Say Anything Blog

Ted Kennedy better watch his ass, in DC. Not that I really think the “law” (such as it is...or isn’t, in this case) applies to libtard sooper-heroes.

This diktat from City Hall is unconstitutional.  I’m surprised that it’s been around for longer than a year.

Ted Kennedy better watch his ass, in DC.

You didn’t know about the chauffeur-driven limo?  You should.  You helped pay for it.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Is this a policy or is it a law? There’s a big difference.

Or is it that if Bush can get away with it, so can D.C?

sounds like d.c. cops are to cowardly to go after real criminals!

Rob,

Once again I’m forced to agree. This isn’t enforcing the law. The law defines what a DWI is. This is enforcing someone’s view that ANY amount of alcohol should be a jailable offense.

Ridiculous. And dangerous.

Election ‘08 - We Are So Screwed

What a great story, because we know that D.C. has so few real crime problems to worry about.

And, you don’t have to worry about the Kennedys getting busted for drinking and driving, they just claim Congressional immunity for their get-out-of-jail-free card. Remember old Patrick Kennedy, man, the apple doesn’t fall too far from the tree, does it.

""That’s the problem with you lefties, you’re not willing to get your hands dirty. I’d suggest you roll up your sleeves.”

-Jack Bauer

There might be more to the story than what is posted. If her only mistake was forgetting to turn on her lights (possible to miss on brightly lit streets), I would not think that was probable cause for a blood alcohol test. The officer certainly could not notice any behavioral change to warrant the test. If the city has a policy of a blood alcohol test for any traffic stop on the whim of the officer (maybe he does, maybe he doesn’t), that would meet at least my definition of an unreasonable search and seizure. And on the other hand, I doubt they would demand a blood alcohol on every last driver pulled over - in which case, the rule is applied capriciously - again an unreasonable search and seizure. If a trooper pulls over a motorist and suspects alcohol impairment, I believe he generally is required to perform a screening test for sobriety or document something that aroused his suspicion to warrant requiring a blood alcohol test. At least, that seems to be the case on the cop reality shows, when the officer requests someone obviously impaired to heel-toe walk or some such test, before requesting the blood alcohol test. If officers did not need to do that for legal reasons - “He just looked drunk to me.” - I suspect they would not bother.