Checkpoint warning

[roadwarrior]

Authorities will conduct a sobriety checkpoint somewhere in Fargo on Friday.

[EndZoneQB]

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/281220/group/homepage/

I'll post as soon as I find out where it is.

[ndsubison1]

Is this because of the big softball tournament this weekend?

[MNLonghorn10]

and ribfest.

btw isn't it kind of a dead give away of telling us where itll be since they mention NDSU's police will help?

[EndZoneQB]

and ribfest.

btw isn't it kind of a dead give away of telling us where itll be since they mention NDSU's police will help?

LMAO, I was literally going to come on and post that right meow. It'll be on University, Broadway, 19th, or 10th st. That is my guess.

[G-city Bison Fan]

Just a legal question I bring up.

Since everyone hates these things, and they kinda border the line of police rights,

what do you think they would do if say a few friends (20-30) got together and all being sober drove right into the "trap" in order to hijack their little plan?

[Bisonguy]

Just a legal question I bring up.

Since everyone hates these things, and they kinda border the line of police rights,

what do you think they would do if say a few friends (20-30) got together and all being sober drove right into the "trap" in order to hijack their little plan?


How about everyone just not be stupid enough to drink and drive, and then they wouldn't need to have these stupid checkpoints? :confused:

[tjbison]

How about everyone just not be stupid enough to drink and drive, and then they wouldn't need to have these stupid checkpoints? :confused:

SOBER GUY is the freaking best thing ever!!!!! although I know lots of people who drive because they cannot wait or call ahead to get a cab/sober guy :banghead: My theory is if you have time to sit in a bar and drink for 2-9 hours a 45minute-hour lead time on getting a sober ride home should be nothing!!!

[EndZoneQB]

Just a legal question I bring up.

Since everyone hates these things, and they kinda border the line of police rights,

what do you think they would do if say a few friends (20-30) got together and all being sober drove right into the "trap" in order to hijack their little plan?

They'll move it haha and you get free coupons for mcdonalds or something.

[duluthbison]

Just a legal question I bring up.

Since everyone hates these things, and they kinda border the line of police rights,

what do you think they would do if say a few friends (20-30) got together and all being sober drove right into the "trap" in order to hijack their little plan?

Good question but there was a case that made its way to the supreme court from Michigan I think. The court ruled that it was ok to do these sobriety check points as long as it wasn't random, in other words every driver had to be stopped. So good luck hijacking their plot ;)

The real head scratcher here is how much money they will spend on these sobriety check points and yet yield relatively few arrests. Next time you see it in the forum, take note on how many people are arrested vs. how much it actually cost. It's surprising how much the police will spend just to give us that warm fuzzy feeling that they are trying to stop drunk driving.

[G-city Bison Fan]

How about everyone just not be stupid enough to drink and drive, and then they wouldn't need to have these stupid checkpoints? :confused:

Well I would agree, but let's be realistic, that isn't going to happen. Someone somewhere has to be stupid and ruin it for the rest of us, it's how society works. ;)

I don't know, I really don't like the idea of wasting valuable time and money setting up a "random" checkpoint. Just seems stupid.

[ndsubison1]

Didnt these come about because of MADD? A wonderful organization. Not

[ndsubison1]

How about everyone just not be stupid enough to drink and drive, and then they wouldn't need to have these stupid checkpoints? :confused:

Cant fix stupid

[02Bison]

Cant fix stupid

Maybe not, but at least you might be able to get their drunken dumb@$$es off the road for at least one night before they ruin someone's life....just a thought for you.

[Bisonguy]

Well I would agree, but let's be realistic, that isn't going to happen. Someone somewhere has to be stupid and ruin it for the rest of us, it's how society works. ;)

I don't know, I really don't like the idea of wasting valuable time and money setting up a "random" checkpoint. Just seems stupid.


They are what they are. It's more effective than most of the TV and other ad campaigns against drunk driving, as shown by a two page thread already on here.

[SDbison]

Infringement on your rights! So the cops pull you over......essentially saying you are guilty until they PROVE you innocent. Can't believe some of you small thinkers really believe this is OK let alone does ANYTHING to make a dent in the dumbasses that are blind drunk and will possibly take anothers life. All they do is fuck up a somebodys life that will blow a .10 (no worse than a sleepy, distracted mom or teenager texter). Great we have a police state due to MADD. Thank you very much!

[TbonZach]

Infringement on your rights! So the cops pull you over......essentially saying you are guilty until they PROVE you innocent. Can't believe some of you small thinkers really believe this is OK let alone does ANYTHING to make a dent in the dumbasses that are blind drunk and will possibly take anothers life. All they do is fuck up a somebodys life that will blow a .10 (no worse than a sleepy, distracted mom or teenager texter). Great we have a police state due to MADD. Thank you very much!

In the case of checkpoints, I'll gladly be guilty 'till proven innocent if it means another drunkard is stopped.

[SDbison]

In the case of checkpoints, I'll gladly be guilty 'till proven innocent if it means another drunkard is stopped.
Whatever dumbass.....enjoy your government control.

[JackJD]

Infringement on your rights! So the cops pull you over......essentially saying you are guilty until they PROVE you innocent. Can't believe some of you small thinkers really believe this is OK let alone does ANYTHING to make a dent in the dumbasses that are blind drunk and will possibly take anothers life. All they do is fuck up a somebodys life that will blow a .10 (no worse than a sleepy, distracted mom or teenager texter). Great we have a police state due to MADD. Thank you very much!

You should consider joining the Fargo chapter of DAMM: Drunks against mad mothers.

Okay, bad joke. Sorry.

[TbonZach]

Whatever dumbass.....enjoy your government control.

Thank you. I will.

[SDbison]

You should consider joining the Fargo chapter of DAMM: Drunks against mad mothers.

Okay, bad joke. Sorry.
Nothing going on at JackA$$ville?

