DUI laws have been changed...

[Psychoholic]

<< Truckers btw, have a diiferent standard. WE also carry a federal liscense. Our standard for bac is .04. And if you have any drink,you can not operate a motor vehicle for 12 hours afteryour last drink. >>


And rightly so that's a pretty big vehicle to be moving down the highway under the influence. Personally I could care less if all states lowered their BAC level. It wouldn't be a bad thing nor would it bother me. I drink but I stay away from the wheel after doing so.

 

[KingHam]

The issue isn't where to set the limit, it's why is the Federal Government trying to set it? Just another area where the Feds are overstepping their bounds and the Bill of Rights.

KingHam

 

[403Forbidden]

<< That's good, since Federal Piggy never had the right to steal the money in the first place. >>




heh...for some reason I missed this post from the charletan himself. You sound like
Art Bell's little troll.

Ok lets see...




<< Federal Piggy never had the right to steal the money in the first place. >>



What is this gibberish supposed to mean? That the Federal Government has no
right to collect taxes? Please take a look at Article 1, Section 8, Part 1.

&quot;The Congress shall have Power to Lay and collect taxes, Duties, Imposts and
Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare
of the United States...

All discussion should end there.

But I'm sure many of you &quot;sovreign citizens of (insert your state here)&quot; will whine
and cry: &quot;oh but no!! I am not a Citizen of the US, I am a citizen of (insert your
state here), so the US Constitution doesn't apply to me!&quot;

Two words: STOP WHINING!!

Read AMENDMENT 14:

&quot;All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are Citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.&quot;

Yes you whiners, that means you have DUAL CITIZENSHIP!!!




<< Read the Constitution >>




Uh, I have and I understand it. I doubt you understand 1/5th of it.

 

[Psychoholic]

Thank you KingHam at least we have a few people here who understand.



<< Uh, I have and I understand it. I doubt you understand 1/5th of it. >>


Hard to believe you have the time with you being the posing porn king you are.

 

[403Forbidden]

<< Hard to believe you have the time with you being the posing porn king you are. >>





What's sorrier is that many of you dolts do have the time to study general laws of this country.

I'm not talkibg about Law School. I'm talking about a general Civics or History class....but I guess you guys are too lazy...

so instead you rely on charletans like Russ and Art Bell to &quot;educate&quot; you on the law.

 

[Spoooon]

Wow, people sure get fired up about some things. Me, I work and I see a big chunk of my paycheck go to taxes. I complain, but I'm not about to say that the government can't have what's mine because I enjoy some of the things that federal money gets spent on. My dad's pension comes out of my paycheck. I guess I could list all kinds of examples but you get my drift. That's how I see it.

 

[Psychoholic]

<< so instead you rely on charletans like Russ and Art Bell to &quot;educate&quot; you on the law. >>


OK, whatever you think. Don't you have some minors to take pictures of???

 

[403Forbidden]

<< OK, whatever you think. Don't you have some minors to take pictures of??? >>




Yeah that's what I thought...

You guys are too light headed to even come up with a
cogent counter-argument. So instead you try to change
the subject.

Hahaha the only thing you've succeded in doing in this
thread is looking like a fool. I suggest you educate
yourself.

 

[Russ]

<< Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. >>



403BrainRidden,

Please quote me the passage in the Constitution that delegates the power to the Federal Government to regulate state traffic laws.

You really should be concerned about this. Next thing, they may be telling the states how they should regulate porno.

Russ, NCNE

 

[chess9]

Russ:

Uh, sorry, but the Supreme Court has done that already.

Anyway, what is this about porn? All I know is I'm not getting any, porn that is. Is 403 passing out free passwords to porn sites? At 57 I need all the help I can get. Why do you think I run every day? But my dream is to go out like Rockefeller.

 

[Russ]

chess9,

The Group of Nine twisted the Commerce Clause so far out of proportion so that it wouldn't even be recognized by the framers if they were alive today.



