Dui Checkpoints

[magic7 2]

Hopefully this should not matter to anyone, but from Dec 12-18 Morris County is doing DUI crackdown. Two were up I passed through tonight. One in Morristown at the train station and one on Route 10 between Denville/Randolph.

 

Stay safe

[MrP 81]

It's a hassle and a time-waster if nothing else.

[Maksim 1,504]

eh, it works I am sure. just don't do anything wrong.

 

for LEO, how effective are these? Not necessarily for DUI's but to get other violations, such as warrants

[RecessedFilter 222]

You'd be surprised at how many drunks they pull off the road. You'd also be surprised at how many peoples cars reek of drugs (marijuana) haha.

[chris327 30]

Maks search for elmwood park pd I believe it was. Newspaper article a few months ago about how effective it has been for them. They do them on a weekly basis.

[crazyboy 13]

eh, it works I am sure. just don't do anything wrong.

 

for LEO, how effective are these? Not necessarily for DUI's but to get other violations, such as warrants

 

 

Unless you have probable cause for something else all you can check for is dui. Everyone I've been at has ended up locking up 5+ people. Even if they get one drunk off the road its worth it.

[Anselmo 87]

 

 

Unless you have probable cause for something else all you can check for is dui. Everyone I've been at has ended up locking up 5+ people. Even if they get one drunk off the road its worth it.

 

I think it is a violation of the 4th amendment. Absent probable cause, no one should be detained by the police and asked for their papers.

[Babaganoosh 192]

 

 

I think it is a violation of the 4th amendment. Absent probable cause, no one should be detained by the police and asked for their papers.

 

they went to court over this one. To get around it they publish the stops ahead of time in the newspaper. That way law abiding citizens can avoid it.

 

As far as usefulness they do pretty good by me. However I live on the jersey shore and have all the popular nightclubs around me.

[tommy3rd 132]

Also, if you think "that's stupid, publishing where they're going to setup the checkpoint!" It really doesn't matter because the stupid drunk will still forget about it and go through it.

[ExpendableRaj 1]

they went to court over this one. To get around it they publish the stops ahead of time in the newspaper. That way law abiding citizens can avoid it.

 

Yes, what a great method of warning people. Since I am 78 years old and retired, I have plenty of time to see whats on page 17 of the local paper every day.

[TheLugNutZ 21]

You'd be surprised at how many drunks they pull off the road. You'd also be surprised at how many peoples cars reek of drugs (marijuana) haha.

 

thats what I was thinking. I wonder if that is more common then alcohol...?

[Babaganoosh 192]

 

 

Yes, what a great method of warning people. Since I am 78 years old and retired, I have plenty of time to see whats on page 17 of the local paper every day.

 

I'm not saying I agree with it. I'm just teling you the why and the how. They also publish it on the newspaper's website.

[coldsolderjoint 84]

I think it is a violation of the 4th amendment. Absent probable cause, no one should be detained by the police and asked for their papers.

 

Well, I have mixed feelings on this issue.

 

I do think its encroaching on everyone's rights, but I frequently drive home late at night and its always been a 30 second, "Hi, we are (insert town name) PD. Where you coming from tonight?" and if you don't give them a response that is retarded, they give you a card about how bad DUI is from the prosecutor and you are on your way. I've never been asked for my party papers.

 

But, being hit/killed by a drunk driver isn't a good situation for anyone, and these checkpoints are very effective. I know the one by my mothers house used to average 10 DUI's a night in only a few hours.

 

I've been in situations where I was trailing a drunk for long periods of time, and lets be honest, unless you happen to get lucky and a cop is sitting there, calling 911 whilst traveling through several towns isn't going to be very effective. "OK, I'm headed north on 35 in Old bridge, ok, no now im in sayerville..." "sayerville?" "yeah.. now im in south amboy".. Aside from crashing into him with your own car and beating the piss out of him, what else are you going to do?

