They also deemed that cops can literally kick your door in and murder your whole family if you resist and the correct way to stop illegal police entry is to sue them in civil court. Just because the Supreme Court makes a ruling doesn't mean it's factually and logically correct. Any pig kicks my door in in the middle of the night is going to get a bullet to the face, not a request to show up in court so I can sue them. A ruling that is factually and logically incorrect should be resisted at every opportunity that presents itself. By force if necessary. Maybe you should get a damn clue. Your uninformed, uneducated personal opinion is irrelevant.
I really hate how we've come to live in a police state, where our 4th amendment rights are meaningless, and our 1st amendment right to free speech (telling others about a potential 4th amendment violation - to protect others rights) can so easily be trampled on by a senator.
I despise drunk driving, but the fact of the matter is, many of the laws passed through the lobbying of MADD are unconstitutional. Forced to consent to a search without a warrant without probable cause under coercion and threat of losing your drivers license - whether you're sober or not.
The problem with checkpoints is they are fishing expeditions. Anything the police can use to say you might be drunk, even refusing to answer questions which you legally may refuse to answer (5th amendment anyone?), gives them the ability (legal or not) to search your car, phone, laptop, etc. Next thing you know you might have been downtown when a bank was being robbed in the area based on your location data. That gives them probable cause to search your whole life -and there are so many laws, you know somewhere they are going to find something to charge you with no matter how petty.
This is how the police state works, turn us into scared little babies. They will probably win.
Come one. Slippery slope is a weak debating technique. Who cares?
I"m not surprised by Apple's decision either. The US Government hasn't been "by the people for the people" in a long time.
Corporations and States that kowtow the the Feds in some cases can get benefits "down the road".
Roughly 618 thousand men and women died during the Civil War to uphold freedoms that today are so "cavalierly" diluted.
Today's DUI checkpoint is tantamount to a British soldier occupying the house of a colonist and searching through private property. If you have a warrant I'm cool with it but a checkpoint assumes guilt before innocence.
The drunk driver stuff is the kind of emotive BS that Americans fall for. Here in Washington the liquor is controlled by the state so they are culpable for every drink driver on the road. They profit in some manner.
The US is going to hell in a handbasket because Apple rejects apps that use non-public information to create DUI checkpoints?
Sure. Personally, I think the country's slide started when they govt decided against the will of the people to allow women to vote. Sheesh.
"Apps which contain DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies, or encourage and enable drunk driving, will be rejected."
Don't local laws require police to notify the public about checkpoints in the first place? So apps that simply publish what the police have already made public should be ok?
As for checkpoints "that are not published", wouldn't the police be violating the law themselves? Then we would have far greater issues besides the apps.
The thing I have never understood about USA and some Americans is the way they will argue for these "rights" and "amendments" and uphold their consitution no matter what.
Do you honestly care so much that people have these "freedoms" that you are willing to assist people who drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs to endanger the lives of others?
The same goes for the whole texting while driving thing. What is it about Americans and road safety that doesn't click?
What use is your bill of rights when you are dead?
Those who would trade fundamental liberties for a little security deserve neither.
I really hate how we've come to live in a police state, where our 4th amendment rights are meaningless, and our 1st amendment right to free speech (telling others about a potential 4th amendment violation - to protect others rights) can so easily be trampled on by a senator.
I despise drunk driving, but the fact of the matter is, many of the laws passed through the lobbying of MADD are unconstitutional. Forced to consent to a search without a warrant without probable cause under coercion and threat of losing your drivers license - whether you're sober or not.
The problem with checkpoints is they are fishing expeditions. Anything the police can use to say you might be drunk, even refusing to answer questions which you legally may refuse to answer (5th amendment anyone?), gives them the ability (legal or not) to search your car, phone, laptop, etc. Next thing you know you might have been downtown when a bank was being robbed in the area based on your location data. That gives them probable cause to search your whole life -and there are so many laws, you know somewhere they are going to find something to charge you with no matter how petty.
