Sobriety checkpoints

[98Cobra]

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/local/stories/080506dnmetcheckpoints.206d526.html

I know this is another law being pushed for under the guise of the good it will do, but this seems very counter to what the founding fathers envisioned, IMO. I do not think that the law should have the right to stop every vehicle that drives down a particular road looking for drunks. Doesnt that seem to violate protections against unreasonable search and seizure?

[Mark #2]

I disagree with the Texas doesn't use them, they sure used too on Greenville north years ago, once on the bike, ABCDEFG.... since you have a valid M license, insurance, and are wearing helmet go on, but you really shouldn't drink when riding a bike.

They probably figured Darwin would take over, almost always road the bike when drinking as I knew what I had to do to get home, not that the bike never sat somewhere if something else worked out.;)

[jeff56]

"Fatalities caused by impaired motorists have made drunken driving a serious public health issue. In 2005, 251 people died in alcohol-related crashes in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration."

[98Cobra]

Do you really believe that because of this, we should give police the power to stop every vehicle that is going down the street to see if they MIGHT have had too much to drink?

What's the difference between that and stopping you to see if you MIGHT have guns in your car, or MIGHT have drugs, or MIGHT have warrants out for tickets or something?

What happened to presumption of innocence?

[wesman]

Do you really believe that because of this, we should give police the power to stop every vehicle that is going down the street to see if they MIGHT have had too much to drink?

What's the difference between that and stopping you to see if you MIGHT have guns in your car, or MIGHT have drugs, or MIGHT have warrants out for tickets or something?

What happened to presumption of innocence?


That's exactly it.....revenue generation my friend. Let's pull you over and then see what else is going on and what we can charge you for.

--wes

[jeff56]

:rolleyes:

Yeah, because there's not enough reasons already on the books to be able to stop people and do that if this was the objective.

Implementation of a sobriety checkpoint would be something done on high DWI holidays or down the road from irreputable bars, etc. Stop the people before they have a chance to get too far out on the road and hurt someone.

[Mark #2]

irreputable bars,

I remember the officers loving those places, always saw them there. Thankfully it was very different in the 80s.;)

[Wht95Lightning]

What the article does NOT say is how many of these fatalities are caused by repeat offenders. The penalties for DUI when nobody gets hurt are way to light. People that drive drunk should be beaten vigorously and repeatedly. Spare the rod, spoil the drunk. :flaming:

Do I think there should be random checkpoints? No, I don't. The cops should focus on getting the drunks, not hasseling EVERYONE that happens to wind up on whatever street they choose to target. :hammer:

This is the same flawed logic that TSA uses at DFW. While they're practically strip searching an 80 year old lady in a wheel chair. OBL is having a cold one in the Admirals Club.

[jeff56]

Actually, I agree with you almost on every point. I particularly agree with your first statement, and that goes hand in hand with my different perspective on your second. The police already do focus very diligently on getting the drunks. The problem is the judicial system that treats it so lightly. It's getting better, but it has a long way to go.

I've been arguing the other side here, but personally, I don't know that I would be a proponent of checkpoints myself. Just like to play the devils' advocate, especially concerning a topic such as this. I do think they could do some good if you set one up right outside the exit to any of the bars that are notorious for overserving. Probably see a lot more taxis and designated drivers. That wouldn't be a long term solution, however.



What the article does NOT say is how many of these fatalities are caused by repeat offenders. The penalties for DUI when nobody gets hurt are way to light. People that drive drunk should be beaten vigorously and repeatedly. Spare the rod, spoil the drunk. :flaming:

Do I think there should be random checkpoints? No, I don't. The cops should focus on getting the drunks, not hasseling EVERYONE that happens to wind up on whatever street they choose to target. :hammer:

This is the same flawed logic that TSA uses at DFW. While they're practically strip searching an 80 year old lady in a wheel chair. OBL is having a cold one in the Admirals Club.