Fox:Man screams "What country is this!" while the pigs strap him down and draw blood!

[Pogo]

(what is "Zone 3"? Anybody?)

Zone 3 is explained in the second paragraph covering the 4 ‘zones’ and level of enforcement in each:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/announcements-and-feedback/277648-usmb-rules-and-guidelines.html

We Now are operating the site under 4 different zones. General site rules apply except where individual zone rules take precedent.
• "Zone 1": Clean Debate Zone (CDZ) / Introduce Yourself (Welcome Threads): Civil discourse is the focus here, regardless of topic matter. Constructive criticism and debate is the tone. No negative repping. No insulting, name calling, or putting down other posters. Consider it a lesson in Civics.
• "Zone 2": Political Forum / Israel and Palestine Forum / Race Relations/Racism Forum / Religion & Ethics Forum: Baiting and polarizing OP's (Opening Posts), and thread titles risk the thread either being moved or trashed. Keep it relevant, choose wisely. Each post must contain content relevant to the thread subject, in addition to any flame. No trolling. No hit and run flames. No hijacking threads.
• "Zone 3": Main Forums: Normal Site Wide Rules apply. This includes PM's (Private Messaging), Visitor Messages, Reputation Comments, and Publicly Viewed Social Groups (Though Lightly Moderated).
• "Zone 4": Flame Zone/Badlands/Rubber Room: The least moderated forum on the site. Not viewed by non members. Site wide rules still apply, but are more loosely enforced. Extreme flaming threads and posts belong here. If the OP (Opening Post) of Your Thread is focused on Mocking or Ridicule, It belongs here.

Basically, NOT the flame zone but not as restrictive as where we started, politics.

And politics being restricted? Are they talking about the same board!

Thanks FAQ2. I don't know where they keep this but I've never seen that before. Maybe they should bump it up to visibility somewhere. Good stuff to know. Still not sure what they mean by "This includes PM's [sic]"

Back to topic, yanno FAQ2, if I get pulled over for DUI (and it would be a bullshit stop since I don't drink) I'm just gonna say your screen name to them over and over.

Sound like a good plan?

 

[Trajan]

The people of Georgia need to do something about this. If they don't, it's because they don't care enough about it.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

To put it in a way close to this conversation, saying, 'You do not have a right to jeopardize others by texting and driving' is not the same as saying, 'You do have a right to jeopardize others by drinking and driving'.

This is what you are all failing to realize.

YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO JEOPARDIZE ANYONE WHILE DRIVING.

That is it. That is the only law you need.

For instances in which no person can said to be jeopardized, you have one more law that is required.

YOU CANNOT DRIVE RECKLESSLY.

All that needs to be done is describe which actions are considered "reckless driving."


Now if you want to collect additional evidence, such as: Was this person drunk? Sure that's fine.

If they accept the test and pass, good. The jury will let him walk.
If they accept the test and fail, but consent to additional tests to prove they weren't drunk (maybe they just used Listerine). Good, the jury will let him walk.
If they accept and consent to all tests and fail, good, the Jury will convict him.
If they REFUSE the tests, good, the Jury will convict him (assuming there is evidence of reckless driving)

Congratulations, we have devised a very peaceful method of convicting drunk drivers that respects the liberties of the individual and the integrity of the State.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The people of Georgia need to do something about this. If they don't, it's because they don't care enough about it.

Hey, if it's lawful precedent, like the NSA spying on us is, perhaps the government on the federal end should lead by example!

 

[Trajan]

(what is "Zone 3"? Anybody?)

Zone 3 is explained in the second paragraph covering the 4 ‘zones’ and level of enforcement in each:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/announcements-and-feedback/277648-usmb-rules-and-guidelines.html

