Slashdot Mirror
Texas Drivers Stopped At Roadblock, Asked For Saliva, Blood
schwit1 writes "Some drivers along a busy Fort Worth street on Friday were stopped at a police roadblock and directed into a parking lot, where they were asked by federal contractors for samples of their breath, saliva and even blood. It was part of a government research study aimed at determining the number of drunken or drug-impaired drivers.The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which is spending $7.9 million on the survey over three years, said participation was '100 percent voluntary' and anonymous. The 'participants' hardly agree."
But those come after the semen and stool samples, right?
In Australia it is called a 'Booze Bus'. They don't take blood, but they do the rest and it is 100% involuntary. They will block off freeways to test everyone and park cop cars in all the side streets.
Personally I am mostly OK with this. The next morning when you see the huge line of cars left behind because the drivers were drunk justifies it to me.
It's a shame that this even happened.
I do not consent to living in a police state.
I do not consent to "federal contractors".
I DO NOT CONSENT
OR:
"These are not the droids you're looking for."
Don't let the fact that an armed man and his buddies just forced you off the road, in the dark, convey any kind of misleading impression about the voluntariness of what you are about to do the sensible thing and agree to....
Why not shoot anybody and everybody? That way, you'll certainly get all the rapists, murderers, etc.
The rights of somebody else granted by law should be respected even when they're violating the law.
The police are unwitting participants in this experiment. Gathering data on intoxication is just the cover story. The real experiment is to see whether Texas is as tough as they talk, or if they're going to bitch out and take this shit. If the result is positive, somebody will roll up to the roadblock with an AR-15 and pop a few skulls. But my money's on the pigs not having anything to worry about, 'cause Texas is full of trash-talkin' BITCHEZZZ!
Did we make sure to get blood and saliva samples from the police officers and federal contractors as well?
I'd like to make sure that my samples aren't being mishandled due to drug- or alcohol-induced ineptitude.
I think this study was less to count the number of drunk drivers and more as a test to see how willing people are to give up their precious bodily fluids when demanded to do so by some random authority. Sort of checking to see if the frog has been boiled yet. Fortunately, it sounds as if some of those frogs were willing to still jump a little bit, as at least the named driver refused to everything but a breathalyzer.
Over my dead body feds.
Shooting cops tends to be...unproductive in the medium term. Their initial performance is likely to be underwhelming; but after that, you'll be lucky if they just empty a dozen magazines into your corpse, since that will at least keep you out of SuperMax Forever Fun Time.
I'm an American expat living in Australia, and the first time I was stopped by a 'booze bus' I was quite indignant. A booze bus is a large, mobile drug and alcohol screening facility which set it up at choke points like any police blockade would so you usually can't take a side-street to avoid it. After that, about half the traffic gets funneled through where drivers are breathalyzed, one after the other - you can't say no. My wife and friends can't understand why I feel that they're so invasive, and get angry any time I have to stop for one. Especially when it's 10:30 in the morning. On the edge of town. With no housing or pubs on the other side. Oz must have a lot of farmers who get drunk every morning and drive into town.
SuperMax Forever Fun Time
Worst Japanese TV game show ever.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Texas and the Feds. What could possibly go wrong?
Table-ized A.I.
Oh, the irony. It was Texas' favorite sun, GWB, who got the ball rolling on this type of intrusion in the first place. I have a feeling most Texans will fail to see the irony though.
They do this in the US as well, having a set-up sobriety checkpoint. It varies by state but Indiana and Ohio both would do it...mostly in college towns for football games or holidays like Halloween.
Usually it's just a breathalyzer but if you get close enough to see it, it's too late to turn around...they strategically place the checkpoints to catch potential dodgers on the way back.
Not optional.
Of course "driving is a privilidge' but from a libertarian standpoint, how much is it really? it is **government regulation** any way you slice it...for some that is always the wrong policy...
I don't know how I feel about mandatory sobriety checkpoints...IMHO there are more important things for the cops to be doing (organized crime in the US is out of control)...I dont see them as much of a deterrant to drunk driving
Thank you Dave Raggett
It would be nice to know this statistics but how to gather the data?
