I just wish the cops around here would worry more about catching thieves than pulling People over for ridiculously slow barely marked speed limits. I got pulled over for doing 36 in a 25 and the sign was behind a tree. Then you go to court and you're guilty until proven innocent. That is bullshit too. Quick, I thought our taxes helped to pay those salaries too?
DUI Checkpoint refusal
- Thread starter Nomar
- Start date
jhk07 said:
There are a lot of rules that have tobe followed when setting up a check point. Those things have been set out by the courts. You can't do random vehicles. You have to do every vehicle that comes through. Google it if you want to know all the rest.
Come on, cut some from your list.knewsom said:
Border patrol checkpoints do their job - and remember that we live at the border.
Agricultural checkpoints - there's a reason for them, even if they don't do their job.
We don't have toll booths out West, except for a very few nearly-bankrupt toll roads that have bypasses.
Facial recognition software?
Speed cameras?
Drones?
DUI checkpoints do bother me, I have to say. Because the chances are that, on the days these are carried out, I am more likely to be driving after having a drink. Does not make me drunk, but it does put me in somewhat murky area.
quick128 said:
Regardless of what the courts say, they are illegal. Courts are wrong all the time. And yes, you are stopping random vehicles , because you are not stopping everyone. Really irrelevant, as there is no probable cause unless driving after dark is a reason to be stopped.
It's an easy money maker, and most drunks don't carry a gun. Go patrol a high crime area.
Drunk Driving is a serious offense. Noticed I said Drunk. Fact is most of the people getting busted are just hardworking people that might have had 1 too many. And chances are they are not going to shoot you. Go catch a criminal with a gun.
just a rant ....... I appreciate my LEO's, but most of the time I think they have their priorities all fucked up.
Last edited:
p m said:
DUI checkpoints serve a purpose too - to keep drunks off the road. I admit to feeling a little nervous around them and around cops when I've had a drink or two before driving, but I'm careful not to drive if I'm impaired... still, I totally get the feeling of unease. You don't want to have to answer "yes" when the officer asks if you've been drinking. I'm always afraid of running into the one LEO who's got an axe to grind and will look for any reason to haul my ass in because I had a scotch after dinner.
Agreed that a good police officer should be able to pick out a drunk with ease. Some cops are morons though, and don't know what to look for. When I was in college, I was pulled over at about 1:30AM by University Police (nowhere near the college, and I hadn't come from there). I was on my way home from a midnight movie (had watched Mulholland Drive), and when the officer came up to my window, he had the big maglight straight in my face. He asked if I'd been drinking. Squinting into the light, "no sir, not a drop." "Get out of the car please sir." "Uh, ok... really? What's the problem sir?" "You've got a tail light out." "Ah - wellsir, I've got a spare in my toolbox not one block from here..." "Step around to the sidewalk please." *sigh* "ok" He proceeded to give me the entire sobriety test. At this point, it should have been PAINFULLY obvious that I'm drop-dead sober, so I was getting pretty pissed at the situation - chances are, there were ACTUAL drunk drivers out there who he could be going after. So when he asked me to recite the alphabet, I got wise (I was getting pissed). "Ok. In which language?" "You getting wise with me kid?" "Yes sir I am - if it isn't completely obvious to you, I'm SOBER. I can say the alphabet in several languages. Swedish, English, French, Spanish, Chinese... Pick one." "I don't like your attitude." "Look, can you just give me the damned breathalizer so I can go home and you can go after ACTUAL drunks?" Entirely sure of himself (and seething with rage) he pulls out the device, obviously looking forward to cuffing me and tossing me in the back of his car. I breathe into it, and his face scrunches up in confusion. He walks over to his partner and whispers to him, "it says 'zero'." "try it again". Again, I breathe into the device. Again, of course, it reads zero. He lets me go (I guess being a smartass isn't an arrestable offense). I asked him, "What the heck made you think I was drunk?" "Your eye twitched when I shone my light into it." :banghead: Gee, my eye twitched at 1:30 in the morning after coming from am movie (which I told him), having had a giant flashlight pointed at me? OBVIOUSLY I was drunk.
quick128 said:
Not to jump on you because you're obviously an LEO but your comment is a facade. You just change the names to 'license check' and they can check cars in any order they please here in NC.
ptschram
Well-known member
We might not have border patrol checkpoints 100 miles from the border (WTF? We don't have a fence but you stop law abiding citizens and demand their papers?) if the citizenry hadn't all been good sheeple and gone along with it because it's "for our own safety".
I can guarantee you I will be arrested at a border checkpoint for refusing to prove my citizenship-but, if stopped with reasonable suspicion, I will gladly proffer my US PASSPORT as proof of identity, citizenship and legality to work in the US.
As an employer, I refuse to conduct I-9 screenings. I cannot determine the status of a motor vehicle or firearm without having a LEO present so it can be confiscated, but I can decline to hire someone because they are not able to work in the US and no action is taken against the person breaking the law?
Yeah, fucked up priorities. This great nation was built upon a solid foundation of freedom and every time a LEO does something like this, there is another crack in the bedrock.
No reasonable suspicion-go fuck yourself and maybe you should be charged with treason as well!
I can guarantee you I will be arrested at a border checkpoint for refusing to prove my citizenship-but, if stopped with reasonable suspicion, I will gladly proffer my US PASSPORT as proof of identity, citizenship and legality to work in the US.
As an employer, I refuse to conduct I-9 screenings. I cannot determine the status of a motor vehicle or firearm without having a LEO present so it can be confiscated, but I can decline to hire someone because they are not able to work in the US and no action is taken against the person breaking the law?
