Traffic Check Points: Good or Bad?

[Danimal16]

The situation that was described I do not have a problem with. We have an elementry school down a few blocks and you see the very same rolling stops, cell phones etc. If these drivers feel that this is a minor infraction what other things will the pick and choose to obey. That could be the difference in them hurting someone.

[John Rogers]

As I suspected, there are some who agree with the rules and those that feel there should be few if any. But as Sammy said, many of the pain in the ass laws were made because of really stupid people causing problems to others. Case in point, many years ago I had a home in Phoenix and their school zones had signs saying to slow down but no real enforcement at all. Then later after several children were run over and maimed/killed the signs got blinking yellow lights AND a patrol car with radar at nearly everyone when school opened and when it let out. It did take a while and lots of *****ing and "interfering with my rights" but people mostly got the message and now they go SLOW when the lights at the school zones are blinking! I know as there is a new school just North of the PIR raceway and they catch trucks pulling cars all the time there.

The San Diego chapter of the ACLU is raising hell about the traffic checkpoints saying they are targeting Mexicans but when the highest percentage of people without a license are here illegally I guess that makes sense? A writer into the SD Union-Tribune said they hoped the head of the SD ACLU would have a family member hit and maimed as they had by an illegal, then maybe they would change their mind?

I was hoping for more interesting traffic stops, but maybe it is just here in So Cal?

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by john rogers

As I suspected, there are some who agree with the rules and those that feel there should be few if any.

I think you're confusing checkpoints with traffic enforcement. I have no problem with cops stopping someone who has committed an infraction. Checkpoints, however, are a gross violation of the 4th Amendment, in that police are allowed to detain citizens at random with ZERO probable cause or even reasonable suspicion of their having committed a crime. If cops really wanted people to slow down, they would place themselves in a conspicuous area and keep their lights on. Everyone would then slow down. Hiding and running radar traps doesn't do anything to slow anyone down except the guy they just ticketed.

[mattdavis11]

Law enforcement screws up the flow of traffic in Austin, on a daily basis. Cash cow only. What can be deduced other wise? Check points have to be advertised here, I have no problem, so long as I'm not held up.

Concerning cell phone users, I have a huge problem. They ought to be stopped. Those people are foul and need to be awakened with the harsh realities that they kill more than cancer.

Most laws state DUI or DWI as having xxx bac or without normal bodily faculties. When slapping Johnny in the back, you're without. Lock em up, throw away the key.

I steer clear of accidents waiting to happen. It's out of control, the sober ones are worse by far.

[john70t]

Spiper and Jeff, I've got a Bells Ale waiting for both of you in Mich.

Of course there are two sides to every argument. At one extreme is obvious police over enforcement and on the other is society gone wild.
While I appreciate the line of police cars pulled over on the side of the highway during the holidays, I certainly don't want a nanny-state vehicle akin to OnStar. "Miss your meeting? Sorry we remotely disabled the wrong vehicle. That will be $240 to reactivate your ability to drive your purchased-and-owned vehicle ".

The hypocracy is that we've had threads here where members have no qwalms about pushing slower drivers off the road into a ditch or running over cyclists. Alcohol wasen't even involved in the senario. Lack of sleep, dehydration, tight scheduling, cell phones, kids, or just being a jerk by nature all play part in a driver's attention and habits.

[Jeff Higgins]

We simply cannot pass enough laws to make stupid people behave, much less smart. The idiots out there will always be idiots, no matter how many different ways we try to slow them down and out smart them. "Never underestimate the brilliance of a fool" when it comes to new and creative ways to fukk up and make themselves a hazard to the rest of us.

The hand-wringing ninnies (the worst sort of fools, by the way) see the passing of endless laws, of endless layered and often contradictory laws, as a "solution". These ninnies assume too much. They give their adversaries too much credit. They actually think the fools are paying attention, and will straighten up and fly right if the law tells them to. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The net result of all of this, the only tangible result of all of this, is that the police and other officials have ever more justification to harangue honest, peaceful citizens. And not for any harm they did, really, but for what could have happened. They bust citizens' balls over "crimes" or "infractions" with no victims. Add to that the new-found profit motive for enforcement in every little god damn one-horse town, and even in the bigger municipalities, and we are faced with one hell of an unholy mess. Profit-driven, victimless "law enforcement" targeted at the non-criminal, non-violent citizen population.

This simply has to stop. It "prevents" nothing - the target audience isn't paying attention, and never will. The rest of us shouldn't have to put up with the b.s. preventative enforcement and its encroachment on our liberties.

[m21sniper]

This is not even about law enforcement anyway, it's about revenue enhancement.

[Tobra]

They were pulling people over, doing random smog checks on my commute this morning, if he had tried to wave me over for that stuff, I would say, "No thanks, going to work."

[Radioactive]

If law enforcement wants to have Safety/DUI/License Check points, I am all for it. If someone has no license, no registration then they definitely don't have insurance and that could affect ME. If they don't have any ID, how do you know who they really are? Take the car so there is a little motivation to get a license, registration, insurance. Now when HELL freezes over and California passes some kind of law like AZ they will need a bunch of buses at the check points to ship all those undocumented immigrants (Illegals) back to Mexico.

