Douchehat at DUI checkpoint.

I'm guessing it's because of your age, although at the couple of checkpoints I've been through, I had no trouble. I've only had to hand them my ID once, and he just glanced at it for a second and told me to have a nice night.

 

The libertarian school of thought is something along the lines of if your impairment is not directly-incriminating, I.E. you could be over the limit but it is not impairing your driving, then you shouldn't be charged with the crime. BUT, it doesn't work that way. The compromise between the ideal and the literal would be that they'd have to pull you over for a DUI, not just filter you out like they're panning for gold.

I know this statement would piss a LOT of people off, but I am going to pose it anyway- I don't think an operation that would put LEOs in a fixed position for any period of time over their normal job duties would ever be implemented for the "safety of the public" if it didn't generate at least enough revenue to pay for itself. BUT, that's extremely cynical.

 

Listen to yourself man. Wake up! It's not one or the other! You just said yourself obviously the chances are low and that anything is possible. So why allow them to continue to practice this shit and automatically get behind them for the hope of a little extra safety and spout off non sense like "but love ones could be saved!"

 

EW, your independent thought is disgusting us.

 

If you're drinking, don't drive. I don't care if you "aren't" impaired. If your BAC is over the legal limit, you shouldn't be driving. The BAC laws exists for a reason.

You have the mindset that DUI checkpoints are evil and do nothing good for the community, and nobody will change your mind. I have the exist opposite opinion on the matter, and that's that.


Why continue to "allow" them to have DUI checkpoints? Because I don't have any problem with them. I support any and all tactics to get people off the road that shouldn't be there. Driving is a privilege, not a right.

 

Hmm, this has been an interesting read. I'm all for protecting ones rights but these people who go out of their way to prove a point just so they can because an internet badass always annoy me. Of course everyone wants to make this about a broader topic and beat around the bush of the actual video. You're on a public road, it's illegal to drive drunk, if you're sober a simple no sir and be on your way. Sure if you're actually drunk I guess you shouldn't have to self incriminate yourself, but they would likely be able to visually tell anyway. I mean if they had the check point and just LOOKED at you people would everyone still have an issue if they never actually speak to you? I mean in Delaware troopers will literally stand at the corner of major roads at traffic lights and look in your car to see if you're wearing your seatbelt since that's a primary offense there. Is that okay since they're not actually asking you a question?

I mean like the people who make these videos seemingly always finding themselves in these positions most people I know who complain about LEO's are those who find themselves on the wrong side of the law.

 

Wasn't making that argument at all sir, but the groupthink strikes again!

 

I must've misinterpreted you.

 

Also to anyone thats talking about being treated rudely... I'm sure its because the officers would rather be out taking REAL calls and helping people with real problems. Instead they're out "babysittying" an incompetent society that can't follow a simple law of not driving while intoxicated. Its bullshit that the officers have to hold everyones hand. I have no sympathy for anyone that has had a DUI, you don't deserve a second chance ever for being stupid....

 

I was talking about ideals, the libertarian IDEAL, not what is or isn't legal. Some libertarians believe that a DUI in itself should not be a crime AT ALL, but thats not how it is.

 

Well said.

 

Ah. Well that's just stupid.

 

Also well said.

 

Nice, "good luck getting a case to the SC because your opinion doesn't hold any legal weight" is a great point! Thank you for enlightening me. I'm not out here to argue with anyone I'm just simply stating my opinion on these sort of situations and trying to point the incredible ignorance of people willing to say the court said it was legal one time it must be right. Shit we use to enslave and kill African Americans, we totally jacked the Indian's land, women didn't have as many rights as men etc. Our country can be fucked sometimes and people need to think for themselves and not just go along with whatever our government says is ok.

Thank you. Didn't think I would need to clarify that.

 

I wonder how many of the respondents to this thread that believe the DUI check points are a waste of time and "a fishing expedition".... would feel the same way if a drunk blew thru an intersection and wiped out their family. Its always a hinderance until it effects you personally.

 

Great minds think alike.



Me and you have a lot in common.

 

Why is that stupid? Because it aint what it is? No philosophy is stupid, it's just not yours- unless it's whatever someone gave you and you accepted without forming your own opinion- then it's pretty stupid... The argument begins to run in circles at that point.

 

I can see where he's coming from. I've just never been treated rudely at a DUI checkpoint, so I'm guessing that is a valid argument as to why some people may be treated rudely.

 

If you read the side of most police vehicles it says "To Protect and Serve". Their job isn't simply "catch, capture and detain". DUI's are Real problems yes, but its something that shouldn't be happening, at all PERIOD. While people are putting themselves first and driving intoxicated, other people are being attacked, raped, killed, robbed by some some lunatic thats off his meds. So instead of taking care of the people that are in need of help, theyre checking up on the people that can't make a simple decision not to drive intoxicated. THAT is bullshit good sir....