Motorcycles being Targetted at Checkpoints
#31
10-03-2010, 12:10 PM
Outstanding HDF Member
Last edited by BobStreetBob; 10-03-2010 at 12:13 PM. Reason: spelling..
#32
10-03-2010, 12:14 PM
Its called implied consent and has been upheld in court. Neither the 4th or 5th ammendment apply - I think they DO - but the STATE does not.
If you Google "Implied Consent" (Wikipedia) it won't take you long to figure that the States & Feds have determined that "Hey, if it works for getting drunk drivers we can use it against anybody at anytime." Welcome to Amerika where your RIGHT against self incrimination, and protections against unreasonable search & siezure now only apply if the state says they do. The funny part is its all paid for by us. God I do hate the terms "Federal" funds or "Federal" grant. Makes it sound like it's their money. Drives me crazy. And if you are wondering about the supreme court- they AGREE that this DOES violate our constitutional rights but have chosen to look the other way. A "little" infringement of the peoples right is ok since it's catching drunk drivers.....and now it's motorcycles. But it's ALL ok because hey, YOU ELECTED these people.
pat
If you Google "Implied Consent" (Wikipedia) it won't take you long to figure that the States & Feds have determined that "Hey, if it works for getting drunk drivers we can use it against anybody at anytime." Welcome to Amerika where your RIGHT against self incrimination, and protections against unreasonable search & siezure now only apply if the state says they do. The funny part is its all paid for by us. God I do hate the terms "Federal" funds or "Federal" grant. Makes it sound like it's their money. Drives me crazy. And if you are wondering about the supreme court- they AGREE that this DOES violate our constitutional rights but have chosen to look the other way. A "little" infringement of the peoples right is ok since it's catching drunk drivers.....and now it's motorcycles. But it's ALL ok because hey, YOU ELECTED these people.
pat
#33
10-03-2010, 12:18 PM
I think I should'nt have to stop. Like your friend I'll let them chase me down and give me the ticket. Then I will plead not guilty and get a court date. Then I will show up in court (not expecting to win,but pleading my case anyway). The cop will have to show for court too. This will also cause the state money, not much but some. If we all do this, they will finally give up and stop the bullshit. That's my plan anyway...
In short, it won't be a "free legal stunt".
~Joe
#34
10-03-2010, 12:23 PM
Outstanding HDF Member
It's profiling that they are doing, I'm not the type to quietly let them. Too many of our rights are being taken everyday.
#36
10-03-2010, 02:12 PM
It's just one more example of "Big Brother" taking over our lives. They use the Commerce Clause to screw us in every way they can--and so far are getting away with it.
But maybe the worm is turning, we'll see in November. Go vote!
But maybe the worm is turning, we'll see in November. Go vote!
#37
10-03-2010, 02:23 PM
compairing trucks to motorcycles is childish, they are weighing and checking to see if they have been on the road for 24hrs, and making sure they are in weight limits or drugs stored in van, motorcycles do not need a book to to see if we have been sleeping apples and oranges,
#38
10-03-2010, 04:06 PM
Advanced
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Port Clinton, Ohio
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your statement makes no sense.
Are you are saying that same incentive (money) to risk matrix that tempts OTR drivers or their companies to take dangerous risks applies to bikers?
Are you saying the company that I work for might overload my bike by say 20,000 lbs so they can make extra money every time I go for a ride?
Are you saying that I might skip sleeping and ride my bike countiously for 3 days so I can make a late mortgage payment?
Admititly some people overload their bikes, but what is the payoff? An extra outfit for Momma? Some people try to ride to far, but they don't get paid to it.
Even if a biker does these things and worst comes to worst and they cause an accident what are the chances they will take inocents with them. Are you saying an accident caused by a 900 lb bike causes the same kind of carnage a 90,000 semi does?
I don't believe the 2 things are related in any way...
Are you are saying that same incentive (money) to risk matrix that tempts OTR drivers or their companies to take dangerous risks applies to bikers?
Are you saying the company that I work for might overload my bike by say 20,000 lbs so they can make extra money every time I go for a ride?
Are you saying that I might skip sleeping and ride my bike countiously for 3 days so I can make a late mortgage payment?
Admititly some people overload their bikes, but what is the payoff? An extra outfit for Momma? Some people try to ride to far, but they don't get paid to it.
Even if a biker does these things and worst comes to worst and they cause an accident what are the chances they will take inocents with them. Are you saying an accident caused by a 900 lb bike causes the same kind of carnage a 90,000 semi does?
I don't believe the 2 things are related in any way...
#39
10-03-2010, 04:53 PM
Advanced
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Port Clinton, Ohio
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want more information and want to take the time to go to a law library, your county court house should have one. Look at: 116 A.L.R.5th 479
It contains all of the cases pertaining to "Checkpoints" for vehicles.
The U.S. Supreme Court has not addressed the issue since the late 70's, they determined them to be constitutional under a 4 Prong Test. Since then they have refused to take any cases on the subject. There are a good number of cases that have reached State Supreme Courts, mainly on the issue of: Search and Seizure, because the person stopped at the check point was found to be drunk or had drugs in their vehicle. The A.L.R. is not computerized, unless you have access to LexisNexis or Westlaw.
It contains all of the cases pertaining to "Checkpoints" for vehicles.
The U.S. Supreme Court has not addressed the issue since the late 70's, they determined them to be constitutional under a 4 Prong Test. Since then they have refused to take any cases on the subject. There are a good number of cases that have reached State Supreme Courts, mainly on the issue of: Search and Seizure, because the person stopped at the check point was found to be drunk or had drugs in their vehicle. The A.L.R. is not computerized, unless you have access to LexisNexis or Westlaw.
#40
10-03-2010, 05:17 PM
Outstanding HDF Member
I know that. I said I was'nt expecting to win any case. But it will cost them some money and time too. They count on everyone to just pay the fine without taking it to court. Even if it costs me some cash..I will fight for my rights.
It's profiling that they are doing, I'm not the type to quietly let them. Too many of our rights are being taken everyday.
It's profiling that they are doing, I'm not the type to quietly let them. Too many of our rights are being taken everyday.
