DUI Checkpoint Blitz - HCPD

[Guest]

Saturation patrols are more effective in terms of arrests and resources and they do not subject the majority of sober motorists to unconstitutional detainment and search. So if there is a cheaper, less man power needed, more effective way to get drunks off the road why don't we use that method?

I do know that MADD is pushing hard to get drunks off the road and I do know that they are happy with unconstitutional statist means to accomplish this, the same groups pushed prohibition as well. Just because the public wants something unconstitutional does not mean that they can have it, the Constitution was designed to protect the minority from the majority, we do not live in a Democracy, we live in a Constitutional Republic with democratic representation. We have the rule of law, not the rule of people.
Im not sure how the supreme court can decide something is unconstitutional and then allow it, it does not make sense and again sets a dangerous precedent.

We as a people in our state, just like in many others need to decide that this is unconstitutional and not allow it, especially given the fact that there are Constitutional means that are more effective and cost less resources. There is no such thing as a perfectly safe world and anybody that promises you this is a liar and a wannabe dictator. The only way for us to feel perfectly safe is for us not to be free and live in a prison, this is not American and it is not Aloha. Just because you have a pet issue of safety, does not give you the right to infringe others rights, just like drunks are free to drink yet have no right to infringe someone else's rights.

Now another dangerous precedent I see set in this thread is to associate anyone against these checkpoints as drunk drivers, these absurd collectivist tactics are again not in the spirit of America or Aloha. Just because I am against the Patriot act does not make me a terrorist, just because I own a gun, it does not make me a school shooter. Anyone who says things like this is sorely lacking in Aloha, intelligence and all full of strawman BS. Grow up.

Aloha.
Compassion, Love, Peace and Tolerance.

[dwedeking]

"I guess I just don't care if they are legal or not."

Most americans think this way. Personal liberty/responsibility is subservient to "greater good". It's a cultural thing so no manner/quantity of logical debate is going to change anyone's mind, especially in a community largely dependent upon .gov for survival (social security retirees and those living at or near the poverty level).

[ericlp]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dragon2k

I guess I just don't care if they are legal or not. If they get drunks off the road, then that saves lives. I'm willing to go through the inconvenience if it shows results, which around here, these checkpoints always do.

---

I guess I'm on the fence about this. My problem is yes, it's great they can get drunks off the road and save lives. But if they can blatantly do something illegally like pull you over for "ANY" reason not just for having a cause.

Where does the state draw the line? If they can get away with this what other laws will they break? Opening up Pandora's box again sometimes isn't wise.

[Rob Tucker]

ericlp, Perhaps you can do a little research, get back to us, and tell us where the state draws the line.

[Lupie]

They have DUI check points in other states too. Everybody can complain about their rights and blah blah blah... But it saves lives. If you're not doing anything wrong... You don't have anything to worry about. Plain and simple. I've been through check points like this before. They are not a big deal.

[dwedeking]

"But it saves lives. If you're not doing anything wrong..."

So by this argument warrantless searches, wiretapping and invasion of privacy are all acceptable as long as you wear a special uniform.

[Rob Tucker]

dwedeking, Trying to put words in people's mouths, that they did not say, is kinda a bad habit. Let's keep this topic dialed in on local DUI check points.

[ourdoc]

quote:

---

Originally posted by afwjam

Saturation patrols are more effective in terms of arrests and resources and they do not subject the majority of sober motorists to unconstitutional detainment and search. So if there is a cheaper, less man power needed, more effective way to get drunks off the road why don't we use that method?

---

At any given time, there are approximately 50 officers on duty on the entire island. Do you seriously think that saturation would work? 50 cops would not be enough to even saturate all of Hilo, much less Puna. The Big Island is just too big to even think about saturation and we don't have a large enough police force to think about it even if all officers were on duty at the same time. A sobriety checkpoint takes less than 5 officers. So your idea of saving resources, while it may work in large cities, will never work here.

Also to the others asking, a 6-3 decision in Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz (1990), the United States Supreme Court found properly conducted sobriety checkpoints to be constitutional, what part of that do you not understand??

[Guest]

Please people look at the very few studies, there is no proof that DUI checkpoints reduce drunk driving, there is proof that saturation patrols are more effective in terms of DUI arrests and cost far fewer in terms of resources. Saying that the DUI checkpoints make us safer is not something that can be backed up with evidence. There is evidence that checkpoints are unconstitutional and history shows us what happens when we allow our rights to be subverted like this, its just the start. There are many states that have ruled that checkpoints are unconstitutional and do not use them.

First they said they were coming for the drunks,
and I cheered them on because it made me feel safer.
Then they said they were coming for the terrorists,
and I cheered them on because it made me feel safer.
then they came for the gun owners,
and I cheered them on because it made me feel safer.
then they came for the political activists,
and I cheered them on because they told me they were dangerous and it made me feel safer.
then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak out.

[Guest]

What if those five officers were on duty one at a time every night patrolling the same streets as the checkpoints looking for drunks? How often do you see police in the beaches at night? What if these patrols were part of their regular pay and not special overtime? What if they did not need to have a commanding officer there to over see these patrol? What if they did not need to print signs, warnings in the paper and spent more time targeting actual drunks instead of stopping every single car on the road a majority of which are not intoxicated?

There are studies that have looked at these questions, for the same resources patrolling is more effective. Not to mention the police might be available when you need them.