fair dui flyer

[buckshotbarlow]

interesting concept...wonder how it would turn out here...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/03/see-this-guy-get-through-a-dui-checkpoint-without-saying-a-word-thanks-to-what-he-hung-out-his-car-window/

[Great-Kazoo]

interesting concept...wonder how it would turn out here...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/03/see-this-guy-get-through-a-dui-checkpoint-without-saying-a-word-thanks-to-what-he-hung-out-his-car-window/

with the following mentality prevalent in certain states and urban areas, i doubt it might fly.

As a Canadian, I don’t quite understand the thinking, as drunk driving is the number one cause of criminal death and you would think that you’d be happy that the police are trying to catch them before they can kill someone.”

[kidicarus13]

These are tricks people come up with when police overstep the law.

[buckshotbarlow]

ha...our neighbors to the north...

[Great-Kazoo]

ha...our neighbors to the north...

Have the same mentality as our neighbors across the street. The WELL IF IF SAVES ONE LIFE ISN'T IT WORTH IT Mentality.

[buckshotbarlow]

life is hard...it's harder when ur stupid.

[Bailey Guns]

I don't have a problem with it. I'm not sure why a police officer would lie about smelling the "odor of an alcoholic beverage" on someone at a checkpoint, though. You still have to collect other evidence on the DUI. Why make it harder on yourself (as an officer)? I think in the few checkpoints in which I participated the average stop was about 30 seconds to 1 min for most motorists.

[Duman]

Hey....how 'bouts we make alcohol illegal ? [Beer]

[SideShow Bob]

I participated the average stop was about 30 seconds to 1 min for most motorists.

And multiply that by the 50 - 70 vehicles in front of you waiting for their turn for the 30 second to 1 minute of having a flashlight shined in their eyes and around the interior of their vehicle and asked questions that are none of the officer's business. Then you will see why most of us think it is a waste of time, resources and tax payer dallors for the results the check points produce.

[mindfold]

And multiply that by the 50 - 70 vehicles in front of you waiting for their turn for the 30 second to 1 minute of having a flashlight shined in their eyes and around the interior of their vehicle and asked questions that are none of the officer's business. Then you will see why most of us think it is a waste of time, resources and tax payer dallors for the results the check points produce.

And being detained without cause.


Sent from my tin foil coated mind reading device.

[kidicarus13]

And being detained without cause.


Sent from my tin foil coated mind reading device.
It's a game of odds. If they contact enough motorists they're bound to find something illegal.

[mindfold]

They search enough homes without warrants they are bound to find something.


Sent from my tin foil coated mind reading device.

[sniper7]

It's starts somewhere. I don't blame the officers themselves because they are doing their jobs, but I certainly won't be complying.

[Bailey Guns]

And multiply that by the 50 - 70 vehicles in front of you waiting for their turn for the 30 second to 1 minute of having a flashlight shined in their eyes and around the interior of their vehicle and asked questions that are none of the officer's business. Then you will see why most of us think it is a waste of time, resources and tax payer dallors for the results the check points produce.

No, you don't multiply it by 50 to 70 vehicles. Usually, not every vehicle is stopped...it's predetermined which vehicles will be stopped but it must not be random. For example, every 10th vehicle or every vehicle. You may think it's a waste of time. But they usually are very productive in terms of catching drunk drivers though there is a perception, even among many police officers, that they're ineffective. At least in my experience they've been productive. But my experience is limited to only working a few checkpoints.

[Bailey Guns]

They search enough homes without warrants they are bound to find something.

Seriously? Is this a problem where you live?

[mindfold]

Slippery slope. We should not hold the 4th amendment with less regard as we do for the 2nd.


Sent from my tin foil coated mind reading device.

[Bailey Guns]

So that's a "no"? You're not really familiar with a rash of incidents involving the police searching homes without a warrant? So it's kind of an imaginary slippery slope you're referring to?

[Bailey Guns]

We go from a guy placing his DL, registration and insurance, along with a not that he's not talking, into a bag at a checkpoint (which I agree is kind of a cool approach), to having to wait for 50 to 70 cars in front of you, to cops searching homes. Why can't we dispense with the hyperbole?