[TbonZach]

I don't know, I really don't like the idea of wasting valuable time and money setting up a "random" checkpoint. Just seems stupid.

To me, what's stupid is that they ANNOUNCE that they are going to have a checkpoint. They would probably be more effective if they just have one without telling people, "Hey. We're going to have a checkpoint this night so make sure you don't drink."

[SDbison]

To me, what's stupid is that they ANNOUNCE that they are going to have a checkpoint. They would probably be more effective if they just have one without telling people, "Hey. We're going to have a checkpoint this night so make sure you don't drink."
In your world cops should just crash your home and assume you are going to drive then arest you. You are such a tool to believe this is good for society, but chances are you are young, brainwashed and ignorant.

[JackJD]

For those who are seriously debating this issue...if you're interested:
Some of the support in the law for the sobriety checkpoints is based on the legal principle that driving is not a right -- it is a privilege granted by the state. Privileges do not have the same level of protections as the "rights" protected by the Constitution. Privileges cannot be just arbitrarily taken away but they can be reasonably regulated, extended, curtailed etc.

[JackJD]

Nothing going on at JackA$$ville?

Hey, SD...still trying to find you a new position in Fargo so that you can be relieved of your misery and apparent forced exile in South Dakota.

[Hammersmith]

In your world cops should just crash your home and assume you are going to drive then arest you. You are such a tool to believe this is good for society, but chances are you are young, brainwashed and ignorant.

Ahh, how I missed the SDbison school of debate during my 1.5 weeks off of the internet. If someone disagrees with you, just insult them. Way to raise the level of discourse there, SD. :rolleyes:

[TbonZach]

In your world cops should just crash your home and assume you are going to drive then arest you. You are such a tool to believe this is good for society, but chances are you are young, brainwashed and ignorant.

No, in my world the checkpoints happen. Not home invasion, not closing bars, not prohibition, not destroying all cars, not [stupid thing that you can of] - checkpoints. You're inconvenienced for what, 2 minutes?

How am I brainwashed? For thinking that it's wrong to drink and drive? For thinking that checkpoints are ok, as long they're stopping everyone and not pulling random people over? For thinking something different than you?


Some of the support in the law for the sobriety checkpoints is based on the legal principle that driving is not a right -- it is a privilege granted by the state. Privileges do not have the same level of protections as the "rights" protected by the Constitution. Privileges cannot be just arbitrarily taken away but they can be reasonably regulated, extended, curtailed etc.

Once again, I'll gladly temporarily waive my "right" to drive if there's even the slightest chance that a drunk driver gets pulled off the road.

[JackJD]

To me, what's stupid is that they ANNOUNCE that they are going to have a checkpoint. They would probably be more effective if they just have one without telling people, "Hey. We're going to have a checkpoint this night so make sure you don't drink."

It certainly seems counterintuitive but cops will claim that by announcing the location of the checkpoint, they get more bang for their buck by getting the word out. (Courts like the public announcements too.) Getting the subject matter in the news -- not necessarily making arrests -- is the goal.

I've never been through one of the sobriety checkpoints. It would irritate me to be stopped when I've done nothing wrong (so I guess I have to concede I have some understanding of SDBison's position --that's scarey.) But, someone close to me was badly injured by a driving drunk so if I have to make a choice, I'm in TbonZach's camp.

[ndsubison1]

No, in my world the checkpoints happen. Not home invasion, not closing bars, not prohibition, not destroying all cars, not [stupid thing that you can of] - checkpoints. You're inconvenienced for what, 2 minutes?

How am I brainwashed? For thinking that it's wrong to drink and drive? For thinking that checkpoints are ok, as long they're stopping everyone and not pulling random people over? For thinking something different than you?



Once again, I'll gladly temporarily waive my "right" to drive if there's even the slightest chance that a drunk driver gets pulled off the road.

What if a car is somebody's home?

[TbonZach]

What if a car is somebody's home?

If they're caught driving drunk then I have no sympathy for them - I don't care who it is or where they live.

[JackJD]

What if a car is somebody's home?

I'll take it a little off topic...there are court cases in which entry into a car is considered a burglary. Definition of burglary is entering or remaining in a STRUCTURE with intent to commit a crime. In some states, a guy breaking into a car to steal a tape deck can be convicted of burglary! So, you pose an interesting question.

It may help some to remember the old adage: The law is like sausage: if you like it, don't watch it being made. (And don't forget the following one: bad facts make the law.)

[ndsubison1]

No, in my world the checkpoints happen. Not home invasion, not closing bars, not prohibition, not destroying all cars, not [stupid thing that you can of] - checkpoints. You're inconvenienced for what, 2 minutes?

How am I brainwashed? For thinking that it's wrong to drink and drive? For thinking that checkpoints are ok, as long they're stopping everyone and not pulling random people over? For thinking something different than you?



Once again, I'll gladly temporarily waive my "right" to drive if there's even the slightest chance that a drunk driver gets pulled off the road.

Just because somebody is opposed to check points doesnt mean theyre in favor of drunk driving. Wouldnt it be more effective to take the money for the checkpoints and just put more officers out on the streets? Just seems like a waste to me.

[Hammersmith]

Just because somebody is opposed to check points doesnt mean theyre in favor of drunk driving. Wouldnt it be more effective to take the money for the checkpoints and just put more officers out on the streets? Just seems like a waste to me.

I would think it's the difference between being proactive and reactive. Which is better for the public: using additional officers to try and catch people once they've already started driving drunk, or keeping people from driving drunk in the first place by widely announcing a checkpoint weekend? Isn't it better to find ways to prevent the crime from ever happening rather than just catching the lawbreaker after the fact? Of course, this pre-supposes that checkpoints actually work in deterring drunk driving. I have a built-in distrust of anything supported by MADD. They and DARE are two prime examples of the road to hell being paved with good intentions.

