Police Admit on Stand That They Falsify Drug Charges All the Time

A former NYPD narcotics detective snared in a corruption scandal testified it was common practice to fabricate drug charges against innocent people to meet arrest quotas.

The bombshell testimony, which led to the arrests of eight cops and a massive shakeup,from Stephen Anderson is the first public account of the twisted culture behind the false arrests in the Brooklyn South and Queens narc squads.

NYPD Stephen Anderson

Anderson was busted for planting cocaine, a practice known as "flaking," testifying under a cooperation agreement with prosecutors, on four men in a Queens bar in 2008 to help out fellow cop Henry Tavarez, whose buy-and-bust activity had been low.

"Tavarez was ... was worried about getting sent back [to patrol] and, you know, the supervisors getting on his case," he said at the corruption trial of Brooklyn South narcotics Detective Jason Arbeeny.

"I had decided to give him [Tavarez] the drugs to help him out so that he could say he had a buy," Anderson testified last week in Brooklyn Supreme Court.

He made clear he wasn't about to pass off the two legit arrests he had made in the bar to Tavarez.

"As a detective, you still have a number to reach while you are in the narcotics division," he said.

NYPD officials did not respond to a request for comment.

Anderson worked in the Queens and Brooklyn South narcotics squads and was called to the stand at Arbeeny's bench trial to show the illegal conduct wasn't limited to a single squad.

"Did you observe with some frequency this ... practice which is taking someone who was seemingly not guilty of a crime and laying the drugs on them?" Justice Gustin Reichbach asked Anderson.

"Yes, multiple times," he said.

NYPD Under Widespread Investigation

The judge pressed Anderson on whether he ever gave a thought to the damage he was inflicting on the innocent.

"It was something I was seeing a lot of, whether it was from supervisors or undercovers and even investigators," he replied.

"It's almost like you have no emotion with it, that they attach the bodies to it, they're going to be out of jail tomorrow anyway; nothing is going to happen to them anyway."

To settle a false arrest suit by Jose Colon and his brother Maximo, who were falsely arrested by Anderson and Tavarez, the city paid $300,000. A surveillance tape inside the bar showed they had been framed.

A federal judge presiding over the suit said the NYPD's plagued by "widespread falsification" by the arresting officers.

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas DUI Lawyer
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl
Follow @Kevin_Cardinale

DUI Tests: The Case is Against You

Unconstitutional Per Se

M.A.D.D. and W.P.L. (Womyn's Prohibition League)

MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) struck a tremendous blow to the constitutional and the rights of every citizen of the united states when they got 48 states in the union to immediately pass an illegal per se law in DUI cases.  An illegal per se law makes it illegal in and of itself to drive with an alcohol concentration measured at or above the established legal level. Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have established a per se law.  The legal limit in most states is .08 blood alcohol concentration (BAC) per se. That means it is against the law to drive a motor vehicle if you have a BAC of .08 or more, without having to prove intoxication. So on its face the illegal per se laws are saying that once the prosecution presents evidence that you had a BAC of 0.08, you are presumed guilty and a judge is then instructed at that point to tell the jury to declare you guilty, and you have to prove your innocence.  The prosecution literally does not have to have a case.

Never Get Another DUI

Beating the Cops at Their Own Game

If you've been following along, in this blog, you know that I have a sweet spot in my heart of hearts for pi ... uh co .... uh ociffers of the law.  I have time and time again told you how, through diligence, hard work and sheer intelligence, the popo have thwarted major top brass criminals and brought them to justice through expert police work.  I have tirelessly pointed out how they are NOT corporate shills, enforcing made up laws, for the sole purpose of throwing countless Americans in jail, simply to generate money for private corporate jails across the land.

Case in point, DUI.  Everyone knows that we definitely needed an entire separate legal system and laws for people who drive their cars and hit people... wait, I mean people who drive their cars and hurt people ... wait, I mean people who drive their cars and are erratic  ... and uh, were drinking?  Hmmm!  We needed separate laws for people who drive their cars and could possibly hurt people?  Wait, we needed separate laws for people who had their back tail light about to go out, and were stopped by police, and smelled of alcohol and the police psychically knew they were going to hurt someone, just cuz?  No no no, I got it!  We needed separate laws for people who the police psychically knew could possibly, potentially hurt someone, since they smelled ... kinda ... of alcohol "wink wink" and thus we needed to throw out the constitution and demand MANDATORY SENTENCES for them.  THERE WE GO LADIES AND GENTLEMEN!