Yeah, fucked up priorities. This great nation was built upon a solid foundation of freedom and every time a LEO does something like this, there is another crack in the bedrock.
No reasonable suspicion-go fuck yourself and maybe you should be charged with treason as well!
Kris, as it follows from your own post, DUI checkpoint serve little purpose.
When you're on the road, you don't have to be a LEO to spot someone who is clearly impaired - whether due to texting or eating or applying makeup or wiping the toddlers' sneeze or being drunk. As you drive along, you can see in a minute whether this condition was accidental or persistent.
But, to do a job as a LEO (if you think your job as highway patrolman is to keep traffic save), you have to be moving along with the traffic. Yet, when I drove to Dana Point on Monday, I saw five speed traps between La Jolla and Oceanside, with motorcycle and CHP cars sitting in the poor-visibility zones behind overpasses and such. This is nothing but revenue generation.
When you're on the road, you don't have to be a LEO to spot someone who is clearly impaired - whether due to texting or eating or applying makeup or wiping the toddlers' sneeze or being drunk. As you drive along, you can see in a minute whether this condition was accidental or persistent.
But, to do a job as a LEO (if you think your job as highway patrolman is to keep traffic save), you have to be moving along with the traffic. Yet, when I drove to Dana Point on Monday, I saw five speed traps between La Jolla and Oceanside, with motorcycle and CHP cars sitting in the poor-visibility zones behind overpasses and such. This is nothing but revenue generation.
SlowChevy07 said:
But "seeing" isn't probable cause for an arrest. Just because someone looks like they may be intoxicated, doesn't mean that they actually are. Questions are asked to determine reasonable suspicion to remove someone from their car, odor of alcoholic beverage on breath, slurring of words, etc. In NJ there are state mandated Psycophysical tests we are required to do before we can arrest for dui. All checkpoints here are planned, and run by the county Prosecutor's Office, and staffed by a mix of fatal accident investigators from the prosecutors office, and local cops, with an assistant prosecutor on scene. And like most places, they're all advertised weeks in advance.
p m said:
That's sillyness. If an officer is driving with traffic north on I5, from LaJolla to Oceanside, He would be driving next to, in front of, and behind the same group of cars for the ~30 minute drive. The only traffic he is affecting is that group immediately around him, and none travelling south. I don't necessarily agree with hiding, I would prefer to be out in the open. That way people will see you and drive a safe speed. Those who are speeding exceptionally, will not be able to slow down as fast, and will be targeted for enforcement. Sitting in the open, you will affect the traffic and driving patterns of thousands of vehicles in the same 30 minutes.
ptschram
Well-known member
Durt D1ver said:
You just supported my arguments against the checkpoints as you have NO REASONABLE SUSPICION to even initiate the "contact", much less conduct psychophysical testing.
Why is this contact any different from any other where I can tell the LEO I do not wish to submit to interrogation and am leaving.
No reasonable suspicion, the stop is prima facia improper (illegal/unconstitutional). Any arguments to the contrary are specious and only intended to support an erroneous conclusion and travesty perpetrated by our own SCOTUS.
Only someone who supports gutting of the constitution would continue to support such unsolicited "contacts".
This is EXACTLY what I think a highway patrolman should be doing. For every ridiculous speeder (moving, say, 20 mph faster than median traffic speed), there are 20 significantly distracted drivers.Durt D1ver said:
An unsafe lane change is a lot more dangerous than speeding - and that is what a LEO driving along the traffic will spot and act upon.
ptschram
Well-known member
teledan said:
Curiously, I am far more likely to argue with a LEO when I'm not doing anything illegally.
If I'm in the wrong, I'm gonna keep my mouth shut.
teledan said:
How about a peek in your trunk? Your home? Your medical history? Where does it stop?
I found this amusing and very sad at the same time.
<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R-Qg0C0WdJg?version=3&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R-Qg0C0WdJg?version=3&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>
<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R-Qg0C0WdJg?version=3&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R-Qg0C0WdJg?version=3&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>
teledan said:
If you are not a US Citizen, you are required to carry proof of your immigration status at all times, and produce it on request. That's part of the deal you made to come here legally.
US Citizens on the other hand, are not required to carry proof of anything. So what is a US citizen supposed to produce to prove that they are legal, then? Are we supposed to carry our US passports at all times now? I have a problem with that.
And don't for a second think that the 100 miles from the border zone you can be asked for papers are only along the southern border with Mexico. The zone is 100 miles from *any* US border, that includes the Mexican and Canadian border, as well as the eastern and western coastline. In other words, the areas where the majority of the US population lives.
ptschram said:
Paul,
As far as I'm concerned, If you said to me "I do not wish to submit to interrogation and am leaving", and when you told me that, you didn't reek of booze, and were able to get that sentence out clearly, my response would be, "sorry for inconveniencing you, have a safe drive home." Which would have been my response to 99.99% of the people who went through the stop. That also being said, My town hasn't run a checkpoint in over 2 years. When they did, I rarely worked them, as my personal belief isn't necessarily in complete disagreement with yours. I do however, pick up numerous DWI patrol shifts every year, where I drive around on patrol, and my sole purpose for being there is to pull over vehicles suspected of being operated by intoxicated drivers.
And just remember, according to Article 1 of the US Constitution, african american's are only worth 3/5ths of a white man, and native american are worth nothing. I don't believe that to be true, and I doubt you do either, but I mention that to show that the constitution can not always 100% be all end all. I also disagree with many of the decisions that the Supreme Court has made. And one day we may be able to sit down in private and discuss these. But, the US Supreme Court, along with the NJ Supreme court, along with many other states, has stated that LEO's are not entitled to free speech as granted by the US constitution, and I could be disciplined for whatever I may say on an open internet forum.