Lets discuss roadside traffic safety checkpioints..

[Noah930]

Originally Posted by cashflyer

I find it interesting that so many feel that these "safety" checkpoints being discussed in this thread are an egregious trampling of their constitutional rights, yet so many people feel that the TSA patdowns are acceptable as a necessary part of travel in the modern post 9-11 world.

I haven't gone back to verify, but I strongly suspect that the guys railing against TSA patdowns have the same opinions re: these safety checkpoints.

[campbellcj]

We did get pulled-over at random in Russia for a 'document check' (I wasn't driving, a native citizen was.). We also saw people stopped near train stations and so forth, pedestrians literally yanked off the sidewalk and asked for ID. Different world...or is it?

[island911]

When I was in Norway I was told to expect a simple stop where once the window is down, the cop will push a breathalyzer tube to your face and will simple say "blow."

So, that seems to the point.

Here, I still don't get how the charade of "let me see your papers . .where did you come from... where are you headed..." is allowed.

[GothingNC]

I'm all for it if it helps get some of the drunks off the road.

130 were arrested at a checkpoint in Raleigh last year.

DWI checkpoint nets 130 arrests in Wake County :: WRAL.com


Meanwhile a truck driver high on drugs and alcohol slammed into a few vehicles on interstate 40 killing three and wounding others

Driver charged in triple fatal I-40 crash :: WRAL.com

[peppy]

A few pics from the wreck John was referencing.

[Noney]

Holy schitt!

[island911]

The majority of accidents are not from drunks. ...so now what?

[GothingNC]

Poor drivers just driving along and getting steam rolled without warning.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 37,261 people died in traffic crashes in 2008 in the United States (latest figures available), including an estimated 11,773 people who died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes. Drunk driving fatalities accounted for 32% of all traffic deaths last year, that is, on average someone is killed in an alcohol-impaired driving crash every 45 minutes in the U.S. (Source: NHTSA/FARS, 2009)

[island911]

Point is, being out on the road is dangerous even if ALL drunks are removed. --which isn't too likely.

So, that begs the Q; Why are we giving up our rights for this very slight increase in safety?

[GothingNC]

Originally Posted by island911

Point is, being out on the road is dangerous even if ALL drunks are removed. --which isn't too likely.

So, that begs the Q; Why are we giving up our rights for this very slight increase in safety?

I thought driving was a priviledge, not a right.

[Radioactive]

100 Citations Issued at Fontana DUI Checkpoint
By Laura Fishman on March 16, 2010 12:01 PM

The Fontana Police Department conducted a drunk driving and driver's license checkpoint last Saturday in order to crack down on people who were driving while intoxicated, but Fontana Herald News reports that Saturday's checkpoint yielded few DUI arrests and numerous citations.

Of the 1,501 vehicles that drove through the DUI checkpoint in Fontana, 153 of the vehicles were stopped and 123 citations were issued for various traffic violations. In addition, 91 vehicles were impounded for various reasons, including driving without a valid driver's license.

While over 100 citations were issued for various traffic violations at the checkpoint, the San Bernardino Sun reports that Fontana police officers were only able to arrest eight people at the checkpoint that was being held on Citrus Avenue, across from Fontana High School. Of the eight arrests, only two people were actually arrested for suspicion of driving under the influence.

The checkpoint lasted from 6:00 p.m. on Saturday to 1:30 a.m. on Sunday, and after seven and a half hours you would probably expect to find more than two people who are suspected of driving under the influence. Yet some law enforcers and DUI lawyers in Los Angeles argue that a sobriety checkpoint isn't about arresting as many as people as possible for DUI, but instead has the purpose of educating the community about the dangers associated with drinking and driving. In Fontana, the DUI checkpoints are funded by a grant that comes from the California Office of Traffic Safety, which is funded through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.


Check 10% of the cars driving down the road and 80% are violating the vehicle code and 60% should not be driving at all!

[70SATMan]

Originally Posted by island911

Point is, being out on the road is dangerous even if ALL drunks are removed. --which isn't too likely.

So, that begs the Q; Why are we giving up our rights for this very slight increase in safety?

In North Carolina, the percentage of traffic fatalities that were alcohol related was at the highest level in 1982, with 63%. The percentage has dropped significantly, reaching the lowest levels in 2006, with 31%. The actual number of alcohol-related deaths was also highest in 1982, with 827. In the most recent year of stats, out of all traffic fatalities, 30% involved a blood alcohol concentration at or above the level considered legally intoxicated - .08%.