[Jim Richards]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

We simply cannot pass enough laws to make stupid people behave, much less smart. The idiots out there will always be idiots, no matter how many different ways we try to slow them down and out smart them. "Never underestimate the brilliance of a fool" when it comes to new and creative ways to fukk up and make themselves a hazard to the rest of us.

The hand-wringing ninnies (the worst sort of fools, by the way) see the passing of endless laws, of endless layered and often contradictory laws, as a "solution". These ninnies assume too much. They give their adversaries too much credit. They actually think the fools are paying attention, and will straighten up and fly right if the law tells them to. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The net result of all of this, the only tangible result of all of this, is that the police and other officials have ever more justification to harangue honest, peaceful citizens. And not for any harm they did, really, but for what could have happened. They bust citizens' balls over "crimes" or "infractions" with no victims. Add to that the new-found profit motive for enforcement in every little god damn one-horse town, and even in the bigger municipalities, and we are faced with one hell of an unholy mess. Profit-driven, victimless "law enforcement" targeted at the non-criminal, non-violent citizen population.

This simply has to stop. It "prevents" nothing - the target audience isn't paying attention, and never will. The rest of us shouldn't have to put up with the b.s. preventative enforcement and its encroachment on our liberties.

I'll buy a round, too!

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Patently unconstitutional.

Either a cop has probable cause (observed a violation) or doesn't. If he/she doesn't, there absolutely should be no basis to go digging around for things to justify their own existence.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

We simply cannot pass enough laws to make stupid people behave, much less smart. The idiots out there will always be idiots, no matter how many different ways we try to slow them down and out smart them. "Never underestimate the brilliance of a fool" when it comes to new and creative ways to fukk up and make themselves a hazard to the rest of us.

The hand-wringing ninnies (the worst sort of fools, by the way) see the passing of endless laws, of endless layered and often contradictory laws, as a "solution". These ninnies assume too much. They give their adversaries too much credit. They actually think the fools are paying attention, and will straighten up and fly right if the law tells them to. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The net result of all of this, the only tangible result of all of this, is that the police and other officials have ever more justification to harangue honest, peaceful citizens. And not for any harm they did, really, but for what could have happened. They bust citizens' balls over "crimes" or "infractions" with no victims. Add to that the new-found profit motive for enforcement in every little god damn one-horse town, and even in the bigger municipalities, and we are faced with one hell of an unholy mess. Profit-driven, victimless "law enforcement" targeted at the non-criminal, non-violent citizen population.

This simply has to stop. It "prevents" nothing - the target audience isn't paying attention, and never will. The rest of us shouldn't have to put up with the b.s. preventative enforcement and its encroachment on our liberties.

One of the things I absolutely love about Pelican is that you can occasionally (upon sifting through all the usual boring, repetitive blather) discern a really valuable nugget of insight or wisdom. This is one such nugget. JH gets a gold star for his post - absolutely dead on the mark and well-put. It'd be my honor to buy you a beverage of your choice someday.

[Eric 951]

Random traffic checkpoint/stops have become the rage around here--they are called "aggressive driving checks, or courtesy patrols" total BS. What they really are is a bunch of cops setting up on random roads, waving people into nearby parking lots and running plates, checking licenses, insurance, etc.

And the cops that I have seen doing these checks and stopping people are the total douche variety--tinted shades, mustache, hard-ass attitude--WTF?

[Shaun @ Tru6]

some would say, if you have nothing to hide, what's the problem?

others might say, if police are running gauntlet-style check points and asking for licenses/registration, they're going to catch a lot of illegal aliens in their fishing expeditions.

other folks say that it's just a revenue generator and good honest people are getting tickets that are unwarranted and unjust

others point to a police power grab, intimidating the citizenry to compensate for their (supposed) low self esteem and reliving their bully days in high school.

others make the claim that the inconvenience of a checkpoint is part of the price of driving on safer roads.

who is right?

What are the many and varied roles of Police in our Society?

Are Police accountable to their local bureaucracy? Who ultimately defines their mission?

Are Police accountable to their local Citizenry?

If you answer no to the last point, what needs to be done to change that dynamic? or can nothing be done and we are all just poor little lamb victims?


My own personal perspective? In 26 years of driving, I've only been stopped unfairly by the police one time. I don't fear the police. I've never been burdened by too many laws. I've never had to go to extraordinary measures to comply with any laws. It's pretty easy to stay within the limits of the law and when I break the law, I expect to pay the consequences.

Around here, they have old school buses just after the checkpoints. they are typically filled to the brim with illegal aliens, drunks and cell phone/texting abusers caught in such checkpoints and there is a local lottery by which you can win the chance to drive them down to Mexico (all of them) and dump them off over the border.

[A930Rocket]

It's not a check point, but in weekly travels from Atl to Chucktown, SC and back I see the cops in GA on I-20 (from Covington to Lake Oconee) have pulled over a car or two and are searching it inside and out. Who's the driver? Just about everyone I see is either a black or Hispanic male.