[mindfold]

It is the same premise many of us on this forum feel about " shall not infringe". We as patriots, should question when ANY part of The Constitution is overlooked in the name of feel good terms like safety.


Sent from my tin foil coated mind reading device.

[Bailey Guns]

So it isn't really a problem where you live...at all? And I'd say not just patriots should be concerned about Constitutional infringements. Every citizen should be whether they consider themselves a patriot or not.

[cstone]

After watching the video, did anyone see anything they would like to criticize about the local police conduct?

Driving is not a Constitutionally protected right. You consent to obtain and maintain several things in your vehicle as you operate a motor vehicle on public roads. Most checkpoints are no more inconvenient than a busy traffic intersection.

One of the best things I found on the web site associated with this flyer was this information:

Of course every cop is different, but most have three major priorities in mind while they’re dealing with you, in this order:
Get home safe.
Don’t get fired.
Don’t get sued.

http://fairdui.org/flyer/what-police-are-thinking/

If you believe the driving impairment laws are unjust, take action and petition your representatives. Checkpoints have been vetted through local, state, and federal courts and they are pretty well planned out for the most part.

While I wholeheartedly support the freedom of speech, I wish more people in this country would exercise their right to remain silent. Just another cross I am willing to bear [Flower]

Be safe.

[mutt]

I can honestly say I don't remember ever seeing, let alone getting stopped at, a DUI checkpoint. I didn't realize they were such a problem. I guess I've lived a charmed life. I do see why many find them infringing. Setting up checkpoints and asking for papers inside our borders seems a bit out of place in a supposedly free society.

[Irving]

I was once stopped at a DUI checkpoint, asked to exit my vehicle, and was found to be carrying on my person without a CCW. Everyone was very professional and the whole thing probably lasted 5 minutes or less. Spoiler Alert: I made it out just fine.

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

No, you don't multiply it by 50 to 70 vehicles. Usually, not every vehicle is stopped...it's predetermined which vehicles will be stopped but it must not be random. For example, every 10th vehicle or every vehicle. You may think it's a waste of time. But they usually are very productive in terms of catching drunk drivers though there is a perception, even among many police officers, that they're ineffective. At least in my experience they've been productive. But my experience is limited to only working a few checkpoints.

I've been through quite a few checkpoints and never been stopped......and there has been many times in my life where i nodded/waved at a cop (or just walked in front of them) and got stopped on the street and frisked for weapons and questioned just because i "have that look", so i have to agree they aren't just harassing everyone looking for tickets. I still dont agree with checkpoints, just agreeing that they are not stopping every car and doing a soft search/questioning session.

[kidicarus13]

Checkpoints have been vetted through local, state, and federal courts and they are pretty well planned out for the most part.


Magazine capacity limits have also been "vetted" through local, state, and federal courts ...doesn't make it right.

[cstone]

Magazine capacity limits have also been "vetted" through local, state, and federal courts ...doesn't make it right.

They may not be right (matter of opinion), but they are legal in many jurisdictions. These types of issues get settled in courtrooms and legislatures...not on the side of a road. I support peaceful civil disobedience. Find me any place on the planet where you agree with every law on the books.

Be safe.

[mindfold]

So it isn't really a problem where you live...at all? And I'd say not just patriots should be concerned about Constitutional infringements. Every citizen should be whether they consider themselves a patriot or not.

Right now..... Of course not. At one time I never thought the State would infringe on my 2nd either. I completely agree on every citizen should be but sad they are not. As a citizen, it is always good to question.


Sent from my tin foil coated mind reading device.

[Dave_L]

They don't really bother me since I never drink and drive. Sure, it may delay me slightly but it's never a big deal. I just wish Colorado would make it a felony state. At least it might feel check points could make some progress instead of just being a fund raiser and restocking the pond.

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

They don't really bother me since I never drink and drive. Sure, it may delay me slightly but it's never a big deal. I just wish Colorado would make it a felony state. At least it might feel check points could make some progress instead of just being a fund raiser and restocking the pond.

or just reclassify it to view it as what it truly is......attempted manslaughter. misuse of a deadly weapon in the form of a gun can get you a felony and prison time no matter what the story, but misuse of ones "right" to operate a potentially lethal piece of machinery with higher "kill" rates than any firearm is just a misdemeanor (most of the time) and just an accident? Not their fault they didn't realize it could kill someone, right? Of course it lacks the media sensationalism of a firearm, but hey.....if you want to get down to numbers automobiles are one of the big three, are they not?