This is how the police state works, turn us into scared little babies. They will probably win.
revilre, Do you have any thoughts on American multinational corporations? They seem to be in lock step with the Feds. Corp. I've worked for seem to be fascist. They've got rules for everything and often change policy on a whim to suit needs of the moment. They lie, cheat, and treat the workers that point out management mistakes and worker rights violations like crazed leapers. They isolate, marginalize, and ostracize them. Management works together to suppress workers, falsify data, punish employees unfairly, bully and coerce workers, etc and etc. As long as the sharecropper plays the game and looks the other way while these corporatists do their "drive-by shootings" a wage slave can expect feed and water. That is until their worn out or awake from their slumber. It sounds to much like the Matrix.
App Store is not a democracy and it is not an outlet for free speech. It is a privately run entity created by and run by a U.S. corporation. They can accept/reject anything they want. It is their right. We can buy or not buy iPhones. That is our right.
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.
DUI checkpoints are direct violation of Constitutional Amdendment IV
I don't think that DUI checkpoints are violation of the Fourth Amendment. You can consent to give up a right, in this case the right to privacy(ish). By driving on the road, you are consenting to the searches at the DUI checkpoints. Its like how you can consent to let a police officer search your house even though he may not have probable cause.
I don't think that DUI checkpoints are violation of the Fourth Amendment. You can consent to give up a right, in this case the right to privacy(ish). By driving on the road, you are consenting to the searches at the DUI checkpoints. Its like how you can consent to let a police officer search your house even though he may not have probable cause.
Driving down the road and coming up to a checkpoint isn't consent to a search, it's actually a forced search under threat of punishment for no wrongdoing. Refuse to talk to a cop at a checkpoint or simply try and drive off after declining to answer any questions related to that stop will get you shot by the police, your license revoked or charged with fleeing the scene among many other things they could charge you with. That doesn't even account for the reputation you'll get for leaving a checkpoint legally and logically after having done nothing wrong. What would you think about a person if you heard they drove right through a checkpoint without stopping? Yeah, thought so.
You have no choice but to be harassed at these checkpoints, they set up these illegal checkpoints without reasonable suspicion or oath and affidavit from someone witnessing a crime taking/having taken place for every single car and person passing through them. It's a violation of the 4th Amendment in a way that couldn't be more cut and dried, no matter what the Supreme Court rules. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that cops can legally kick your door in and commit murder without a chance of penalty or criminal charges, a DUI checkpoint isn't the same anymore. We used to have some semblance of perspective and respect for the individual to live his life according to how he see fit, now you can be murdered by a cop for defending yourself and your family because you were asleep in your bed when they kicked the door in without cause, because of a simple paperwork mistake, or without a warrant. Neither are allowed under the 4th Amendment because they are both illegal according to that crucial part of the Bill of Rights, and every single person in this country needs to refuse an illegal search at a DUI checkpoint and violently resist illegal entry into their homes by corrupt and stupid cops.
This must be challenged again and again until it becomes a horrific thought to even question it's meaning and applicability.
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.
DUI checkpoints are direct violation of Constitutional Amdendment IV
App Store is not a democracy and it is not an outlet for free speech. It is a privately run entity created by and run by a U.S. corporation. They can accept/reject anything they want. It is their right. We can buy or not buy iPhones. That is our right.
It's not so much that Apple has decided to remove them, it's the fear mongering and bullshit reasons that this even got the spotlight to begin with. I could care less that Apple has restricted the rules on what DUI apps can use as a source of information, what I don't like is lying politicians that railroad legislation through like the Patriot Act and then feign like this is some dangerous piece of information in the wrong hands. Cause we all know the US Government, it's agencies and it's corporate financiers are so concerned with public safety.
Then you are simply blind to reality. These road stops are highly intrusive and as many have already indicated nothing more than a way to harass people.