<< Anyway, what is this about porn? >>



He made up some story about all his &quot;models&quot; and some girls Dad coming after him with a gun. Nobody believes him anymore.

Russ, NCNE

 

[chess9]

Russ:

Oh, drats! Everyone's complaining about porn, but no one's doing anything about it. I think it's time we got this problem in hand, er, check.

 

[Psychoholic]

<< Nobody believes him anymore. >>


Quite a few never did to begin with.

 

[403Forbidden]

Russ




<< << Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. >>



403BrainRidden,

Please quote me the passage in the Constitution that delegates the power to the Federal Government to regulate state traffic laws.

You really should be concerned about this. Next thing, they may be telling the states how they should regulate porno.

Russ, NCNE
>>





Hahahahhahaha you really do have trouble comprehending simple legislative powers.
The States GAVE Federal Government the power to regulate certain limited areas of state traffic laws (DUI laws) when the States accepted Federal money.

Hahahah you lame a$$es don't have a clue about the constitution .


I'm pretty suprised that none of you even refuted the Art Bell reference. You guys
must really listen to that wacko hahahaha.

 

[Opinionated]

<< The States GAVE Federal Government the power to regulate certain limited areas of state traffic laws (DUI laws) when the States accepted Federal money. >>



What? geez, what a load of horse crap. The States have no authority to cede ANY power to the Federal Government. Have you completely lost touch with reality. That's the whole point of this discussion.

The Fed has no business trying to coerce States to do anything by using the Federal purse strings. Do they do it? yes, of course they do it and have been, and will continue to do so, until we make them stop.

Geez...

 

[403Forbidden]

<< The States have no authority to cede ANY power to the Federal Government >>




Wrong.

That statement is not even logical. The States have inherent powers that the Federal
Government CANNOT touch. But, if the States want to give that power to the
Federal Government, they have every right to do so. Hell, it is their power in the first
place. They have every authority to do what they please with that power (i.e. give it
to the Federal government).

The States can relinquish a State power to the Federal Government. Ever hear of
FEMA???

There are handful of powers that State cannot hand over to the Federal Government
even if the State wanted to. But I highly doubt anyone here can intelligently dicuss
them.



<< The Fed has no business trying to coerce States to do anything by using the Federal purse strings. Do they do it? yes, of course they do it and have been, and will continue to do so, until we make them stop. >>




The State's aren't forced to do anything. If you want your state to
ignore Federal rules/money, then you should complain to your State
representative.

 

[403Forbidden]

All you state's righters...point out the US Consitutional clause that
says: a State can never relinquish a state power to the Federal government
even if they want to.

You won't find it. The 10th Amendment says that powers not mentioned in the
US Constitution are reserved for the States. But that doesn't mean that the
States can't relinquish it if they want to.


Now, your own individual State's Constitution, might have a clause saying:
we will never relinquish a State power to the Federal government.


So go research you own State consitution.

 

[Opinionated]

It is NOT the State's power. The State derives it's power by way of the people within it. Thus, without the people's consent, the state cannot cede power to the Federal government.

Don't get me started on FEMA... That's one scary organization.

Frankly, I'm not comfortable with any Agency that thinks it can supercede local authority. Case in point.... the FBI entering a private residence.... Only my County Sheriff has the authority (with a warrant) to enter my domicile. if the FBI (or any other Federal or State agency) wants in my house or on my property, they'd better have the Sheriff with them, or it's going to get really interesting....

My State and Federal representatives know me by name.

 

[403Forbidden]

<< Thus, without the people's consent, the state cannot cede power to the Federal government.
>>




You consent when you elect your State Legislature/representatives
who in turn ceded part of the traffic powers to the US Government. This is
the Republican form of government.


Anyways, this is all a moot point. The States voluntarily follow the Federal
DUI guidelines. Like I said before, no one is forcing the States to follow it.
If the States don't follow it, all that happens is that they don't get any
Federal highway money...money that the States never had a right to in the first
place.

