Even the Police Oppose a Police State Mentality

I will soon launch a new DWI blog, where I talk specifically about issues surrounding Texas DWI laws, and more specifically, how they affect folks arrested in Austin, Texas for DWI.

Still days (weeks?) away from officially going online, I have some ideas swimming around in my head for topics. One that jumps out is MADD’s new campaign to eventually have ignition interlock devices put in all cars…yes, that means you, even if you’ve never even gotten a speeding ticket.

I refrained from commenting on this issue, due to its increased relevance for my soon-to-be blog, when I ran across this post, from The LawDog Files, titled "MADD Loses Their Ever-Loving Minds":

Well, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers is about to lose support from this Peace Officer.

In a desperate attempt to prove that Nietzsche was correct, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers has issued the outline of their National Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving.

In pursuit of this goal this, they have stated Four Points.

The first of which is increased DWI Checkpoints -- a moot point for me, since Sobriety Checkpoints are currently unconstitutional in the State of Texas. As it should be.

Kudos, by the way (and off topic) for the officer recognizing checkpoints for what they are: an infringement on everybody’s liberty. He continues:

It's the third tick on the MADD wish list that really sets the cat amongst the pigeons. Allow me to quote it here:

"Exploration of advanced vehicle technologies through the establishment of a Blue Ribbon panel of international safety experts to assess the feasibility of a range of technologies that would prevent drunk driving. These technologies must be moderately priced, absolutely reliable, set at the legal BAC limit and unobtrusive to the sober driver;"

Allow me translate that for the Gentle Reader: MADD wants technology developed to be installed in every car that will prevent intoxicated drivers from starting the car.

Well, if that’s not a police state, tell me what is. More from the LawDog:

Believe me when I say that I hate drunk drivers at least as much as anyone at MADD -- if not more so.

Nevertheless, you can not -- you CAN NOT -- trample on the rights of everyone else in your crusade to end drunk driving.

I am not a drunk. I am not a drunk driver. I do not want a piece of equipment with the "good enough" reliability of a cell phone or a computer operating system determining whether I should be allowed to start my car or not.

I do not want to install a gadget on my car to decide if I may start it because you're afraid that someone else in this country might be drunk.

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"…that Latin phrase from high school asking “Who will guard the guards?” Apparently the “guards” themselves are balking at some of the draconian, no, Orwellian methods proposed in the DWI wars…

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://blog.austindefense.com/admin/trackback/17028
Comments (2) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Grant Griffiths - November 22, 2006 7:43 AM

I look forward to you new blog. If it is anything like this one, it should be great. Keep up the work of informing the public and providing such great information.

john s - December 10, 2007 11:25 PM

i was arrested for dwi.(dps).,..blanco county..officer said i was high on marijauna...he..requested a blood test..i refused..am i screwed..he found nothing in the car..situation seems to be fubar..thanks for any help

Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.