Quote:
It's completely reasonable for Apple to have rules against apps that find ways to circumvent the law.
It has nothing to do with circuventing the law. There is no law that requires you to navigate through a DWI check point.
Quote:
That's what an app like this does, it allows people to effectively bypass the law. If people don't like it they should work to change the law, and DUI checkpoints are legal.
They are only legal in the sense that the Supreme Court has turned a blind eye towards our freedoms.
Quote:
4th Amendment right arguments are debatable here.
No they aren't. The 4th amendment is very important with respect to your security as a person. The erosion we are seeing with respect to this issue if frightening, today it isn't uncommon for cops to get warrants on flimsy evidence and then break into a home and shoot everybody. These incidence are increasing at an alarming rate and simply aren't justified. The courts have simply lost their capacity to be a reasonable check on police powers.
Quote:
Don't conflate your actual 4th amendment rights with a responsible society that is trying to keep people safe on the roads.
The way to deal with the safety issue is simple go after the drunk drivers. It is really a crime that deserves capital punishment. The problem is we have a society that is overly permissive with respect to drunk driving. If you have ever served on a jury where drunk driving was being contested you would know what I'm talking about.
In a nut shell the problem with these road blocks is that they punish the whole community without justification for an issue easily dealt with in other ways.
Let's see, Reid endorsed a spending bill to build a bridge between Nevada and Arizona that would make land he owned more valuable. Schumer called a flight attendant on a US Airways flight from New York to D.C. a "bitch" because she asked him to comply with federal regulations and turn off his cell phone.
Two out of four ain't bad I guess.
All seriousness aside, shouldn't these folks be doing something worthwhile with the taxpayers money like, oh, balancing the budget?
TERM LIMITS! AND NO PENSION!! That will ensure the steady turnover in the halls of power of BOTH PARTIES where new hires have that "fire in the belly" to do good, like work together on say, balancing the budget, versus today, where we have 20, 30 year creeps that have the mentality that it is all about them! That is why I do not call them Representatives or Senators... to me, they are affectionately known as "PIece of Shit"! When they earn my respect, then I might show them some! \
They need to ban the Police Scanner apps too. Criminals monitor them so they can make a clean getaway.
You may think that is funny but they have done just that in NY. It is now against the law to drive with a radio in your car that can tune into police frequencies. That is total stupid because such scanners can be very useful to drivers and actually make driving safer. Not to mention it direct attacks ones ability to keep your self informed about governmental activities.
I'm deeply sadden by Apple move as it is completely ballless and directly aids the repressive direction our government is going in.
Then you are simply blind to reality. These road stops are highly intrusive and as many have already indicated nothing more than a way to harass people.
Prove it. All I see lots of tinfoil.
Quote:
It has nothing to do with circuventing the law. There is no law that requires you to navigate through a DWI check point.
What? That makes no sense. You're just twisting my words around and misunderstanding/confusing what I said?
Quote:
They are only legal in the sense that the Supreme Court has turned a blind eye towards our freedoms.
No, they are legal as in under the law legal.
Quote:
No they aren't. The 4th amendment is very important with respect to your security as a person. The erosion we are seeing with respect to this issue if frightening, today it isn't uncommon for cops to get warrants on flimsy evidence and then break into a home and shoot everybody. These incidence are increasing at an alarming rate and simply aren't justified. The courts have simply lost their capacity to be a reasonable check on police powers.
Yeah those sorts of things have happened, but that's not at all the same as a DUI checkpoint. Slippery slope arguments are one straw away from a straw man.
Quote:
The way to deal with the safety issue is simple go after the drunk drivers. It is really a crime that deserves capital punishment. The problem is we have a society that is overly permissive with respect to drunk driving. If you have ever served on a jury where drunk driving was being contested you would know what I'm talking about.
Fascinating. What specifically are you proposing then? How would you go after a drunk driver if not a DUI checkpoint?