[JMBD2112]

They don't really bother me since I never drink and drive. Sure, it may delay me slightly but it's never a big deal. I just wish Colorado would make it a felony state. At least it might feel check points could make some progress instead of just being a fund raiser and restocking the pond.

That's exactly what it is, the shop I work at, we have a guy that installs interlocks all day long......don't quote me on this but I think they charge $75 to have them calibrated each month, so on top of the fines that person pays, they're paying an additional $900 a year to the state.

[Irving]

That's exactly what it is, the shop I work at, we have a guy that installs interlocks all day long......don't quote me on this but I think they charge $75 to have them calibrated each month, so on top of the fines that person pays, they're paying an additional $900 a year to the state.

I don't believe this to be the case. The state sure doesn't pay your tow bill when the device breaks though.

[JMBD2112]

I don't believe this to be the case. The state sure doesn't pay your tow bill when the device breaks though.

When they do break, either the person brings the head unit in and he gives them another, or in some cases he's gone to their house and swapped them out

[Irving]

That's a real favor to those people. I certainly took calls for enough people who had them malfunction on them when they were trying to get some where.

[Jer]

And being detained without cause.

Winnar!

I'm not cool with DUI check points any more than I'm cool with them going door to door in my neighborhood looking for something illegal in my house. If I do something by my driving ability to make you suspect that I've been drinking and may be a danger to everyone else then pull me over. DUI checkpoints are the lazy dept's way to 'make the community safe' through revenue generating. It's also wildly unconstitutional and widely accepted as 'just doing it to be safe because if you're not doing anything wrong... what do you care?' which many apply to just about every other one of our constitutionally protected freedoms whenever they think we'll all be better off and safer if we just give them up.

Pass.

[brutal]

That's a real favor to those people. I certainly took calls for enough people who had them malfunction on them when they were trying to get some where.

"Malfunction" huh?

[Irving]

"Malfunction" huh?

I knew that was coming. I'm sure there are instances of both, but I think the reliability of those devices is well known due to actual malfunctions.

[Bailey Guns]

How does a police dept generate revenue by conducting a DUI checkpoint? And the "door to door" house searching thing isn't a valid argument, either. Stopping a person briefly, in their car, is in no way analogous to searching someone's home in the slightest. For many reasons. And FYI, there are instances where the police can legally search your home without a warrant, too.

Jer, you may think it's "wildly unconstitutional" but the SCOTUS disagrees. And, like it or not, right or wrong in your mind, they're the ones who decide that sort of thing.

[HoneyBadger]

They don't really bother me since I never drink and drive. Sure, it may delay me slightly but it's never a big deal. I just wish Colorado would make it a felony state. At least it might feel check points could make some progress instead of just being a fund raiser and restocking the pond.
California gun laws don't bother me because I chose not to own guns.




..oh wait. [facepalm]

Lets see if we can count how many ways that is wrong...

[Dave_L]

Sigh...I knew that'd come up. I have plenty of other things to stress myself over. DUI check points aren't one of them. Now I'll wait for Someone to ask where my spine is...

[HoneyBadger]

Sigh...I knew that'd come up. I have plenty of other things to stress myself over. DUI check points aren't one of them. Now I'll wait for Someone to ask where my spine is...
YOU SPINELESS BASTARD! GROW A PAIR AND STAND UP FOR FREEDOM AGAINST THE COMMUNIST REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


[Neene3] I kid, I kid!

It's unrealistic to draw any comparisons between home searches and vehicle checkpoints because driving is a priviledge, not a right. When you agree to freely drive on those roads, you accept the terms and conditions. Your home is entirely different.

[Bailey Guns]

I have plenty of other things to stress myself over. DUI check points aren't one of them.

No kidding. Whether you're for or against them the reality is the vast majority of people will NEVER encounter a DUI checkpoint. And if you do see one you may not even get stopped. Hell...I've only seen two and that's because I was working them.

