DUI Checkpoints Discussion

[SpEcRv9]

The best is when you hit a checkpoint and you're in the back seat drunk...justinlansdale as your DD FTW!

The only other time I've hit one while driving was at 8pm on a Thursday. I was only 20 and the cop took my license said "oh you're not 21 for a few months..don't ruin it have a good night"

[DB Dude]

great responses. good to know I'm not the only one that doesn't mind sacraficing a little bit for the greater good. Its a sad state of affairs when its necessary to employ DUI checkpoints, but I think they originated out of necessity based on the number of DUIs and fatal accidents, etc... FocusDude- there is evidence that shows that patrolling does in fact result in more DUI arrest, but not every municipality has enough officers to be constantly driving around all the trouble spots at all times. DUI checkpoints do work. Though I really don't see the point if you are going to post where they are in the newspaper, with todays social networking that will spread amongst the drink-n-driver crowd like wild-fire. I don't think the app is a good idea from a social context (in that it makes DUI easier to get away with), but its kindof hard to argue against it when we post it in the newspaper.....

Conflikt - the airport searches is a great analogy, but my friend conveniently seemed to glaze right over that. In fact airport searches appear to be a much greater intrusion of privacy, and a much greater waste of resources....but u don't hear as many people complaining about that. Why? Because no one wants to be on a plane that blows up. I don't have a problem with checkpoints because I don't drink and drive, and I understand that they are for the greater good and safety of society. I can't understand how anyone who is not trying to protect their own interests as a DUI'er can disagree with that.

My friend (and his snarky bitchy chick friend on FB who says she is a lawyer. lol) claims that the checkpoint constitutes an illegal search (as protected against under the 4th amendment). And I am trying to tell him, a cop standing outside your vehicle window and asking u questions does not constitute a search of either your person or your property. Now if they have reasonable cause to search you because you smell of alcohol or have bloodshot eyes, that is a legal reasonable search. He does not get it.

Edit: And Conflikt, you pwnd me alrite. its not a bill, but a proposal from a few senators. However there is quite an ongoing debate about teh constitutionality of DUI checkpoints, and some states have even banned them. Here is the link about the app
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/...rom-app-store/

[Supraru]

Originally Posted by FocusDude

I'm not saying DUI's are not a problem, I'm just saying the municipalities staff and resources could be better used then sitting and waiting for skip to come through and blow over a .8 or whatever it is-

A .8??????????????? Dude they would be dead.

[RSX Type-Slow]

Originally Posted by Bane

that app is like radar detectors, it might be a few people out of trouble but the large majority of individuals will still get stopped

DUI check points can actually save you from yourself, get stopped and get a DUI or turn the next corner and kill a family of 5

drunk drivers get no slack, ever

have the anti checkpoint crew lose a family member to a drunk driver and see if they sing the same tune

agreed 100%.

And from personal experience, being on the wrong side of the law and getting a DUI is irresponsible, stupid, expensive, 100% avoidable. Please don't drink and drive people.

[Bane]

Shes not a lawyer because if she was she would understand the difference in stops and understand that a checkpoint is a mere encounter, no information is legally required to be given to the officer in a mere encounter. Its the same as if I walked up to you on the street and just asked for your information of where you were coming from, you have no legal obligation to tell me if I am not conducting and investigation. So if I walk up to your vehicle at a check point and ask where you are coming from in a mere encounter you are not required to give me any information in which your 4th amendment rights are intact. But if I walk up to you car and smell alcohol then I have reason to believe a crime is in progress and can now require you to identify yourself to me. Again as if I was walking up to you randomly on the street, if I approach you and ask for your information you are not required to give it to me but if I have reason to believe that you are in the commission of a crime I am now conducting and investigation and you are required to identify yourself to me.

A persons 4th amendment rights are in full effect at a checkpoint unless an officer as probable cause to believe they are in the commission of a crime. If an officer asks for your information on at a checkpoint you are not required to give it to him because of your 4th amendment rights


....tweet that

[sean3]

DUI checkpoints... good.
Government banning phone apps... not good.

[JSpecV03]

even if the market places on android, apple, and rim remove the apps, its the same thing as sending/calling a bunch of people and telling them to look at for them. ive even heard the djs at bars announce them over the sound system. but in Bane's last post, everything he said just about sums up this debate. since him being a police officer, im gonna beleive what hes telling me.
someone else posted about police roaming around instead of sitting one spot waiting, alot of times ive noticed they set up at one location and stay there for a while then move to a differant location. they dont bother me. it actually amuses me the number of people who get caught for doing something stupid like this. and some people never learn.

i went through one on my 21st bday when i was wasted in the backseat of my friends car. the cop who was talking to us was cool as hell and had me laughing so hard i almost pissed myself.