Quote:
In a nut shell the problem with these road blocks is that they punish the whole community without justification for an issue easily dealt with in other ways.
Or they keep public roadways safe and citizens free from harm in areas where lots of partying is going on and drunk driving is likely.
All the applications do is publish publicly available information. The Supreme Court has held that it is unreasonable to have DUI checkpoints without publishing the information first thereby removing a persons' reasonable expectation of privacy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"Apps which contain DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies, or encourage and enable drunk driving, will be rejected."
I don't understand the problem. If all the apps do is publish publicly available information and don't encourage or enable drunk driving, then they're still permissible under the revised terms of the App Store.
I don't think that DUI checkpoints are violation of the Fourth Amendment. You can consent to give up a right, in this case the right to privacy(ish). By driving on the road, you are consenting to the searches at the DUI checkpoints.
Your comment is ludicrous. No citizen forfeits their rights simply by driving on a PUBLIC thoroughfare, nor is the right in question one of privacy but of unreasonable search and seizure.
You don't understand what a strawman is. That's when you respond to an argument or statement that wasn't actually made. The exact statement I was responding to was "Personally, I'm glad for anything that saves lives." (My emphasis.)
Literally anything? My question about outlawing cars (statistically the least safe way to travel, btw) was not a strawman but a rhetorical device used to show the absurdity of such a sweeping statement and how such a pollyanna view can lead to insane ideas about how to keep us all safe from ourselves.
Forced to consent to a search without a warrant without probable cause under coercion and threat of losing your drivers license - whether you're sober or not.
Reasonable cause is used all the time to pull folks over to test them. There's no warrant but it is upheld if they fail the tests. And if they refuse to take them they can be arrested over it.
As for the checkpoints, the reason why some states require the publication is because of the notion that driving through that area is your consent to be 'searched' (in the sense of the typical DUI tests). But you can't refuse consent via driving a different way if you don't know the location of the checkpoint. And the apps that only give out that police provided info are in the clear under the new guidelines.
Comments
They also deemed that cops can literally kick your door in and murder your whole family if you resist and the correct way to stop illegal police entry is to sue them in civil court. Just because the Supreme Court makes a ruling doesn't mean it's factually and logically correct. Any pig kicks my door in in the middle of the night is going to get a bullet to the face, not a request to show up in court so I can sue them. A ruling that is factually and logically incorrect should be resisted at every opportunity that presents itself. By force if necessary. Maybe you should get a damn clue. Your uninformed, uneducated personal opinion is irrelevant.
+++10!
Damn right!
Papers please?
I really hate how we've come to live in a police state, where our 4th amendment rights are meaningless, and our 1st amendment right to free speech (telling others about a potential 4th amendment violation - to protect others rights) can so easily be trampled on by a senator.
I despise drunk driving, but the fact of the matter is, many of the laws passed through the lobbying of MADD are unconstitutional. Forced to consent to a search without a warrant without probable cause under coercion and threat of losing your drivers license - whether you're sober or not.
The problem with checkpoints is they are fishing expeditions. Anything the police can use to say you might be drunk, even refusing to answer questions which you legally may refuse to answer (5th amendment anyone?), gives them the ability (legal or not) to search your car, phone, laptop, etc. Next thing you know you might have been downtown when a bank was being robbed in the area based on your location data. That gives them probable cause to search your whole life -and there are so many laws, you know somewhere they are going to find something to charge you with no matter how petty.
This is how the police state works, turn us into scared little babies. They will probably win.
Come one. Slippery slope is a weak debating technique. Who cares?
I"m not surprised by Apple's decision either. The US Government hasn't been "by the people for the people" in a long time.
Corporations and States that kowtow the the Feds in some cases can get benefits "down the road".
Roughly 618 thousand men and women died during the Civil War to uphold freedoms that today are so "cavalierly" diluted.
Today's DUI checkpoint is tantamount to a British soldier occupying the house of a colonist and searching through private property. If you have a warrant I'm cool with it but a checkpoint assumes guilt before innocence.
