DUI Checkpoint caught on film

Status
Not open for further replies.
JD, you are having an emotional response based on your experiences.

It is understandable.

But it is still wrong, no matter how many lives they "save".

Just like gun control is wrong, no matter how many lives it "saves."

It is the age old debate - "free speech doesn't allow you to yell fire in a theatre"

So where is the line?

I know where it is and Nazi checkpoints are over the line.
 
if giving up some of my rights would bring back some of the little children i`ve had to put in a body bag, i would do it..
Click to expand...

Hey, if you want to give up your rights, that's your call. But that won't be enough... people like you insist that I must give up my rights to make the world "a better place" in your mind.
 
No JD, I don't think that it's funny. I think your post was repulsive. The world you envision is not one I'd want to raise my kids in.
Freedom is a simple concept...I'm a simple guy.

Biker
 
if it was stop and go, then fine...but

it is not stop and go if your not drunk, its ask you to come out of the car and stand in the cold for 15 minutes, then ask you why your shaking and if your afraid of somthing and why. why are you nervous, your shaking all over. that kind of crap.

i have no problem with a cop doing his job. but lets get the job done instead of looking for, or creating problems.
 
JD0608, I can understand that dealing with the aftermath of drunk drivers has made you more sensitive to the issue than most of us who haven't.

I hope you can grasp why those of us who don't drink and drive (or drink at all, for that matter) find these checkpoints to be both intrusive and unacceptable.

We'll fight them at every turn, and you're just putting yourself into the line of fire by defending them.

So many in the medical community allow their exposure to death and injury to push them into the Socialist mindset of mass punishment of the innocent in order to catch the guilty few, and it's tragic.

You may not think being detained without cause (however briefly) is a problem, but an awfully large number of people do.
 
I appreciate Evan price taking time to post the LE perspective. Here's the other side of that coin.

At checkpoints, I find it appropriate to only respond to such questions from the officer with these same two questions, window only ~1/4 way down, hands visible on the steering wheel, door locked:

"Officer, why am I being stopped?"
"Officer, am I free to go?"

And if the officer starts to escalate and threaten, there's:

"If I'm being detained, I would like to call my attorney at this time. I do not consent to any search of my person or vehicle."

Been doing this for years at the various drunk driving and clickit or ticket checkpoints, worst it's gotten me was a few minutes' wait and no-seatbelt ticket from a severely pissed cop having a bad shift.

I went to court on that one (after rescheduling my court date twice at the last allowable minute, check with your friendly court clerk) and got it thrown out.

I'll understand if any LEOs don't appreciate this, but as a law-abiding citizen and commissioned officer in the Army I don't find checkpoints to be acceptable.
 
guys i`m not willing to give up my gun rights. what i`m saying has nothing to do with gun rights. you would have to look hard to find a more conservitive person than me. the only thing i`m saying is being respectful and following directions at a traffic check is not going to hurt any of us. if we all are honest with ourselves we know these traffic checks have done a lot of good.
just like being at the airport and being searched. if it keeps some idiot from bringing a bomb on the plane, i`ll wait an extra 5 or 10 minutes and let the people do their job.
 
I know I'm probally chimming in a little late but IMO the kid should'nt have been a smart a**. I'm only 25 but in my 8 years of driving and getting pulled(a few,but major times) I've always found that being polite and being honest is the best policy with LEO's.Back when I was'nt so mature I still got issued tickets,but I did'nt get hauled off (for which I easily could) for several major offenses.Driving 100mph in rush hour (on I-40),no ins,no reg,no current insp,etc.etc.If you admit to what your doing and be polite they'll cut you some slack,I've even had a few laughing and joking w/me before they left.Same with dealing with the DA and the judge at the court house.I've gotten all my stuff droped,bymyself,no attorney,but just being myself and admmiting my guilt(Okay,maybee a little but-kissing:D )If you offer any resistance or act like your gonna give them a problem(Such in this kids case) ofcourse there gonna mess with you,it makes them suspicious and it would me too,if I was a LEO.Kid got what he deserved.

