DUI Check Point Constitutionality.

5th amendment says you are not compelled to be a witness against yourself in a criminal case, yes? How is driving through a DUI checkpoint a criminal case? They ask the same questions of everyone driving through that checkpoint, regardless of if you're drinking or not.

DUI checkpoints are not searches, they are not seizures, they are not arrests nor are they custody. They are a point where police can contact all individuals driving through a certain area to ensure compliance with state law.

 

Correct but you are insinuating that if they don't have probable cause they will not ask for permission which is incorrect. If A pound of cocaine is seen on the front seat permission in some cases will still be requested even though despite the answer a search will be conducted. SO yes or no to the search matters not but the request will still be made.

 

Right, I didn't mean to imply that you did say that. I just wanted to point out that ,in fact, ones permission is not required to get your car searched.

On the probable cause issue (and not specific to the above quoted text), I would say it's a gray area. I mean anyone could say they smelled pot right? Maybe it was from a passing car and they really did or maybe they didn't but just used it to look anyway????

Although, I have to agree (with some of the other posters on this thread), I've (or anyone I know) not been subject to this type on conduct and therefore don't really think it's a problem area other than I think it does not reflect the spirit of the 4th amendment in my eyes.

 

You are not compelled to incriminate yourself in a criminal case, and contact with police is where they start building their case. The moment the officer initiates contact, a case has begun. That's why civil liberties groups advise you not to answer questions at a checkpoint, because from the moment the cop asks, "How are you this evening?" he's assessing you and gathering evidence in the event the case goes farther than a quick stop and you get on your way.

 

You mean to tell me when you go through a DUI check point you don't have to say anything?! That sounds like probable cause to me like your trying to hide something, I dunno I'm dumb

 

Yeah, they *could* ask even with probable cause, it would sure clear up any question about whether they were allowed to, because it tosses probable cause out the window. But in that case asking is a dog and pony show.

"Can we search?"
"No."
"Too bad. We're doing it anyway."

That's not polite.

If the cop really wanted to be professional, instead of wasting time asking he'd respectfully say, "Sir, I [smelled marijuana/saw a giant bag of coke] as I approached your vehicle. This gives me probable cause for a search, which I am now going to perform." And I have a hunch this is actually how most encounters go when they already have probable cause. Because I might not like a lot of things police do, but by and large they still act professionally.

 

To me it's not a 5th amendment issue as much as a 4th amendment. I don't drink and drive or dope or carry illegal weapons and I do have coverage etc...I'm as legal as I know how to be. It's more of a 4th amendment issue which states:

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.

To me a road block, a random drug test and maybe a few other times do not fit with the intent of the 4th amendment. To me my car fits in the "effects" portion of the 4th amendment. Also reading it, I believe the intent was the government must have a warrant and further to have a warrant they must have probable cause which there must have been an oath describing why I'm being checked. That's my take, and I admit I use a strict interpritation.

Next the government will want to take DNA samples to keep on file "just in case".

 

Driving is a not a constitutional right. When you obtain a driver's license you agree to use it to drive according to the rules that have been put in place to help make an inherently dangerous situation somewhat less so.

Alcohol and drugs play a major role in vehicle accidents, more so than the “official” stats would suggest. I was a paramedic for a couple of decades and went on hundreds of accidents where the ultimate cause was someone on drugs or alcohol. A good many of these "accidents" resulted in injury and death to people that were obeying the rules of the road while the drunken or drugged out idiot walked away uninjured.

In some places the police may use checkpoints as an excuse to conduct further searches but in most of the cities I've worked in they used them for their intended purpose – to help keep the roads saver for non-violating motorists.

Not all cops are out to get you. I was passing through a small town once when I was pulled over by the county sheriff. I told him that I didn't think I was doing anything wrong and he said to not worry, I wasn't but that the next town had extended their 30 mph zone and the local cops had a speed trap set up so I ought to be careful about my speed through there.

 

Correct, that's your Constitutional right. You don't have to answer any question, before or after you are read your Miranda rights (except some states require you to identify yourself). Courts have agreed with that, the simple act of exercising your rights by refusing to consent cannot be held against you, it does not create the assumption of guilt. BUT it may cause the police to detain you longer to conduct a more thorough investigation (they are allowed to detain you for a reasonable amount of time to conduct an investigation, some states even specify what is "reasonable"), call and ask that a warrant be obtained and delivered, etc. I'm not saying it's the quickest, easiest, or even the smartest thing to do; if you aren't sure you know exactly what the law says, you could find yourself in a heap of headache. And you could end up in court. If that is worth it to you to stick up for your Constitutional rights, go for it. If not, you should just answer the questions and move on with your day.

 

Supreme Court says road blocks/ DUI check points do not constitute a search. They have spoken, like it or not that's the rules we play by.

 

Yup and those 9 people who have the final say were chosen by the clowns we elected. Even though they are the final say, it dosen't mean I agree with them (although I bet they are smarter then myself).

 

Very good point sir.

I do have to agree with you about free speech in this forum. Chris4x4 has said it himself, about folks posting whatever they want on here.

And I do have to agree that at times, LE and Conservatives aren't on the same page. I'm simply stating from my experiences, which aren't necessarily the same as others in this forum.

And no...I did not take your comment personal.

 

Glad to hear it. Just wanted to ensure you and other LEOs knew that my point is from a Constitutional view and not the boots on the ground element. Your job, like mine, has rules that are inacted by those not actually doing the work and they are where my bitch is....

 

Troll.

 

BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!


DREW!!!!!!

 

Here's the thing folks... Whenever you start invoking your civil rights you can expect LE to focus more scrutiny on you. The reality is LE take great offense to citizens exercising their rights. LE are the one's with the badge and think they have GOD like authority... LEO's (I'm not saying all but many) tend to have a Contempt of Citizen complex...

Poster Sunflower is correct know the law and don't let yourself be harassed or tricked.

 

totally unrelated and (thread jack):

The girl i'm dating now has identity theft...so every time we cross the border, (2 or 3 times a month) they automaically send us to secondary because she has to get off and input her password...they never search my truck, last week, I almost got arrested for kindly replying (although i'm a firefighter, i do respect LE) "No I will not let your dog climb into my truck where there's food and other personal stuff. They never search my vehicle because we're here for her identity theft" (pointing at the girl)...the CBPO started yelling at me saying my truck looked suspicious and that the whole identity theft deal was fishy...i guarded my truck and insisted that the dog has destroyed some of my property in the past and don't wish that it happens again...i kindly asked to speak to someone higher in rank...he disrespectfully said: "ok, i'll get her, but you're going to end up getting arrested if you don't comply" so i talked to the woman...she appologized and sent us on our way pretty quick...now, do you guys think I disrespected the system..?


i appologize before hand hah, I figured you guys are already bashing on this dude...might as well get you thinking on another subject...

 

Who let the hose dragger in??

 

lol, i see what you did there, bacon.