[G-city Bison Fan]

http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/crime/court-kicks-dwi-case-sets-new-standard

An interesting addtion to this thread.

Also, I think it does lead to a slippery slope. If they can set up checkpoints, why can't they just set them up outside of bars, or in the bar parking lots.

And naturally, the argument isn't in favor of drunk driving. It comes down to how much do you infringe on people who aren't doing anything wrong, in order to prevent "stupid" people from doing illegal things that they are going to usually do anyways.

[DjKyRo]

If it means I'm inconvenienced for two minutes to keep someone who runs the risk of killing me, my family members or my friends off the road I'm glad to be stopped. I wouldn't want to be the one complaining about what I could've been doing when I wasn't being randomly checked to the kid whose parents were killed by a drunk driver.

[MNLonghorn10]

You should consider joining the Fargo chapter of DAMM: Drunks against mad mothers.

Okay, bad joke. Sorry.

i laughed.

[ndsubison1]

If it means I'm inconvenienced for two minutes to keep someone who runs the risk of killing me, my family members or my friends off the road I'm glad to be stopped. I wouldn't want to be the one complaining about what I could've been doing when I wasn't being randomly checked to the kid whose parents were killed by a drunk driver.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

:)

[EndZoneQB]

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

:)

Bingo, it's like building a fence around wild bores/hogs. You can do it side by side, until it's too late. I disagree with more control from this vastly overspread government.

[DjKyRo]

I'm not entirely sure taking two minutes to prove you're sober equates with allowing troops quarter or similar things Ben Franklin said that about. I think that's taking it a little far.

[Tatanka]

It may help some to remember the old adage: The law is like sausage: if you like it, don't watch it being made. (And don't forget the following one: bad facts make the law.)

Wow. Congratulations to everyone at Bisonville (except me apparently) for not taking the obvious bait here and drifting this thread into oblivion...

[Bisonguy]

http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/crime/court-kicks-dwi-case-sets-new-standard

An interesting addtion to this thread.

Also, I think it does lead to a slippery slope. If they can set up checkpoints, why can't they just set them up outside of bars, or in the bar parking lots.

And naturally, the argument isn't in favor of drunk driving. It comes down to how much do you infringe on people who aren't doing anything wrong, in order to prevent "stupid" people from doing illegal things that they are going to usually do anyways.

Why not just set them up outside bars? The police usually have more of a presence where crimes occur, and last time I checked driving while intoxicated is a crime.

I wouldn't mind if the United States adopted laws closer to some of the euro countries like Sweden: BAC of .10 first offense is two years in jail and lesser penalties start with a BAC of .02.

Anyone that thinks the checkpoints are stupid should take 20 seconds and check this out-LINKY (http://www.bringvictory.com)

[SDSUAlum08]

Why not just set them up outside bars? The police usually have more of a presence where crimes occur, and last time I checked driving while intoxicated is a crime.

I wouldn't mind if the United States adopted laws closer to some of the euro countries like Sweden: BAC of .10 first offense is two years in jail and lesser penalties start with a BAC of .02.

Anyone that thinks the checkpoints are stupid should take 20 seconds and check this out-LINKY (http://www.bringvictory.com)

TOTALLY FELL FOR IT! :banghead: That was pretty good! :nod:

[TheBisonator]

All I'm gonna say is that you can thank MADD and Ronald Reagan for the drinking age being 21 in this country. There is absolutely NO NEED for the legal drinking age to be that high in ANY country.

As for sobriety checkpoints, better to just try to avoid them by detouring around them. The only time I feel I need to be stopped at a checkpoint is if I'm entering Canada.

(I'm a hardcore civil libertarian)

[Bisonguy]

All I'm gonna say is that you can thank MADD and Ronald Reagan for the drinking age being 21 in this country. There is absolutely NO NEED for the legal drinking age to be that high in ANY country.

As for sobriety checkpoints, better to just try to avoid them by detouring around them. The only time I feel I need to be stopped at a checkpoint is if I'm entering Canada.

(I'm a hardcore civil libertarian)


That's a whole other can of worms.

I have no problems with 18 being the legal drinking age. Just make the DUI penalties much, much harsher like most other countries that have lower drinking ages.

[BlueBisonRock]

Why not just set them up outside bars? The police usually have more of a presence where crimes occur, and last time I checked driving while intoxicated is a crime.

I wouldn't mind if the United States adopted laws closer to some of the euro countries like Sweden: BAC of .10 first offense is two years in jail and lesser penalties start with a BAC of .02.

Anyone that thinks the checkpoints are stupid should take 20 seconds and check this out-LINKY (http://www.bringvictory.com)

For a moment, I thought UND Thundering Herd was back and posting! :D

[onbison09]

Why not just set them up outside bars? The police usually have more of a presence where crimes occur, and last time I checked driving while intoxicated is a crime.

I wouldn't mind if the United States adopted laws closer to some of the euro countries like Sweden: BAC of .10 first offense is two years in jail and lesser penalties start with a BAC of .02.

Anyone that thinks the checkpoints are stupid should take 20 seconds and check this out-LINKY (http://www.bringvictory.com)

That link is hardcore! I tried to click out of the tab and it made me hit "OK" for every lyric of the song. Good stuff.

[02Bison]

Didnt these come about because of MADD? A wonderful organization. Not

What's so wrong about an organization that is against drunk driving and has a goal to eliminate it? Would like to hear what your beef with MADD's mission is.

[ndsubison1]

Why not just set them up outside bars? The police usually have more of a presence where crimes occur, and last time I checked driving while intoxicated is a crime.

I wouldn't mind if the United States adopted laws closer to some of the euro countries like Sweden: BAC of .10 first offense is two years in jail and lesser penalties start with a BAC of .02.