My two cents,

Brian Craig
 
and biker it`s not a world i invision it`s the real world we life in. when you see a bad accident you get to drive on by and forget about it. when i go i find out real quick how the accident happened and way too many times it`s because of a drunk driver. if you don`t ever have to deal with what i see every day, it probably dosen`t seem real until it happens to you. but repulsive or not our children face it everyday. drunk drivers kill more people in one year than all the american soldiers killed it the whole veitnam war. i still say traffic check away.
 
JD, you don't have to share your rationale for voluntarily giving up your freedom.

It's unlikely to change any minds on the subject of guarding ours jealously, however, so not a productive investment of your time.

If you want to effect change, push your lawmakers for stiffer DUI penalties. I was rear-ended by what I found later to be a 3rd time offender, and was shocked that this person had been able to get a license to drive.
 
JD...

Drunk drivers kill more than 58,000 people a year? Don't be offended if I ask for the slightest bit of proof.
M'kay?

Biker
 
briancraig81 wrote:
I've always found that being polite and being honest is the best policy with LEO's.
Click to expand...

Yup, just to clarify on my previous post I don't recommend that procedure for a righteous pull-over.

On those rare occasions where I've been stopped for a moving violation, politeness has been and will be the rule.

"And no, officer, I don't consent to any search of my person or vehicle" if asked for a quick look around the inside of my car. If the officer has PC or cause for a Terry frisk he/she won't need to ask for consent.

Voluntarily consenting to a search is right up there with happily participating in seatbelt/DUI checkpoints, in terms of giving up your rights...IMHO.
 
1st things first. The kid knowingly drove into a checkpoint he could see from far away. He didn't try to avoid it and already had the camera on. He was lookin' for trouble, and got just the amount he wanted.

That being said, the officer did his job and tried to find evidence to use against the kid. I don't fault him for that, he was trained to do that, and he was within the law. The kid politely declined. That was also legal. The officer THEN decides to pull him over. Can it be proven that he pulled him over based on the response? Actually, no, intent is hard to prove. Can it be deduced that he was subjected to intensified scrutiny for exercising his rights? Common sense says yes.

i`ve been a paramedic for 15 years and can`t count how many dead and dying people- mothers,fathers,and children i`ve pulled out of mangled vehicles because some drunk ran them over. so don`t give me the " they have rights crap" 5 minutes out of your day at a traffic check to catch drunks is not asking a whole lot.
Click to expand...

Translation: There's lotsa bad things out there, I know, you may not, but I do. Don't object when they try to limit your freedom, they are trying to prevent bad things. Except that I've never seen any numbers showing DUI stops reduce drunk drivers.

I've been on both sides of the situation. Among others, I lost my cousin to a drunk driver. I've also been the drunk driver allowed to leave because I steadfastly, but politely, exercised my rights. I'm not recommending anyone ever drunk drive...

But it REAFFIRMED in my mind that DUI stops don't catch enough drivers to make them worth the resources they use. Put the same LEOs in a car circling a bar or something. That way they will be looking for criminals in a way that is legal AND constitutional.
 
How was the kid being a smart ass? The officer asks him where he was headed and the kid said he didn't care to discuss that.

In this country, do we have to tell the police where we are going when we are stopped at a DUI checkpoint and NO offense has been commited?

Is the cop's sense of authority so threatened by someone declining to engage in a conversation not germain to the reason for the interaction?

Why was the car searched? I always thought a DUI checkpoint was a simple matter of the cop talking to the driver, checking driver's license, etc., and trying to detect signs of intoxication--odor of alcohol, open containers, slurred speech, confusion, etc. If they detect something, they do a field sobriety test, if not, they say have a nice day and off you go.

How was this justified? I'm willing to hear an explanation and change my mind.

K
 
Fortunately, In my state of Georgia I don't have to wear a seatbelt in my truck if I don't want to; they are a pain and an inconvenience.

Also, knock on wood, I have never encountered a DUI checkpoint in my neighborhood. The cops know where and when they can pull this BS and get away with it. For example, there were a lot of blue lights flashing in certain "high crime" areas on New Year's eve but not in my community which is located next to Agnes Scott College in Decatur.