The drunk driver stuff is the kind of emotive BS that Americans fall for. Here in Washington the liquor is controlled by the state so they are culpable for every drink driver on the road. They profit in some manner.
The US is going to hell in a handbasket because Apple rejects apps that use non-public information to create DUI checkpoints?
Sure. Personally, I think the country's slide started when they govt decided against the will of the people to allow women to vote. Sheesh.
"Apps which contain DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies, or encourage and enable drunk driving, will be rejected."
Don't local laws require police to notify the public about checkpoints in the first place? So apps that simply publish what the police have already made public should be ok?
As for checkpoints "that are not published", wouldn't the police be violating the law themselves? Then we would have far greater issues besides the apps.
The thing I have never understood about USA and some Americans is the way they will argue for these "rights" and "amendments" and uphold their consitution no matter what.
Do you honestly care so much that people have these "freedoms" that you are willing to assist people who drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs to endanger the lives of others?
The same goes for the whole texting while driving thing. What is it about Americans and road safety that doesn't click?
What use is your bill of rights when you are dead?
Those who would trade fundamental liberties for a little security deserve neither.
Papers please?
I really hate how we've come to live in a police state, where our 4th amendment rights are meaningless, and our 1st amendment right to free speech (telling others about a potential 4th amendment violation - to protect others rights) can so easily be trampled on by a senator.
I despise drunk driving, but the fact of the matter is, many of the laws passed through the lobbying of MADD are unconstitutional. Forced to consent to a search without a warrant without probable cause under coercion and threat of losing your drivers license - whether you're sober or not.
The problem with checkpoints is they are fishing expeditions. Anything the police can use to say you might be drunk, even refusing to answer questions which you legally may refuse to answer (5th amendment anyone?), gives them the ability (legal or not) to search your car, phone, laptop, etc. Next thing you know you might have been downtown when a bank was being robbed in the area based on your location data. That gives them probable cause to search your whole life -and there are so many laws, you know somewhere they are going to find something to charge you with no matter how petty.
This is how the police state works, turn us into scared little babies. They will probably win.
revilre, Do you have any thoughts on American multinational corporations? They seem to be in lock step with the Feds. Corp. I've worked for seem to be fascist. They've got rules for everything and often change policy on a whim to suit needs of the moment. They lie, cheat, and treat the workers that point out management mistakes and worker rights violations like crazed leapers. They isolate, marginalize, and ostracize them. Management works together to suppress workers, falsify data, punish employees unfairly, bully and coerce workers, etc and etc. As long as the sharecropper plays the game and looks the other way while these corporatists do their "drive-by shootings" a wage slave can expect feed and water. That is until their worn out or awake from their slumber. It sounds to much like the Matrix.
The US is going to hell in a handbasket because Apple rejects apps that use non-public information to create DUI checkpoints?
Since when is something that happens on a public street "non-public" information?
Amendment IV
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.
DUI checkpoints are direct violation of Constitutional Amdendment IV
I don't think that DUI checkpoints are violation of the Fourth Amendment. You can consent to give up a right, in this case the right to privacy(ish). By driving on the road, you are consenting to the searches at the DUI checkpoints. Its like how you can consent to let a police officer search your house even though he may not have probable cause.
I don't think that DUI checkpoints are violation of the Fourth Amendment. You can consent to give up a right, in this case the right to privacy(ish). By driving on the road, you are consenting to the searches at the DUI checkpoints. Its like how you can consent to let a police officer search your house even though he may not have probable cause.
Driving down the road and coming up to a checkpoint isn't consent to a search, it's actually a forced search under threat of punishment for no wrongdoing. Refuse to talk to a cop at a checkpoint or simply try and drive off after declining to answer any questions related to that stop will get you shot by the police, your license revoked or charged with fleeing the scene among many other things they could charge you with. That doesn't even account for the reputation you'll get for leaving a checkpoint legally and logically after having done nothing wrong. What would you think about a person if you heard they drove right through a checkpoint without stopping? Yeah, thought so.