[mindfold]

YOU SPINELESS BASTARD! GROW A PAIR AND STAND UP FOR FREEDOM AGAINST THE COMMUNIST REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


[Neene3] I kid, I kid!

It's unrealistic to draw any comparisons between home searches and vehicle checkpoints because driving is a priviledge, not a right. When you agree to freely drive on those roads, you accept the terms and conditions. Your home is entirely different.

Is it fair to draw comparisons between the DUI checkpoints and NY stop and frisk?


Sent from my tin foil coated mind reading device.

[cstone]

Is it fair to draw comparisons between the DUI checkpoints and NY stop and frisk?


Sent from my tin foil coated mind reading device.

Are you required to meet government standards, carry mandatory liability insurance, and renew your license periodically to walk down a public street?

Fourth Amendment search and seizure law is its only specialty niche within the legal profession and law enforcement. If we took ten experts on this area of the law and asked them for opinions, we are likely to get more than ten opinions, and several of them would begin with the phrase; It depends...

[kidicarus13]

They don't really bother me since I never drink and drive. Sure, it may delay me slightly but it's never a big deal. I just wish Colorado would make it a felony state. At least it might feel check points could make some progress instead of just being a fund raiser and restocking the pond.
Sounds like, "It doesn't matter to me since I don't own guns."

[Bailey Guns]

Owning guns isn't a crime and shouldn't be equated to criminal behavior.

[TFOGGER]

I could not care less about DUI checkpoints personally, but I have problems with them as a societal issue. I find it comparable to the cops closing down the intersection in Aurora to arrest the bank robber a couple of years ago. Both are wrong on any number of levels, treating everyone as if they are criminals in order to catch the vanishingly small percentage that are.

[kidicarus13]

Owning guns isn't a crime and shouldn't be equated to criminal behavior.
Driving isn't a crime and I shouldn't be stopped because 1 in 35 people contacted at DUI checkpoint are legally intoxicated.

[PugnacAutMortem]

I could not care less about DUI checkpoints personally, but I have problems with them as a societal issue. I find it comparable to the cops closing down the intersection in Aurora to arrest the bank robber a couple of years ago. Both are wrong on any number of levels, treating everyone as if they are criminals in order to catch the vanishingly small percentage that are.

Weener weener cheekin deener. If it saves one life right fellas?

[clublights]

No kidding. Whether you're for or against them the reality is the vast majority of people will NEVER encounter a DUI checkpoint. And if you do see one you may not even get stopped. Hell...I've only seen two and that's because I was working them.


I think that depends on where you are ...


in Albuquerque they are ( or at least were ) in love with the damn things in less then 3 years of having a DL I went thru 4 of them . then I moved here and have been thru 2 in a little over 20 years . well three if you count going thru the same one twice ( went to the grocery store then back thru it on the way home )

[buckshotbarlow]

damn this thread is a rockn

[Dave_L]

Sounds like, "It doesn't matter to me since I don't own guns."

No. Sounds like I'm not driving under the influence so a minute delay is of no bother to me.

[Hound]

Until its a minute delay to check if you are a jew, terrorist (a label defined by the Gov during the American Revolution) or from when the Constitution was created...... "A damn Yank!!!"


No. Sounds like I'm not driving under the influence so a minute delay is of no bother to me.

[Chad4000]

Driving isn't a crime and I shouldn't be stopped because 1 in 35 people contacted at DUI checkpoint are legally intoxicated.


thank you..

I have a massive problem with them. That's because they are unconstitutional. so there is that....

Also, I can absolutely make the case the "driving" (efficient transportation) is a right. a constitutional right. You are LITERALLY in pursuit of happiness when you are transporting yourselves. so this whole thing that I owe somebody a big fucking thank you that I'm "allowed" to drive is bullshit.

buuuuut of course if we all look at it like it's a privilege, swallowing the $1000's of dollars of taxes on it is easier.... isn't it.

[cstone]

thank you..

I have a massive problem with them. That's because they are unconstitutional. so there is that....