 

Now those damn mobile inspection stations for MVC, those I have a bigger problem with.

[Malsua 1,422]

Where you coming from tonight?"

 

This is in lieu of "paper's please".

 

It's none of their business. The state has no right to know and despite the fact that they've been getting away with asking this question for decades, it's still none of their business. "But it's part of their investigation". I've got an idea...ask me if I've been drinking. If I respond in the negative and I'm not slurring, release me from your illegal Terry stop.

[CageFighter 236]

Since Im not answering their "have u been drinking tonight" & hoping to stop the fishing exp, can I refuse the field test (aka alphabet, walk, etc)? I kno they will make me blow in the breathlyzer @ HQ, but i dont wanna deal w/ the BS on scene.

[Dan 177]

I feel these checkpoints are unconstitutional and are nothing more than "suspisionless investigatory seizures", as pointed out in this excellent article. Just like those roadblocks that ICE does for immigration checks miles inside the US from the border with Mexico. The govt is always probing to see what they can get away with, trying to push that bar as far as they can without anyone pushing back.

 

The supreme court needs to look at this again. Their last decision was based on their idea that a little unconstitutionality or infringement on liberty is OK because the intent is good for the masses (stopping drunk drivers). I always subscribe to the old saying "the road to hell is paved in good intentions". Sounds like judicial activism to me.

[this_is_nascar 162]

I have no problem being inconvenienced for a few minutes if it means getting a drunk off the road. Most folks feel one way, until they've had a family member or friend killed by a drunk driver, then their opinion usually changes.

[Midwest 28]

Now those damn mobile inspection stations for MVC, those I have a bigger problem with.

 

Here they have the occasional DOT inspections, which seem to concentrate on commercial drivers in commercial vehicles.

 

My question what if an out of state driver goes through the NJ MVC mobile inspection checkpoint? They can't cite a driver for only having one license plate or doesn't have an emissions check certificate if their state back home doesn't require it. I guess for them ...they check license, insurance and registration and lets them go on if those are in order?

[Soju 153]

The courts have upheld that DUI and Immigration checkpoints are allowed but ONLY under limited circumstances and ONLY related to DUI and Immigrations checks. As soon as they do anything other then that, they are operating outside the scope of their legality, and these become illegal. As I understand, they cannot even require you to produce a drivers license UNLESS they have REASONABLE suspicion that you are drunk.

 

Regardless, I strongly doubt that any of these checkpoints follow the law as required at all times. Therefore they are likely ILLEGAL and have no business being done. You know where else that random suspicion less checkpoints took place? Nazi Germany.

 

I strongly encourage anyone who goes through a checkpoint like this to both refuse to answer ANY questions, any I mean ANY and every, and to also record the encounter. The only one who is going to protect you, and your rights, is yourself.

 

Sobriety checkpoints have increasingly become profitable operations that are far more likely to seize cars from unlicensed — and often illegal immigrant — motorists, than to catch drunken drivers.

 

Basically, they are illegal revenue grabbers.

[XDJohnTact 49]

I have only run by two of these, the officer asks "where are you coming from" or "how are you doing today" just to get close enough to see if he can smell alcohol or if you can speak coherently. Neither time did they as for any paperwork! If they save one person from being killed by a drunk driver, I am all for them!

[Anselmo 87]

I have only run by two of these, the officer asks "where are you coming from" or "how are you doing today" just to get close enough to see if he can smell alcohol or if you can speak coherently. Neither time did they as for any paperwork! If they save one person from being killed by a drunk driver, I am all for them!

 

This is the same argument the anti-gun people use. People get all bent out of shape when an open carrying person is stopped by the police and "investigated."

 

It is a slippery slope.

[Soju 153]

I have only run by two of these, the officer asks "where are you coming from" or "how are you doing today" just to get close enough to see if he can smell alcohol or if you can speak coherently. Neither time did they as for any paperwork! If they save one person from being killed by a drunk driver, I am all for them!

