Sobriety Checkpoints, Patrols Step Up

[RogerB]

I know everyone on here is a responsible adult that always errors on the side of caution, right?

Even if that WERE 100% correct, I'd still want to post this reminder.

Officers 'Blitz' Drunken, Dangerous Drivers - Indiana News Story - WRTV Indianapolis

Stay safe out there people, nothing wrong with a little partying. But just keep your senses about it.

 

[BloodEclipse]

Keep a can of kipper snacks handy.

They will only ask to smell your breath once.

 

[Substance-P]

I know everyone on here is a responsible adult that always errors on the side of caution, right?

Even if that WERE 100% correct, I'd still want to post this reminder.

Officers 'Blitz' Drunken, Dangerous Drivers - Indiana News Story - WRTV Indianapolis

Stay safe out there people, nothing wrong with a little partying. But just keep your senses about it.

Something that it never hurts to be reminded about. I have a friend who has been stopped by the cops twice recently on nights he was the designated driver as part of routine checks. Each time it was a great reminder to him on why it is important for him not to drink at all when he is the DD (he is not the best at self control).

 

[RogerB]

Keep a can of kipper snacks handy.

They will only ask to smell your breath once.

Kipper breath could work, true...

Or you could practice the "Art of not being seen"

YouTube - Monty Python "How Not To Be Seen"

 

[BloodEclipse]

Kipper breath could work, true...

Or you could practice the "Art of not being seen"

YouTube - Monty Python "How Not To Be Seen"

I think my chances of survival are better with the Kippers.

 

[RogerB]

I think my chances of survival are better with the Kippers.

true, but to be on the safe side....don't stand UP

or drink and drive lol

 

[BloodEclipse]

true, but to be on the safe side....don't stand UP, hide behind a shrubbery

or drink and drive lol

Fixed it for you.

 

[antdog/zook]

need to have "citizen" checkpoints!

 

[RogerB]

lol he said "Shrubbery"

 

[jrogers]

Or you could practice the "Art of not being seen"

You can always tell a Milford man.

Seriously though, while DUI checkpoints rub me the wrong way, people who drive while impaired are subhuman scum.

 

[Benny]

I love drinking too much and driving too much to do both at the same time, but I think sobriety checkpoints are bullsh*t.

 

[rhino]

Checkpoints are wrong, but we're not getting rid of them any time soon.

Don't forget that (at least in Indiana), you don't have to go through it. If you see it, you can turn around and go the other way.

I did so two weeks ago, in fact. I don't drink alcohol (at all), but I'm not submitting to a checkpoint.

 

[Bigum1969]

I'm with you Rhino.

I absolutely agree that checkpoints are wrong. I can honestly say that I have utter contempt for those who drive drunk, but that still does not make what the police do right. I'm fine with law enforcement nailing drunk drivers, but a checkpoint means that lots of folks get dinged for other things. Every time you hear about the results of these checkpoints, they catch a couple drunk drivers but issue 56 tickets for "other" violations.

Again, I think drunk driving is reckless, selfish and deserves severe punishment. But checkpoints are BS. Just my

 

[RogerB]

Checkpoints are wrong, but we're not getting rid of them any time soon.

Don't forget that (at least in Indiana), you don't have to go through it. If you see it, you can turn around and go the other way.

I did so two weeks ago, in fact. I don't drink alcohol (at all), but I'm not submitting to a checkpoint.

I would think if the law saw someone turn around to avoid going through a checkpoint...they would consider it probable cause and chase you down to test you anyway.

Wouldn't that be cause for suspicion?

But I'm probably completely wrong, been that alot of times.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

Checkpoints are wrong, but we're not getting rid of them any time soon.

Don't forget that (at least in Indiana), you don't have to go through it. If you see it, you can turn around and go the other way.

I did so two weeks ago, in fact. I don't drink alcohol (at all), but I'm not submitting to a checkpoint.