If I have gotten anything out of this encounter, it's that there is a potentially large market for car video surveillance cameras and audio equipment to keep a check on cops who may abuse their authority and can get away with it because a judge will defer to their story if there is no contrary evidence available.
 
The kid knowingly drove into a checkpoint he could see from far away. He didn't try to avoid it and already had the camera on.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight: A person having a video camera on in their own vehicle indicates that a crime is being committed?????

Sure, the kid may have been expecting that there would be trouble at the checkpoint from the police. But why would he have expected such trouble?
It sounds to me like the citizens of that area are policing their own police. So what's wrong with that? And where have laws been broken in doing so?
Sounds like the kid will make a fine libertarian to me!
 
Last edited:
busy, the purpose of DUI checkpoints is to acclimate the public to this type of government intrusion. They don't work and the cops admit that they do not work.

However, the purpose is to make the coming permanent checkpoints where drugs, guns and money will be the targets more acceptable.

Kentak, it wasn't justified and that's what has people scrambling to defend the police with dead, mangled baby stories.
 
DUI checkpoint or just Checkpoint?

If a DUI checkpint was merely to stop drivers, stick your nose in the window and sniff for alcohol, I wouldn't be nearly so put off by them. What we have, instead, is checkpoints intent on finding something, anything, to detain drivers. Where are you going? None of their business, it's a free country. Mind if we look in your vehicle? Yes, I mind, it's my vehicle and this was a free country last time I checked. We'll find a reason. Huh? Since when is the job of police to "find a reason"? These are a small step to "Your papers, please."

As for driving around a checkpoint, here in Ohio that will get you pulled over. Deliberately avoiding one is considered probable cause. Not wanting to be hassled is apparently a crime in my fine state. Possibly the teens, also. Taping the stop was the smart thing to do, for his own protection. What need did the officers have to get him out of the vehicle and move it themselves? If the car was damaged in any way, he'd have no recourse. State law forbids one to sue the state without the states approval. Must be nice.

The principle of what happened here is the issue, not the specific events. A citizen going about his legal business was detained, deliberately intimidated and his private property was used without his permission. If I did that to someone, that would be called kidnapping, menacing and theft. All because a mayor or commissioner wants a little fundraising action.
 
not sure

about where you live. but around here the flashlight is a sniffer. they get it in your face/car and it lights up if it detects alcohol.
 
Last time I drove across the border (maybe 2 years ago)
Click to expand...

Just to clarify, my event wasn't at the border. It was just north of Truth or Consequences, NM, which is at milemarker 75. Factoring in that I-25 begins at Las Cruces, and that town is about 25 miles north of the Mexican border, this Border Patrol checkpoint was about 100 miles north of the border. Note that I had not travelled outside of the country at any time during my travel, but I still have an official of the US government asking me about my personal business. What happened to America?
 
That being said, the officer did his job and tried to find evidence to use against the kid.
Click to expand...

That is the officer's job? To try to trump up some charges against someone that they have stopped at a checkpoint? And you think that this is acceptable?

This is a far cry from the role of law enforcement that the Founders envisioned. The fact that you, and many others, buy into the lie that this is how cops "do their job" shows that we have lost our freedom. Heaven help us.
 
hes lucky to be as young as he is i can remember when there were penalties for being a richard. painful ones.
Click to expand...
Really? Penalties from whom?

The police? Are you saying that you're in favor of extra-judicial use of violence by the police to impose a submissive attitude on someone neither violating the law, nor obstructing their activities?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
Why it's important to not show ID to police when asked for no reason
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
132
Views
8K
Art Eatman
A
T
  • Locked
San Diego police kill driver who they say reached for fake gun
Replies
6
Views
533
50 Freak
5
S
  • Locked
Getting pulled over as a passenger
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
smalls
S
F
  • Locked
This happened in my old neighborhood!
Replies
14
Views
2K
Art Eatman
A
T
  • Locked
Driver eluding Minneapolis police crashes into SUV, killing its driver
Replies
1
Views
458
Tamara
T
Back
Top