If this is involuntary, only sober people would consent. Why take a risk?
Some sober people would refuse also, perhaps a small group.
So do they imply refuse" as "drunken" then?
4wdloop
White females are special in their get-out-of-everything-free card, but crime stats say black female beats white male though. Sexism's worse than racism among LEOs, prosecutors, and judges.
"A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head."
After all that's all they are really after. They take your saliva and blood because you're driving a care which means that you have something of value that they can take from you, and that's all they really want. Why catch criminals that only possess stolen property? You can't pay for law enforcement with contraband. But you can pay for all of this stuff by impounding cars and busting people who can afford to drive one. The efforts of law enforcement are skewed towards the crime that gives THEM the most reward, not what gives the citizens the most value. Last night my buddies car got broken into by a pro - no broken glass. It was in his driveway, and all of his tools were stolen. The police couldn't care less and have no intention of doing ANYTHING about it. They just resent you wasting their time on something that gets them ZERO. At least drug dealers have cash to confiscate, but a thief costs the system even more than it costs the victims. And the police cost everyone a whole hell of a lot more than that. But don't expect them to do anything particularly helpful. That serve and protect crap went away when municipal coffers ran dry...
The response will be rather reminiscent of MiB, when "Edgar" gave the alien "Bug", in the fresh impact crater on his farm, a similar response when told to drop his weapon.
"Your proposal is acceptable."
LE officers these days no longer accept nearly as much personal risk to avoid injuring/killing subjects. The amount of time, risk, and effort to try and defuse & deescalate situations before tasers and/or firearms are used against subjects has dramatically fallen over the last 25-35 years.
This is largely due to extreme militarization coupled with the "officer safety first" and "*I'm* going home tonight!" mentality culture and training. Also, it seems like the psych-screening and attitude/demeanor suitability culling processes have suffered greatly, judging by the tsunami of YT videos available recording a huge and ever-growing number of over-the-top LE behaviors and actions.
Besides, as long as they don't kill you, you can hurt them much worse and for far longer with paper than with bullets, as long as the court system and rule of law means anything at all. I'll leave that for you to judge.
Check out what DHS will do to one of their own who tries to do their duty. They used a freaking Blackhawk and a military style 27-man SRT to raid her and her husband's house. The 24-year-old neighbor who video-recorded the raid and Blackhawk was found dead in his house of unknown causes. If they'll do that to one of their own, what are they willing to do to you or I if we should happen to attract their anger over something we said, or something we have no clue would have any connection to anything government or cause any kind of reaction by anyone at all?
http://www.whistleblowers.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1181
http://youtu.be/3LHC-C-ODO0
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Worth noting: "federal contractors" working on behalf of the NHTSA are not cops. I'm not saying that shooting them would have been a god use of one's time, but this *is* Texas. I'm a bit surprised if none of them were at least threatened with a gun if the "100 percent voluntary" part is as BS as people are claiming.
There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
see title
Thank you Dave Raggett
Who can tell anymore? Wars fought by mercs, prisons run by corps... Corporate municipal police would seem to be the next logical step — they already write our laws. It is fascism defined.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
If you think American are sheep, wait until you have seen Canadian... No guts whatsoever, no rights AT ALL (our Charter of Rights and Freedom is a lieberal joke)... A land of subject, not free people.
This is not a contract. This is the law. Violating it isn't a contract dispute. It is a criminal offense.
But presumably many/most of the people who were involuntarily detained and intrusively searched weren't committing a criminal offence, so what is the justification for the detention and search?
We shouldn't allow carte blanche intrusions into people's lives in exchange for just doing something that is a normal or even necessary part of those lives such as travelling from place to place or communicating with someone else. It's like saying we should condone arbitrary, abusive security theatre at an airport because terrrsm, and everyone "accepted" that they could be mistreated in those ways by buying a ticket so they have no grounds for complaint.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
This is the norm in Canada.
