DWI checkpoints

[Nolacopusmc]

serious question; since driving is a privilege and not a right, as has been debated here in recent history, does one waive whatever "rights" he or she may have under say, 4A?

Driving and being inside of the personal possession which is your car are two different things. So the short answer is no. Not sure the case off the top of my hand, but the US Supreme court has already stated you have the same right to protection (carjacker laws) but you do not have all the same rights to privacy in your car, mainly because cars tend to be operated in public roadways which are not your private property and as such not protected by the 4th in the same manner.

However, there are still rules protected by the 4th that allow for search and seizure situations within you vehicle.

 

[jmcrawf1]

It's a Terry Stop without probable cause. It violates my freedom of movement. Furthermore, it's a range of other infringements that vary from annoyance to police state hyperbole.

I don't mind the 5 or 10 DWI citations they may give out that night. I mind the however-many other people who committed no wrong, were not observed to have been under suspicion of any crime - and yet still were detained, and put through a delay of being able to go about their lives because M.A.D.D. convinces people that sacrifices rights is for "the greater good".

I can't say whether it is fact or not, but the rumor of it being probable cause to chase you down and pull you over if you are seen turning around or otherwise avoiding the checkpoint after coming upon it is disconcerting as well. No clue if that is a fact or not.

Wrong, a terry stop requires reasonable suspicion that a crime has been, about to be, or is being commited.

Regulatory checkpoints have been upheld by the supreme court. In short, you operate a motor vehicle, you subject yourself to being stopped to check for license, seatbelt, insurance etc.

sitz v. michigan

 

[Nolacopusmc]

It's a Terry Stop without probable cause. It violates my freedom of movement. Furthermore, it's a range of other infringements that vary from annoyance to police state hyperbole.

I don't mind the 5 or 10 DWI citations they may give out that night. I mind the however-many other people who committed no wrong, were not observed to have been under suspicion of any crime - and yet still were detained, and put through a delay of being able to go about their lives because M.A.D.D. convinces people that sacrifices rights is for "the greater good".

I can't say whether it is fact or not, but the rumor of it being probable cause to chase you down and pull you over if you are seen turning around or otherwise avoiding the checkpoint after coming upon it is disconcerting as well. No clue if that is a fact or not.

You are absolutely right in the bolded statement, and it shows exactly how wrong you are.

If you would have taken to time to actually digest what i wrote in relation to that, you would see why it makes perfect sense and is a daily fact and not a rumor.

Secondly, perhaps you should do a little research into what probable cause is and how it applies or does not apply to Terry Stops, which I fear you do not have a clue about either. When you make statements like you did here, it highlights your true ignorance about the subject at hand.

Go look on Google and come back when you learn what a Terry Stop is and is not and how probable cause and reasonable suspicion differ from each other and their application to checkpoints. Until then, you are simply running your gums without adding anything coherent to the conversation or providing an well founded articulate counter point.

 

[aard3]

If it potentially saves my wife or kids then I don't give a **** about your rights...

Then why don't we ban guns, and take them all away so that no one can get shot... OHHHH wait.. That's because that's a right you care about!

The DWI check points suck, because they stop people (majority of people) that haven't done anything wrong... yes, it's just a minor inconvience, but still aggervating. I've been through one, and I thought it was some huge wreck or something until the officer walked up to my truck (and no, I wasn't drinking).

I personally don't understand why cops don't just wait outside bars, and wait for someone visibly drunk to get in a car and drive off??? Seems more effective?

Aaron

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Wrong, a terry stop requires reasonable suspicion that a crime has been, about to be, or is being commited.

Regulatory checkpoints have been upheld by the supreme court. In short, you operate a motor vehicle, you subject yourself to being stopped to check for license, seatbelt, insurance etc.

Gitz v. michigan

Your wasting your time. I think this one might have had a criminal justice class or two.