You have no choice but to be harassed at these checkpoints, they set up these illegal checkpoints without reasonable suspicion or oath and affidavit from someone witnessing a crime taking/having taken place for every single car and person passing through them. It's a violation of the 4th Amendment in a way that couldn't be more cut and dried, no matter what the Supreme Court rules. Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that cops can legally kick your door in and commit murder without a chance of penalty or criminal charges, a DUI checkpoint isn't the same anymore. We used to have some semblance of perspective and respect for the individual to live his life according to how he see fit, now you can be murdered by a cop for defending yourself and your family because you were asleep in your bed when they kicked the door in without cause, because of a simple paperwork mistake, or without a warrant. Neither are allowed under the 4th Amendment because they are both illegal according to that crucial part of the Bill of Rights, and every single person in this country needs to refuse an illegal search at a DUI checkpoint and violently resist illegal entry into their homes by corrupt and stupid cops.
This must be challenged again and again until it becomes a horrific thought to even question it's meaning and applicability.
Amendment IV
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.
DUI checkpoints are direct violation of Constitutional Amdendment IV
Agreed.
App Store is not a democracy and it is not an outlet for free speech. It is a privately run entity created by and run by a U.S. corporation. They can accept/reject anything they want. It is their right. We can buy or not buy iPhones. That is our right.
It's not so much that Apple has decided to remove them, it's the fear mongering and bullshit reasons that this even got the spotlight to begin with. I could care less that Apple has restricted the rules on what DUI apps can use as a source of information, what I don't like is lying politicians that railroad legislation through like the Patriot Act and then feign like this is some dangerous piece of information in the wrong hands. Cause we all know the US Government, it's agencies and it's corporate financiers are so concerned with public safety.
I really don't see a problem with this.
Then you are simply blind to reality. These road stops are highly intrusive and as many have already indicated nothing more than a way to harass people.
It's completely reasonable for Apple to have rules against apps that find ways to circumvent the law.
It has nothing to do with circuventing the law. There is no law that requires you to navigate through a DWI check point.
That's what an app like this does, it allows people to effectively bypass the law. If people don't like it they should work to change the law, and DUI checkpoints are legal.
They are only legal in the sense that the Supreme Court has turned a blind eye towards our freedoms.
4th Amendment right arguments are debatable here.
No they aren't. The 4th amendment is very important with respect to your security as a person. The erosion we are seeing with respect to this issue if frightening, today it isn't uncommon for cops to get warrants on flimsy evidence and then break into a home and shoot everybody. These incidence are increasing at an alarming rate and simply aren't justified. The courts have simply lost their capacity to be a reasonable check on police powers.
Don't conflate your actual 4th amendment rights with a responsible society that is trying to keep people safe on the roads.
The way to deal with the safety issue is simple go after the drunk drivers. It is really a crime that deserves capital punishment. The problem is we have a society that is overly permissive with respect to drunk driving. If you have ever served on a jury where drunk driving was being contested you would know what I'm talking about.
In a nut shell the problem with these road blocks is that they punish the whole community without justification for an issue easily dealt with in other ways.
Let's see, Reid endorsed a spending bill to build a bridge between Nevada and Arizona that would make land he owned more valuable. Schumer called a flight attendant on a US Airways flight from New York to D.C. a "bitch" because she asked him to comply with federal regulations and turn off his cell phone.
Two out of four ain't bad I guess.
All seriousness aside, shouldn't these folks be doing something worthwhile with the taxpayers money like, oh, balancing the budget?
TERM LIMITS! AND NO PENSION!! That will ensure the steady turnover in the halls of power of BOTH PARTIES where new hires have that "fire in the belly" to do good, like work together on say, balancing the budget, versus today, where we have 20, 30 year creeps that have the mentality that it is all about them! That is why I do not call them Representatives or Senators... to me, they are affectionately known as "PIece of Shit"! When they earn my respect, then I might show them some!
