Constitutionality of DWI checkpoints?

[rubber duck]

They absolutely 100% are about money.

Example:

I have a very good friend that owns his own construction company. One day last summer he was driving home from a job he has been working on for several months.
He was pulled over by local law enforcement and when the cop walked up to his car, after asking for the dl and registration etc...he asked my friend to get out of his car since he said he smelled alcohol. My friend admitted he had a few beers earlier that day at a late lunch, he's not much of a drinker for the record.
The cop started to adminster the drunk test, touch your nose, etc...when another cop rolled up and said "hey we gotta go we have another cal, blah, blah, blah"
The cop now smacked his drivers license & registration back into my buddy's chest and said "get out of here".
So you tell me, if a DUI stop is really about safety, why would you let one loose?

The job is all about discretion.

If an officer chooses to do field sobriety on you he is observing you from the time he first makes contact with you. I'm sure the officer observed your buddy while he was talking to him, observed him exit the car, walk back to him and obviously when he started to give field sobriety testing. I'm guessing the officer felt comfortable enough to let your buddy continue on home based on his observations of your friend, and due to an in progress call he needed to respond to. If your friend was trashed off his ass the officer wouldn't have let him leave behind the wheel, as there are other options when there is no time for a DUI.

If you're going to make an outlandish claim that DUI's are 100% about money, you're going to have to use a better example. Better yet, join a PD, put a couple years in, which should be more than enough time for you to experience your first gruesome DUI related accident, scoop some formerly human meat off the pavement, have to sack up and explain to the deceased's next of kin what happened, and then get back to me.

 

[TERMIN8TR]

experience your first gruesome DUI related accident, scoop some formerly human meat off the pavement

Been there, done that, and much worse.

 

[rubber duck]

Been there, done that, and much worse.

So you must know it's really all about the money then.

 

[juzlookzfazt]

Just wiki'd it and it seems it is unconstitutional, but is a necessary infringement to save lives according to the Supreme Court. If I remember correctly (I closed it), they called it a "permissible infringement" lol.

 

[juzlookzfazt]

So you must know it's really all about the money then.

Yep. Where else can officers constantly hit home runs with their ticket books lol.

 

[exdeath]

DUI isn't about money, it's just carried to an emotional extreme by fanatics and taken overboard. Fear mongering about "what if" scenarios at it's finest.

No, there can't be drunk drivers on the road. But manhandling and intimidating and searching people who haven't even had a drink isn't the way to go about it.

There are plenty of more common and insignificant things to pull people over for if you're just trying to make money.

If you want to talk about revenue schemes, DUI isn't one of them. However, the sudden explosion of photo radar and speed traps everywhere all of the sudden when cities are facing budget crisis is another story. I've seen more people simultaneously pulled over on the side of the same stretch of road on a daily basis in the last year than I have since I got my license.

 

[svtcop]

Seems that all states conduct checkpoints differently.
Ohio advertises the checkpoints on the local news, in newspapers, etc.. days before they are conducted. The precise location is also given in advance. Don't like it, go another route. Kinda like road construction that seems unnecessary, is that unconstitutional too? They make you wait. :shrug:

5 in one night is insane! You couldn't go through 5 in Ohio if you tried.

 

[svtcop]

DUI isn't about money, it's just carried to an emotional extreme by fanatics and taken overboard. Fear mongering about "what if" scenarios at it's finest.

No, there can't be drunk drivers on the road. But manhandling and intimidating and searching people who haven't even had a drink isn't the way to go about it. Where does this happen at?

There are plenty of more common and insignificant things to pull people over for if you're just trying to make money.

I have to say that I know a lot of Officers what absolutely HATE doing OVI's. And you all would be surprised at how many people that could have been arrested for OVI but were given the opportunity to "catch another way home"
Not much money being made there.

 

[yosemiddysam]

What is OVI?????

 

[txyaloo]

I have to say that I know a lot of Officers what absolutely HATE doing OVI's. And you all would be surprised at how many people that could have been arrested for OVI but were given the opportunity to "catch another way home"
Not much money being made there.

I've seen the same, but I also know officers that specifically target drunks. They spend their entire night going after them because they enjoy getting drunks off the road no matter how bad the paper work sucks.

What is OVI?????

OVI = Operating a Vehicle while Intoxicated

 

[svtcop]

I've seen the same, but I also know officers that specifically target drunks. They spend their entire night going after them because they enjoy getting drunks off the road no matter how bad the paper work sucks.