So, obviously I'm being sarcastic.  There is, was, never had been a need for additional laws for people driving who hurt people, regardless of their alledged smelling of alcohol, other than the police being the lap dogs of private corporate prisons who definitely need more money.  DUI is a scam, plain and simple.

So, what can I do for you?  Buy your own breathalyzer.  You want to beat police at their own game?  Breathalyze yourself before they do, so you know exactly what your B.A.C. (blood alcohol content) is.  When everyone was getting stupid speeding tickets, that they knew were bogus, they bought radar detectors.  Now, people who know that DUI is the number one way police departments and local governments generate tons of cash from their citizens are buying their own breathalyzer.

Conclusion

People never got another DUI after buying their own breathalyzer.  It's easy to carry and you should never leave home without it.  You never know when someone will call you to ask you to stop by and have a drink.  The legal limit in all 50 states is now 0.08% B.A.C.  There's no reason to ever get another DUI, when you can purchase this device.  Having  DUI on your record is a kick in the balls, and it destroys so many people's lives.  It's a shame that so many college students, freshly turned 21, promptly get a DUI and ruin their lives immediately.  Heck, buy one for your kid if he's in college yourself. 

Stop burying your head in the sand and wake up to what's going on out there.  The police are out there to get as much money from you as they can.  Do not give them a chance to get you on DUI.

Please visit my legal website: DUI Las Vegas
See me on YouTube: Shakaama Live

Do Police Use DUI to Intimidate People They Don't Like

U.S. Attorney DUI Charges Dropped

We hear it all the time. "We need to crack down on drunk drivers." If you have half a brain and / or have read my blog for any length of time, you will see, and I show you, that the numbers for drunk driving are very low. So where is this vehemence, against drunk driving, coming from?

1. it's coming from police departments who want to rake in the dough for drunk driving
2. it's coming from victims of drunk driving who are then further victimized by special interest groups

Let's look at these two groups.



In Las Vegas, it was let out that the new quota for police departments is 13 tickets per hour. QUOTA?!?!?!?! Are the judges asleep at the helm? This isn't legal? It has no part of "legal" written on it. Any time you can place a number on the amount of tickets you expect to get, you are no longer playing peace officer, you are playing burglar. Surely there is nothing constitutional, national nor state, about a policeman meeting a quota of tickets and arrests.

Now, let's add this fervor of "cracking down on DUI." There is no DUI to crack down on. The top accident cause, is "driver inattentiveness." This includes: cell phones; noisy kids; turning the radio; reading while driving. In fact DUI doesn't even make the top 10 causes of accidents. More pedestrians and drivers have died from the use of cell phones in the short years that cell phones have existed, than all of the DUI deaths combined. More pedestrians and drives have died from noisy kids than all of the DUI deaths combined. Yet there is no call to crack down on kids nor make cell phones illegal.

Clearly driver inattentiveness is the number one cause. But, in all of the cases, the skill of the driver is at the root of the cause. Over half of the drivers on the road today, are insecure about their own driving. Some refuse to drive under certain conditions: darkness; rain; snow; wind.

Second: special interest groups. What do they stand to gain? Special interest groups are merely an excuse for the government to ask for and receive more tax dollars, all in the guise of cracking down on DUI. The special interest groups think they are using the government, when it is they themselves that are being used. Because, they end up paying more taxes just like you and I. Also, special interest groups victimize the victims. They grab DUI victims and use and abuse them to their own ends. They have no interest in the victims, no more so than what those victims can do to further their own agenda.

Let's see if the police harass people with DUI. Clearly, any average person knows that the police departments, nearly universally nationwide, can charge any citizen with any charge they like.

Let me repeat that: cops can charge you with anything, and they do it often.

Rhode Island - Federal Prosecutor Gerard Sullivan was pulled over and refused to give a breathalyzer. It seems the police were not too friendly to him and charged him with DUI anyway. He was quoted as informing them that he was an Assistant U.S. Attorney many times.