At this time of year, they arbitrarily pull over any vehicle passing through an unpublished checkpoint, the location of which is kept secret for as long as possible, and interrogate every driver at the side of the road.
Police state manual entry #1: permit the arbitrary and sudden detaining of citizens for committing absolutely no offense (the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that this is somehow not in violation of our charter rights)
If they demand a sobriety test, it is *mandatory* ... as in, you *cannot* legally refuse. Legally speaking, refusal is identical to guilt. You refuse out of principle (or maybe not wanting to be humiliated, demoralized and degraded, not to mention ostracized by your community...) you get cuffed, dragged into the cruiser and charged the same as if you over the limit, even if you were 100% sober.
Police state manual entry #2: leave discretion entirely at the whim of cops with no disincentive for corruption and get rid of those pesky requirements for consent.
Yes, currently, as far as I know, they need reasonable suspicion to demand a sobriety test ... and when they come up with any bullshit they want, what court is going to believe your word over a cop's?
Police state manual entry #3: always give cops the benefit of the doubt, because an advanced pinky swear apparently bestows one with magic trustworthiness.
And nobody with credence fights this blatant abuse of power because OMGDRUNKDRIVERS ... never mind that there are numerous other ways of preventing it that don't stampede over everyone's rights. But none really give that "tough on crime" appearance that works so well in a news spot.
Police state manual entry #4: gain a complacent public's majority support (making dissenters look like conspiracy theorist nutjobs) by convincing them that your "tough on crime for their safety." Don't tell them that they will eventually all be criminals (or already are because of vague laws that can be interpreted with equal vagueness) and will have their lives ruined whenever they become "inconvenient."
Your constitution may be spending it's retirement as toilet paper, but you might be surprised to learn that, in some factions of law, there are graver violations of rights being waged against your neighbors to the north.
There were no on-duty police officers involved ...just off-duty officers and government contractors, illegally distrupting traffic, illegally collecting passive sensor data, even when consent was declined, and collecting a bunch of other information if you were willing to give it for free (the breathalyzer) or willing to be paid $10, $50, or $60, depending on how intrusive you let them get in exchange for money.
Everything about it was illegal; this was not a standard DUI checkpoint which contractors "embraced and extended", this was private citizens pulling over private citizens and collecting at least a minimum amount of data without consent.
This is a civil rights violation, and for each count where consent was not given after the fact, worth 20 years in a Federal prison.
one - as far as i know cars now officially kill more people than anything else on the planet. more importantly - cars kill more children than anything else on the planet. as far as i know the situation in north america, in particular, suggests that the safest place to be is behind the wheel of an american dream, because - apparently - cars don't usually kill car drivers - just the pink and brown squishy things, the stuff without air bags.
apparently we have evolved into a species of metal beetle brain, and no other form of human - to date - has a better chance of survival.
two - alcohol appears to be the leading factor in cases vehicular death or trauma, and if there is any bias at all, alcohol appears to favour the survival of the driver, over that of the victim(s).
various other intoxicants have a similar, sometimes worse, effect on the body count.
setting all else aside, the simple fact that drunk drivers kill more children than anything else on the planet, indicates that something MUST BE DONE.
but what?
how do we fix this?
please list.
What would they do if you refuse?
Isn't this called kidnapping?
It was a running (bad) joke in TV/films of the 1970s/80s that muggers would frequently 'suggest' in very moderate and 'reasonable' language that their victims might like to consider giving them a 'donation'. The idea was that the situation was so clear, that the actual threat could be left implicit, as if this somehow reduced the criminality, or made the victim some kind of accomplice.
Of course, the mugger would ensure the victim was aware that he had a weapon (frequently dual use, like a screw-driver), so that a classic power game played out.
Now we see the police in the USA using the SAME tactic, but with one more refinement- the use of proxies/mercenaries/'contractors' to do the actual 'mugging' of citizens Human Rights, while the uniformed goons themselves stand to the side as 'back-up'.