Also, I can absolutely make the case the "driving" (efficient transportation) is a right. a constitutional right. You are LITERALLY in pursuit of happiness when you are transporting yourselves. so this whole thing that I owe somebody a big fucking thank you that I'm "allowed" to drive is bullshit.

buuuuut of course if we all look at it like it's a privilege, swallowing the $1000's of dollars of taxes on it is easier.... isn't it.

Sounds like you will be taking your legal argument to the SCOTUS. I hope you have already researched the legal precedents. Good luck.

[Chad4000]

Sounds like you will be taking your legal argument to the SCOTUS. I hope you have already researched the legal precedents. Good luck.


... thanks for your concern stone. lol

how exactly is it that you think all these folks are getting away with not "complying" at DUI checkpoints? more and more everyday. spend a little time on youtube. It's the same as getting contacted for (legally) open carrying. how do you suppose these folks are getting away with non compliance? It's because there's no sound legal argument to be made.. they're banking on our indifference..

[Chad4000]

and what,, no "be safe" for me on that?? lol ;)

[cstone]

... thanks for your concern stone. lol

how exactly is it that you think all these folks are getting away with not "complying" at DUI checkpoints? more and more everyday. spend a little time on youtube. It's the same as getting contacted for (legally) open carrying. how do you suppose these folks are getting away with non compliance? It's because there's no sound legal argument to be made.. they're banking on our indifference..

Actually, I have watched numerous UTube videos related to CopWatch type activities. Most of them seem to be fine, although some of the people posting get a bit screechy and preachy for my tastes.

One of the things that is extremely obvious with the citizens who are questioning authorities is that they have done quite a bit of legal research and they make certain that they fully comply with the laws of the jurisdiction where they are conducting their protests. When they do not comply with the law, they go to court and lose, which results in a criminal record.

Your opinions are noble, but not supported by the legal precedents currently on the books in most jurisdictions. Driving is not a right recognized by any jurisdiction that I am aware of anywhere in the nation. It is a regulated responsibility, which may not be exercised without receiving a license to operate a motor vehicle that has been inspected, insured and operated within the legal parameters set by the state and local jurisdiction.

DUI checkpoints were not dreamed up by some legislature or police department. They are the result of vocal citizens who wanted their elected representatives and paid law enforcement to address criminal operation of motor vehicles by operators who are impaired. When other citizens, who are more vocal than those like the ones in MADD get the attention of legislators and other authorities, checkpoints will go away.

Be safe. [Flower]

[Chad4000]

Actually, I have watched numerous UTube videos related to CopWatch type activities. Most of them seem to be fine, although some of the people posting get a bit screechy and preachy for my tastes.

One of the things that is extremely obvious with the citizens who are questioning authorities is that they have done quite a bit of legal research and they make certain that they fully comply with the laws of the jurisdiction where they are conducting their protests. When they do not comply with the law, they go to court and lose, which results in a criminal record.

Your opinions are noble, but not supported by the legal precedents currently on the books in most jurisdictions. Driving is not a right recognized by any jurisdiction that I am aware of anywhere in the nation. It is a regulated responsibility, which may not be exercised without receiving a license to operate a motor vehicle that has been inspected, insured and operated within the legal parameters set by the state and local jurisdiction.

DUI checkpoints were not dreamed up by some legislature or police department. They are the result of vocal citizens who wanted their elected representatives and paid law enforcement to address criminal operation of motor vehicles by operators who are impaired. When other citizens, who are more vocal than those like the ones in MADD get the attention of legislators and other authorities, checkpoints will go away.

Be safe. [Flower]

totally agree with you on most of the delta bravos that post on youtube. but it is working for a lot of folks out there. i understand that nobility of opinion and legality are not the same thing.. although they should be. also well aware of what it takes to own and operate a vehicle.

let me ask you this, do you personally see efficient transportation as a privilege to be granted by the government?

[cstone]

Since I still believe that "the government" is We the People (a belief not held by all), and We pay for the roads, and the roads are maintained with our money and we expect fair use of these roads, then the use of the roads by all people, citizen, non-citizen, tourist, etc... is a privilege, not a right as delineated in the Constitution.