Anyone that thinks the checkpoints are stupid should take 20 seconds and check this out-LINKY (http://www.bringvictory.com)

.02 really? i can drive in my sleep with a .02

[ndsubison1]

What's so wrong about an organization that is against drunk driving and has a goal to eliminate it? Would like to hear what your beef with MADD's mission is.

MADD believes the solutions to every problem is strict laws. If you looks at all of MADDS stats and claims they're ridiculous. They clam that countries with a lower drinking age has higher intoxication. That's false. They have great intentions but what they end up doing has unintended consequences and makes thing far worse

[BigDeal]

Three arguments I've seen are against the checkpoints are:

1. Govenment overstepping their authority
2. Drinking age should be lowered anyway
3. laws are too strict because of MADD

So, to solve the problem of drunk driving we should...

1. Have less patrol
2. lower the drinking age
3. relax the drinking laws

:confused:

[56BISON73]

What's so wrong about an organization that is against drunk driving and has a goal to eliminate it? Would like to hear what your beef with MADD's mission is.

The mission is fine even though ultrarealistic. The problem with MADD is its cause and effect. They havent reduced drunk driving but they have created an entire industry in regards to this issue. It has also created a cash cow for many departments.

[bisonmike2]

MADD believes the solutions to every problem is strict laws. If you looks at all of MADDS stats and claims they're ridiculous. They clam that countries with a lower drinking age has higher intoxication. That's false. They have great intentions but what they end up doing has unintended consequences and makes thing far worse

MADD is the classic example of a good idea gone bad. It was set up and established by a mother who lost a child to a hard core repeat drunk driver. Her goal was to bring awareness to drunk driving and put a stop to repeat drunk drivers. You know an organization is off track when it's founder is quoted as saying all they have become is a neo-prohibitionist group. If it were up to MADD, alcohol would be banned and they'd use minority report like psychics to charge anyone who is even thinking about drinking with a dui.

[WYOBISONMAN]

I actually resent the check points. Drunk driving needs to be a crime with some very substantial penalties, but, allowing the police to stop all people with out any probable cause is just plain un-American. If there is not any probable cause, I should not have to even look at a cop if I do not want to.

[80ALUM]

I know a former director of MADD who allowed her underage children to drink and use fake ids to enter bars all the while lecturing others. This is why I question these organizations.

[SDbison]

MADD is the classic example of a good idea gone bad. It was set up and established by a mother who lost a child to a hard core repeat drunk driver. Her goal was to bring awareness to drunk driving and put a stop to repeat drunk drivers. You know an organization is off track when it's founder is quoted as saying all they have become is a neo-prohibitionist group. If it were up to MADD, alcohol would be banned and they'd use minority report like psychics to charge anyone who is even thinking about drinking with a dui.
So how many hard core repeat offender drunk drivers that get blackout drunk and can kill people are actually taken off the road by the checkpoints. Really, what percentage are removed and how many possible lives saved?
So how many of the social drinkers that would blow a .10 to .12 actually cause a significant accident or traffic fatality. How does this compare to the general population not drinking? What percentage of the DUIs are issued to people that are .10 to .12? What percentage of accidents are caused by cell phone abusers, road rage, texters, overworking, sleepy and emotionally depressed drivers? Lets get them off the road. Anybody got facts?
Since driving is a right and government can regulate it any way they want lets get the traffic related fatalities way down. Change the speed limit from 75 to 65, or 55. Why not 45 or 35. Heck bring it down to 25 and there would hardly be any deaths. I mean what justifies our convenience to get from point A to point B quicker yet it takes tens of thousands of lives each year?

[02Bison]

You can definitely tell this board is frequented by people with close ties to the #1 binge drinking state in the country...seems some of you would prefer anarchy over the current state all because of checkpoints.

[02Bison]

MADD is the classic example of a good idea gone bad. It was set up and established by a mother who lost a child to a hard core repeat drunk driver. Her goal was to bring awareness to drunk driving and put a stop to repeat drunk drivers. You know an organization is off track when it's founder is quoted as saying all they have become is a neo-prohibitionist group. If it were up to MADD, alcohol would be banned and they'd use minority report like psychics to charge anyone who is even thinking about drinking with a dui. You're taking your argument down a slippery slope path....

[02Bison]

I know a former director of MADD who allowed her underage children to drink and use fake ids to enter bars all the while lecturing others. This is why I question these organizations.

And that means the whole organization is bad??????

[bisonmike2]

So how many hard core repeat offender drunk drivers that get blackout drunk and can kill people are actually taken off the road by the checkpoints. Really, what percentage are removed and how many possible lives saved?
So how many of the social drinkers that would blow a .10 to .12 actually cause a significant accident or traffic fatality. How does this compare to the general population not drinking? What percentage of the DUIs are issued to people that are .10 to .12? What percentage of accidents are caused by cell phone abusers, road rage, texters, overworking, sleepy and emotionally depressed drivers? Lets get them off the road. Anybody got facts?
Since driving is a right and government can regulate it any way they want lets get the traffic related fatalities way down. Change the speed limit from 75 to 65, or 55. Why not 45 or 35. Heck bring it down to 25 and there would hardly be any deaths. I mean what justifies our convenience to get from point A to point B quicker yet it takes tens of thousands of lives each year?

12.

Honestly, I have no idea what your question or point is so here's a picture of a cat.
http://www.iacuc.arizona.edu/training/cats/images/Tabby1-DomesticCat-Closeup.jpg

[ndsubison1]

no we just believe in liberty

[TheBisonator]

I think 02Bison is none other than Hank Hill.

[SDbison]

Lots of control freaks here that think government always knows better. Also need to look at what liberties are lost in pursuit of so called perfection (which will never happen, especially if goverment involved).

[TheBisonator]

Lots of control freaks here that think government always knows better. Also need to look at what liberties are lost in pursuit of so called perfection (which will never happen, especially if goverment involved).

