Dui Checkpoints

[MarkWVU02 47]

sorry to say, but COPS are the BIGGEST violators of DRUNK driving bc they can get away with it! I worked in a bar for over 9yrs and see it all 1st hand! Whats good for us ISNT good for them....-WTF!

 

Couldn't agree with you more...I know a few officers that hang out at bars nightly getting tanked and then get behind the wheel. No one would arrest a fellow officer. Normally when I go out with my LEO buddies I make them drive for this very reason.

 

On a side note I got stopped at a DUI checkpoint. I was sick so I had one beer early in the night but stopped. My roommate got hammered. Obviously the car stunk from my roommate. I explained to the officer that I didn't drink but my passenger did. I was asked to count backwards from 67 to 59. After that I was told to have a good night. It's not much of an inconvenience but I feel stopping people like that is assuming you're guilty until you prove your innocent and I do believe there's something wrong with that.

[this_is_nascar 162]

thats the LIBERAL attitude in the NY/NJ area. (esp about capital punishmt, etc)

 

 

NO, sorry. That's reality. Obviosly, you've never had your kid, parent or sibling's life distroyed by an intoxicated driver, otherwise you'd feel differently.

[PeteF 1,044]

Wait wait wait wait.. Ok.. So first of all this was 1986.. It is physically impossible to go from a .10 to a .02 in 30 minutes.. The burnoff rate for alcohol is .015 per hour.. So if you blew a .10 at the stop then 30 minutes later you would have blown a .093 if anything.. How old were you when you got stopped?

 

OR the roadside equipment didn't work so well, which is a why a second reading at the station was required. 21

 

On a side note the summons is not being issued for a non offense.. I arrested you because I felt that you were too impaired to drive.. Just because you blow less then a .08 does not mean you are not impaired.. You have a better chance of getting it thrown out but a Judge can still rule against you based on observation..

 

No you are wrong. You can't issue an impaired if you have no evidence of impaired. You can issues many citations careless driving, reckless etc. But good luck with impaired if your only evidence of impairment is 3 miles over the speed limit.

[PeteF 1,044]

NO, sorry. That's reality. Obviosly, you've never had your kid, parent or sibling's life distroyed by an intoxicated driver, otherwise you'd feel differently.

 

So if a person is killed by a sober driver, the families life is any less destroyed. Get real.

[this_is_nascar 162]

Who cares whether it's revenue generator or not? The only way "the man" is making money off of you during a checkpoint is if you've f*cked-up and are doing something you shouldn't be. And, as far as I'm concerned, if you were stupid enough to do that than you deserve everything within the realm of the law to be thrown at you.

[this_is_nascar 162]

So if a person is killed by a sober driver, the families life is any less destroyed. Get real.

 

 

Please apply some common sense here. Of course I'm not saying that, but someone who's life is destroyed by someone who shouldn't have been behind the wheel is a different story.

[rdsmith3 19]

The airport searches bother me more than the DUI checkpoints, but maybe that's because I do not drink. I do understand about the erosion of rights, and it is a concern. The DUI checkpoint is borderline, IMO, but the airport searches seem to be beyond "reasonable."

 

Also, DUI arrests are about to become more controversial. In some states, they are now drawing blood from people who refuse to do a breathalyzer. They cannot force you to breathe heavily enough to register on the machine, but they can hold you down and take some of your blood.

 

All that said, DUI is a very serious crime, and I do not think the checkpoints are merely for revenue generation.

[this_is_nascar 162]

Please apply some common sense here. Of course I'm not saying that, but someone who's life is destroyed by someone who shouldn't have been behind the wheel is a different story.

 

So if a person is killed by a sober driver, the families life is any less destroyed. Get real.

 

 

Put yourself in this situation. Your "whoever you want to add" just had their life taken by an intoxicated driver vs. someone accidently failed to yield and caused the same end result. You mean to tell me you're not more pissed because of the intoxicated driver?

[KpdPipes 388]

Couldn't agree with you more...I know a few officers that hang out at bars nightly getting tanked and then get behind the wheel. No one would arrest a fellow officer. Normally when I go out with my LEO buddies I make them drive for this very reason.

 

On a side note I got stopped at a DUI checkpoint. I was sick so I had one beer early in the night but stopped. My roommate got hammered. Obviously the car stunk from my roommate. I explained to the officer that I didn't drink but my passenger did. I was asked to count backwards from 67 to 59. After that I was told to have a good night. It's not much of an inconvenience but I feel stopping people like that is assuming you're guilty until you prove your innocent and I do believe there's something wrong with that.