We Now are operating the site under 4 different zones. General site rules apply except where individual zone rules take precedent.
• "Zone 1": Clean Debate Zone (CDZ) / Introduce Yourself (Welcome Threads): Civil discourse is the focus here, regardless of topic matter. Constructive criticism and debate is the tone. No negative repping. No insulting, name calling, or putting down other posters. Consider it a lesson in Civics.
• "Zone 2": Political Forum / Israel and Palestine Forum / Race Relations/Racism Forum / Religion & Ethics Forum: Baiting and polarizing OP's (Opening Posts), and thread titles risk the thread either being moved or trashed. Keep it relevant, choose wisely. Each post must contain content relevant to the thread subject, in addition to any flame. No trolling. No hit and run flames. No hijacking threads.
• "Zone 3": Main Forums: Normal Site Wide Rules apply. This includes PM's (Private Messaging), Visitor Messages, Reputation Comments, and Publicly Viewed Social Groups (Though Lightly Moderated).
• "Zone 4": Flame Zone/Badlands/Rubber Room: The least moderated forum on the site. Not viewed by non members. Site wide rules still apply, but are more loosely enforced. Extreme flaming threads and posts belong here. If the OP (Opening Post) of Your Thread is focused on Mocking or Ridicule, It belongs here.

Basically, NOT the flame zone but not as restrictive as where we started, politics.

And politics being restricted? Are they talking about the same board!

Thanks FAQ2. I don't know where they keep this but I've never seen that before. Maybe they should bump it up to visibility somewhere. Good stuff to know. Still not sure what they mean by "This includes PM's [sic]"

Back to topic, yanno FAQ2, if I get pulled over for DUI (and it would be a bullshit stop since I don't drink) I'm just gonna say your name to them over and over.

Sound like a good plan?

they keep it right here-

http://www.usmessageboard.com/announcements-and-feedback/277648-usmb-rules-and-guidelines.html


where else would it be kept?




anyway-

I recall when I was posted in Germany, being told if the Polizei pull you over for suspicion of DUI/DWI they may want a blood sample, give it to them or they will take it....I don't have an issue with it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

2nd, you don't make the rules. So write your legislator and suggest what s/he should do about this in writing the rules.

 

[Pogo]

Zone 3 is explained in the second paragraph covering the 4 ‘zones’ and level of enforcement in each:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/announcements-and-feedback/277648-usmb-rules-and-guidelines.html

Basically, NOT the flame zone but not as restrictive as where we started, politics.

And politics being restricted? Are they talking about the same board!

Thanks FAQ2. I don't know where they keep this but I've never seen that before. Maybe they should bump it up to visibility somewhere. Good stuff to know. Still not sure what they mean by "This includes PM's [sic]"

Back to topic, yanno FAQ2, if I get pulled over for DUI (and it would be a bullshit stop since I don't drink) I'm just gonna say your name to them over and over.

Sound like a good plan?

they keep it right here-

http://www.usmessageboard.com/announcements-and-feedback/277648-usmb-rules-and-guidelines.html


where else would it be kept?

Yeah I know there's a link to it; it's just not prominent enough for guidelines that we need every post every day. Now that I search around I found it and realize I did see that when I first signed up (there was prolly a direct link in the signup process) but after that it's in practical terms obscure. Ideally it could be a "sticky-link" atop every thread or every CP list so as to be easier to find-- based on how the site's actually used. Similarly I've always thought the CDZ should have some way of setting itself apart (maybe a different style, or background a slightly different colour) as an immediate reminder that you're in the CDZ since it looks exactly like any other zone. Same reason we don't make our money denominations all the same size and colour. Oh wait...

(/offtopic)

I have to say, before this topic came up I didn't know we were literally at this level in the real world. Can't say I'm surprised but it's sobering to see it in action in the video. We live in a dark day when this shit goes on. Whether it's Georgia or Germany.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

2nd, you don't make the rules. So write your legislator and suggest what s/he should do about this in writing the rules.

I don't have the right to voice my opinion on the internet?

For all those who do not know what he's referencing, I wrote the following:

This is what you are all failing to realize.

YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO JEOPARDIZE ANYONE WHILE DRIVING.

That is it. That is the only law you need.

For instances in which no person can said to be jeopardized, you have one more law that is required.

YOU CANNOT DRIVE RECKLESSLY.

All that needs to be done is describe which actions are considered "reckless driving."


Now if you want to collect additional evidence, such as: Was this person drunk? Sure that's fine.

If they accept the test and pass, good. The jury will let him walk.
If they accept the test and fail, but consent to additional tests to prove they weren't drunk (maybe they just used Listerine). Good, the jury will let him walk.
If they accept and consent to all tests and fail, good, the Jury will convict him.
If they REFUSE the tests, good, the Jury will convict him (assuming there is evidence of reckless driving)

Congratulations, we have devised a very peaceful method of convicting drunk drivers that respects the liberties of the individual and the integrity of the State.