Like I said, I think 02Bison is Hank Hill.

He fits the personality profile.

"02" probably means he graduated from NDSU in 1902.

[mebisonII]

I'm confused...who is on who's team here?

SD appears to be yelling at bisonmike2, who, I think, agrees with SD.

02 is being accused of being the beer-swilling Hank Hill, as he (I think) argues in favor of checkpoints.

Either my sarcasm detector is off, I left my reading comprehension at home today, or this is a sign that I should stop slacking off and get back to work.

I do like the cat, though.

[Bisonguy]

I know a former director of MADD who allowed her underage children to drink and use fake ids to enter bars all the while lecturing others. This is why I question these organizations.


The same and much worse can be said for many organizations, including the church, government, nearly any large business, etc.

[Facts]

sobriety check points, + + +

[TheBisonator]

I'm confused...who is on who's team here?

SD appears to be yelling at bisonmike2, who, I think, agrees with SD.

02 is being accused of being the beer-swilling Hank Hill, as he (I think) argues in favor of checkpoints.

Either my sarcasm detector is off, I left my reading comprehension at home today, or this is a sign that I should stop slacking off and get back to work.

I do like the cat, though.

If you watched many episodes of King Of The Hill, you would understand Hank Hill's personality.

[BigDeal]

Do you guys bitch this much at the airport when security randomly decides to pull you aside and search you?

[BlueBisonRock]

Do you guys bitch this much at the airport when security randomly decides to pull you aside and search you?

Of course! And when security does a 'random' full car search as I made my daily trip to Walter Reed.

[Facts]

I'm also very confused... I've come up with several takes on the situation.

The 'SD' in SDbison either stands for Sober Driver, Suckit Democrats, or Still Drunk. One possibility is he should change his moniker to SDDbison, which would of course stand for Support Drunk Driving...

My last take is that Bisonmike2 is exceptionally gifted at herding cats.

:)

[TheBisonator]

This thread got derailed fast. I think it's time for Dr. Kevorkian to come in and put this thing out of its misery.

[02Bison]

no we just believe in liberty

Complete liberty is anarchy

[02Bison]

I think 02Bison is none other than Hank Hill.

"I sell propane and propane acccesories"

[02Bison]

Linky (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHXpOOq4U1s)


"I am glad the highway patrol does this. I lost a best-friend to a drunk driver who blew through a red light and T-bone our car on the passenger side which my buddy was sitting on. And what pisses me off the most is the son of a bitch walked away with some scratches thanks to his airbag. In my opinion every drunk that is taken off the street is one live that has been saved. "

[TbonZach]

"I sell propane and propane acccesories"

"I tell you what."

[SDbison]

I'm also very confused... I've come up with several takes on the situation.

The 'SD' in SDbison either stands for Sober Driver, Suckit Democrats, or Still Drunk. One possibility is he should change his moniker to SDDbison, which would of course stand for Support Drunk Driving...

My last take is that Bisonmike2 is exceptionally gifted at herding cats.

:)
Only a person like you with limited intelligence could come up with those comments.

[Facts]

Only a person like you with limited intelligence could come up with those comments.



I'll take that as a compliment.

Thanks San Diego!!

[MNLonghorn10]

it was on broadway between like 15th and 16th ave by the stop n go gas station.

we drove by it while they were settin up....i had a few beers at ribfest..woops

[80ALUM]

The same and much worse can be said for many organizations, including the church, government, nearly any large business, etc.

My point exactly. Like I said, that is why I question these organizations. They are established for the the right reasons but soon become political and people are appointed as favors, etc. and they lose their original intent. People who stand on their principles are rarely appointed to head these organizations and they lose their effect and so now we have the reason so many on this board question the intent of MADD, etc. Get it now!?

[roadwarrior]

They had 2 DUI arrests last night.

[Bisonguy]

They had 2 DUI arrests last night.


And a 9 page thread on bisonville....

[02Bison]

Like I said, I think 02Bison is Hank Hill.

He fits the personality profile.

"02" probably means he graduated from NDSU in 1902.

Close but no cigar. 2002..1902...what's 100 years difference....

[North Side]

All I'm gonna say is that you can thank MADD and Ronald Reagan for the drinking age being 21 in this country. There is absolutely NO NEED for the legal drinking age to be that high in ANY country.

As for sobriety checkpoints, better to just try to avoid them by detouring around them. The only time I feel I need to be stopped at a checkpoint is if I'm entering Canada.

(I'm a hardcore civil libertarian)

your brain doesn't fully developed until you are around 21 years of age using drugs or alcohol at a young age can stunt your frontal lobe growth

[North Side]

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

:)

yep, i say the same thing to the patriot act

[tjbison]

your brain doesn't fully developed until you are around 21 years of age using drugs or alcohol at a young age can stunt your frontal lobe growth

Crap thats what happened to me:banghead:

[bisonmike2]

yep, i say the same thing to the patriot act

I used to work in the financial industry. The patriot act is insane. If you were to breakdown the generics of what that bill allows the government to do, then mix it in with a list of stuff that the Nazi/Gestaupo did before and during WWII, it would be very hard to tell the two apart. Scary stuff.

[ndsubison1]

your brain doesn't fully developed until you are around 21 years of age using drugs or alcohol at a young age can stunt your frontal lobe growth

i think that's a pretty valid point, but kids under 21 do it anyways regardless if it's legal or not

[rutlandbison]

What just happened in this thread?

[Bison Dan]

I used to work in the financial industry. The patriot act is insane. If you were to breakdown the generics of what that bill allows the government to do, then mix it in with a list of stuff that the Nazi/Gestaupo did before and during WWII, it would be very hard to tell the two apart. Scary stuff.

Really?? The patriot act deals with mostly new technologies of communication. I didn't know the Nazi's had email?

[DjKyRo]

Godwin's Law in action here people...