 

I've arrested half a dozen or so over the years..including a supervisor and my chief's Brother-in-law.

[MarkWVU02 47]

I think you'd be more of an exception then. I'm not against law enforcement so don't take me the wrong way. I have an uncle who's been on the JCPD almost 30 years now and a bunch of close friends in various departments. I just think they tend to look out for each other and would more likely have him park the car and drive the intoxicated officer home then make an arrest. I think it's human nature to protect your own and there are certainly arguments for and against that mentality.

[Anselmo 87]

Driving is a privilege not a right so they can ask you.

 

Let's be honest the DMV check points are all about revenue. On Rt 206 in Montgomery they run the DMV stop at least once a month.

 

It matters not a traveler's mode of transportation. Whether on foot, horse or carriage, one should not be subject to unreasonable search and detention without probable cause.

[Soju 153]

I've arrested half a dozen or so over the years..including a supervisor and my chief's Brother-in-law.

 

How many of them were convicted?

 

Though not on this forum, but I have consistently advocated for MORE severe punishment for drunk drivers. With that said, I don't agree with DUI checkpoints a single bit. They are unconstitutional, and even even though legal, most are operated illegally. If instead of stopping everybody at these BS checkpoints, they just sat at the side of the road and pulled over those who looked like they were driving drunk, then nobody has rights violated, they still get those breaking the law and driving dangerously, and everybody wins.

 

To clarify, when I say 'those who looked like they were driving drunk", I mean those actually driving in a manner that would make you think they are drunk, (or just a terrible driver) like swerving for example.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Ok, all you with Tinfoil hats on the that side of the room, those without the other side....

[Soju 153]

Tinfoil hats? There is a ton of video evidence, criminal cases, civil suits, and what the heck, Supreme Court rulings and case law regarding the subject. Tinfoil hat not necessary. As the saying goes, ignorance is bliss. It is always easier and usually you remain happier if you stay in your little hole where you don't know what is going on...until it effects you. I can't blame anyone for that.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Tinfoil hats? There is a ton of video evidence, criminal cases, civil suits, and what the heck, Supreme Court rulings and case law regarding the subject. Tinfoil hat not necessary. As the saying goes, ignorance is bliss. It is always easier and usually you remain happier if you stay in your little hole where you don't know what is going on...until it effects you. I can't blame anyone for that.

 

So my middle of the road comment brought you out.

 

By the way, before you start with the Stay in Your little Hole ****, find out who the fugg your talking to first. I see you very quick to alway take a defense when something isn't exactly to your liking. Relax man, relax, it's the internet, your not going to win or lose, you're not going to change a persons view on things most of the time..

[Anselmo 87]

And yet someone buying 10 rifles a day a at Texan gun store near the Mexican border shouldn't be identified? Who has the tin foil hat?

[hd2000fxdl 422]

And yet someone buying 10 rifles a day a at Texan gun store near the Mexican border shouldn't be identified? Who has the tin foil hat?

 

Why would someone buying 10 rifles raise a flag in the first place?????

 

I don't have to be in AZ or TX to do that, I can do that right here in NJ so, I'll buy 10 rifles a day here, I can, don't have the money for 10 new ones, maybe 10 used depending on what they are and maybe just for 1 day,, and your point is??

[Anselmo 87]

Why would someone buying 10 rifles raise a flag in the first place?????

 

I don't have to be in AZ or TX to do that, I can do that right here in NJ so, I'll buy 10 rifles a day here, I can, don't have the money for 10 new ones, maybe 10 used depending on what they are and maybe just for 1 day,, and your point is??

 

Just another example of how our 4th amendment rights are eroded.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Just another example of how our 4th amendment rights are eroded.

 

Did something change? Can I not head over to PK90 place, TJ Tony's or Legends Ira's place, or how about DSG (Dicks Sporting Goods) and I can buy 10 longs guns.

 

Good night, I'll check in tomorrow, OL is calling me and I do have to get up early to go shoot steel tomorrow. Later

[Duppie 73]

And Canada,

 

I even saw a CBP vehicle on rt 2 in Ohio on my way to CMP, I guess they're worried the Canadians might swim across lake Erie.

I go through a couple just about every summer in the Adirondacks usually 50 miles south of the Canadian border and ICE,ATF,park police,customs,agricultural are all present at the random stops. They have yet to find my whole milk cheeses and boudin noir.