/
/
/
They need to ban the Police Scanner apps too. Criminals monitor them so they can make a clean getaway.
You may think that is funny but they have done just that in NY. It is now against the law to drive with a radio in your car that can tune into police frequencies. That is total stupid because such scanners can be very useful to drivers and actually make driving safer. Not to mention it direct attacks ones ability to keep your self informed about governmental activities.
I'm deeply sadden by Apple move as it is completely ballless and directly aids the repressive direction our government is going in.
Then you are simply blind to reality. These road stops are highly intrusive and as many have already indicated nothing more than a way to harass people.
Prove it. All I see lots of tinfoil.
It has nothing to do with circuventing the law. There is no law that requires you to navigate through a DWI check point.
What? That makes no sense. You're just twisting my words around and misunderstanding/confusing what I said?
They are only legal in the sense that the Supreme Court has turned a blind eye towards our freedoms.
No, they are legal as in under the law legal.
No they aren't. The 4th amendment is very important with respect to your security as a person. The erosion we are seeing with respect to this issue if frightening, today it isn't uncommon for cops to get warrants on flimsy evidence and then break into a home and shoot everybody. These incidence are increasing at an alarming rate and simply aren't justified. The courts have simply lost their capacity to be a reasonable check on police powers.
Yeah those sorts of things have happened, but that's not at all the same as a DUI checkpoint. Slippery slope arguments are one straw away from a straw man.
The way to deal with the safety issue is simple go after the drunk drivers. It is really a crime that deserves capital punishment. The problem is we have a society that is overly permissive with respect to drunk driving. If you have ever served on a jury where drunk driving was being contested you would know what I'm talking about.
Fascinating. What specifically are you proposing then? How would you go after a drunk driver if not a DUI checkpoint?
In a nut shell the problem with these road blocks is that they punish the whole community without justification for an issue easily dealt with in other ways.
Or they keep public roadways safe and citizens free from harm in areas where lots of partying is going on and drunk driving is likely.
All the applications do is publish publicly available information. The Supreme Court has held that it is unreasonable to have DUI checkpoints without publishing the information first thereby removing a persons' reasonable expectation of privacy.
"Apps which contain DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies, or encourage and enable drunk driving, will be rejected."
I don't understand the problem. If all the apps do is publish publicly available information and don't encourage or enable drunk driving, then they're still permissible under the revised terms of the App Store.
I don't think that DUI checkpoints are violation of the Fourth Amendment. You can consent to give up a right, in this case the right to privacy(ish). By driving on the road, you are consenting to the searches at the DUI checkpoints.
Your comment is ludicrous. No citizen forfeits their rights simply by driving on a PUBLIC thoroughfare, nor is the right in question one of privacy but of unreasonable search and seizure.
Straw man.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
You don't understand what a strawman is. That's when you respond to an argument or statement that wasn't actually made. The exact statement I was responding to was "Personally, I'm glad for anything that saves lives." (My emphasis.)
Literally anything? My question about outlawing cars (statistically the least safe way to travel, btw) was not a strawman but a rhetorical device used to show the absurdity of such a sweeping statement and how such a pollyanna view can lead to insane ideas about how to keep us all safe from ourselves.
Forced to consent to a search without a warrant without probable cause under coercion and threat of losing your drivers license - whether you're sober or not.
Reasonable cause is used all the time to pull folks over to test them. There's no warrant but it is upheld if they fail the tests. And if they refuse to take them they can be arrested over it.
As for the checkpoints, the reason why some states require the publication is because of the notion that driving through that area is your consent to be 'searched' (in the sense of the typical DUI tests). But you can't refuse consent via driving a different way if you don't know the location of the checkpoint. And the apps that only give out that police provided info are in the clear under the new guidelines.