Due to these Nazi laws, however, refusing the test, which is your constitutional right, he lost his license for 7 years anyway. I highly recommend you research your own state and find out if you have these same draconian type of laws on the books.

The chief of the police department ordered and internal investigation. It seems Sullivan was a personal friend of the chief, which Sullivan also mentioned to the on the scene cops.

What can we learn from this case?

1. you have to have balls to stand up for your constitutional rights. And that right is a right to privacy. Your right to privacy includes not yielding to the police your breath nor your blood, to prosecute yourself with. This is handed down by the supreme court, over and over. Yet people give up the right daily. However, to get around this, states then say they can refuse your right to drive and suspend your license if you avail yourself of your own constitutional right to privacy. So the state is trying to force you to give up your right. But, before you get ahead of yourself sparky, think about this hypothetical: you decide to go ahead and take a breathalyzer test and not lose your license temporarily; the test comes back positive, which isn't a very scientific test to begin with, and you get sent to actual prison based on the degree of the breathalyzer. You just gave up your life for your stupid right to drive. So you were so short sighted to think you couldn't live without driving, to the point your couldn't see that you were giving up your freedom altogether.
2. police will come after those they do not like. On my website there is case after case, where a judge, prosecutor, defense lawyer, celebrity were harassed and got trumped up charges against them, based on no evidence, nor even laws. In some cases the state supreme court ruled the exact opposite, meaning that "in no circumstance should a person be arrested for this." In plain English then, the police arrest someone for something their own state supreme court forbid them to.
3. here's the kicker, 7 other people were arrested the same day Sullivan was arrested and also refused to take a breathalyzer test. They too were dismissed. Apparently they got the memo that you have a right to privacy.
4. some states will say you have a right to refuse a breathalyzer test on the curb side, but you cannot refuse a blood test if you are arrested, inside the jail.
   

Gerard Sullivan DUI Charges Dropped Conclusion

Until we completely clean out the police departments we are not going to get rid fo the very bad seed that is sprouting in them across the nation. Until we remove the temptation to the state and local government to generate tax money through police writing tickets, we are not going to be rid of draconian laws designed to generate tax money. Until we get everyone informed of their constitutional rights, people will be giving them away constantly and thus taken advantage of by the state. Until people understand that there is no circumstance where it is ok to give up your constitutional right, will be done with states making laws to penalize people from exercising their rights.

Remember that police quite often and frequently: beat; tear gas; arrest and harass peaceful protesters. Police use tear gas on civil protesters. That is against the Geneva Concords, specifically named as chemical warfare. Yet, nearly no one stand up for their right to free speech against this chemical warfare use. Everyone knows this country is founded on a freedom of speech. If the free speakers are being beaten and arrested, what makes a driver think it's OK to give up their right to privacy only to be arrested anyway? People do not think.

Remember, the Patriot Act has not been removed by Obama either. He has not only kept it in place, but has expanded it. It most definitely removes your freedoms from you, and without due process of law.

Finally, about the Sullivan case, the police act as if they did not know Gerard Sullivan. Sullivan had prosecuted some of the most high profile cases in the state for 24 years. At one point he received death threats in a Latino gang trial and required a police bodyguard. It is an impossibility that the arresting officers did not know who he was. Sullivan's career as a U.S. Attorney is placed in jeopardy due to this arrest. The arresting officers would know this too. The media got involved because the police claimed Sullivan said he was a U.S. Attorney AFTER he was handcuffed and in the back of the squad car. Whether he said this or not, clearly telling the press this was a calculated move by the police department. Clearly, if he was already inside the squad car, and handcuffed, it is immaterial what he said then. It is too late. Releasing the information then, is just a ploy to incite the press and bring pressure on the U.S. Attorney's offices. Which is exactly the effect that it had. Shameful, police department.

Please visit my legal website: Nevada DUI
See me on YouTube: Shakaama Live

Washington Officer Pleads Not Guilty to Shooting a Man in the Back 7 Times

Wash. Officer Pleads not Guilty to Manslaughter

EVERETT, Wash. — An Everett police officer charged with manslaughter for shooting a drunken driving suspect has pleaded not guilty in Snohomish County Superior Court.