 

[Opinionated]

Mmmm, nope.... I did NOT consent to allow the State to cede power to the Fed, nor did the State do so.

My contention is that it is ILLEGAL for the Federal Government to attach restrictions on receipt of &quot;Federal&quot; funds, when such restrictions would infringe on powers reserved to the State or the People. DUI laws/traffic laws are simply matters reserved to the State.

NOW, if the Federal Government wants to enact a Federal law declaring that 0.08% BAC is the legal limit for sobriety, they can try to do so.... I don't think it's a good or productive idea, but they could. But they should NOT and cannot legally restrict highway funds with a DUI limitation.

Now... all of that said... I happen to agree with the 0.08% BAC limit, and think that States should pass such an amendment to the current DUI laws..... Don't think it will have much impact on drunk driving though. We have a serious lack of respect for traffic laws in this country both by the populace and the courts. Might have something to do with letting any idiot with a pulse have a license in the first place.

 

[403Forbidden]

<< My contention is that it is ILLEGAL for the Federal Government to attach restrictions on receipt of &quot;Federal&quot; funds, when such restrictions would infringe on powers reserved to the State or the People. DUI laws/traffic laws are simply matters reserved to the State...But they should NOT and cannot legally restrict highway funds with a DUI limitation. >>




That's a valid argument. Actually refreshing compared to the idiotic rehtoric that
charletans like Russ and his a$$ kissers have been spewing out
(i.e. the Federal government has no right to collect taxes hahahaha lol.)

The counter is that the States are voluntarily following Federal guidlines.
No one is forcing the States to accept Federal highway money/guidelines.

But it is still a contentious issue that courts deal with regularly.

 

[Frenchie]

The counter is that the States are voluntarily following Federal guidlines

Voluntarily? 31 of 50 states have decided that .08 is not the appropriate BAC standard. If those majority of states do not want to lose the funding which they so desperately need to (barely) maintiain their highways, they must give up a portion of their police powers. This is just a back door way of getting something. If Congress would try to do be open about it and pass a federal law, it would be overturned as unconstitutional for trampling on states rights. That is the problem I have. If you want to do it, come right out and do it. The method that they are using is tantamount to blackmail. PA has 3 of the 10 worst roads (pothole and maintenance wise) in the country. You really think they have a choice? At least they have until 2004 to chcnge the laws.

And Tripleshot, WTF is up with this you have no diploma, you dont know the law sh*t. There happen to be more than one attorney (besides myself) that is a member of this forum.

 

[rahvin]

<<It was money the states had received before with no strings attached. Maybe you don't understand the definition of blackmail.>>

This is 100% false. There have ALWAYS been strings attached to all federal highway money. One of the biggest is national standards for design, if you use federal money you must comply with national standards (federal was left off intentionaly, AASHTO governs design stadards).

 

[Frenchie]

True, there are frequently strings attached. But, those string are not typically a back door route to removing a part of the states' police powers. DUI is a state criminal act. The elements and punishment should be set by the states. Period.

 

[rahvin]

Ever wonder why you have to be 21 to purchase alcohol? Because the fed's tied a bunch of money to a mandatory drinking age of 21. Some states used to be 18, it encouraged people <21 to jump a state border and get drunk. Caused a bunch of DUI's and was an enforcement nightmare. Standards between the states is a good thing. Although blood alcohol content has questionable merits as far as interstate relationships go there are a lot of people that think it should be consistent to allow better education efforts. *shrug* Doesn't really hurt anything in my opinion so it doens't really matter.

Control of the federal purses is an absolute right of congress and they can constitutionally attach any condition to that money they feel is necessary. Any state that doesn't want the money doesn't need to abide by the rules congress places on it. If enough states revolt then the rule would most likely dissappear (kinda like the federal speedlimit that got axed).