DUI Check Points

[AldebTX]

This last weekend, my state set up sobriety check points where drivers were pulled over, asked (forced) to submit to a breathalyzer and if they refused, a judge was on hand to sign an order that allowed officers to take a blood test.

Ok. I want it to be said I am all against drunk driving. However, this seems extreme. It seems like something that might of been reported on in the old Soviet Russia.

I think the part that made it seem almost unreal was some of the same folks that have been screaming that "liberals" are killing the constitution, saw nothing wrong with forcing someone to take a forced blood test.

It just seems like this has to be close to an illegal stop and search.

What happened to probable cause? Innocent until proven guilty. These check points make you prove your innocence before you are allowed to proceed.

For the record I did wait in traffic at one of these check points. I blew clean (I had not been drinking). But the more I thought about it the wronger the whole set up seemed.

[lpbk2713]

1. Judge Roy Bean is alive and well.

Are you west of the Pecos?


"Yer guilty son. That'll be $500 ..... NEXT!!"

[GoneOffShore]

2. "An abundance of caution" "Anything to be safe"

A risk free society is a controlled society.

And that's where we're headed.

[FiveGoodMen]

3. Just amazing that so many would be so stupid.

We'll never get our rights back.

[Xenotime]

7. Must do it for the children.

[GoneOffShore]

32. Right - think of the children!

[lunatica]

4. And they cut the police departments

and real crime continues but now they can work in sobriety check point.

[Angry Dragon]

5. The Patroit Act took care of all the rights you thought you had

[ixion]

9. exactly... took care of... what was left

after two decades of the so-called 'war' on (some) drugs was used in the same fashion, to pass the same laws.

[AngryOldDem]

6. That's always been my problem with sobriety checkpoints.

Stop someone with probable cause -- that's fine. But anything else is just a fishing expedition and is borderline illegal, IMO.

If that would happen to me I would refuse the blood test until I could confer with an attorney.

[former9thward]

40. You are not allowed to refuse.

In my area they just strap you down and forcibly take the blood if you refuse.

[KeepItReal]

8. I think it is a money maker

Those checkpoints may net the odd driver under the influence, but how many more drivers are ticketed and fined for not having licenses on them, or proper registration, proof of insurance, "busted tailights", etc?

[villager]

10. Bingo. It's a tax.

n/t

[kath]

42. People also get busted for pot possession at these DUI checkpoints.

The whole thing is unconstitutional -- the whole concept of a search warrant is now obsolete in this country.

[RKP5637]

11. IMO it's the ratcheting up of a police state when one looks at all of the

things going on ... what you mentioned is IMO just one more step.

[Obamanaut]

12. In my local paper from time to time there will be a schedule as to where

LEOs will be checking licenses, registration, lights, etc. It isn't that hard to avoid them.

[tkmorris]

16. Like that makes it OK or something

No offense friend but advertising in advance violations of rights does not make it any more acceptable to me.

[Obamanaut]

20. Like yeah, it does make it ok or something. No offense, friend, but by

accepting the license, you have agreed to it. I didn't bother checking all the states, but here is the one from Florida. One would imagine the other states are similar. If you don't want to be subjected to a check, don't drive on the public highways. And again, driving is not a right, but a privilege.

Here you go:



Implied Consent Law
You will be asked to take a blood test, a urine test, or a breath test if an officer thinks that you are under the influence of alcohol or drugs while driving. By law, if you drive in Florida, you have agreed by signing your driver license to take these tests if asked. If you refuse to take the tests when asked, your license will automatically be suspended for one year. A second refusal will result in an 18 month suspension.

http://www.123driving.com/drivers-handbook2.shtml

[NYC Liberal]

23. "driving is not a right, but a privilege" - isn't so black and white

Yes your license may be taken away, but having a license does not mean you give up Constitutional rights. The Fourth Amendment still applies when you're in your car on the road...differently in some cases, of course, but accepting a driver's license does not mean cops can do whatever they want the minute you get in your car.

[Obamanaut]

24. If one accepts a driver permit, one at that time chooses to abide by the

Implied Consent Law
You will be asked to take a blood test, a urine test, or a breath test if an officer thinks that you are under the influence of alcohol or drugs while driving. By law, if you drive in Florida, you have agreed by signing your driver license to take these tests if asked. If you refuse to take the tests when asked, your license will automatically be suspended for one year. A second refusal will result in an 18 month suspension.

http://www.123driving.com/drivers-handbook2.shtml

That seems rather straightforward

[Hassin Bin Sober]

39. You have posted the implied consent clause twice but apparently haven't read it.

Either that, or you are not able to grasp the difference between:

"If you refuse to take the tests when asked, your license will automatically be suspended for one year"


And: Having a needle stuck in your arm at the point of a gun and against your will.