The Everett Herald reports Officer Troy Meade remained free without bail after Thursday’s plea, under orders not to leave the state or possess weapons.

Prosecutors say he was not justified in shooting Niles Meservey, 51 years old [pictured above], of Stanwood last June in the parking lot of a restaurant.



Other customers reported Meservey was intoxicated. Investigators believe Meade was attempting to prevent him from driving away in his Corvette.

Meservey had been shocked with a stun gun and had rammed a chain-link fence when Meade fired through the rear window, hitting him seven times.

The DUI Scam and Scare

This is retarded. This is absolutely ridiculous. What you ask? I looked up the numbers for DUI vs all traffic vs pedestrian accidents vs motorcycles. Guess who came in last? Guess who didn't even make the national bar? Guess who they didn't even want to report? DUI!

Let's look at the numbers:

• 2.9 million injured in car wrecks due to: lack of seat belt; driver inattentiveness; running red lights
• 3,662 motorcycle deaths: due to lack of helmets; other driver inattentiveness
• 4,749 pedestrian deaths: due to other driver inattentiveness

Ok you ready for the DUI numbers?

• 17,103 alcohol related ACCIDENTS: not deaths; not injuries. Just the accident itself. Now if you scroll back through my blog you'll see I discussed the word ALCOHOL RELATED. That's a euphemism for something that sounds like one thing but means another.
  

Alcohol Related:

1. does not mean there was a test for alcohol by anyone involved in the accident; does not mean anyone was intoxicated; does not mean anyone was under the suspicion of being intoxicated; does not mean anyone was visibly intoxicated.
2. means that there was the presence of alcohol at the scene of the accident
3. means that alcohol could have been present inside the passenger compartment.
4. means that alcohol could have been present inside the trunk of the car
5. means that alcohol could have been present in either vehicle including the victim of the accident.

Ok just so everyone understands: when they say "17,103 alcohol related ACCIDENTS", it literally could mean that there was a closed, sealed, just purchased, unopened container of some form of alcohold somewhere in either vehicle, OR EVEN INCLUDING A PEDESTRIAN, and they did not perform any DUI screening test whatsoever, they will write it down as an alcohol related accident.

They would not release the nationwide DUI deaths. How can they? They lie about the accidents, so can they pencil in a number of deaths that are alcohol related?

So let's compare 2.9 million to 17,103. No let me make it quite visible

• 2,900,000
• 17,103

If you have a calculator, you can see immediately that DUI accidents... WAIT, no no no, alcohol related accidents. DUI accidents are an even smaller number than the alcohol related accidents. I don't have that number. They won't release it. A DUI accident would be an accident, where they actually tested and tried to prosecute someone in connection to the DUI laws. The number would probably number in the hundreds. Be that as it may, just by looking at the numbers we do have, the alcohol related accidents compared to overall accidents is .0058975. That means it's not even 1%.

This Lunatic Cop Shoots the Man in the Back

This is getting way out of hand. Just by the sheer numbers, DUI accidents nationwide aren't even remotely in the top 10 causes of accident or death while driving. The fear mongers that have demonized DUI as some huge out of control factor in America are simply doing it to make money. There is no reality to DUI being something that we need fear and smite from our roads. The danger that DUI posses to loss of life is less than pedestrians who cross the street inattentively. Yet we are not passing harsh punishments for those pedestrians. If anyone with half a brain wishes to go look up the statistics, I welcome them to see for themselves.

This scare, that has surrounded DUI, is so out of control that we have the above incident, that this untrained policeman, so gripped with fear that this person would become some demon on wheels, took the man's life. There is simply no defense for it. No judge, worth his salt, should sit on his bench and listen to any defense for it. He admittedly shot the man in the back seven times, ending his life.

We need to look at real numbers and real facts about DUI and stop paying attention to fear mongers.

I pray for his family. That is just... God bless his family and watch over them and help them through this painful time.

