your thoughts on driving checkpoints

[Snackbar]

I've already detailed a less intrusive measure that you continually dismiss; namely, looking for signs of impaired driving using usual police methods. The statistics in that SCOTUS case bear out the fact that such usual methods are just as effective, if not more so, than checkpoints while being less intrusive.

It is hardly intrusive preventative policing. I think watching for signs of impairment is a great policy to compliment dui check stops.
I think dui check stops are being confused with prison planet type headlines of crooked cops stripping our freedom. In our area check stops occur on weekends and long weekends in high traffic areas near liquor serving establishments. It takes less than 30 seconds, a light in your face, one question " have you been drinking" and your on your way unless the officer observes reason for a sobriety test.

Even if a check stops one drunk driver in 1000 is that not worth it for the possible outcome?

 

[BKMMAFAN]

It is hardly intrusive preventative policing. I think watching for signs of impairment is a great policy to compliment dui check stops.
I think dui check stops are being confused with prison planet type headlines of crooked cops stripping our freedom. In our area check stops occur on weekends and long weekends in high traffic areas near liquor serving establishments. It takes less than 30 seconds, a light in your face, one question " have you been drinking" and your on your way unless the officer observes reason for a sobriety test.

Even if a check stops one drunk driver in 1000 is that not worth it for the possible outcome?

No. It isn't justified because less intrusive means exist that are just as efficient. But hey, the 4th amendment has been inexorably marched off a cliff from which it will probably never scale again.

Go read the Prado v California case just released last week.

 

[Snackbar]

No. It isn't justified because less intrusive means exist that are just as efficient. But hey, the 4th amendment has been inexorably marched off a cliff from which it will probably never scale again.

Go read the Prado v California case just released last week.

Just looked up the case, unless the guys truck bed was covered and the cops opened it without first obtaining a search warrant , which the document didnt state, i dont see anything wrong. He ran someone off the road, who then reported his vehicle make and licence, and when the cops find him they walk up to a open truck bed with a ton of weed in it.

Off the topic of dui check stops however. If you hit a dui check stop and the cop pulls you out and digs through your vehicle then that cop is in the wrong, until that point though the check stop does far more good than harm.

Also on the case mentioned is that not an example of monitoring for impaired driving signs? Just on the civilian level, then reported to law enforcement

 

[TeTe]

don't have a huge issue with it. Drunk driving is fucking stupid and I think the penalties as it stands are too lenient. If they wanted to start searching my car then that would be a different story.

Thing is, here police set up road blocks not just to catch drunk drivers. They look for anything like expired tags, insurance, license, etc.

Basically pulling over for one of these road blocks is accepting being questioned without probable cause then at that point police can use any excuse to search your car, if you let them. Which of course people need to understand forth amendment rights at that point.

 

[7437]

It is ok to drive intoxicated if you can handle your liquor. Its people you cant handle it that gives us good folk a bad rep.

The benefit is getting home when you need to get home.

Give me 10 beers and I gaurantee you Im still a better driver than 85% of the population. And much safer because Id drive slow and very careful

said every guy who killed someone on the road at 2am

 

[irish_thug]

I 100% support them and think we need more of them.

 

[HIMBOB]

No point having laws if you don't enforce them.



What bugs me is one they commonly set up near my old place, you can see it about 500m away and if you thought you were over the limit you can just take a turn before you get to it, thereby avoiding it.
If you avoid it you do have to go over the harbour bridge and so it would take you 5-10 mins to avoid it and but if you thought you were drunk that aint much hassle.

In short I dislike the time it takes like upto 5mins, but they are completely worth that minimal cost to me.

 

[Happiness]

i never argued the merits of drunk driving as if it is a positive. I argued that in some cases, drunk driving is not harmful and people should not be penalized without showing driving impairment.

In the vast majority of instances Russian roulette isn't harmful either. Go play a round or two.