[bisonmike2]

Really?? The patriot act deals with mosting new technologies of communication. I didn't know the Nazi's had email?

The Patriot Act allows the government to monitor and investigate citizens without their knowledge just like the Nazi's did. Sorry I had to connect the dots for you. The Nazi's wish they had access to the technology governments had today.

You can be added to an FBI watch list just for showing up in a bank. Tellers have the ability to flag accounts suspicious without any actual proof. They could use an excuse as simple as "he looked nervous when he dropped off his deposit." So if you got a racist teller you might see them flag all brown people going into the bank that day. At the major bank I worked at (rhymes with Bells Cargo) it was as easy as using a drop down menu to flag an account. What happens after an account is flagged, was never told to us but we compiled reports of how many accounts were flagged, at which location, and which bank officer or teller did the flagging. I say accounts but really it was the persons customer number that's flagged. And along with that number goes info on all the persons financial history. Loans, mortgages, retirement accounts, everything that they had at Bells Cargo. But don't hold Bells Cargo responsible, all the banks do it, and they are required to do so thanks to the Patriot Act.

I know this post makes me sound like a conspiracy nut, but it's true. The Patriot act uses the Constitution as toilet paper.

[NorthernBison]

Godwin's Law in action here people...

Funny how that works.

[Bison bison]

You can be added to an FBI watch list just for showing up in a bank.

this is why i count myself among the unbanked.

and part of the greater reason why i've worn an aluminum foil helmet since '82.

[bisonmike2]

this is why i count myself among the unbanked.

and part of the greater reason why i've worn an aluminum foil helmet since '82.

Me too. My currency is now Garbage Pail Kids cards. There isn't anything worth buying that I can't throw down an Adam Bomb or a Acne Amy card and purchase.

[02Bison]

In your world cops should just crash your home and assume you are going to drive then arest you. You are such a tool to believe this is good for society, but chances are you are young, brainwashed and ignorant.

Your arguments on this topic are always on a slippery slope SD....maybe you should read this (http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/slippery-slope/).

[Twentysix]

Me too. My currency is now Garbage Pail Kids cards. There isn't anything worth buying that I can't throw down an Adam Bomb or a Acne Amy card and purchase.

I generally try and pay with nuka cola bottle caps or bits of string.

Most places wont take my peoples money, the race card seldom works.

[TbonZach]

I generally try and pay with nuka cola bottle caps or bits of string.

Most places wont take my peoples money, the race card seldom works.

http://www.quahog5news.com/downloads/quotes/season2/FG209/janet7.mp3

[TransAmBison]

This thread is in a severe need of a TAB-ing.

[Tatanka]

This thread is in a severe need of a TAB-ing.

That's what he said*.




* see what I did thar?

[TransAmBison]

That's what he said*.




* see what I did thar?





*No, I didn't, is it over already?**
**That's what she said***
***To Tatanka

[Notorious]

Here you go BisonMike2....

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0618/senators-introduce-bill-disconnect-internet/

What constitution???

[BisoninNWMN]

I used to work in the financial industry. The patriot act is insane. If you were to breakdown the generics of what that bill allows the government to do, then mix it in with a list of stuff that the Nazi/Gestaupo did before and during WWII, it would be very hard to tell the two apart. Scary stuff.


Patriot is not insane.

Good for all of us.

It targets or red flags individuals that call consistently to countries that are red flagged.

Joe Schmo from dumb-fu** ND is not going to be targeted but someone consistently calling Pakistan-Algeria-Syria or any other country that harbours terrorists will be checked.........No problem with me!!!

Let me guess the world should all hold hands and love each other.....right.

People on this planet want to kill us no matter what and I want my government to do what is neccessary to protect us.

[bisonmike2]

Patriot is not insane.

Good for all of us.

It targets or red flags individuals that call consistently to countries that are red flagged.

Joe Schmo from dumb-fu** ND is not going to be targeted but someone consistently calling Pakistan-Algeria-Syria or any other country that harbours terrorists will be checked.........No problem with me!!!

Let me guess the world should all hold hands and love each other.....right.

People on this planet want to kill us no matter what and I want my government to do what is neccessary to protect us.

They already had shit in place before the patriot act that red flagged suspicious international activity. The patriot act allows the banks and the Fed's to monitor domestic financial activity between US citizens, a completely different animal. I'm not talking about investigating Habib sending money to Abul's Terrorist Training and Supplies in Syria, I'm talking about the investigation of US citizens for no other reason than a teller clicking a button while your waiting in line because he or she thinks you may be a terrorist. The idea of "don't do nuthing, don't get in trouble for nuthing" is ignorant and dangerous. You got to draw the lines on personal freedoms some where and you sound like you're okay with the Gov't completely jumping over it. I love your last quote too, "I want my government to do what's necessary to protect us." Why not have door to door searches? If you truly want your government to do anything, then you shouldn't mind, right? 4th amendment, have you heard of it? Hey, I didn't write, I'd just prefer that my government follow it, that's all.

[EndZoneQB]

They already had shit in place before the patriot act that red flagged suspicious international activity. The patriot act allows the banks and the Fed's to monitor domestic financial activity between US citizens, a completely different animal. I'm not talking about investigating Habib sending money to Abul's Terrorist Training and Supplies in Syria, I'm talking about the investigation of US citizens for no other reason than a teller clicking a button while your waiting in line because he or she thinks you may be a terrorist. The idea of "don't do nuthing, don't get in trouble for nuthing" is ignorant and dangerous. You got to draw the lines on personal freedoms some where and you sound like you're okay with the Gov't completely jumping over it. I love your last quote too, "I want my government to do what's necessary to protect us." Why not have door to door searches? If you truly want your government to do anything, then you shouldn't mind, right? 4th amendment, have you heard of it? Hey, I didn't write, I'd just prefer that my government follow it, that's all.