The right to travel by any means is not guaranteed by the Constitution. The type of search conducted at airport checkpoints has been ruled on several times by various federal and state courts. It is considered a blend of a consent search and an administrative search. Numerous courts have ruled that in order to board a commercial aircraft, you give consent to a search for dangerous or prohibited items (not contraband) in order that all other passengers may enjoy safe passage. If a passenger does not wish to consent to this type of administrative search, they can travel by another means. Today, in the USA, the ultimate free method of travel is walking. Efficiency is also not Constitutional guarantee.

It is my understanding that the phrase; Pursuit of Happiness is a substitute for the right of property as defined in English common law.

And really, my opinion is not that important to anyone but me.

[cfortune]

Wait, so by driving I'm giving up my 4th amendment rights? Why does an officer need approval to search a vehicle then?

I'm being srs here.

[Chad4000]

I'll respond more shortly! Sry!

[buckshotbarlow]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lpzqQst-Sg8

[cstone]

Wait, so by driving I'm giving up my 4th amendment rights? Why does an officer need approval to search a vehicle then?

I'm being srs here.

You are not giving up your 4th Amendment protection while driving a vehicle. There are well spelled out protocols, reasonable suspicion, probable cause, exigent circumstances, expectation of privacy, etc... that play into when a search is legal and when a search is not legal. Even with the many rules that govern this area of the law, legal opinions are not static and rules change. Sometimes those changes go in the favor of protecting citizen's right to be secure in their papers, person, and property. Sometimes those changes go in the favor of administering justice and providing for the common good and safety of the public. The whole process is adversarial, so there are always winners and losers. Not many people like to be on the losing side.

If the Constitution and the plethora of laws passed in this country, not to mention the acts of hundreds of thousands of public servants under variable conditions were easy to govern, legislatures and courts would not need to exist.

I can't speak for anyone other than myself, but when I act on behalf of the government, I usually act from the standpoint of: How would I feel if the same actions were being taken, under similar circumstances, on me or one of my loved ones? If the answer is: This is wrong, then I look for another way to accomplish my goal. More importantly, I personally hope that I never need to defend myself against a DUI charge.

I don't like checkpoints...anywhere. My opinion doesn't make checkpoints illegal or unconstitutional. There are lots of things I don't like and wish didn't exist. Some of those things are issues I have some ability to change. Other issues just go a bit farther down my daily priority list.

Be safe.

[th3w01f]

Well since these aren't here yet I might as well add them. [Coffee] It's all for our own good anyway...... and besides, it hardly ever happens so you should be OK with it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP2c-dy4T3Q


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0MMXjaD3zo

[th3w01f]

WOW, gotta love the dialog in this one.

"It's a little stressful...... pointing big guns..... they're doing the RIGHT thing"

"Each time the SWAT would RESCUE a family at the POINT OF A GUN"....

Good stuff here.... :) At least they never go door to door.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ1-ZUN3Li0

[Hound]

From most cops standpoint I think this sums it up pretty succinctly. From that standpoint I don't really feel the need to bitch too much at them because it is really the same 'it's for the kids' BS that we hear from the same crowd about guns. I think that is where the bitching needs to be actually directed. I do think the checkpoints were/are a very bad precident to establish/continue and should be fought at any time possible. ........ Unfortunately, That means the cops get to hear about it even if they did not start it. ;) To be clear, I am only talking to the DUI checkpoints, the other types of checkpoints.................


DUI checkpoints were not dreamed up by some legislature or police department. They are the result of vocal citizens who wanted their elected representatives and paid law enforcement to address criminal operation of motor vehicles by operators who are impaired. When other citizens, who are more vocal than those like the ones in MADD get the attention of legislators and other authorities, checkpoints will go away.

[Hound]

This could have gotten a cop shot. With no warrant and no 'bad guy' that would be a bad day for all.


WOW, gotta love the dialog in this one.

"It's a little stressful...... pointing big guns..... they're doing the RIGHT thing"

"Each time the SWAT would RESCUE a family at the POINT OF A GUN"....

Good stuff here.... :) At least they never go door to door.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ1-ZUN3Li0

[hollohas]

No, you don't multiply it by 50 to 70 vehicles. Usually, not every vehicle is stopped...it's predetermined which vehicles will be stopped but it must not be random. For example, every 10th vehicle or every vehicle. You may think it's a waste of time. But they usually are very productive in terms of catching drunk drivers though there is a perception, even among many police officers, that they're ineffective. At least in my experience they've been productive. But my experience is limited to only working a few checkpoints.