 

[Kondor3]

Will not take a breath or blood test? Fine. Impound, confiscate, and sell the car for the state transportation fund.

One cannot be deprived of their property without due process. He must be convicted of a crime in order to seize his car. His car belongs to him, not to the state. His license governs if he can drive the car, but not if he can own the car.

True.

The State can IMPOUND the car without further due process (as an interim measure) but it cannot CONFISCATE AND SELL the car... and I think (not sure) it works that way in all (or almost all?) jurisdictions nationwide.

I also seem to remember that DRUG DEALERS can have THEIR cars confiscated and sold, once they've been sentenced, and, of course, the car remains in the pound - irretrievable - until that time.

I do not know whether someone in mere POSSESSION of drugs - in user-level quantities - can also have their cars confiscated and sold upon conviction. I hope not, but I wouldn't bet much money on that hope.

If POSSESSION is ALSO a valid cause for confiscation and sale (upon conviction), then, it is probably only a hop-skip-and-a-jump from there to confiscating and selling the cars of DUI perpetrators as well, upon conviction.

I would be surprised to learn that this is already happening someplace within the US but not so surprised as to render the report completely incredible.

 

[Pogo]

Will not take a breath or blood test? Fine. Impound, confiscate, and sell the car for the state transportation fund.

One cannot be deprived of their property without due process. He must be convicted of a crime in order to seize his car. His car belongs to him, not to the state. His license governs if he can drive the car, but not if he can own the car.

True.

The State can IMPOUND the car without further due process (as an interim measure) but it cannot CONFISCATE AND SELL the car... and I think (not sure) it works that way in all (or almost all?) jurisdictions nationwide.

I also seem to remember that DRUG DEALERS can have THEIR cars confiscated and sold, once they've been sentenced, and, of course, the car remains in the pound - irretrievable - until that time.

I do not know whether someone in mere POSSESSION of drugs - in user-level quantities - can also have their cars confiscated and sold upon conviction. I hope not, but I wouldn't bet much money on that hope.

If POSSESSION is ALSO a valid cause for confiscation and sale (upon conviction), then, it is probably only a hop-skip-and-a-jump from there to confiscating and selling the cars of DUI perpetrators as well, upon conviction.

I would be surprised to learn that this is already happening someplace within the US but not so surprised as to render the report completely incredible.

And that (the confiscation of property) is complete bullshit law and always was. It's the same thing the Church used to do with its Inquisition victims. Personal property, unless it's sold to pay some fine, should be off limits to government hands, period.

 

[Jarlaxle]

"...Yer PROJECTING again, junior!"

1. That's the second time you've used that 'projecting' response - on different posters on the same thread - within 24 hours - you really DO have to get some newer and snappier comeback material.

If you think you are worth the effort to do so, you are having delusions of adequacy.

2. I see that you failed to engage on the particulars of your Constitutional objection; consequently, I'm left with little choice but to speculate that you're out of your depth there; even from a layman's perspective. Funny, if true, given your earlier rambling.

Are you STONED or are you just a FUCKING MORON?

 

[FA_Q2]

Thanks FAQ2. I don't know where they keep this but I've never seen that before. Maybe they should bump it up to visibility somewhere. Good stuff to know. Still not sure what they mean by "This includes PM's [sic]"

Back to topic, yanno FAQ2, if I get pulled over for DUI (and it would be a bullshit stop since I don't drink) I'm just gonna say your screen name to them over and over.

Sound like a good plan?

LOL - No... VERY bad plan. If you do that, we might not see you posting here for quite awhile. Just trust me on that.

Similarly I've always thought the CDZ should have some way of setting itself apart (maybe a different style, or background a slightly different colour) as an immediate reminder that you're in the CDZ since it looks exactly like any other zone.

Like pink maybe?

Oh no I didn’t! Yes. Yes I did.

I have to say, before this topic came up I didn't know we were literally at this level in the real world. Can't say I'm surprised but it's sobering to see it in action in the video. We live in a dark day when this shit goes on. Whether it's Georgia or Germany.

