[Mikey]

I can.  And although I find this objectionable, it's not clear that it violates the constitution.  

Why would anyone care if law enforcement entered their house without a warrant, if they had nothing to hide?

That was actually a response to 2 comments, but I can't seem to quote 2 people at the same time.

[corkybstewart]

Wow, I never thought of that. Is it possible to fail a breath test eight hours after drinking? 

Im pretty sure I could pass a field sobriety test with a hangover, not sure about a breath test. Im sure my breath aint good then, kinda like a thousand Russian soldier marched over my tongue in their stocking feet but could I fail a breath test?

I'm safe, you're safe, most of us on this site are probably safe but if you're a heavy BMC drinker and drink an 18 pack between 6 and midnight, sleep 6 hours and get on the road you're probably still drunk.  I don't think the liver  metabolizes alcohol any faster just because you're asleep.

[kerneldustjacket]

I can.  And although I find this objectionable, it's not clear that it violates the constitution. 

In the US Supreme Court decision in the case DELAWARE V. PROUSE, 440 U. S. 648 (1979), it was found that an officer cannot pull over a lone vehicle to merely check the driver's/vehicle's license or registration.
However, the court stated that "The holding in this case does not preclude Delaware or other States from developing methods for spot checks that involve less intrusion or that do not involve the unconstrained exercise of discretion. Questioning of all oncoming traffic at roadblock-type stops is one possible alternative." http://supreme.justia.com/us/440/648/case.html#663
Though not a specific ruling on the constitutionality of roadblocks, the suggestion is present that the court would rule in that manner were it presented as a case before the court.

Note however, that a police roadblock cannot be set-up "randomly," they must be pre-warned (such as public posting in a newspaper or on a police department website) and adequately posted as being such when you approach it.

In another court case, evidence found after searching a car that exited a highway to avoid a roadblock was suppressed, as the police had no reason to pull the vehicle over other than the "suspicious" act of exiting the highway to supposedly "avoid" the roadblock.

Obviously, the best thing to do is to avoid driving when there is a chance you might be above the limit... unless you want to be the first to take a case to the Supreme Court to have the rule on the constitutionality of the practice.

[capozzoli]

My problem is this. Nothing is working and people are just driving around totally s*** faced. Im sure you all have seen it. Try telling someone that has had a few that they cant drive.They get defensive. Alcohol makes you think you can do anything.

Im also pissed that people just zig zag through traffic with no regard for other peoples safety, yet I get a ticket for driving ten miles over the speed limit. Why? Cause I am easier to catch.

I really wish law enforcement would take seriously our safety instead of just trying to meet ticket quotas and generate revenue.

[tubercle]

Useless laws weaken the necessary laws - Charles de Montesquieu, The Spirit of Laws, 1748

[1vertical]

People drive like Sh*t...I said it before I will say it again, It is my government's job to keep me
FREE Not Safe.  We are not safe, no matter what...hell it is dangerous
just breathing....

proof'
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=-qvXbIenivk

[punatic]

I can.  And although I find this objectionable, it's not clear that it violates the constitution. 

US Constitution - Amendment 4 - Ratified 12/15/1791.

The 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.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[capozzoli]

People drive like Sh*t...I said it before I will say it again, It is my government's job to keep me
FREE Not Safe.  We are not safe, no matter what...hell it is dangerous
just breathing....

proof'
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=-qvXbIenivk

I agree with you to an extent, but if my tax dollars are paying for a police force I dont want them out there trying to keep me free. I want them out there trying to keep me, my kids and my loved ones safe, just not only writing tickets to make money for the city.

That video is unbelievable and Ill bet you a lot of those drivers were drunk. I want those idiots off the road, or charged so severely that they stop doing it and start paying attention to the road.

I get so angry. Not sure what drivers are like where you live but here in Philly we have a high asshole count and a lot of them drive.

[beerocd]

I get so angry. Not sure what drivers are like where you live but here in Philly we have a high asshole count and a lot of them drive.

Ooooh, filter FAIL.

[johnf]

I can.  And although I find this objectionable, it's not clear that it violates the constitution. 

US Constitution - Amendment 4 - Ratified 12/15/1791.

The 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.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What part of being on the road on Saturday night when the bars close and refusing a breath test is not probable cause for a warrant?

[tubercle]

I can.  And although I find this objectionable, it's not clear that it violates the constitution.  

US Constitution - Amendment 4 - Ratified 12/15/1791.

The 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.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What part of being on the road on Saturday night when the bars close and refusing a breath test is not probable cause for a warrant?

 All of it.

  Tubercle spent 10 years in law enforcement busting DUI's. Ms. Tubercle did also (that's where she was met). Got 2 daughters and 2 sons -in-law in law enforcent now that bust them every day. Pulled up on many scenes where death and destruction was caused and many lives changed because of drunk drivers.

 Got sick of law enforcement due to the degradation of the constitution due to case law by activist judges. DUI check points are governed by the Carrol Doctrine due to the mobility of the alleged offender.

 There is very little of the 4th amendment left.

 BTW, a breath test doesn't require the level of probable cause, just reasonable suspicion.

[punatic]

I can.  And although I find this objectionable, it's not clear that it violates the constitution. 

US Constitution - Amendment 4 - Ratified 12/15/1791.

The 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.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What part of being on the road on Saturday night when the bars close and refusing a breath test is not probable cause for a warrant?

You are kidding, right?  You're saying that just by driving a car at a particular time of day makes you suspicious and gives the authorities the power to detain you against your will and take blood from you against your will?

That kinda sucks for people who a driving to or from work don't you think?  Perhaps they should be required to carry a note from their employer, "Please excuse (your name here) from having his civil rights violated.  He is on his way home from work."

[capozzoli]

I have to ask again. Why refuse a breath test?

[1vertical]

This checking is also being done in my area and I posted it in the wrong thread a few days ago.
Here it is better served in this thread.

From Google News...how is this for "Guilty until proven innocent"  or Trial by Breathalyzer...not your Peers...

The Laramie City Council approved the change to the city’s municipal code on final reading in an eight-to-one vote Tuesday night.

The ordinance also creates a new offense of the refusal of a chemical test to determine BAC when a police officer deems there is probable cause to assume a driver is drunk. The penalty for refusal of a chemical test to determine BAC is the same as if the suspect blew a 0.15 BAC.

 

I believe this poorly worded dribble says that you will loose your Drivers license just for refusing a Breathalyzer.....
even if you have NOT touched a drop.....the offense has become the act of "refusal".

I have trouble discerning where the law ends and politics begins, so if this post is over the edge, I will gladly delete it.

Seems on topic because of the mention of laws in the opening paragraph of your post re:federalist papers

[1vertical]

What part of being on the road on Saturday night when the bars close and refusing a breath test is not probable cause for a warrant?

The part where I have NOT touched a drop, all my tail lights are working, I am NOT weaving, I did NOTHING wrong, but get  stopped anyhow and I should NOT have to prove my innocence because I am ......that is the part
Maybe I was the SOBER designated driver....and Now I am GUILTY until proven innocent
Edit:(tried by a machine instead of my peers)...that is just Backwards.