Let me ask you all a question. Would you prefer your police-state to be upfront and honest, like say Stalinist East Germany, or Obama style, where everyone pretends the man with the gun and uniform who is forcing you do act against your will is just a friendly, harmless 'servant' of the people.
Would you prefer your mugger to be some lone pathetic loser, or a member of a well organised gang whose power and influence reaches into ever aspect of your city's administration and law enforcement? Team Obama not only abuses you, it pays massive amounts to PR operations so stories of the abuse are ignored or dismissed as untrue by your fellow sheeple.
The best method I can think of for eliminating the conflict of interest related to fines is to introduce the concept of destroying money. When a fine is given, the money should not go to the police department, or the treasury, and especially not to private contractors. Instead it should be possible to destroy the money entirely. Not the cash, mind you, the money (cash is only a small part of the money supply). No one would receive it and instead a small amount of deflation would occur making everyone's money a little more valuable. The money destruction could be handled by the Federal Reserve, since they are the ones doing most of the money creation.
Do they check if your ballot is actually valid, and if so, how does that work with elections being secret?
Also, not voting changes nothing. It's not a vote against the system, it's a vote of not caring.
And many states do, and many more have done in the past.
If these rights are somehow universal as GP claimed, how is it that throughout history only a minority of people have (or had) them?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Forced DNA sample collection, it is just me seeing that?
No, they check that you have turned up and that you put the ballot paper in the ballot box. You state your name and address without providing formal identification.
The rights of individuals surpass that of society to be protected at any cost. Life has risks. Deal with it. Driving has risks. Deal with it. If you can't bare the thought of dying don't drive.
While society has the right to general protection under the law it doesn't have the right to bear no risks at the cost to civil liberties.
I'm against social security numbers. I'm against mandated health insurance. I'm for publicly funded medical system funded through taxation. I'm against governments involvement in regulating hospitals (beyond public safety issues, ie yes to minimum standards, no to restrictions on abortions/etc).
I'm against drivers licenses. I'm for making arrests of those who have shown a complete disregard for public safety and there is evidence to back it up beyond a cops say-so (ie drunk driving, seriously excessive speeding; 2x max limit, etc).
I'm against license plates. There are plenty of identifiers and police shouldn't be allowed to use modern tracking technology/license plate readers.
Not a bad idea really. A radical approach that definitely eliminates the perverse incentives, and gives a miniscule amount of carrot juice to everybody. Talk about taking a bite out of crime... The thing is, with the computer power we have, its not technically impossible to pull it off anymore. Too bad our social and political reality is heading more towards The Lord of the Flies.
See? This is another problem that would go away if autonomous vehicles were the norm.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Before we start electing contractors to represent us in Congress. (bit of a hyperbole, yes, but it seems we have sold off the government to all of these private companies)
Racism and sexism rampant, is it? Then explain the face of the USA in the Phillipines in this last hurricane, is a black female and the president is a black man when they represent no more than 15% of the population. I fail to see the racism you talk about.
I ride motorcycles. Over the past few years, it's become 'normal' for the police to stop a motorcyclist for no other reason than the fact that he's on 2 wheels. I'm not talking about random here and there stops, this is an organized troop of LEO's that wave every single motorcycle coming down an interstate into a rest area and taking the opportunity to 'educate' the detainees. In the process of having the luxury of this captive audience, they look for and prosecute every violation they can see. The impetus for this is largely enforcing a totally ridiculous helmet law. Regardless of your thoughts on helmet use the practice of singling out a subset of all motor vehicles for 'education' is or SHOULD be illegal. This would be no different than the cops saying ' studies show that cars painted red speed .0025% more than other colored cars' and proceed to pull over and do a 'safety check' on all red vehicles. This is the very definition of the slippery slope.