A-f*cking-men.

This line will be the death of our freedoms.

[BisoninNWMN]

Give me a frickin break......

99.9999% of all Americans will never be affected by the PA one bit.

ANYONE doing suspect business or anything else should be looked at.

Damn right, I want my gov protecting me....if that means listening to conversations that "potential" terrorists are having, bank or financial dealings that "potential" terrorists are having, or firing a smart bomb off an unmanned drone into a terrorist camp.

Oh by the way bisonmike, I get checked by the border patrol up by the Canadian border when I am in my bee yards that are close to the border.......and you know what???.......I do not mind one bit. They know me know and honk and wave.......boy, my personal freedoms are being infringed upon.....whatever. I should call the ACLU.....:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[ndsubison1]

We have about a 1 in 80,000 chance of being attacked by a terrorist in this country. We have a better chance of drowning in a bath tub and about the same as being hit by an asteroid. Just saying. Maybe it sounds all good and dandy that the gov't is doing everything to protect us in the name of terrorism, but the terrorists are probably laughing at us for our overreactions

[sambini]

Be safe everyone++++

[02Bison]

From sobriety checkpoints to the patriot act....wow....

[DjKyRo]

From sobriety checkpoints to the patriot act....wow....

Like I said: Godwin's Law.

[02Bison]

Looks like they got six more idots off the road in Sargent and Ransom counties this weekend during alochol saturation patrols...

[MNLonghorn10]

Looks like they got six more idots off the road in Sargent and Ransom counties this weekend during alochol saturation patrols...

damn idots. when will they ever learn?

[A1pigskin]

When I fly on business I don't have any problem of TSA checking my stuff out. It's all part of making our country safe.

[bisonmike2]

When I fly on business I don't have any problem of TSA checking my stuff out. It's all part of making our country safe.

There's keeping the country safe then there's rummaging through grandma's panties for 2 hours looking for explosives that aren't there.

[TransAmBison]

There's keeping the country safe then there's rummaging thought grandma's panties for 2 hours looking for explosives that aren't there.
Just a matter of time...

[ndsubison1]

There's keeping the country safe then there's rummaging through grandma's panties for 2 hours looking for explosives that aren't there.

Yeah I always see them pulling aside old grannies to check. It's funny

[Tatanka]

There's keeping the country safe then there's rummaging through grandma's panties for 2 hours looking for explosives that aren't there.

I agree. Profiling is bad policy.

[Tatanka]

Here we go again....

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/287320/group/homepage/

[MNLonghorn10]

this is becoming weekly.

[BisonBabe]

If people would stop driving when they have had too much to drink this would not be necessary. Plan ahead when going out and have a designated driver or call a cab. Not too hard now is it.

[ndsubison1]

Looks like they need more $$$$$$$$$$$ again

[EndZoneQB]

If people would stop driving when they have had too much to drink this would not be necessary. Plan ahead when going out and have a designated driver or call a cab. Not too hard now is it.

Did you see last time they did this, they got like 2-3 drivers? How is this worth our money? It is not worth the price of overtime(if not overtime, lack of patrol elsewhere). Checkpoints will NOT stop drunk drivers, harsher penalties and less restrictions on drinking itself. Our culture is taught that drinking is forbidden until a ridiculous age so we learn no self control growing up. I digress, so /rant.

[BisonBabe]

Did you see last time they did this, they got like 2-3 drivers? How is this worth our money? It is not worth the price of overtime(if not overtime, lack of patrol elsewhere). Checkpoints will NOT stop drunk drivers, harsher penalties and less restrictions on drinking itself. Our culture is taught that drinking is forbidden until a ridiculous age so we learn no self control growing up. I digress, so /rant.

I think they get grant money to do the checkpoints.

Do I think it is $$ worth doing this? I agree harsher penalties for driving drunk are needed.

BTW I think we need to start taking the European stance on drinking and teach our youth it is not that big of a deal.

[EndZoneQB]

I think they get grant money to do the checkpoints.

Do I think it is $$ worth doing this? I agree harsher penalties for driving drunk are needed.

BTW I think we need to start taking the European stance on drinking and teach our youth it is not that big of a deal.


WE HAVE A WINNER! I agree 100%. My parents took that approach, I got to have wine with big family events once I was older, and my dad let me taste his beer when I was like 7. I hated the beer at the time, and never wanted to touch it again for a looonnnggg time. Looking back, it really filled the "desire" I had to drink while being safe with my parents. It wasn't anything special when someone would say lets drink, so I hardly did it. They always offered to give me a ride if I did indeed drinking, and always said we know we can't stop you, so we will make sure you do it responsibly. Once I turned 18, I could drink whenever we got together as a family(usually at the lake, or bbqing). The deal was I had to stay with them the whole night if I was drinking or I could not drink and go out with my friends.

Maybe not everyone responds to that sort of approach, but I have a feeling it would go a long way in changing things. There are plenty of examples around the world...even Canada.

[TbonZach]

WE HAVE A WINNER! I agree 100%. My parents took that approach, I got to have wine with big family events once I was older, and my dad let me taste his beer when I was like 7. I hated the beer at the time, and never wanted to touch it again for a looonnnggg time. Looking back, it really filled the "desire" I had to drink while being safe with my parents. It wasn't anything special when someone would say lets drink, so I hardly did it. They always offered to give me a ride if I did indeed drinking, and always said we know we can't stop you, so we will make sure you do it responsibly. Once I turned 18, I could drink whenever we got together as a family(usually at the lake, or bbqing). The deal was I had to stay with them the whole night if I was drinking or I could go out with my friends.

Maybe not everyone responds to that sort of approach, but I have a feeling it would go a long way in changing things. There are plenty of examples around the world...even Canada.

I wish everyone in the US did this.