 

Glad to hear you support violations to our 4th Amendment. Bravo for standing up for the oppression of our rights! Heil, mein Führer!

[Anselmo 87]

Just replace "drunk driver" with "illegal gun" or "illegal immigrant" and you can see the slippery slope.

[njpilot 671]

I feel these checkpoints are unconstitutional and are nothing more than "suspisionless investigatory seizures", as pointed out in this excellent article. Just like those roadblocks that ICE does for immigration checks miles inside the US from the border with Mexico. The govt is always probing to see what they can get away with, trying to push that bar as far as they can without anyone pushing back.

 

The supreme court needs to look at this again. Their last decision was based on their idea that a little unconstitutionality or infringement on liberty is OK because the intent is good for the masses (stopping drunk drivers). I always subscribe to the old saying "the road to hell is paved in good intentions". Sounds like judicial activism to me.

 

Yep. Say goodbye to your privacy as more and more police departments want to procure UAVs so they can surveil the general public. Big brother wants to be watching all of us all of the time.

 

(Tin foil hat off)

[TacGuy911 25]

There is a simple solution.. Don't drive drunk.. We do the checkpoints in my town.. We do the "every x car".. A simple Hi, how are you and you are on your way unless of course you are or appear to be drunk.. No harm done.. If you don't have a habit of driving drunk you shouldn't have a problem with it.. Its amazing the people that are against cracking down on drunk driving deaths/accidents..

[JimmyAGR 54]

There is a simple solution.. Don't drive drunk.. We do the checkpoints in my town.. We do the "every x car".. A simple Hi, how are you and you are on your way unless of course you are or appear to be drunk.. No harm done.. If you don't have a habit of driving drunk you shouldn't have a problem with it.. Its amazing the people that are against cracking down on drunk driving deaths/accidents..

 

Not against cracking down on drunk driving. Against having my rights violated.

[diamondd817 827]

Personally, Im for it. I am also a big fan of profiling. There, I said it.

[TacGuy911 25]

Driving a motor vehicle is not a right, its a privilege.. You are not being stripped searched or having a pat down.. You speak with an Officer and are on your way... I don't see how your rights are being violated.. You are not being taken out of the vehicle and having your vehicle or persons searched.. You simply roll down the window and speak with an Officer.. The best are the guys that roll up with their windows lowered about half inch and say they did nothing wrong and ask if they are being detained, blah blah blah.. Meanwhile his vehicle easily has 10 mv violations.. Yea.. Real smart.. Each checkpoint is authorized and overseen by the prosecutor to ensure everything is done 110% correctly.. If it was illegal then we wouldn't be doing it and wouldn't get convictions in court..

[TacGuy911 25]

Personally, Im for it. I am also a big fan of profiling. There, I said it.

 

Nothing wrong with profiling.. It's racial profiling that is the issue...

[Soju 153]

. If you don't have a habit of driving drunk you shouldn't have a problem with it..

 

Well some people you know, support their rights. It is views like this why are rights are constantly eroded, over 'safety'.

 

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Ben Franklin

 

I don't see how your rights are being violated..

 

You need to take a look at the constitution then. Particularly the Bill of Rights, more specifically the 4th Amendment. Might as well take a look at the 5th Amendment while your at it. Heck, the whole thing would be nice.

You are not being taken out of the vehicle and having your vehicle or persons searched.. You simply roll down the window and speak with an Officer.. The best are the guys that roll up with their windows lowered about half inch and say they did nothing wrong and ask if they are being detained, blah blah blah..

That is exactly what you should do.

 

Each checkpoint is authorized and overseen by the prosecutor to ensure everything is done 110% correctly.. If it was illegal then we wouldn't be doing it and wouldn't get convictions in court..

 

What bizarro world do you live in? That is hilarious!

 

Nothing wrong with profiling.. It's racial profiling that is the issue...

 

So it is okay to profile by age, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and anything else one choices then?