Checkpoints can get long. I trust your experience Bailey, but that limited to where you've worked. Other areas work differently and even each op can be different.

I have been through 3 checkpoints. Two were quick because they were on side roads with little traffic. EVERY car was stopped including cars that turned off before the checkpoint. The 3rd was on Kipling, two lane road but JeffCo setup 3 lanes at the stop point. EVERY car was stopped and the line was deep. Stop was less than 30 sec, but dozens of cars were stopped...time added up. Again, cars that turned off early or turned around were also pulled over.

At none of the checkpoints was I even asked to produce ID. All three were JeffCo.

[Chad4000]

Checkpoints can get long. I trust your experience Bailey, but that limited to where you've worked. Other areas work differently and even each op can be different.

I have been through 3 checkpoints. Two were quick because they were on side roads with little traffic. EVERY car was stopped including cars that turned off before the checkpoint. The 3rd was on Kipling, two lane road but JeffCo setup 3 lanes at the stop point. EVERY car was stopped and the line was deep. Stop was less than 30 sec, but dozens of cars were stopped...time added up. Again, cars that turned off early or turned around were also pulled over.

At none of the checkpoints was I even asked to produce ID. All three were JeffCo.


This has been my experience too.. every car, and cops going after the ones that turned around also...

[mindfold]

I am pretty sure I am the one who hijacked the thread. I forgot to mention that I really like the idea of the baggie out the window. All too often people give up their rights without knowing it. If everyone started doing this it would make the checkpoints quicker and it would lead to departments to determine that these DUI check points are a waste of time and effort.

[Dave_L]

Honestly, if we just made it a felony state and/or made the punishment more strict, it would probably fix itself. No more checkpoints but if you are at-fault for an accident that causes bodily injury (under the influence), you get 1 year in jail, no questions. If someone dies, 10 years, no questions asked. Right now, you can have a DUI accident and be back out the next day. No serious consequences means repeats and people fed up with DUI drivers which turns into lots of talk which forces the hand of those in charge to "do something", aka checkpoints.

[Dave_L]

Im not saying to add more laws. I'm saying make the punishment more strict.

[Hound]

Ummmmm...... Making the punishment fit the crime is a fundamental axiom of all law and order and.....ya, it is a big reason we don't live in a Mad Max world or on the other side a full on tyranny. It is not crazy to suggest that a law needs to be revisited. Now, which laws and how much change.... That is something to be debated.

The fact is, if it were as black and white as you try to make it here..... We would ALL NOT be considered 'law abiding'. It is imposible to comply with them all. Ever drive a black car in Denver on Sunday, have anything hanging from your rearview mirror, ever gone over the speed limit....... Even once?


I think you must be crazy to think that making something more illegal is going to stop crime. we have millions of laws on the books that do just that. yet, people still break the law. everyone should not be punished because of criminals. no amount of laws or taking away licenses or interlocks or or or will stop someone from breaking the law. either you are law abiding or you are not.

if we only had gun free zones, then murder wouldnt happen. right?

[hollohas]

Sounds like at least one LEO in this country thinks it would be a very bad idea to do this...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/06/i-challenge-him-to-please-come-to-lee-county-hell-go-to-jail-florida-sheriff-threatens-silent-dui-checkpoint-guy/


“I challenge him…to please come to Lee County and drive around,” Lee County Sheriff Mike Scott said. “Eventually he’ll find one of our checkpoints and he’ll try his luck. He’ll go to jail.”

“I can tell you with certainty that if this gentleman enters a Lee County checkpoint the same outcome will not be the case,” Scott said, arguing that officers need to be able to interact with and smell drivers to ensure the driver does not seem impaired and no odors of alcohol or drugs emanate from the car.
He also claimed that most car windows are tinted and thereby pose a “threat to officer safety.”
“By not rolling your window down, you’re interfering with our investigation,” Scott said. ”If a driver refuses to roll down their window they will be arrested.”