[checko 180]

It saves lives. I like things that save lives. If you don't like it call your congressional representative.

[Anselmo 87]

POSITION: The Brady Campaign supports banning military-style semi-automatic assault weapons along with high-capacity ammunition magazines. These dangerous weapons have no sporting or civilian use. Their combat features are appropriate to military, not civilian, contexts.

 

While we will never be able to stop all violence, there is no reason we should make it so easy for dangerous and irresponsible people to get weapons that help them kill a lot of people so quickly. Sensible gun laws can help save lives.

 

 

Why worry so much about the 2A but be complacent about the 4A when the battle cry is that infringement on our rights is allowable because it can help save lives?

[PeteF 1,044]

Put yourself in this situation. Your "whoever you want to add" just had their life taken by an intoxicated driver vs. someone accidently failed to yield and caused the same end result. You mean to tell me you're not more pissed because of the intoxicated driver?

 

I just as pissed and devastated because my loved one is gone. Does it really matter how No.

By your logic old people shouldn't be on the road and young people shouldn't be on the road just because of there age group. Since they are at the greatest risk of causing an accident.

[Soju 153]

So my middle of the road comment brought you out.

 

By the way, before you start with the Stay in Your little Hole ****, find out who the fugg your talking to first. I see you very quick to alway take a defense when something isn't exactly to your liking. Relax man, relax, it's the internet, your not going to win or lose, you're not going to change a persons view on things most of the time..

 

Apologize. My post wasn't clear. That comment wasn't directed at you, but rather was a generalization of the uninformed public who think the police are always all nice and everything they say and do is right.

 

But anyways...

 

find out who the fugg your talking to first

 

Kettle

 

quick to alway take a defense when something isn't exactly to your liking

 

meet pot.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Apologize. My post wasn't clear. That comment wasn't directed at you, but rather was a generalization of the uninformed public who think the police are always all nice and everything they say and do is right.

 

But anyways...

 

 

 

Kettle

 

 

 

meet pot.

 

Ok, I'll be Black, you be Kettle.

[this_is_nascar 162]

I just as pissed and devastated because my loved one is gone. Does it really matter how No.

By your logic old people shouldn't be on the road and young people shouldn't be on the road just because of there age group. Since they are at the greatest risk of causing an accident.

 

 

Being "old" and driving is not a crime in itself. Neither is being "young" behind the wheel. If you're illegally intoxicated and behind the wheel, then all bets are off. It doesn't matter if I feel 17-year olds and 90-year olds shouldn't be driving. BTW, I'm not saying that I feel that way. Legally, they can. Dead is dead, I agree, however I'd bet that many if not most would feel differently in losing a loved-one via an intoxicated driver vs. a driver that simply made an unintentional mistake behind the wheel.

 

As I said in one of my earlier posts, people's "opinions and feelings" on the subject somehow always seem to change once they've been directly impacted by an intoxicated driver.

[scig 12]

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

 

Where will your rights be when you are killed by a drunk. Let's fight for reasonable infringements

 

of the 4th.

 

Scig

[ChrisJM981 924]

I don't think BAC should be used at all. If you fail a field sobriety test you are impaired and shouldn't be operating a motor vehicle. If you pass the test you aren't impaired by definition. People have different tolerances. I don't drink like I did in my early 20's and now I'm impaired after 3 beers in an hour. With that said....

 

A few years ago the Bergen County Police decided they were going to conduct a DWI checkpoint on State Rt 17 South. They diverted all south bound traffic into the Ridgewood park & ride parking lot and had 8 lanes set up. It took 40 minutes to get through. Registration checkpoints are bs too. The first one was definitely a 4th Amendment violation.

[scig 12]

It's not about driving cars or what's in the constitution. Those rights NOT SPECIFICALLY GRANTED TO THE GOVERNMENT ARE RESERVED FOR THE PEOPLE.

 

Furthermore, you are being unlawfully detained on your course of travel every time one of these DUI checkpoints occur. How come they don't run one on the parkway or the turnpike if they're legal? Surely drunks drive the parkway, the turnpike, and the interstates...

 

Too dangerous for both police and person being pulled over.

Scig

[Babaganoosh 192]

When you have 4 cops patrolling 40sq miles of urban/suburban territory, it's going to be real tough to catch people in the act.

 

Seems easy to me. Sit in the parking lot across the street from the bar and watch who stumbles to their car. Follow a short distance and pull over if they are driving like ****.