User Profile: superfly75

Member Since: April 04, 2013


  • June 28, 2013 at 6:05pm

    There needs to be “probable cause” to make an arrest. If the officer has probable cause then he/she can make an arrest, investigate further, obtain evidence, etc, etc. If you tie an officer’s hands to the point where they are not allowed to collect evidence involved in a crime you might as well not have any laws because there won’t be an convictions in court.

  • June 28, 2013 at 1:01pm

    In South Dakota we have “implied consent”. If you’re operating a vehicle you’ve already consented to give blood. We also get a search warrant now due to a recent supreme court case. Without these measures there would be no consequences for DUI drivers. A blood sample is the only solid evidence that stands up in court. Don’t want your blood taken—-don’t drink and drive.

    Responses (7) +
  • April 11, 2013 at 1:20am

    I think 90% of Americans agree with background checks——the ones that are already in place.

  • April 7, 2013 at 8:45pm

    Ha! Tell that to black people and native americans. What a moron.

  • April 5, 2013 at 11:44pm

    The idiots and liberal are taking over Oregon just like they did Colorado. I know there are quite a few Sheriff’s in Oregon that are not going to go along with this nonsense.

  • April 3, 2013 at 9:33pm

    I work as a deputy sheriff and I can assure you that no one that I work with would ever dream of taking anyone’s guns. Police officers believe in the 2nd Amendment more than anyone. It’s unfortunate that police chiefs have to take orders and stand behind the president as props while he spouts this nonsense. That’s why you see so many sheriff’s in this country taking a stand against these ineffective gun control measures—because they are elected officials and stand up for their people and the Constitution.