<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: DUI Lawyers and Faith In Websites	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/</link>
	<description>Classical liberalism, criminal laws, the war on drugs, economics, free speech, technology, photography, sex work, cats, and whatever else comes to mind.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2015 22:02:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Mark Draughn		</title>
		<link>https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20789</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Draughn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2015 22:02:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://windypundit.com/?p=8476#comment-20789</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20786&quot;&gt;Matt Haiduk&lt;/a&gt;.

Gee, maybe someone could blog about it...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20786">Matt Haiduk</a>.</p>
<p>Gee, maybe someone could blog about it&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Matt Haiduk		</title>
		<link>https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20786</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt Haiduk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2015 21:38:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://windypundit.com/?p=8476#comment-20786</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20741&quot;&gt;Mark Draughn&lt;/a&gt;.

There&#039;s all sorts of &quot;wrong&quot; going on there.  Almost makes you wonder what&#039;s in the downloadable e-book, right?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20741">Mark Draughn</a>.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s all sorts of &#8220;wrong&#8221; going on there.  Almost makes you wonder what&#8217;s in the downloadable e-book, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mark Draughn		</title>
		<link>https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20741</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Draughn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2015 05:43:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://windypundit.com/?p=8476#comment-20741</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20740&quot;&gt;Matt Haiduk&lt;/a&gt;.

Hey Matt, Thanks for the explaining.  I guess it was even worse than I thought.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20740">Matt Haiduk</a>.</p>
<p>Hey Matt, Thanks for the explaining.  I guess it was even worse than I thought.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Matt Haiduk		</title>
		<link>https://windypundit.com/2015/01/dui-lawyers-faith-websites/#comment-20740</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt Haiduk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2015 03:30:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://windypundit.com/?p=8476#comment-20740</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;I’m not a lawyer, so unlike Matt Brown, I can’t generally spot legal errors in marketing materials...&quot;

By virtue of either some sort of joke on the profession or inflated bar passage rates, I am a lawyer who can spot such errors and I&#039;d like to give you a hand here.

&quot;Just know this: There is no such thing as an Illinois Department of Motor Vehicles.&quot;

Correct. That&#039;s #1.

&quot;The police officer cannot force you to submit to a chemical test.&quot;

Incorrect. That&#039;s #2. Blood can be drawn in accidents involving personal injury.  Additionally, google &quot;Kane County No Refusal Weekend&quot; for the Kane County State&#039;s Attorney&#039;s position on the matter (hint: They&#039;ll get a warrant).

&quot;However, if it is found that you refused the test, your Illinois Driver’s License will be suspended for a one-year period by the Department of Motor Vehicles no matter what the outcome of the court case is.&quot;

Incorrect #3. If you meet the criteria for a summary suspension and you refuse, it will be a MINIMUM of one year. A maximum of three. And it doesn&#039;t have to be &quot;found&quot; by anybody. If the cop checks that box on the paperwork that&#039;s headed to the Secretary of State (not the DMV, as we know), the wheels are automatically set in motion.

&quot;You have the right to a hearing to contest this suspension and must request this hearing within ten (10) days from the date of your arrest.&quot;

Incorrect #4. Your suspension starts 45 days after your arrest. You have a right to a hearing within 30 days of the day you file the petition asking for a hearing. However, you have NINETY days (not 10) in which to file the petition demanding a hearing.

In short, everything in that paragraph is wrong.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I’m not a lawyer, so unlike Matt Brown, I can’t generally spot legal errors in marketing materials&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>By virtue of either some sort of joke on the profession or inflated bar passage rates, I am a lawyer who can spot such errors and I&#8217;d like to give you a hand here.</p>
<p>&#8220;Just know this: There is no such thing as an Illinois Department of Motor Vehicles.&#8221;</p>
<p>Correct. That&#8217;s #1.</p>
<p>&#8220;The police officer cannot force you to submit to a chemical test.&#8221;</p>
<p>Incorrect. That&#8217;s #2. Blood can be drawn in accidents involving personal injury.  Additionally, google &#8220;Kane County No Refusal Weekend&#8221; for the Kane County State&#8217;s Attorney&#8217;s position on the matter (hint: They&#8217;ll get a warrant).</p>
<p>&#8220;However, if it is found that you refused the test, your Illinois Driver’s License will be suspended for a one-year period by the Department of Motor Vehicles no matter what the outcome of the court case is.&#8221;</p>
<p>Incorrect #3. If you meet the criteria for a summary suspension and you refuse, it will be a MINIMUM of one year. A maximum of three. And it doesn&#8217;t have to be &#8220;found&#8221; by anybody. If the cop checks that box on the paperwork that&#8217;s headed to the Secretary of State (not the DMV, as we know), the wheels are automatically set in motion.</p>
<p>&#8220;You have the right to a hearing to contest this suspension and must request this hearing within ten (10) days from the date of your arrest.&#8221;</p>
<p>Incorrect #4. Your suspension starts 45 days after your arrest. You have a right to a hearing within 30 days of the day you file the petition asking for a hearing. However, you have NINETY days (not 10) in which to file the petition demanding a hearing.</p>
<p>In short, everything in that paragraph is wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/?utm_source=w3tc&utm_medium=footer_comment&utm_campaign=free_plugin

Page Caching using Disk: Enhanced 
Minified using Disk

Served from: windypundit.com @ 2026-06-14 03:31:19 by W3 Total Cache
-->