His posts are a perfect example of someone who has ZERO knowledge, but a WEALTH of opinion about a topic they are clueless about being given free run on the internet to spew ignorance.

Whenyou cannot even articulate properly the difference between RS and PC, but try to substantiate an opinion about a legal matter....FAILBURGER!

 

[charliepapa]

I don't mind the 5 or 10 DWI citations they may give out that night. I mind the however-many other people who committed no wrong, were not observed to have been under suspicion of any crime - and yet still were detained, and put through a delay of being able to go about their lives because M.A.D.D. convinces people that sacrifices rights is for "the greater good".

not sure you know what I think or believe, but I don't need anyone from MADD to explain to me that checkpoints are for the greater good. I'm smart enough to know that all on my own. I realize the few minutes I have to sit in line are a worthwhile investment against ensuring that I don't have to endure a different type of life changing event such as disability or even death as the result of being in an accident with a drunk.

BTW, you still haven't answered exactly what right has been violated. and what is "freedom of movement" anyway? being able to take a crap wherever you want to? kids!

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Then why don't we ban guns, and take them all away so that no one can get shot... OHHHH wait.. That's because that's a right you care about!

Did you totally miss the memo that driving is not a right, or are you just consciously choosing to disregard that fact in your argument?

 

[Nolacopusmc]

not sure you know what I think or believe, but I don't need anyone from MADD to explain to me that checkpoints are for the greater good. I'm smart enough to know that all on my own. I realize the few minutes I have to sit in line are a worthwhile investment against ensuring that I don't have to endure a different type of life changing event such as disability or even death as the result of being in an accident with a drunk.

BTW, you still haven't answered exactly what right has been violated. and what is "freedom of movement" anyway? being able to take a crap wherever you want to? kids!

Dude, give him a minute...my Google is running slow tonight too. Must be the checkpoints choking the bandwidth to run all those plates without probable cause.

 

[MOTOR51]

Privilege not a right to operate a vehicle. I love the anti government people, they are no better tthan t& street side lawyer who knows all of his rights when you stop him and he ends up in jail. Keep the posts coming, I forget sometimes what a great country we live in that allows people to post such crap for everybody to read.

 

[MOTOR51]

Oops. Yall are fast. I see someone already touched on the privilege and right thing

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Oops. Yall are fast. I see someone already touched on the privilege and right thing

Stand-by, I am confident it will be repeated as those who donot see the value of checkpoints also have problem with the printed word.

 

[aard3]

Did you totally miss the memo that driving is not a right, or are you just consciously choosing to disregard that fact in your argument?

We've been through this one before nola ;-) ...I'm sure we could find the thread... IMHO driving is a right (or should be).

I was just pointing out how illogical his argument want, that we should not let people do things that might hurt his wife and/or kids... in which case guns should be gone, roller coasters, all driving for that matter (because statistically, there are more non-alcohol related driving deaths than drunk driving deaths), etc.

 

[James Cannon]

nolacopusmc; the "Terry Stop w/o P C" was a statement half completed I think. I do not believe anyone should be stopped unless there is suspicion that a crime has been, about to be, or is being committed. But I'll be the first to admit that I have a problem with checkpoints and came to the conclusion first, and try to justify it afterward.

ETA: Of course, I'm not arguing what -is- at all... merely what 'should' be from my POV.

Let me ask this to all the checkpoint defenders, though. Has it changed anything? Has it prevented one thing? ...well... I am trying to ask a question that doesn't require someone to prove a negative, but it is kind of difficult in this situation. :/ To me, the check points seem to be another thing that police can tell people "Look, we're doing good!" but with no way to prove results, it merely provides the ILLUSION of security, rather than actual security. What if the officers are the check point were patrolling rather than stationary? To me, they seem to be more like a security camera, which is a "security" feature that is often laughed about on this site and any other site with an interest in self defense.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

FYI...checkpoints do not suck.

