or wrong?



1. depends on your bodyweight and tolerance.
2. No.
3. wrong, but driving on drugs is more wrong.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 8:09:11 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By Mmanwitgun:
This brings up a whole list of questions, how many beers is enough before your legally intoxicated? should open containers be allowed? the war on drugs, right or wrong?



1. depends on your bodyweight and tolerance.
2. No.
3. wrong, but driving on drugs is more wrong.



whats wrong with open containers? If someones in the back seat sipping on a beer its not going to mess up the drivers motor skills, or if theres a half dranken bottle of whiskey will its mere presence intoxicate the driver?
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 8:11:29 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 8:15:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By nationwide:

Originally Posted By Adam_White:


Look man, I agree with you...

but where in the Constitution is "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" mentioned?
Ok, it's in the Preamble to the Declaration of Independance

Basd on thet first statement, how are we supposed to take your supposed knowledge of "federal regulations."
Because I've been trained, son.

In the past day we have had kids posting about Bin Laden being in the US - and US LETTING HIM GO, and about DEFCON 4 being a high readiness state. With all of the morons out here - I just recommend you be careful about how you word things - it is easy for us to just ignore the rest of a post when the first few words make no sense.
My friend, I shall defile myself and those around me with whatever verbage I feel is apropriate at the time. The fact that I am right is enough for me, I do not require your aproval for me to feel good about myself



I'm surprised no one caught this sooner.

There is no preamble to the Declaration of Independence. There is a preamble to the Constitution, but it doesn't say anything about life, liberty or the persuit of happiness. Nor is the Declaration law. Fortunately or unfortunately, life, liberty and the persuit of happiness are not legal rights. They are, indeed, ideas upon which this country was founded, but they are not law. One cannot cite the Declaration the same way one cites the Constitution. One is law, the other is not.

Link Posted: 10/31/2004 8:45:47 AM EST
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton




Google is your friend!

Vulcan94

Link Posted: 10/31/2004 8:59:54 AM EST

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
what's that little phrase about unreasonable searches...???

those that would give up liberty for security deserve NEITHER.



They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin

Link Posted: 10/31/2004 9:08:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By hydgirl:
I'm surprised no one caught this sooner.

There is no preamble to the Declaration of Independence. There is a preamble to the Constitution, but it doesn't say anything about life, liberty or the persuit of happiness. Nor is the Declaration law. Fortunately or unfortunately, life, liberty and the persuit of happiness are not legal rights. They are, indeed, ideas upon which this country was founded, but they are not law. One cannot cite the Declaration the same way one cites the Constitution. One is law, the other is not.




Ok, ok. So when we have University of ARFCOM Civics 101, I better sit up in front.

But you spelled pursuit wrong!!!

Seriously, in being The Declaration is one of our founding documents, I have never been told that it doesn't carry significant weight. I've always understood that the Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of happiness were inealienable rights endowed by God, not man's law. As if they were "understood" and only mentioned more of as an aside than spelling them out.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 9:28:18 AM EST
This question is directed at any LEO. ( not personal)

* Can you just stop anyone driving down the road for no other reason than to check there license and registration when you have seen then do nothing illegal or suspicious?

* If you can’t do this, then how can you setup road blocks to do this?

I would just like to know what makes one legal and the other illegal?
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 9:50:18 AM EST

Originally Posted By labrat454:
This question is directed at any LEO. ( not personal)

* Can you just stop anyone driving down the road for no other reason than to check there license and registration when you have seen then do nothing illegal or suspicious?

* If you can’t do this, then how can you setup road blocks to do this?

I would just like to know what makes one legal and the other illegal?



Not an LEO (actually, apparently by some definition given here I have been), but I do deal with 4th ammendment stuff regularly.

The key difference is that in the latter example you are singling out a single car. At roadblocks, the checks are completely random, or everyone is checked. Some judges allow these things because it is thus not seen as having the same potential for abuse. The same deal goes with health and welfare inspection or piss tests in the military. As long as they are random or efect everybody, they are perfectly legal. However, if the defense could prove that somehow an individual was singled out based on prior suspicion - and the command tried to avoid the legal hassle by presenting the search as someting else - it would be an illegal search, and the evidence could be thrown out.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 9:55:11 AM EST
Roadblocks don't bother me that much. The only people that complain are people that are breaking the law. Are all those laws right? Maybe not, but it shouldn't matter, if your elected officials pass laws you don't like, vote for someone else. I think it's good that they check for insurance, because being hit by an un-insured driver makes your day the worst EVER. I really don't mind people that take drugs, and I like to drink myself, but if people are out there doing that AND driving, you're endangering MY rights.

"Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins"

There are some things that you have to give up to live here. I don't agree with all the things we need to give up, and neither do most of you... but if you don't want to be here move to Canda.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 10:01:46 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/31/2004 10:04:03 AM EST by Cincinnatus]

Originally Posted By thelibertarian:

Does anyone think it was a coincidence that this checkpoint was set up at the exit where people would be getting off to go do their early voting in the county?


You make no sense.
"Exit"? Who travels far on a highway, to vote?
Don't you have to vote in YOUR OWN precinct?



Link Posted: 10/31/2004 10:04:36 AM EST
good post.

Chris


Originally Posted By Paul:
When I took a class in law a long time ago - and seemingly in another galaxy far far away - random road blocks were illegal.

Knock, knock.

"Excuse me ma'am, sherrif's office. We're here on a random inspection of your home for such evil things as drugs, guns, and money. You don't have any child porno on your computer now do you? Been surfing at any non-approved web sites? Are the shots up to date for your dog? Do your mattresses have all their tags? We'll be done in just a few hours so surry off like a good subject then will ya'?"

Link Posted: 10/31/2004 10:06:15 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 10:14:23 AM EST
When the people get enough of "random roadblocks" they have the power to remove them through a number of avenues.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 10:18:10 AM EST
I have no problems with random roadblocks on the weekend. If they catch just one person driving under the influence then I believe their actions are justified. But then I lost a close friend to a drunk driver so my opinion maybe skewed just a bit.
Link Posted: 10/31/2004 10:19:12 AM EST

Originally Posted By A_Free_Man:
Last time I got stopped in a roadblock, I had to unsnap my seatbelt (the officer saw me do this) to get my wallet. Then he made a crack about ticketing me for driving without a seatbelt.



And you didn't tell him to go for it. I would have loved to have gone to court for that one. Your honor I arrived at a check point and was asked for my Dl. I undid my seatbelt to get my Dl and the officer cited me. I would hire an attorney, I don't care the cost to shove it down that assholes throat.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top