🚀 go-pugleaf

Ken M. <pobox-dc@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Being lenient with drunk drivers doesn't create solutions either. I've
> heard that in Prince George's County, Maryland, the officers go to the
> bars around 1:00 am, and place colored stickers on the back bumpers of
> cars that are sitting outside of bars, then later, they can be easily
> spotted. I  think it's a great idea, it makes the officer's job easier.

Ah, yes, and with this wonderful implied consent we've got, and the bogus
breath tests, we can send _all_ of them to jail! Even the DDs who are
being responsible!

What a great solution!

> Maybe if you could take a "Ride-A-Long" with a state trooper in your
> area, on a Friday or Saturday night, and see the *destruction* ONE drunk
> driver can cause, you might be more concerned about the problem -- and
> solution.
> 
> Or, do you just enjoy bashing authority figures?

'public safety' is never a good reason for the abrogation of the
individual's rights. Else, why don't we institute house to house searches
for 'contraband'? Maybe we can even cook up some sort of 'implied consent'
-- they built/bought a house in our state, they _want_ to be searched!

What happened to good, old fashioned police work? Ya know, patrolling the
streets, pulling people over for reckless driving, weaving out of their
lane, etc., and busting the people there who are obviously intoxicated?

--
-- John E. Jasen (jjasen1@umbc.edu)
-- You can have it: right; cheap; now. Pick any two.