[68Charger]

Sounds like at least one LEO in this country thinks it would be a very bad idea to do this...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/06/i-challenge-him-to-please-come-to-lee-county-hell-go-to-jail-florida-sheriff-threatens-silent-dui-checkpoint-guy/

Here is the best part of that article, IMHO:


“It’s legal, but you draw attention to yourself,” advised Tampa DUI defense attorney Elliott Wilcox. “When you draw attention to yourself, then you’d better be squeaky clean going through. Because otherwise, you give them another reason to pay attention to you. If you are not squeaky clean, that could be the worst thing that happens to you.”
If you try the windows-up, bag out approach in Lee County, be warned: You may be in the right, but the sheriff is willing to fight you

[buckshotbarlow]

Sounds like at least one LEO in this country thinks it would be a very bad idea to do this...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/06/i-challenge-him-to-please-come-to-lee-county-hell-go-to-jail-florida-sheriff-threatens-silent-dui-checkpoint-guy/


damn u beat me 2 it...

[Chad4000]

Sounds like at least one LEO in this country thinks it would be a very bad idea to do this...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/06/i-challenge-him-to-please-come-to-lee-county-hell-go-to-jail-florida-sheriff-threatens-silent-dui-checkpoint-guy/


I hate to bring this back to the first page, but Jesus that is ridiculous. Isn't that the entire problem right there? corrupt politicians pass stupid laws to generate income, (and maybe to appease MADD), then the same government wearing different uniforms enforces these retarded laws, and not only that, derives happiness from enforcing unjust and unconstitutional laws. actually issuing challenges and everything. "oh yeah, big tough citizen who knows his rights!!! try that in my county! You'll go to jail!!!!!".... and guess what, he brings up officer safety lol...

Im sorry, but mayyyyybeee just maybe if they are so scared of tinted windows they shouldn't be contacting at all in this situation. this entire debate is all 4th and 5th amendment.. what investigation is he talking about??? they are stopping ALL (or doing some fancy math to make it not 100%) cars to check for crimes. on what grounds can they possibly suspect every single car that day to driving under the influence?

this is so black and white here guys...

[cstone]

"Is Scott in the right?"

"He (Scott) certainly seems to stand alone among Florida law enforcement."

"But Scott could well be overstepping his legal bounds when he says drivers must roll down their windows."

"Following the release of the plastic bag video, Florida Highway Patrol spokesman Sgt. Steve Gaskins told WTVT-TV that DUI checkpoints are not intended to violate anyone’s rights."

Apparently, the issues involved in the original post are not black and white, even to members of the law enforcement community in Florida.

[Chad4000]

"Is Scott in the right?"

"He (Scott) certainly seems to stand alone among Florida law enforcement."

"But Scott could well be overstepping his legal bounds when he says drivers must roll down their windows."

"Following the release of the plastic bag video, Florida Highway Patrol spokesman Sgt. Steve Gaskins told WTVT-TV that DUI checkpoints are not intended to violate anyone’s rights."

Apparently, the issues involved in the original post are not black and white, even to members of the law enforcement community in Florida.

Certainly not saying it's black and white to them....Im saying it should be.

:edited to not further the thread unnecessarily:

:edited again cause stone responded to what I asked him.. which was whether or not he would follow an unconstitutional order. sorry for the confusion everyone lol

[cstone]

For simplicity sake, No. I try not to do anything that I know is illegal. Does that answer get me a gold star? Well, take it back, because I am not perfect and I am willing to confess that I have broken a few laws in my lifetime. I have done things that in hindsight I regret.

Life in general, and certainly working in law enforcement are often not that simple. I have used this phrase often as a parent, as a supervisor, and probably on this board; You can do everything right, and still be wrong.

What is black and white to you, does not make it black and white for everyone.

As was just presented in another thread; regardless of what you believe is right, when on the street and dealing with uniformed law enforcement, you should comply. The place to deal with issues that you believe are illegal, unconstitutional, wrong, etc... is not on the side of a road or in a dark alley.

Reading Sheriff Scott's comments should inspire some enterprising civil disobedience. The monetary settlement from the resulting civil suit would buy some new cameras and printers to assist in their efforts to document their DUI flyer campaign.