You see, exercising your "privilege" to drive, doesn't cause you to permanently waive your inalienable 4th and 5th Amendment rights guaranteed in The Constitution.

The penalty is and should be the loss of driving "privileges" if you break the implied consent agreement and re-assert your right to not self-incriminate. Not a further involuntary intrusion at the behest of a road-side kangaroo court judge.

You can temporarily bargain away your rights for a privileges. But breaking that bargain doesn't result in further denial of other rights - it causes a loss of privileges.

[former9thward]

41. The officer needs probable cause.

The "if the officer thinks" does not come out of the air someplace. The problem is that many drivers who have been drinking will tell an officer that "I had 1 or 2 beers" thinking that if they are partially honest the officer will be lenient with them. Just the opposite. Making that statement gives the officer probable cause and he can then make you give the blood. It is better to make no comments about drinking when asked.

[emilyg]

37. Thank you.

[Tesha]

46. The statement you quoted *DOES NOT* give blanket permission for searches.

ou will be asked to take a blood test, a urine test, or a breath test
<b>if an officer thinks that you are under the influence
of alcohol or drugs while driving</b>.

Merely driving down a road that happens to have a checkpoint
*IS NOT* evidence that you are under the influence and thereby
subject to an implied-consent search.

These Gestapo tactics will fall when someone is willing to take
an appropriate case and litigate it far enough.

Tesha


Tesha

[BlueJac]

13. Just another test on how much the American people will take!

Who knows what the next test will be? They are burning the constitution for sure, probable cause is out the window. Let them feel your balls and your tits because I want to be safe, WTF. What happened to this country?

[brewens]

14. Keeping your rights is worth a few alcohol related deaths. Sorry,

but there it is. We'll get a lot more people killed getting those rights back.

[CreekDog]

18. they're not catching as many with all those cops focused on mostly sober drivers

rather than on all roads patrolling for those that are driving impaired (and badly).

[emilyg]

30. In Georgia they did spot checks and were all

over the roads past holidays.

[spanone]

15. been going on for years here in nashville....

[CreekDog]

17. It's a waste of time and takes critical resources away from finding drunk drivers

by staffing up checkpoints designed to spend almost all their time intrusively examining mostly sober drivers.

they should take those officers and put them on the road looking for weaving cars outside bars, on highways and so forth. they will find no shortage of drunk drivers the old fashioned way: patrolling!

[Telly Savalas]

31. Excellent point.

[mrdmk]

19. There are two things, one said in your OP, another said in a reply

1) Being beaten down to give into authority and to comply without notice.

2) Revenue for the state, commonly referred to as a tax.

[emilyg]

21. If it saves lives - I don't mind.

[Alexander]

26. Putting everyone in a rubber room with no access to sharp objects would save lives, too.

I take it you don't mind that.

[emilyg]

29. Silly.

[Alexander]

34. Yes, your attitude of giving up your rights because it "saves lives" is silly.

I'm glad you agree.

[emilyg]

36. Your opinion rules? I don't think so.

[Alexander]

38. Just using your own standards to point out your ridiculous point of view.

Nowhere did I say or imply my opinion "rules", but nice straw man.

You could justify nearly any erosion of our rights by saying it "saves lives". Where do you draw the line, or do you have one?

[tkmorris]

43. You can keep your safety, I long to be free.

Enjoy your gilded cage.

[emilyg]

45. I guess you never had a family

member hit by a drunk driver. I have.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. I always ask for a blood test

Breathalyzers have a checkered history. Also it takes staff away from the checkpoint to accompany someone to get a blood test. If enough of us do it...

[ZombieHorde]

25. Americans are stupid. This is why Bush won in 2004. Stupid people do stupid shit. nt

[madinmaryland]

27. If you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear...

It's all about fear and propping up the police state.

[Synicus Maximus]

28. They have been doing this off and on for at least 30 years in

Georgia. If you don't seem intoxicated they just let you go, it takes 30 seconds. If you seem impaired you are asked to take a field sobriety test or you can demand a blood alcohol test. They have trucks with judges to write out warrants and medical technicians to draw blood if so ordered or requested.

[Lucian]

33. There is no more innocent until proven guilty.

Now it's guilty until proven innocent.

Our country is going down the shithole. It happens to all great empires eventually.

[bemildred]

35. It's all about the money.

DUI checkpoints are a profit center for the criminal justice system, easy money.

[Rochester]

44. Isn't it possible to turn around and go around on the next street over?

[badtoworse]

47. They will come after you

I saw it happen at a DUI checkpoint in NYC by the Lincoln Tunnel. Someone did a U-turn out of the line of cars and the police went after him, light and sirens. I'm not a lawyer, but I'll speculate that could regarded as probable cause.