[BlueMSProtege]

Originally Posted by DB Dude

Hey guys, I was just involved in a very heated debate on FB about the constitutionality of DUI checkpoints. I was very curious to get some opinions of car people. The debate was focused around a bill in congress that would ban iPhone apps that divulge the location of DUI checkpoints. I happen to think that DUI checkpoints are a good way to deter drunk driving and even more so to get drunk or drugged people off the road before they kill someone. I don't mind having to go thru a checkpoint for 2 minutes when I'm sober, if it means increased safety for everyone on the roads. And I certainly don't think it should be allowed for apps to tell people where checkpoints are -- it completely negates the point.

My friend however is vehemently opposed to the DUI checkpoints in general, stating that they are an infringment on the 4th amendment which protects people against unreasonable searches. He feels that innocent sober people should not be subjected to checkpoints simple as a justification to weed out the DUI'ers. Furthermore, he believes that there is nothing wrong with the app that tells people where the checkpoints are.

Discuss.

Your friend is wrong, a DUI checkpoint is constitutional as long as all person entering it are subjected to the checkpoint and it is departmentally authorized. a bored cop cannot suddenly decide to set up a checkpoint to catch one or two people and then take it away. Some states do require that police give "notice" (can be done simply by putting the information in a newspaper) about where the checkpoints will be so people can avoid the wait if they choose. The supreme court has roundly rejected the premise that a vehicular stop is an infringement of the 4th amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures. The standard required for a regular stop is reasonable suspicion. in the case of a checkpoint the suspicion does not need to be met. A vehicular stop is not a search as the information requested is of such a nature that the police can reasonably request it. The same rule applies to border crossings; border crossing searches are per se reasonable and justified. Tell your friend to read a few court cases regarding the 4th amendment before he shoots his mouth off.

As far as the app goes, i dont see that being a federal issue because of what i said before, some states require the informing of checkpoints while others do not. while this bill would only remove the app's notification it still would open the door to prohibiting all notice of the checkpoints

[evomike]

Read the paper problem solved

[CrazylilPunk]

not a big deal, slow down, roll through, they look you, you look at them, good night officer, then on your way.

edit: besides, apps exists for plenty of other illegal activities, why would they go after this one first?

[mcperson2k]

Originally Posted by RedBowTies88

I wouldn't have a problem with them if they only looked for DUI suspects instead if hassling you about everything illegal on your car

Never had that problem...

[BlueMSProtege]

Originally Posted by DB Dude

great responses. good to know I'm not the only one that doesn't mind sacraficing a little bit for the greater good. Its a sad state of affairs when its necessary to employ DUI checkpoints, but I think they originated out of necessity based on the number of DUIs and fatal accidents, etc... FocusDude- there is evidence that shows that patrolling does in fact result in more DUI arrest, but not every municipality has enough officers to be constantly driving around all the trouble spots at all times. DUI checkpoints do work. Though I really don't see the point if you are going to post where they are in the newspaper, with todays social networking that will spread amongst the drink-n-driver crowd like wild-fire. I don't think the app is a good idea from a social context (in that it makes DUI easier to get away with), but its kindof hard to argue against it when we post it in the newspaper.....

Conflikt - the airport searches is a great analogy, but my friend conveniently seemed to glaze right over that. In fact airport searches appear to be a much greater intrusion of privacy, and a much greater waste of resources....but u don't hear as many people complaining about that. Why? Because no one wants to be on a plane that blows up. I don't have a problem with checkpoints because I don't drink and drive, and I understand that they are for the greater good and safety of society. I can't understand how anyone who is not trying to protect their own interests as a DUI'er can disagree with that.

My friend (and his snarky bitchy chick friend on FB who says she is a lawyer. lol) claims that the checkpoint constitutes an illegal search (as protected against under the 4th amendment). And I am trying to tell him, a cop standing outside your vehicle window and asking u questions does not constitute a search of either your person or your property. Now if they have reasonable cause to search you because you smell of alcohol or have bloodshot eyes, that is a legal reasonable search. He does not get it.