Just make sure you do so legally. Turn from the wrong lane, cut a u-turn where it isn't permitted, don't use your turn signal, have an equipment violation, etc....a chase car will stop you to see why you are avoiding the checkpoint.

 

[RogerB]

Just make sure you do so legally. Turn from the wrong lane, cut a u-turn where it isn't permitted, don't use your turn signal, have an equipment violation, etc....a chase car will stop you to see why you are avoiding the checkpoint.

+1 yup! thats what I was referring to, thanks!

 

[rhino]

Question answered!

One must be careful to not violate any regulations when lawfully avoiding a court-determined-to-be "legal" yet completely bullsh** abuse of our liberties.

You're not breaking any laws or providing any kind of probable cause if you turn away, but if the people at the checkpoint aren't busy, they're going to be watching you and looking for a reason to pull you over. Do not give one to them.

 

[Roadie]

Fixed it for you.

Gotta love a Forum where the members quote Monty Python!

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

Question answered!

One must be careful to not violate any regulations when lawfully avoiding a court-determined-to-be "legal" yet completely bullsh** abuse of our liberties.

You're not breaking any laws or providing any kind of probable cause if you turn away, but if the people at the checkpoint aren't busy, they're going to be watching you and looking for a reason to pull you over. Do not give one to them.

Drinking is a liberty, driving is a liberty. Drinking and then driving is not a liberty, it is against the law. There is no oppressed freedom to drink and drive.

You're not providing probable cause when you turn away, but you are providing reasonable suspicion that "criminal activity is afoot." I don't fault you for wanting to avoid the checkpoint, you just have to do it the right way so your freedom isn't temporarily restricted by the local constabulary. And it won't be the officers working the checkpoint that are watching for you to turn around, it will be the officers assigned to watch for people turning around and heading the other way.

On a related note: When a checkpoint is set up the coordinator decides how many vehicles are going to be stopped at one time. While the checkpoint is full of vehicles, all other traffic will be allowed to pass until it is time for more vehicles to enter. Did you know that EVERY vehicle selected has to enter the checkpoint? This includes all emergency vehicles (police, fire, ambulance), even if they are on duty, unless they are on an emergency run.

 

[rhino]

Drinking is a liberty, driving is a liberty. Drinking and then driving is not a liberty, it is against the law. There is no oppressed freedom to drink and drive.

Sure, but I don't drink and thus drinking and driving is impossible for me. Stopping everyone is wrong. Stopping me for that reason is not only wrong, it's a stupid waste of taxpayer's money. I have no problem with you enforcing legitimate laws and stopping someone when you have evidence or some reasonable suspicion. I have a huge problem with you stopping me because I might be doing something bad. Why that is unclear to some escapes me. It's just way too close to a blanket presumption of guilt. That's wrong.

If you think it's okay to stop everyone who is driving because they might be drinking too, why not detain and question everyone who has male genitalia? They might have raped someone after all, or they might rape someone in the future since they have all of the necessary tools. In my book, raping is a worse crime than operating a vehicle while intoxiated. The latter is the epitome of irresponsible behavior (and thus adequate justification of at least temporary compromise of that individual's rights after adjudication). The former is a deliberate, predatory and thoroughly evil act. I know you could catch a lot of rapists if you just stopped everyone who is male, forced a cotton swab into their mouth for an epithelial DNA sample, and just kept doing it. You'd save a lot of innocent women, children, and even men from suffering a horrible fate. It would still be wrong to do it.

It troubles me that more people do not object to roadblocks.

Keeping drunk drivers from hurting people is a good thing. Punishing people who are determined to have put others at unnecessary risk by doing so is a good thing.

Stopping everyone who happens to be driving by is not a good thing. It might make it easier to catch some drunk drivers. It might result in catching more of them in a specific time period. The erosion of my rights as someone who does not drink and drive is not worth it.

The ends do not justify the means. I try to sympathize with those who are in careers where they are systematically brainwashed into believing that the ends do justify the means. "The greater good" is an alluring concept and much harm has been done to many people in its pursuit.

I'll repeat myself: the ends do not justify the means.