All 50 states in the US now apply two statutory offenses to operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. The first (and original) offense is known either as driving under the influence (DUI), driving while intoxicated/impaired (DWI), or operating while intoxicated/impaired (OWI). This is based upon a police officer's observations (driving behavior, slurred speech, the results of a roadside sobriety test, etc.)

The second offense is called "illegal per se", which is driving with a BAC of 0.08% or higher. Since 2002 it has been illegal in all 50 states to drive with a BAC that is 0.08% or higher.

Year Fatalities
Tot Alc-Rel % 0.08+ %
1982 1,303 827 63 743 57
1983 1,234 672 54 609 49
1984 1,450 750 52 672 46
1985 1,482 686 46 605 41
1986 1,647 806 49 711 43
1987 1,584 764 48 682 43
1988 1,573 709 45 633 40
1989 1,471 621 42 556 38
1990 1,385 644 46 575 42
1991 1,369 600 44 547 40
1992 1,265 567 45 502 40
1993 1,389 529 38 459 33
1994 1,431 535 37 473 33
1995 1,448 501 35 443 31
1996 1,494 546 37 471 32
1997 1,483 545 37 472 32
1998 1,596 581 36 506 32
1999 1,505 573 38 491 33
2000 1,557 614 39 533 34
2001 1,530 536 35 458 30
2002 1,576 592 38 527 33
2003 1,531 554 36 474 31
2004 1,557 553 35 496 32
2005 1,534 549 36 484 32
2006 1,558 490 31 420 27
2007 1,675 570 34 487 29
2008 1,433 500 35 423 30

[Radioactive]

Fontana police arrest 5
Lori Consalvo, Staff Writer
Created: 06/13/2011 08:24:14 PM PDT

FONTANA - A police checkpoint resulted in dozens of citations and vehicle impounds as well as five arrests Saturday night and early Sunday.

Officers with the Fontana Police Department conducted the drunken driving and driver's license checkpoint between 6 p.m. Saturday and 1:30 a.m. Sunday on Valley Boulevard at Catawba Avenue.

Police stopped 55 vehicles and issued 47 citations, according to a police statement. Police also towed 32 vehicles.

One of the five people arrested was found to be under the influence of alcohol, and the other four were arrested on outstanding warrants.

The checkpoint was funded by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety

Check 55 cars driving down the road and 85% are violating the vehicle code and 60% should not be driving at all!

[island911]

Originally Posted by GothingNC

I thought driving was a priviledge, not a right.

regardless of if driving a right or privilege, we have one right deemed so important that it was put into our US Constitution. That is citizens are given protection from unreasonable search and seizure. ...where "unreasonable" hinges on probable cause.

Clearly, that right is being corrupted by those police blockades.

[island911]

Originally Posted by 70SATMan

In North Carolina, the percentage of traffic fatalities that were alcohol related was at the highest level in 1982, with 63%. The percentage has dropped significantly, reaching the lowest levels in 2006, with 31%. ...

Ah, you focus on statistics to 'cherry pick' from all accidents to select/present only fatal accidents. That would make sense, since the non-drunk accident drivers are less likely to drive 70 mph into a tree. (killing themselves) ...how many only kill themselves?

The statistic I would like to see, would be my chances of being killed by a drunk driver. . ..and what are my chances of drowning in a swimming pool or hot-tub.

[70SATMan]

Originally Posted by island911

Ah, you focus on statistics to 'cherry pick' from all accidents to select/present only fatal accidents. That would make sense, since the non-drunk accident drivers are less likely to drive 70 mph into a tree. (killing themselves) ...how many only kill themselves?

Originally Posted by island911

Point is, being out on the road is dangerous even if ALL drunks are removed. --which isn't too likely.

So, that begs the Q; Why are we giving up our rights for this very slight increase in safety?

Ummm, no. I didn't cherry pick anything. I posted stats directly related to your myopic post about drunks. I wouldn't call that kind of reduction in human deaths "slight". Wanna bet alcohol related INJURIES are down too? That would add to the safety, no?

I could look up WA stats to see how less likely you are to die on the road from a drunk for the same time periods.

Maybe it's slightly less than slight.

[island911]

Originally Posted by 70SATMan

.. your myopic post about drunks...

uh huh. My post was about statistics. If there is a myopia, it's with those who have a simple 'drunks = bad => must have gestapo-type check points for safety for everyone. POV.

Seriously, look at what is happening here. The LEOs are not looking ONLY for drunks at these stops. The "we will SAVE-aha thou from the EVIL-aha Drunk-aha Driver" routine is just for selling the check points as an acceptable intrusion.

Like I said, I have no problem with all sorts of other approaches to nab drunks - this roadside random search approach is unconstitutional. The supreme court opinion that it is only kind of unconstitutional doesn't help.