DUI Checkpoint Blitz - HCPD

[Kapohocat]

Why not just stay home, have a beer at home with friends, smoke a joint at home with friends, maybe even BBQ at home with friends.... and make sure the friends got a place to crash at your house till sober?

[dragon2k]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kapohocat

Why not just stay home, have a beer at home with friends, smoke a joint at home with friends, maybe even BBQ at home with friends.... and make sure the friends got a place to crash at your house till sober?

---

That's it Cat! It's cheaper and safer to gather in this manner. Bravo!

[eigoya]

Driving is a privlege, not a right.

[kalakoa]

KCat is describing "German" (or generally "European") style hospitality: because those countries have "real" DUI penalties, inviting friends over for dinner and drinks implicitly includes a night in the guestroom.

Obie's point is both 100% valid and 100% irrelevant: suppose you call ahead, and find out there's a checkpoint in Kurtistown... on the only highway in or out, so you can't easily "avoid" being stopped (well, unless you have an extra hour or so, detailed knowledge of the "back roads", and a high-ground-clearance vehicle...)

[Rob Tucker]

It would seem that Obie's point only applies if one feels entitled to drive impaired.

[Guest]

No it does not. No one should be detained without probable cause impaired or not. I was not aware of the supreme court case, and find it very interesting that they find it violates the Constitution while permitting it to happen. The problem is the dangerous precedent that it sets. Obviously at this point the Fourth is so far gone that DUI checkpoints are low down on the list, but it is still a big problem. There are now checkpoints all around this country for various unconstitutional reasons, they will stop you to see if you are a terrorist, they will stop you to check if your a citizen, this list is growing everyday now that unconstitutional checkpoints are accepted.

Can anyone else think of a country in history where the phrase "Papers please" during a unnecessary detainment was common?

I hope I can get through to some people, DUI checkpoints are not for our safety.

Besides the philosophical problem, which is the big one in this scary day and age.
There is very little evidence that DUI checkpoints have any positive effect removing intoxicated drivers from the road.
Most studies have found that saturation patrols are much more effective both in resources and man power used as well as arrests and removing drunks from the roads. Checkpoints take a lot of man power, money and focus mostly on the majority of sober drivers. Its easy to spot a drunk on the road, why don't they patrol for them? Besides the patrols which are effective, the real problem is the way our court system lets repeat offenders out to repeat their crimes, drunks, wife beaters, pedophiles, etc... They get let out as a matter of precedent, another one we should resist.

Checkpoints are unconstitutional as found by the supreme court, even if they let them fly and they are not to keep us safe, they are a waste of resources and man power. We are paying for them, why wont they patrol for drunks and why wont our judges put the drunks away?

[jlgerk]

It's not so much the actual check point that works, it's the going after the cars that turn around 2-3 blocks before the stop where they make their big finds. Seems that trying to avoid a check point is cause enough to stop and search.

[Guest]

Which is exactly the point, it should not be. You should not be forced into an unreasonable search and then get searched because you did not want it. This precedent is very very dangerous, I know right now people just want drunks off the road, I do too, but this is not the way to go about it and we WILL see why in the future.

[Rob Tucker]

afwjam,

You have made your point here six or seven times. We get it. Time for you to tell your state representatives and see what you can get them to do about it.

[oink]

Rob, I don't understand your comment? He was just referring to the result of policies required by the court.

Andy, I'm surprised you were unaware of that decision. It's not new. There are many exceptions to the Constitution that the court has ruled in favor of. Another one for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_v._United_States .
Road blocks for other purposes but similar in nature to the DUI road blocks are an undecided issue. Some of the same rationale that justified the DUI road blocks are used by agencies employing them for other (DL checks, etc.) purposes, but perhaps less convincingly. I don't believe SCOTUS has ruled on them.

By the way, drunks near the legal limit are often not easy to pick out while driving but can kill you none the less. It's easier on long straight roads but much more difficult to do where you don't have that long straight observation period. Long time alcoholics become experienced drunk drivers and are even harder to detect unless totally smashed but again can kill due to their dismal reaction times and general poor judgement.

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.