[BisonBabe]

I have already planned out how to handle drinking with my kids. I know they will do it. I do not hide the alcohol in our house. They know that right now they do not need to have any (only have tequila) but will start giving them the chance to taste wine from time to time. Maybe some chokecherry vodka (pretty low alcohol content) but that can wait another year. I am trying to teach my kids that drinking is not a big deal. When they are old enough they will know if they do drink to call me for a ride no matter what time or where they are. Cause if they get pulled over they will spend a night or two in jail.

[bisonmike2]

WE HAVE A WINNER! I agree 100%. My parents took that approach, I got to have wine with big family events once I was older, and my dad let me taste his beer when I was like 7. I hated the beer at the time, and never wanted to touch it again for a looonnnggg time. Looking back, it really filled the "desire" I had to drink while being safe with my parents. It wasn't anything special when someone would say lets drink, so I hardly did it. They always offered to give me a ride if I did indeed drinking, and always said we know we can't stop you, so we will make sure you do it responsibly. Once I turned 18, I could drink whenever we got together as a family(usually at the lake, or bbqing). The deal was I had to stay with them the whole night if I was drinking or I could not drink and go out with my friends.

Maybe not everyone responds to that sort of approach, but I have a feeling it would go a long way in changing things. There are plenty of examples around the world...even Canada.

You're parents sound like they had the right idea. And unfortunately if they would have been caught doing this today, they'd probably be in jail for child abuse.

[TransAmBison]

You're parents sound like they had the right idea. And unfortunately if they would have been caught doing this today, they'd probably be in jail for child abuse.
I was going through family pics a while ago and saw a picture of me sitting in a highchair drinking a small glass of wine. This wasn't teh weak sauce either...and I had to have been somewhere between 2 and 3. Good times.

[EndZoneQB]

You're parents sound like they had the right idea. And unfortunately if they would have been caught doing this today, they'd probably be in jail for child abuse.

Yep, pretty much. That was when parents were also allowed to spank kids. You know what tho? That shiz worked the FIRST time. They merely had to threaten me after that happened. I respected the shit out of my dad's anger with me. Kids these days just need to grab the phone and the states knocking on the door.


I was going through family pics a while ago and saw a picture of me sitting in a highchair drinking a small glass of wine. This wasn't teh weak sauce either...and I had to have been somewhere between 2 and 3. Good times.

Lmao, thats awesome.

[TransAmBison]

Yep, pretty much. That was when parents were also allowed to spank kids. You know what tho? That shiz worked the FIRST time. They merely had to threaten me after that happened. I respected the shit out of my dad's anger with me. Kids these days just need to grab the phone and the states knocking on the door.

.
Yeah, the threat of a spanking was more than enough after getting one.

[Tatanka]

I had the benefit of getting my ass whooped at home AND at school. The nuns had no mercy. And what's worse, my parents made a point to tell my teachers that if they had to discipline me at school, I would get it again x 2 when I got home. (Dad was a teacher and didn't put up with any shit). Ahhh the good old days. Now teachers spend more time trying to deal with the ne'erdowells than they do actually teaching.

As usual, South Park has the solution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1ytqd4gqh8

[BisonBabe]

BTW In ND you can discipline your kids within reason. Spanking is allowed contrary to what some would want you to believe. It pays to know your rights as a parent.

[ndsubison1]

I had the benefit of getting my ass whooped at home AND at school. The nuns had no mercy. And what's worse, my parents made a point to tell my teachers that if they had to discipline me at school, I would get it again x 2 when I got home. (Dad was a teacher and didn't put up with any shit). Ahhh the good old days. Now teachers spend more time trying to deal with the ne'erdowells than they do actually teaching.

As usual, South Park has the solution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1ytqd4gqh8

Teachers cant even touch their students now days or else there's a lawsuit

[JackJD]

Teachers cant even touch their students now days or else there's a lawsuit

Bison Babe, two posts up, is correct.

ming01: I disagree with your statement. Personally, I think its a poor idea for teachers (my wife is a teacher) to hit students but there is no absolute rule that a teacher cannot administer a corporal punishment to a student. (You can research the law on that -- don't take my word for it.) There's a common misconception about a proliferation of lawsuits -- not borne out by the evidence and facts. However, its probably a healthy thing that people have some fear of lawsuits. It may make them carefully consider their actions.

I remember getting clobbered by a teacher -- he got the wrong kid. The guy next to me was the culprit but I was in the way. (In those days, we didn't even tell our parents about it.) If some teacher clobbered my kid and was wrong, I'd tear his head off.

[JSUBison]

Teachers cant even touch their students now days or else there's a lawsuit

Teachers still whoop ass here in the dirty south. Every so often a story shows up in the local fishwrap about some momma hollering that "her baby dint deserve no paddlin" and a lawsuit is filed. I never hear what happens to these lawsuits, I'm guessing they are dismissed.

[lakesbison]

I have FOX LA on my dish.

CAR PURSUIT been going on for 20 minutes.. hilarious. this guy is just messing with the patrol cars.

checkpoint that!!!!

[roadwarrior]

Five DUI arrests last night on South University.

[02Bison]

Good job law enforcement.

[02Bison]

I have FOX LA on my dish.

CAR PURSUIT been going on for 20 minutes.. hilarious. this guy is just messing with the patrol cars.

checkpoint that!!!!

I found a video of people you relate well with here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewrImymm7iA)

[56BISON73]

I found a video of people you relate well with here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewrImymm7iA)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etMlNW5w-50

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WBmrrRKg-c&feature=related

[BisoninNWMN]

If you drink too much have a friend take you home, or call a cab.

If people would follow this there would be no need for soberiety check point stops.

[sambini]

If you drink too much have a friend take you home, or call a cab.

If people would follow this there would be no need for soberiety check point stops.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[ndsubison1]

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/288261/group/homepage/

Saturation Patrols make a lot more sense then checkpoints IMO