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas DUI Attorney
See me on YouTube: Shakaama Live

DUI Checkpoints a Great Way for the Government to Make Money

DUI Checkpoints

SKIPPACK PA – Expect drunk driving checkpoints operated by the Pennsylvania State Police from Troop K barracks in Skippack PA, and across the state, to continue for the next 12 months. Arrests of intoxicated drivers caught by the program “make it worthwhile” to keep at it, State Police Commissioner Frank E. Pawlowski said.

Under what Pawlowski called the “Checkpoint Strikeforce Initiative” that began last October, each of the 15 regional state police troops conducts a random sobriety checkpoint within its troop area every weekend. When the weather’s bad, troops conduct roving DUI patrols rather than man a checkpoint.

During the past 12 months, Pawlowski said troopers made 1,574 DUI arrests as the direct result of checkpoints and 868 DUI arrests as the result of roving patrols. Troop K, which covers Montgomery, Delaware and Philadelphia counties, accounted for 191 of those arrests.

The enforcement effort is paid for in part by federal funding through the state Department of Transportation.

---

The Problem with DUI Checkpoints

Let's begin by saying the word Unconstitutional. Repeat after me: "UNCONSTITUTIONAL". What is really insane is that police take an oath to uphold the constitution, as do politicians, as does the military.

We let this happen. Yes you, let this happen. When you hear about a DUI checkpoint, you say nothing. When you are stopped at a DUI checkpoint you say nothing. You let police intimidate you as if this were in fact NAZI Germany. You let police run all over you roughshod and you say nothing.

The courts let this happen. They are so afraid of not getting re-elected as judges, or not getting promoted to the supreme court that they go along with it. We have no judges with balls. We have no one fighting for citizens. Even life time appointed judges comply with the status quo. It is unconscionable to even entertain that any of this is constitutional. They have allowed the power of the court to be usurped little by little. From the 1800s to today, the court has nearly no power. It serves more as an instrument of the presidency than it does it's own body. State courts serve the police and the governor, not as a separate body to keep tabs on them or to keep them in check.

But the courts can't act alone. We need sober citizens to go complain to the mayors and governors. We need sober citizens to bring lawsuits against police departments. We need civil suits and criminal suits brought against individual police. Only when we wake up and realize it is we that has the power, will they recognize this.

We are being raped of tax dollars all in the name of safety?

"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither." - Benjamin Franklin

They are making these checkpoints; police are getting overtime; and the federal government is funding it all with our tax money. And when asked why, they say "the arrests make it worth it"? Hogwash! Time after time they have checkpoints and come to find out that less than 1% are even charged with ANYTHING. That means if they stop 1,000 vehicles: they might find 4 driving without license; 3 driving without insurance; and 1 near the limit. One DUI arrest out of 1,000 people's constitutional rights violated does not justify creating the dui checkpoint. I hope you get mad as hell at these numbers. Once we are used to these checkpoints, and they are becoming more frequent, it is nothing to say they can't say they are going to go house to house to search for contraband.

What would stop them from going to house to house and searching? You didn't say anything when they stopped you in your car. You didn't demand your tax dollars not be used to violate your constitutional rights. You said nothing. You sat in your car cringing at the big scary cop with bad breath, not saying a word.

What are you afraid of? Jail? Is that the worst thing in your life that could happen to you? You are giving up your real freedom for the threat of potentional loss of freedom, i.e. you are giving up your constituional freedom willingly because you are afraid if you speak up they might throw you in jail and lose your freedom.

Do you know Ben Franklin made that quote while the country was at war? So here is a guy that said, I will not allow you to use this war as an excuse to rape and pillage my freedoms all in the name of protecting us from possible war invaders. How many U.S. founding fathers risked life, limb, freedom to make this country free from this very same tyranny? And, we let them do it to us, AND we pay for the privilege.

The DUI Checkpoint Pocketbook Scam

How much money could be saved if every state stopped their unconstitutional DUI checkpoints? Millions of dollars per state and billions yearly by the federal government. This is what it boils down to. Forget constitutional, forget rights, you are being suckered into paying more taxes all in the name of safety. You are being taken for a ride on your dollar. They are telling you they are making these checkpoints for your safety. What is really happening is that you are paying more in taxes yearly, which grows the government. The more programs they start up and continuosly have, the more justification they have to charge more in taxes. So they raise taxes for DUI checkpoints and make them more and more frequently. No one complains about it. Instead of raising taxes for homeless shelters or welfare or school activities, which no one wants to do or fund, they instead fund DUI checkpoints to the tune of millions of dollars.

