What do you think about DUI checkpoints?

Posted by on . 14 comments.

Since I don't drink and drive, I don't fear them.


But I got pulled over in Las Vegas, and I thought they were pretty rude, even though I was cooperative.

I thought the Constitution was supposed to protect us from this kind of thing?
'mona lisa', what about the parent who had a child die fighting for freedom? would you 'allow' them an opinion?
patrick, that's a false choice

cops could easily dit by a bar area, a look for probable cause. it would be like shooting fish in a barrel, and just as effective

Facebook comments:

Comments

  1. Craftygirl says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    I think DUI checkpoints are great. My town has so many of them. A lot of kids in my town have done stupid things and have killed themselves. If it’s the only way to keep people from drinking then I’m all for DUI checkpoints. I think we need to keep the drunks off the road. So many innocent people have been killed by drunk drivers!!

  2. macaroni says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    My problem is that they have too many lights and its hard to see. I’ve been through two of them and been sober both times.

  3. fangtaiyang says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    The Constitution does protect us from unlawful search and seizure, as well as from unlawful detention. A D.U.I. checkpoint is not unlawful. They are set up at times when people may be driving while intoxicated and in areas where drunk driving has been a problem and concern. This does meet the legal requirement for reasonable cause. It is also worth noting that driving is a priviledge, not a right, so stopping you fromdriving to make certain that you are licensed, insured, and capable of driving is not a violation of your Constitutional rights.

  4. wazup1971 says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    I think it is more rude to deal with drunk drivers everyday and clean after a drunk driver has killed some innocent driver.

  5. Angelbunny17 says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    I don’t fear them either, but i don’t agree with them at all. Cops already have way too much power, why give them more!

  6. here to help says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    it is discriminatory

  7. Mz. Tee says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    I think they are a great idea, because there are too many irresponsible people who drive, while they are under the influence of something, and those people are not only putting their own life in danger, but my life and everyone else’s as well.

  8. sosueme534 says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    I do not drink and drive either. As a matter of fact, I am a 50 yr old woman who has never been arrested or in any troble, because I am a law abiding citizen. They are rude, mean, and horrible. After being stopped by our "men in blue" when ever I get one behind me I am terrified. I say when the mere sight of a cop to a law abiding citizen strikes fear we have a serious problem. One we better address before we are no longer a free society. They report anyone who even says the words rights or constitution to the national security folks as suspected terrorists. where the hell do you think we are headed? I know I am frightened, and you should be too.

  9. Mona Lisa says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    Ask someone whose kid has been killed by a drunk driver what they think. The rest of us have no right to an opinion.

  10. Patrick P says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    It’s either:
    A– have the checkpoint or
    B– die from a drunk-driver loser.

    I choose plan A.

    (That and we should super-glue a drunk driver’s hands together…behind their back… ^_^)

  11. Proud*Marine*Wife says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    They don’t bother me a bit. They have them alot around this area. I don’t drink and drive, so I have no problems with them. I would rather go through a DUI checkpoint than be hit by a drunk driver. People like that have no regard for other peoples lives, and it’s best to try to get them off the road.

  12. Don C says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    The U.S. Constitution is supposed to protect us from a lot of government intrusion but I’m afraid that most of government pays little attention to its provisions. Your question, which I presume is based upon the 4th amendment’s prohibition against unreasonable or warrantless searches and seizures in connection with the use of a drivers license, has been addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court (California :vs: Byers) and also in terms of the alleged requirement to submit to a so-called DUI test. You have no legal obligation to submit to such a test. However, failure to submit to the test can normally result in a license suspension. A drivers license is issued by the State and it is legally the property of the State, not of the individual in whose name the license is issued. Therefore, the courts hold that while you do not have to submit to any such tests, you also have no constitutional right to hold a drivers license. This is a state-granted permit and, being the property of the state, can be withdrawn by the state whenever it chooses.

  13. kajun says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    I sure wish there had been a checkpoint where the drunk 16 yr old killed my sister-in-law and my 6 yr old neice. They didnt deserve to die like that.
    Youre referring to the 4th amendment…and it says UNLAWFUL search and seizures….a DUI checkpoint is not unlawful.

  14. leslie b says:
    June 30, 2009 at 8:00 am

    since I don’t drunk and drive, I’m indifferent.

Leave a Reply