Is it profiling or just dumb luck they get pulled over? I see money here when I see county cops patrolling their portion of the highway.

I-20 inside 285 is another hot spot for cops. Multiple state troopers, Fulton and Dekalb County cops every day looking for speeders or HOV violators. Surely the resources can be better utilized.

[Moses]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

Hypothetically:

Suppose you were the father of a 17 year old girl who was minding her own business and was killed by a drunk driver with three convictions on his record yet was still driving. Drunk.
Would you still oppose random check points?
That happened to someone I work with.


OK different hypothetical scenario:
suppose your wife was jogging along pacific coast highway in the middle of the day and was run over by a drunk driver who didn't have a license because of prior DUI's and had just been let out of a half-way house.
Your wife is now a quadriplegic and can't take care of herself, much less her two young kids. Her medical bills are into the hundreds of thousands of dollars and her in-home care will add up to about 70% of your take-home pay.
How would you think about random DUI checkpoints?
That actually happened to a friend of the family.


People suck. Letting people get away with sucking because you don't want to be inconvenienced for 15 seconds sucks too.

I'd gladly give up 15 seconds of my time to help make sure some POS doesn't kill someone I care about.

If we could keep the sucky people off the road we wouldn't need check points. But it's against the law to shoot them, go figure.

Wow. Where to start...

First you need to establish that DUI checkpoints have had an impact on the rate of alcohol related crashes. You have not.

Second; The Constitution was not designed to be ignored when it "seemed like the right thing to do". This document is your only protection against tyranny. It's shocking that anyone would support illegal search and seizure because the target is unsympathetic.

[Moses]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

We simply cannot pass enough laws to make stupid people behave, much less smart. The idiots out there will always be idiots, no matter how many different ways we try to slow them down and out smart them. "Never underestimate the brilliance of a fool" when it comes to new and creative ways to fukk up and make themselves a hazard to the rest of us.

The hand-wringing ninnies (the worst sort of fools, by the way) see the passing of endless laws, of endless layered and often contradictory laws, as a "solution". These ninnies assume too much. They give their adversaries too much credit. They actually think the fools are paying attention, and will straighten up and fly right if the law tells them to. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The net result of all of this, the only tangible result of all of this, is that the police and other officials have ever more justification to harangue honest, peaceful citizens. And not for any harm they did, really, but for what could have happened. They bust citizens' balls over "crimes" or "infractions" with no victims. Add to that the new-found profit motive for enforcement in every little god damn one-horse town, and even in the bigger municipalities, and we are faced with one hell of an unholy mess. Profit-driven, victimless "law enforcement" targeted at the non-criminal, non-violent citizen population.

This simply has to stop. It "prevents" nothing - the target audience isn't paying attention, and never will. The rest of us shouldn't have to put up with the b.s. preventative enforcement and its encroachment on our liberties.

Well said!

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Eric 951

Random traffic checkpoint/stops have become the rage around here--they are called "aggressive driving checks, or courtesy patrols" total BS. What they really are is a bunch of cops setting up on random roads, waving people into nearby parking lots and running plates, checking licenses, insurance, etc.

And the cops that I have seen doing these checks and stopping people are the total douche variety--tinted shades, mustache, hard-ass attitude--WTF?

If this ever happens to me, I'd demand to know why they stopped me, ask for a supervisor and then file a complaint. People should put up with this BS. And searching my car? Yeah, that'll ever happen.

[John Rogers]

There have been several posts about the "check points" being unconstitutional so I asked a law professor when I was at school teaching last night and he referred me to a site that explains what each part of the constitution means in words we normal folks can understand and also cites cases. Here is an excerpt that covers DUI check points and such.

The original post I made mentioned a check point at the court houses and a NON check point where the motor officer was sitting at a corner observing the way people were driving. I think there is a big difference there?

Quote: Investigatory Stops Of Motorists At Sobriety Checkpoints.

The unique situation in which the Supreme Court has approved suspicionless searches in the traditional law enforcement context. See Michigan Dep't of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 ('90). The Sitz Court relied on well-settled law that motorists have a lessened expectation of privacy regarding stops and visual searches of automobiles on the nation's roadways. Id. at 450 (explaining the importance of the context of 'police stops of motorists on public highways'). At these sobriety checkpoints, which motorists may choose to avoid, only the initial brief stop and preliminary questioning may take place without individualized suspicion: 'more extensive field sobriety testing' requires justification. Id. at 450-2.

Like the highway sobriety checkpoints, the 'special needs beyond normal law enforcement' rationale supports searches on lesser grounds than probable cause only in a very few, carefully tailored regulatory contexts that do not involve apprehension of criminal perpetrators. See, e.g., National Treasury Employees Union v. Von Raab, 489 U.S. 656, 65-66 ('89) (applying the special needs exception to suspicionless quasi-consensual drug testing of Customs Service employees seeking transfer to positions having a direct involvement in drug interdiction).

[Rick Lee]

And did you know you can also refuse field sobriety tests? In fact, you should ALWAYS refuse them, as the cops are by then just collecting evidence against you. Don't help them. They have usually decided to arrest you before they even ask you to perform the tests.