If they can't get your money by appealing to your guilty conscious, they'll scare you into handing over the money instead. And, you fall for it. How many "programs" are being funded like this? They raise taxes every state and federal session. No one complains. But, if they say they need more taxes for medicare, there's a big uproar. So instead, they have these safety programs that everyone agrees to and goes along with, without complaint. They scare and scare you into handing over the money. And, you fall for it every year.

Wake up!

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas DUI Attorney
See me on YouTube: Shakaama Live

MADD Mad About Female DUI Arrests on the Rise

MADD Speechless Over Female DUI Arrests

Recently a trend was noticed, recorded, and reported on in the national media: Drunken driving arrests on the rise -- for women.

Oh no Martha, say it ain't so!!!

DUI arrests have rising by 28% from 1998 to 2007. This is according to the Transportation Department reports. For men DUI arrests have actually fallen off by 7.5% during that time. The numbers, however, for male arrests for DUI are simply staggering. In 2007 there were over 620 thousand DUI arrests for men, for women the figure is a mere 162 thousand.



Here's where it gets sticky. They sought a statement from MADD, mothers against drunk driving, an all female organization that lobbys to reinstate prohibition lawas against alcohol. MADD was very caught off guard by the reports, and very angry that the national news media outlets reported it. [ I assume the national media has to run everything by MADD these days? ]

When asked what did they make of the findings, they had this to say:

Laura Dean-Mooney, president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, told the Associated Press she could not explain the jump in arrests of women. “There's no hard data on that," Dean-Mooney told AP. "What you're hearing more is that women are under more pressure, they're now perhaps the breadwinner because of the unemployment rate.”

Riiiiiight! Last time I checked, 1998 wasn't back in the stone ages. We're talking about the last 10 years. There has been no tremendous change in female occupation stature in the last 10 years.

It is amazing that feminists will stoop to victimization tactics to explain away, criminal activity? Well, to you working bread winner moms out there, here's to you. MADD, might get their way and stop your choice to have any alcohol one day, but for now, this bud's for you.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

P.S.
Seriously, don't drink and drive... well at least not over the limit.

Please visit my webstie about Drunk Driving: Las Vegas DUI Attorney
See me on YouTube: Shakaama Live

Drinking Philosophy: A Study in America

Americas Puritanical Deprivation and Abstinence

I'd like to discuss in this post the habits of people in America who drink versus the European attitude.


First the American sensibilities were founded based on the puritanical philosophy, i.e. one must deprive oneself of all carnal lusts and temptations. This is further echoed in the protestant religions of the Bible Belt. And, it was canonized into the legal realm with the Blue Laws: no alcohol before a decent hour nor after a decent hour of the day; no alcohol on Sunday... etc. Also, the views of abstinence and puritanical eyes also falls into the same category: the naked body is an evil above all other evils to behold. All of this falls dangerously short in the area of violence. One can commit nigh heinous acts of violence for entertainment, but no drinking or smoking and definitely show no flesh.


All these prohibitions have led to one mindset: when i get a chance to drink, I will indulge myself to the fullest. In fact this philosophy is now accepted as the cool attitude towards drinking.

European Sensibilities Towards Drinking Alcohol

Let's quickly juxtapose this versus the European attitude toward drinking. It's actually a very archaic take on drink. During the bible age, i.e. the turn of the Julian calendar, one drank wine as much as one drank water. Of course, wine wasn't distilled to such a degree that four glasses would render you senseless and a buffoon, but it was as much a part of the meal as bread, and they ate a lot of bread. Consider one wheat stalk to make 12 loafs of unleavened bread [i made that up, I've never personally seen a wheat stalk], but you get the idea.