Yes we do. It is a sticky situation but here on this board we already have a better solution from second and another from an earlier poster. It makes you wonder why they have enacted such laws when there are far simpler and better ways of doing these things.

Drunk on their own power and authority.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Will not take a breath or blood test?

Fine.

Impound, confiscate, and sell the car for the state transportation fund.

Sounds good, on a 'gut' or visceral level, but somebody's gonna scream 'coercion' in connection with testing, and they might be right...

No problem...JakeTheFake is and has always been an authoritarian!

 

[Jarlaxle]

(what is "Zone 3"? Anybody?)

Uhh...a place between Zone 2 and Zone 4?

*ducks and runs*

 

[Jarlaxle]

Will not take a breath or blood test?

Fine.

Impound, confiscate, and sell the car for the state transportation fund.

One cannot be deprived of their property without due process. He must be convicted of a crime in order to seize his car. His car belongs to him, not to the state. His license governs if he can drive the car, but not if he can own the car.

That is completely false and has not been the case for 30+ years. people have things seized without conviction (often, without even being CHARGED) all the time.

 

[Kondor3]

"...If you think you are worth the effort to do so, you are having delusions of adequacy..."

Yes, yes, yes... very nice... I'm sure... next slide, please.

"...Are you STONED or are you just a FUCKING MORON?"

If you able to demonstrate where (between the time I invited you to do so, and the time you posted this) you responded to me in a fashion that detailed your Constitutional Objection(s), then, by all means, do so; at which time, I will concede the point in the interim.

Alternatively, should you be unable to demonstrate a response detailing your Constitutional Objection(s), then, it may prove justified to speculate that - of the two of us - I was not the one who should be facing charges of being stoned or being a fucking moron, after all.

You may proceed at your discretion to address this challenge-to-demonstrate.

You may proceed to Take the Test at your discretion.

You may, of course, refuse to Take the Test, but that would have the same effect as failing the test.

Should you fail the test - i.e., be found to have a Blood Moron Content of 8.0 or above - or should you be judged in that fashion for refusing to take the test...

The State may be obliged to impound your Personal Computer and sentence you to three months of classes designed to correct mental deficiencies and aberrations and aid you in learning How-To-Control-Your-Online-Tourettes-Syndrome.

 

[Kondor3]

"...And that (the confiscation of property) is complete bullshit law and always was..."

Yeah, I've always thought that 'the government' was full of $hit for doing that, myself.

Then again, we've had, what? - 20 or 30 years since those laws became fairly widespread, in the wake of the Druggie Decades (1960s and 1970s), and they're still on the books.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the same idea is being contemplated with respect to DUI.

 

[Pogo]

"...And that (the confiscation of property) is complete bullshit law and always was..."

Yeah, I've always thought that 'the government' was full of $hit for doing that, myself.

Then again, we've had, what? - 20 or 30 years since those laws became fairly widespread, in the wake of the Druggie Decades (1960s and 1970s), and they're still on the books.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the same idea is being contemplated with respect to DUI.

Yeah they have, and they have about the same legitimate basis as the reefer madness laws.

Btw ....

next slide, please

It's official; I get that phrase in trade for "Gullible's Travels" Nice. Kind of a "Kondor, gentler notion".

 

[Kondor3]

"...Btw ....

next slide, please

It's official; I get that phrase in trade for "Gullible's Travels" Nice..."

Done. Same deal. Public domain.

"...Kind of a "Kondor, gentler notion".

Ouch. That was so bad, I laughed. My kids call those 'Dad jokes'...

 

[JakeStarkey]

"...And that (the confiscation of property) is complete bullshit law and always was..."

Yeah, I've always thought that 'the government' was full of $hit for doing that, myself.

Then again, we've had, what? - 20 or 30 years since those laws became fairly widespread, in the wake of the Druggie Decades (1960s and 1970s), and they're still on the books.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the same idea is being contemplated with respect to DUI.

Sensible that anyone who uses autos or whatever to endanger the public welfare, the public safety of others, can have that property condemned.

I would approve a legislature that automatically confiscated the vehicle of a person convicted of DUI.

The safety rate would sky rocket.

No one has the freedom of liberty to endanger others in the public realm.