Edit: And Conflikt, you pwnd me alrite. its not a bill, but a proposal from a few senators. However there is quite an ongoing debate about teh constitutionality of DUI checkpoints, and some states have even banned them. Here is the link about the app
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/...rom-app-store/

She must have missed criminal procedure class the day they talked about this because our professor explained how they were legal and in the very few instances they were not

[BlueMSProtege]

Originally Posted by Bane

Shes not a lawyer because if she was she would understand the difference in stops and understand that a checkpoint is a mere encounter, no information is legally required to be given to the officer in a mere encounter. Its the same as if I walked up to you on the street and just asked for your information of where you were coming from, you have no legal obligation to tell me if I am not conducting and investigation. So if I walk up to your vehicle at a check point and ask where you are coming from in a mere encounter you are not required to give me any information in which your 4th amendment rights are intact. But if I walk up to you car and smell alcohol then I have reason to believe a crime is in progress and can now require you to identify yourself to me. Again as if I was walking up to you randomly on the street, if I approach you and ask for your information you are not required to give it to me but if I have reason to believe that you are in the commission of a crime I am now conducting and investigation and you are required to identify yourself to me.

A persons 4th amendment rights are in full effect at a checkpoint unless an officer as probable cause to believe they are in the commission of a crime. If an officer asks for your information on at a checkpoint you are not required to give it to him because of your 4th amendment rights


....tweet that

Opps, i should have read further down, when i read what she said i was like wtf? hell im only a second year law student and i knew that^

[SovXietday]

Originally Posted by BlueMSProtege

Opps, i should have read further down, when i read what she said i was like wtf? hell im only a second year law student and i knew that^

Dude, I'm an engineering student and I knew that. It's more or less common sense.

This is kinda like the lady who I talked to at a party with my parents once. She was arguing with me about how she believed the cops should give her a break because she's a local, and ALWAYS drives home drunk. But since she's not from out of town she didn't think that she should be fronted with the same punishment as someone who wasn't local? I wanted to smack her with a baseball bat so bad...

[BigWhiteTodd]

I think they are a good thing who cares if it is a hassle. Any way cool story this time last year I made a beer run after school (night student 1:20am class ends) well they did not have more then 12 packs at the place I went. Anyway after couple trips I got the 13 cases of 12 packs in my buddies car as we are drving to my place DUI check point lets just say we had about a hour long talk with the cops. They took pictures and we all a good laugh then we went on our way.

[Fujito]

Your friend won't be saying the same thing after he gets hit by a drunk driver and can't feel his penis anymore, or when he gets a phone call telling him that one of his close relatives is dead.

[JST2KWIK]

funny store - I wanted to steal a stop sign that somebody had knocked down on 202, so I pulled over and popped the hatch. Then I saw a state trooper at a nearby Wawa (close enough that he could clearly see what i was doing), so I said **** it and drove off. I forgot to get out and open the hatch and close it though (I was driving my mom's station wagon), since I had popped it. 30 seconds down the road there was a DUI checkpoint. As I rolled up all of the cops rushed the car freaking the **** out and ordered me to stop. I was like wtf?! but obviously complied.

Little did I know my hatch had flown open while driving since I had popped it and the cops at the checkpoint thought I was a drunk idiot. I also had car parts, tools, and a flashlight in the car since I had been working on my car and a buddy's into the night, so they also assumed I was a thief lol. They made me get out and sit on the curb and an officer parked the car while they ran mine and my buddy's information. They were making fun of me and stuff, it was hilarious. If I had been wasted though, I would be glad to be off the road. I've had several close calls with people who are obviously drunk and it's very scary. I won't sit on my high horse and say I've never driven drunk, but it is very stupid and I'm thankful nobody was ever hurt as a result. Stricter regulations should be in place

[jpalamar]

Originally Posted by Fujito

Your friend won't be saying the same thing after he gets hit by a drunk driver and can't feel his penis anymore, or when he gets a phone call telling him that one of his close relatives is dead.

Exactly, my aunt was hit by a drunk driver. Her kid died, she can't have kids again from complications from the accident, and now she is a cripple with perminent pain. I feel no pitty for people who DUI. I honestly think the laws should slam the book down harder on them.

[DB Dude]

Originally Posted by jpalamar

Exactly, my aunt was hit by a drunk driver. Her kid died, she can't have kids again from complications from the accident, and now she is a cripple with perminent pain. I feel no pitty for people who DUI. I honestly think the laws should slam the book down harder on them.

so what about apps that make it easier for people to drive drunk and avoid checkpoints? doesn't that bother you?

and btw, I agree 100% with Bane's post above....eventhough I can't believe I just heard myself say that. lol

[jpalamar]

Originally Posted by DB Dude

so what about apps that make it easier for people to drive drunk and avoid checkpoints? doesn't that bother you?

and btw, I agree 100% with Bane's post above....eventhough I can't believe I just heard myself say that. lol

I highly doubt the app is going to make much of a difference in the long run. If your dumb enough to drive drunk your dumb enough not to check the app.

I'm personally called 911 and followed drunk drivers til the cops came several times.