Right now this blood, saliva and breath test is supposedly voluntary. I would imagine having gone through the 'education' experience on motorcycles the experience is anything but when you're sitting there talking to the officers. I'm sure that there will be a 'positive' result from this test as well. Why not do it more often? More places.. look at all the 'bad guys' we can catch this way! You as a private citizen cannot avoid breaking the law. A prominent law professor and a retired 30 year detective did a very interesting lecutre I watched on youtube.. there are simply too many laws to be aware of all of them, so the opportunity to have cause to LOOK for a reason to cite someone at one of these random stops is egregious. Anyone that doesn't see the bad precedent this sets deserves the police state we are heading for.
If I sound stupid, it's not me talking....
To a TSA line near you; especially the DNA sampling part. #Gattica
Oh, there isnt one?
That's irrelevant; the logic is the same. They could just say, "By owning a house in this city/state, you agree to waive your rights away," and that would apparently be okay with you people. Actually, it wouldn't be, but that's probably because you're egregiously inconsistent.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
I don't know of any, but according to these people's logic, it would be perfectly fine to randomly harass people who choose to walk around.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/pub/HS810704/pages/ExecSummary.html
http://www.pire.org/topiclist2.asp?cms=63
They don't stop everybody, they stop, say, every third car. And they use high-pressure sales techniques to try to get "biological samples". But they actually don't arrest people they find impaired; they try to arrange transportation for them. I don't think that makes it right, but let's at least be accurate about what they're doing.
More information and links to past examples of these "studies":
http://www.politechbot.com/2007/09/21/colorado-sheriff-creates/
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Yeah, I know that this is what the first paragraph in the article says, but I have to wonder why KXAS even wrote that. The rest of the article specifically says the Fort Worth Police had no involvement - it was ran by the federal government, and they hired a few off-duty police officers - and that the Fort Worth Police was conducting an internal investigation about it.
This is again about the Federal Government overstepping their authority, and the federal government closing down a city road without consulting local law enforcement is horrible. The cities should really sue the federal government over this.
Moreso, Beach Street is an extreamely busy street, expecially now with all the construction in the area. The video says this is on the border of Fort Worth and Haltom City, and the video seems to confirm that area. This is a very busy area - I am usually over here a few times a month. The federal government closing off this area is inexcusable. I am sure that if someone had of called the FWPD about this when it was happening, the NHTSA contractors would have been arrested, and the off-duty officers placed on administrative leave - Fort Worth doesn't put up with that kind of crap.
stopped in these situations. What do they know their plates and let them pass? Or do they have a special sticker in their window?
> You're either trolling, or stupid, not sure which
I take it you're new to planet earth. The post to which you replied is a nice example of what we call "sarcasm".
Hell put them on everyone's front door in case they try to GOWI (going outside while impaired)
So let me get this straight, police and federal authorities (read contractors) were pulling people over and sampling them for intoxication levels for an anonymous survey.
Now correct me if I'm wrong but shouldn't a police officer cite someone who is then proven to be intoxicated? If this person is allowed to continue driving while intoxicated wouldn't the police department as well as the fed be liable for damages this person may cause.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
But off-duty police officers can?
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Maybe Texas wasn't actually looking for drunks. It sure is a handy way to create a DNA database tied to license plates tied to name, address and ssn#. I'm sure they disposed of all that data aftewards however. Right?
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
By your argument; They need a sample to learn what to do, and it is random then it justifiable.
This cuts to a central idea of liberty.They could make the same argument (and in some ways they are trying to) that they can enter any house, because those houses might harbor terrorists. Because it is entirely random therefor it cannot be construed as harassment.
It is still harassment irrespective of the randomness. There is no cause without a warrant gathered due to reasonable suspicion that police or government can search your affects or home. Randomness does nothing to give cause for suspicion whatsoever.
This isn't the first time and it is voluntary. The is just Texans too cowardly to say 'no think you' to an off duty police officer and then whining about it later.
From the article
"They're essentially lying to you when they say it's completely voluntary, because they're testing you at that moment," Colosi said.
Hay lady, did you say 'No thank you'?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You don't need to be a police officer to stop or direct traffic. Have you never seen a flagger at a construction site?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"This is the worst case of reading comprehension failure I've seen on this site. "
You must be new here...