I know those kind of Officers as well. (very well) :coolman:

had a guy ask me just the other night.."you enjoying yourself?" my response: "getting drunks like you off the road before you kill yourself or someone else, you bet your ass I am" he was .001 away from being 3 times the legal limit :bash:

and thank you sir for clarifying OVI for those who wondered (Ohio uses this term). but OVI in Ohio is actually "operating vehicle under the influence of alcohol or drugs" oke: :beer:

 

[snakecharmer]

Totally and completely opposed to them. They are a violation of the 4th ammendment, and no one will ever convince me otherwise.

 

[95oRANGEcRUSH]

A brief explanation of why it is legal in the United States.

Opinion: Why Are DUI Sobriety Checkpoints Constitutional?

 

[FX4 SAPPER]

I think they are un-needed and a violation of civil liberty. But then again i dont ever drink and drive. I dont understand though why at least in my state you usually only see them towards the end of the month... sounds like quota filling to me

 

[NyteByte]

A brief explanation of why it is legal in the United States.

Opinion: Why Are DUI Sobriety Checkpoints Constitutional?

From the article:
"yes, it appears to be a blatant violation of the Constitution. However, he continued, it's only a little one"

Well, gee I guess it's OK then. :shrug:
Unbelievable.

 

[FordSVTFan]

They absolutely 100% are about money.

Example:

I have a very good friend that owns his own construction company. One day last summer he was driving home from a job he has been working on for several months.
He was pulled over by local law enforcement and when the cop walked up to his car, after asking for the dl and registration etc...he asked my friend to get out of his car since he said he smelled alcohol. My friend admitted he had a few beers earlier that day at a late lunch, he's not much of a drinker for the record.
The cop started to adminster the drunk test, touch your nose, etc...when another cop rolled up and said "hey we gotta go we have another cal, blah, blah, blah"
The cop now smacked his drivers license & registration back into my buddy's chest and said "get out of here".
So you tell me, if a DUI stop is really about safety, why would you let one loose?

Your rhetoric is getting old. DUIs are very serious and are taken as such. However, they dont take priority over other criminal acts that involve immediate threats to life. For instance, a call for a strong armed burglary will necessitate multiple officers and will take priority over a DUI stop.

Additionally, L.E.O.s dont give a crap about revenue. The thinking is analytical. It is which crime requires my attention first. Sort of like triage in a hospital although a patient was being treated for a significant head laceration, a patient having an M.I. is treated first and they stop working on the head laceration patient.

Tell me what was the other call they were going to?

 

[FordSVTFan]

Totally and completely opposed to them. They are a violation of the 4th ammendment, and no one will ever convince me otherwise.

Too bad SCOTUS doesn't agree with you. The great thing is your opposition doesn't matter, the Court has spoken. BTW, learn how to spell Amendment.

 

[rubber duck]

Yep. Where else can officers constantly hit home runs with their ticket books lol.

If officers are nothing more than glorified tax collectors, there are MUCH faster, easier, and efficient ways to collect revenue than DUI enforcement, but whatever you guys need to tell yourselves to continue the fight against "the man".

 

[FordSVTFan]

If officers are nothing more than glorified tax collectors, there are MUCH faster, easier, and efficient ways to collect revenue than DUI enforcement, but whatever you guys need to tell yourselves to continue the fight against "the man".

That is so true. If people would do some research and look at the fines associated with other "crimes" they would pale in comparison to DUI.

 

[ecoastkid]

Too bad SCOTUS doesn't agree with you. The great thing is your opposition doesn't matter, the Court has spoken. BTW, learn how to spell Amendment.

Holy smokes....Is anyone allowed to have an opinion that differs from yours?


I dont think general DUI inforcement is about money and it is certainly needed. However, DUI checkpoints sure the hell are about the bucks. Its easily disguised as a public saftey initiative but its used to check out every car for every infraction as it goes by. If the true intention was to just stop drunk driving, the cops wouldn't waste time writing tickets for minor offenses such as a missed inspection and would focus on their altruistic actions...HAHA...yeah right.

In general, the very actions the police take to cite violators of any traffic related law point to the fact that its primary goal is revenue generartion. If the true desire was to get the public to stop commiting the infractions, they would NOT HIDE and have 1/2 their fleet be unmarked (Obviously there are some legit uses for them). Instead, they would be in plain site and even attempt to be extra visable all the time to PREVENT the breaking of the law.


I agree that its a total violation of our constituional rights regardless of what any court or anyone else says.