LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteIf it's reckless driving as defined under MCL 257.626 http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ri-012_7736_7.pdf then yes you are barred for 8 years.
This is a discussion on Reckless driving in 2006, am i screwed within the Michigan Discussion and Firearm News forums, part of the Firearms Discussion by State category; I got a Reckless driving in 2006 am I screwed until 2014 for getting a CPL?...
Reckless driving in 2006, am i screwed I got a Reckless driving in 2006 am I screwed until 2014 for getting a CPL?
If it's reckless driving as defined under MCL 257.626 http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ri-012_7736_7.pdf then yes you are barred for 8 years.
Apparently in Michigan driving too fast means your family's life isn't worth spit anymore.Originally Posted by alduane
If the police in this country would stand up and quit enforcing these unconstitutional laws we could defeat this.
You're already half way there. You refuse to enforce ANY on fellow officers all the time.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
In Michigan, Reckless Driving means "a person who operates a vehicle......in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property..." If you do that then I guess your family and everyone else's family isn't worth spit....
With that definition I would tend to agree. Do you lose your right to worship and free speech too?
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
No, but those first amendment rights can be limited and regulated by law and the Supreme Court just like your second amendment rights.
Re: Reckless driving in 2006, am i screwed Really? How?
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Like I said, by law and the Supreme Court. Not hard to understand. Free speech has limits and how you worship can be limited also. Varioius forms of religious practice is prohibited. Mormons can't legally have multiple wives and try offering up a young virgin on an altar and see how far you get.
Re: Reckless driving in 2006, am i screwed The supreme court could tell you that marriage is no longer legal. But that doesn't make it constitutional
You need to read Jefferson on lawful vs constitutional
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
No I don't need to read Jefferson or anyone else. The way separation of powers works has been developed over the past 200+ years with many opinions and arguments. Andrew Jackson supposedly responded to a Supreme Court decision that, "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!," meaning that the Supreme Court couldn't enforce their rulings and he wasn't going to. Over the years the question has been settled with the Supreme Court deciding "constitutionality" of laws and the other branches accepting that. A Supreme Court opinion may not make it constitutional in your mind but it does in the current law of the land. You can disagree all you like but push it far enough and you'll become what is referred to as a "jail house" lawyer.
Posting Permissions