Now the modern European shares the same attitude as those ancient people. He eats his meal and drinks wine with it. Also if he wants to enjoy a liqueur he'll retire after the meal and have a nice discussion and a glass, not 5-10 and definitely not enough to render him stumbling. He knows he has to get on with his life, and can't be hampered by nursing a hangover. In fact it is looked down upon if one is drunk or can't handle the liquor. The attitude is, one shouldn't partake if one is going to be rendered drunk. This self same attitude of do not deprive oneself, is also seen in their view of nudity in public. One should be free to experience the world and be nude. There isn't then a rash of drunkards, nor and outbreak of rapists. In fact the Europeans are quite normal in their every day life.




Wish this familiarity with alcohol, from an early age, and exposure to nudity the European attitude is very nonchalant toward drinking. Compare that to Americans and we're seen as ravening beasts when we get our hands on alcohol. Also pubs, bars, lounges and such are hang outs for far more people overseas, so the club owner or bar owner doesn't have to greedily get everyone drunk in the place to make a profit. Imagine if 10 times more people come into your bar, there would be no need to encourage them to drink. You'd have your hands full serving alcohol anyway.
I don't have the statistics but when i lived in Europe I wasn't struck as it being serious nor heard of drunk driving as an issue at all. Iin fact, I don't believe I knew a homeless person or a drunkard.







For local Las Vegas info on DUI visit: LasVegasDUI.com

Please Visit My Website: Las Vegas DUI Lawyer

Watch Me on Youtube: Shakaama Live

DUI is a Scam

I'm sure you've heard of the sad stories MAAD [mothers against drunk drivers] tells you of poor little Timmy that was killed by a drunk driver and for poor Timmy's sake we need tougher laws. While I can feel sorry for little Timmy and his family, I'm not so sure about the logic behind tougher DUI laws.

So, I did some checking.

You know me, I have to see the numbers and the facts. Throw some numbers in front of me or some facts and I'll skip meals reading it.

Lesson Learned LaBeouf DUI

Shia LaBeouf and the DUI


Actor had charges of drunk driving in Los Angeles dropped, but he still loses license for a year.


Shia LaBeouf was arrested early on suspicion of drunk driving, after he tried to make a left turn at an intersection of West Hollywood and instead got into a car crash when he ran into another vehicle. LaBeouf rolled the truck he was driving, injuring his hand and knee in the process.


Actor LaBeouf, star of INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL and the blockbsuster TRANSFORMERS, was booked for a misdemeanor DUI and then released for medical attention for his injuries. A female passenger of LaBeouf’s and the driver of the vehicle he hit were not seriously hurt.




Insufficient Evidence to Prosecute

Shia LaBeouf had his driver’s license suspended stemming from the accident and a case of suspected drunk driving in Los Angeles, California. LaBeouf was involved in a two vehicle accident in West Hollywood last July. While he was initially arrested for suspicion of driving under the influence, the LA County Sheriff’s Department later said there was insufficient evidence to press charges.

At the time of the accident, the ‘Transformers" star refused to submit to a breath test to check for blood alcohol content. Even though he was cleared of CA DUI charges, that refusal was used by the Department of Motor Vehicles to automatically suspend LeBeouf’s license.

These Illegal Per Se Laws are Illegal

California DUI law states that a person’s license shall be suspended for up to one year when he/she refuses to submit to a chemical test (blood, breath or urine) when drunk driving is suspected.

It was later determined that the other motorist ran a red light and struck LeBeouf’s Ford pick-up truck while he was making a left turn. LeBeouf, 22, had his hand crushed in the accident and has had two surgeries since the July 27 accident.

Do you see the DUI charges normally relieve the police of having to do any actual POLICE WORK. In a normal case, they would have charged LaBeouf with DUI, gotten their DUI fees and penalties and everyone would have gone home. It wasn't until LaBeouf refused to take a breath test did the officers have to continue with the investigation OOOOOoooops it was the other driver's fault all along.

What's the Lesson?

What can we the public learn from this? Now for him to lose his license, probably won't impact him that much. He could get someone to drive him where ever he wants to go. For the average person though losing their license would seriously hamper their lifestyle. But the lesson is, you have a constitutional right to refuse submitting yourself to state invasion. Regardless of the legislation the state passes, they really have no authority to invade your privacy. If more people woke up and realized this we wouldn't be headed toward the Nazi fascism we are today. It might hurt at first, i.e. losing your license, but I feel it's a small price to pay for freedom.