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Well, that's Monarchy for you.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I'm gonna start keeping a jar of spit on my person at all times, in case I run into any federal agents.
"It is fascism defined."
no, it is not. You should probably understand what fascism is before spewing nonsense out of your pie hole.
.
Fascism is about nationalism, and comes from syndicalism. Please tell me how corporation running things is nationalism or syndicalism.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Red: The man's been in here fifty years, Heywood. Fifty years! This is all he knows. In here, he's an important man. He's an educated man. Outside, he's nothin'! Just a used up con with arthritis in both hands.
one road always has priority and the other gives way.
How do you tell which road has the right of way?
Always north-south/east-west? What about diagonal streets then (I live on one)?
Are there signs at every intersection saying which road has right-of-way?
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
Wait. Are you actually, seriously, arguing that racism cannot exist in the U.S. because a handful of people in positions of authority are black? Are you really advancing that as an argument? Or am I missing some sort of subtle joke?
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
I'm almost afraid he means the 3rd...
Now some Vodka to get that picture out of my mind.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It's corporatism. Basically fascism but without the ideology behind it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You might want to take a look at the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation http://www.pire.org/index.asp . They appear to be an advocacy group against the use of any kind of drugs or alcohol. Their own literature notes that they want to promote "...expansion of laws and programs that will result in a substantial reduction in alcohol and drug related traffic fatalities." That's a fine goal but way too often these kinds of things come at a huge cost to civil liberties (TSA, NSA, etc). In any case it's hard to believe such a group would have real objectivism with their research and are probably fine with drivers being sent off to jail for the least bit of alcohol these road blocks might uncover.
It all starts at 0
According to news reports:
"Fort Worth police earlier said they could not immediately find any record of officer involvement but police spokesman Sgt. Kelly Peel said Tuesday that the department's Traffic Division coordinated with the NHTSA on the use of off-duty officers after the agency asked for help with the survey."
The actual contractors doing the sampling weren't cops; but they were accompanied by cops (who, no doubt, made every effort to convey that they were off-duty and not involved in any sort of law-enforcement exercise or official capacity; but merely being used because a 100% voluntary sampling operation needed a security force punchier than generic rentacops, or um, something?)
They are only as strong as their weakest part, the rotors. Anybody with a sling and a large rock could knock one out of the sky.
It wouldn't be the first time that we got shafted by a contractor under-delivering; but the UH-60's design requirements were (among other things) formulated in response to the number of UH-1s that were lost to small arms fire in Vietnam. The body was given enough armor to (ideally) have some resistance to 20mm rounds; but survivability testing of external components included consideration of the (common) "what if some belligerent locals with 7.62mm eastern-bloc cheapies where shooting at us?" scenario.
Now, given the number of aircraft downed (not necessarily with any fatalities, since this tends to happen at low altitude for obvious reasons) by wire strikes, I suspect that a suitably clever 'entangling' fiber payload could make a considerable nuisance of itself even with very low impact speed; but that isn't exactly a household object.
Same exact beltway bandit company who socially engineered a Colorado Sheriff into forcing motorists into providing DNA samples at a roadblock.
Suggestion: Maybe the Maryland state police, out of sympathy for their Texas and Colorado fooled by this corporation might consider setting up a mandatory roadblock on the edge of that company's parking lot so the US public learn the percentage of crack cocaine users on staff. I see more Probable Cause for blood testing that company's executives than the Texas or Colorado officers had for testing random citizens.
-proctor
Now, given the number of aircraft downed (not necessarily with any fatalities, since this tends to happen at low altitude for obvious reasons) by wire strikes, I suspect that a suitably clever 'entangling' fiber payload could make a considerable nuisance of itself even with very low impact speed; but that isn't exactly a household object.
A rope-gun with Kevlar-based line would probably play hell with the tail or main rotors.
You can also improvise an RPG with a length of PVC pipe and and projectiles made with model rocket motors and a warhead filled with gunpowder or other explosive and some BBs or other fragmentation material.
