DUI Check Point Constitutionality.

Why would you be a prick at a DUI checkpoint if you're sober? The police are there, taking drunk drivers off the road so that it is safe for you and your families. IMHO people who complain about DUI checkpoints, are the ones who will and should get nabbed.

 

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I'm not really sure how it can be construed that a road block is probable cause. The fact that they are stopping random drivers defeats the "describing the persons" portion. How do they know which persons will be driving on that road at that time?

The one that really pisses me off is the "random" drug test at an employer. If it's random, where is the probable cause?

 

Well here in America we have a constitution that some people still believe it.

Some people dont consider it "being a prick" by remaining silent and asserting constitutional rights.

Some people might actually believe its "being a prick" when the government stops, detains and questions people without any reasonable suspicion of a crime.

However, there is no evidence that DUI check points take drunk drivers off the road any more than regular patrols.

 

Don't drink and drive. End of thread.

If ass hats would just get that through their head then we wouldn't be discussing this issue to begin with.

 

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/exc...topia-we-now-live-post-constitutional-country

Some people (myself included to a large degree) believe we live in a post constitutional country.

 

Something tells me you had a bad experience with the police before....
I just don't see why it's necessary to assert your rights when you're asked a question you can answer honestly and be on your way...

 

Hell, extend that logic and no one would do anything bad and fine folks currently in uniform wouldn't have to put themselves in harms way.

But I do agree with you... crap like check points are because there's too much ass-hattery in the world.

 

I dont see why any police officer in America would object to a citizen asserting their constitutional rights. Especially considering all law enforcement agents in America swore to honor and uphold my consitutional rights.

 

I didn't say they would. I just don't get why you as a citizen would want to use that right in that exact moment if there was no reason to. Just to say you flexed your rights..? That's cool I suppose. Guess we just have different priorities.

 

I'm aware of all that. I just don't agree. Just because someone, no better than any of us, states this is their inturpritation does not make it correct even if it is law. I do not believe it is what the authors of our Constitution intended. I also am aware provisions are in place to change the Constitution but, again this is not consistant with what I believe was intended. Much of the concept of these laws is based on "what's good for the people" or intrest of the state. Could anyone argue that fewer people would die if we were all dis-armed? When will the state find it reasonable to search homes and take our guns?

On the "at will" part, I've worked in my (granted chosen) industry prior to these laws, I remember when the laws were implimented. I also remember a major diving factor of why they were implimented. Again, I just disagree.

We, as citizens have continued to watch our rights be desolved for longer than I've been alive and I feel unless we put a stake in the ground somewhere that line will continue to move.

 

I don't drink and drive and I don't dope. I also don't support being checked for no reason and neither should anyone else.

 

What are you hiding?

How many people have to die from drunk drivers until we need to step in make a serious effort in stopping the problem? Would you have supported the TSA check points we have now pre 2001? I bet not but now its a fact of life.

BTW 200 years ago if you were riding through town on a horse and the local sheriff wanted you to stop and speak to you, I bet you wouldn't keep your mouth shut and go "but my constitutional rights bla" cause you'd get the shit kicked outta ya and thrown in the brig.

 

I'm sorry, but the "for the good of the general populace" argument gets old sometimes. Yes, we need to act to protect society as a whole but the collective possession of individual rights is what makes our society in the first place.

Yes, we should all stop being idiots, grow up and be responsible adults. Sadly, for some, it just won't happen and we need to find a way to get those people away from everyone else who is just trying to go about their lives. But I don't think stopping every person passing down a given road is the most efficient way to achieve the goal and it is by far the most individually intrusive method available.

TSA checkpoints are among my least favorite things. It's essentially impossible to prove how effective/ineffective they are and they are extremely expensive. There are usually a variety of ways to deter undesired behavior but, for some reason, our government tends to pick the most expensive but dubiously effective methods available at any given point. As slow as the government is at adopting new processes and technologies there's no way they will be able to keep up with folks who want to do bad things. I'm not saying being slow is a bad thing... it's just an inherent quality in our type of government that is supposed to contribute toward rational actions. But those who are irrational can always keep a step ahead.

As for the Sheriff of 200 years ago, I consider it a sure sign of how professional our law enforcement personnel are today that we can stand behind our rights and not get clunked on the noggin.

 

lol

 

Sorry, but you dont get to trample the constitution in an effort to solve a problem.

We have a constitutional protections for a reason.

 

Im all for DUI checkpoints if they were for catching drunk people only. I don't like how they run them here; I ALWAYS get pulled over because I have a modified truck. and I'm never drunk. I don't even drink. I HATE them. they set them up and even if your not drunk they'll still ticket you for recon, safety check etc.

 

No they don't, I assure you.

 

See, you think like them...

Would it have mattered? Check your facts, box cutters were legal then, the TSA (under the rules then) would have made no difference.

Does that make it right?

To quote James Madison: "I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."

 

You aren't incriminating yourself about being drunk, but you could easily say something completely innocent that would make them suspicious. Police assume the worst, assume everyone is doing something wrong and work back from there. That's fine, because to catch criminals you have to think like one.

Maybe you had a random case of nerves at the checkpoint, you stuttered when you answered or simply tripped on your own tongue. Now the cops wonder if you're drunk. So they ask you more, pull you out of the car. They think you might be drunk now so they want to find out if you have alcohol. They ask to search your car. You're trying to be a good, cooperative citizen and consent. And then they find it: a baggie your buddy dropped when you drove him home a couple days ago. It slipped under the seat, you had no idea and he's never seemed like a druggie. You're innocent, and you're going to jail for narcotics possession. And if you had kept quiet they'd never have searched.

Or a less extreme example: they search your car and find nothing. They release you. You leave, but a couple blocks later you find out your iPod, that was working fine and playing music as you pulled up to the checkpoint is now broken after they rifled through your stuff and threw your belongings all over the car (they do, I've had my car searched and it was a mess when they were done). The report said you were questioned and released; the search found nothing so the officer never mentioned it happened. Even if they did mention it and you complain, you have no proof it worked before the stop, or that you didn't drop it yourself after the search. Your desire to be a good and helpful citizen just cost you an iPod. Not the biggest loss you'll face in your life, but it's enough to tick you off.

Just because you have nothing on hide doesn't mean you want the police digging around in your life.