Crude, short-ranged, and not very accurate, but if you can manage to put one through the side-door of a UH-60, effective none the less. One of those going off in a crowded passenger/cargo compartment of a UH-60 will seriously impact the combat effectiveness of any personnel inside. As in, if the helo makes it back at all, they'll need to hose-out the blood & gore, find themselves a replacement combat team, and send out official condolence letters to some families for their loss.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
I presume you are British/Commonwealth due to the spellin of "offence." Therefore, why do you spell the word licenCe as such, while you write "unlicenSed?" I am not being snarky, I'm just curious.
"Yes, I have something for each of you."
Oh, I'm hardly proclaiming their invulnerability (indeed, the tl;dr of the report I linked was 'the only thing keeping cheap-ass RPGs and the occasional MANPADS from being the leading killer is mechanical unreliability and controlled flight into terrain'); but just noting that AC's hypothesis is probably false. Helicopters are rather fragile, especially if they have the doors open in 'dropping the strike team because we can' or 'shooting up the place with door guns, because we can' modes; but post-Vietnam designs generally consider the possibility of some 3rd-world nuisance scoring a number of hits with rifle or light machine gun fire.
(In a sense, though, this is all irrelevant to that specific case, since shooting at a DHS helicopter either involves it shooting back, or you winning, and getting to go on to the challenge mode, which involves substantially more cops, with substantially more guns, swarming you in APCs and either levelling the place or breaking out the trusty 'who would have guessed that tear gas and flashbangs cause suspects to burn alive horribly, along with any tedious evidence we would otherwise have to waste our time with?' technique, as seen in that 'rogue-cop' case in California some time back.)
I just ask, because I went to grade 5 just outside of Fort Worth, and you sure look like Serfs to me.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I saw the sarcastic GP of your post as its parent.
(In a sense, though, this is all irrelevant to that specific case, since shooting at a DHS helicopter either involves it shooting back, or you winning, and getting to go on to the challenge mode, which involves substantially more cops, with substantially more guns, swarming you in APCs and either levelling the place or breaking out the trusty 'who would have guessed that tear gas and flashbangs cause suspects to burn alive horribly, along with any tedious evidence we would otherwise have to waste our time with?' technique, as seen in that 'rogue-cop' case in California some time back.)
Oh, absolutely. Engaging in such actions are strictly for when the wheels come completely off any pretensions of rule of law, and it's become open armed conflict between government and citizens.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
You do realize feminazi patriarchy bullshit rests on the official face-people of the teeny tiny elite being male, right?
"A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head."
They can test you and, provided you were in custody, they can prove what your BAC must have been a clocked number of hours ago when you were stopped... WITHOUT regard to your body weight. The standard clearance rate of .0169 BAC/hr applies pretty consistently regardless of body weight.
But since the ability to have property is equivalent to the right to private property
I don't think so.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
you seem to think we're all drunks...
(i realise i'm flaming here, if offended please substitute "me" and "you" for "sober" and "drunk"
additional tax deductions - you want us to pay for your lack of self control?
coverage of taxi fares - you actually want us to carry you home?
loosening transport regulation - you expect these good people to carry drunks?
free parking - is there even enough to go around, as it is? where do the sober citizens park, next morning?
monetary honariums - you want us to pay for you lack of self control?
sponsoring ride share software - for drunks?
subsidise "drive-you-home-in-your-own-car" - you want us to pay to make like easier for drunks?
no, sorry, what i see is a rubbie, touching me for change, to spend on booze.
what i think is we need to promote a social division - drunk people are over here, and the rest of us are over here, by defining, legally, the lines around existing "red light" areas, to begin with - and the thing we focus on controlling is whatever it takes to keep teh zombies on the proper side of those lines.
if you are out of it and you can't pay to be carried home, you are simply not allowed out, or you go to jail, no option.
Contractors operating under color of authority directing (ordering) people to pull into a parking lot is a kidnap. I would seek arrest warrants for all involved. The notion that all people complied without feeling they were under threat in itself is proof of coercion. Did these contractors make it clear that they were a private company or did they imply that they were government workers?