What sucks is that we live in a world so void of personal responsibility that something like checkpoints are an actual necessity. If multiple offense DUI's were actually prosecuted, then there would be less of a need for checkpoints as the deterrent effect of arrest , incarceration, and financial impact would be an actual deterrent. I arrested a guy for 7th offense DUI...I mean really. He was 35 BTW.

Why is he allowed to even be in a position to be able to drive? He should be in prison for the maximum time under that statute.
One DUI with no injuries...we all make mistakes.Two with no injuries...you are cutting it close. Sit in jail and decide how you want your life to be.

Three DUI's...batter batter out!

 

[James Cannon]

If multiple offense DUI's were actually prosecuted, then there would be less of a need for checkpoints as the deterrent effect of arrest , incarceration, and financial impact would be an actual deterrent. I arrested a guy for 7th offense DUI...I mean really. He was 35 BTW.

Why is he allowed to even be in a position to be able to drive? He should be in prison for the maximum time under that statute.
One DUI with no injuries...we all make mistakes.Two with no injuries...you are cutting it close. Sit in jail and decide how you want your life to be.

Three DUI's...batter batter out!

Could not agree more with the above.

 

[JadeRaven]

Did you totally miss the memo that driving is not a right, or are you just consciously choosing to disregard that fact in your argument?

Sure driving is a "privilege" which requires certain criteria to be met. . . obey traffic laws, license, registration, insurance, have a roadworthy vehicle, etc. . . but if barry obama decided to shut down all motor vehicles in the name of being green or whatever, we wouldn't all just lay down and say "oh well so much for that privilege." The right to be one's self, conduct one's affairs, work, go to and from work, travel, etc, is all heavily tied to the ability to drive down the road.

We too have to jump through many hoops (thankfully less in Louisiana) in order to own, possess, and use our firearms. That's a "right" but many would argue that it's a privilege too

 

[aard3]

Privilege not a right to operate a vehicle. I love the anti government people, they are no better tthan t& street side lawyer who knows all of his rights when you stop him and he ends up in jail. Keep the posts coming, I forget sometimes what a great country we live in that allows people to post such crap for everybody to read.

I personally think this "privilege" crap is nonsense... it can be applied to ANY THING... and that's the problem with it. The next thing is going to be "it's a privilege to be able to own a home", etc...there isn't an easy way to define what is a "privilege" and what is a "right".

That's why the bill of rights was meant to define certain rights, but not to limit them... just because it's not in the constitution doesn't mean it isn't a right ;-)

Aaron

 

[Nolacopusmc]

We've been through this one before nola ;-) ...I'm sure we could find the thread... IMHO driving is a right (or should be).

I was just pointing out how illogical his argument want, that we should not let people do things that might hurt his wife and/or kids... in which case guns should be gone, roller coasters, all driving for that matter (because statistically, there are more non-alcohol related driving deaths than drunk driving deaths), etc.

I hate to break this to you, but it does not matter what you think or what you think should be. That is just reality. In a way, i agree it should be a right since it is taxpayer funded. I also think when I pull someone over on a traffic stop and they ask me "is there a probelem officer?" I should be able to slap them in their face...but hey, neither one of us gets the cookie i guess.

Point is, regardless of what you were trying to do, you did a poor job of doing it. Comparing a constitutional right to a constitutionally defined privileged is retarded. I understand the whole "guns don't kill people thing", you just picked a poor way of explaining it in my opinion.

The fact is, checkpoints save lives. Period. Do they save millions? No, but if they save mine or my families, that is enough for me. I hate checkpoints to, since we are all very important and in a hurry, but i deal with them, because I have a front row seat to what DUI's cause. I am willing to be inconvienced in the exercise of my privelage for a few minutes if it potentially takes someone who is a threat to me off the road for that short period of time I am also on it.

 

[aard3]

FYI...checkpoints do not suck.

What sucks is that we live in a world so void of personal responsibility that something like checkpoints are an actual necessity. If multiple offense DUI's were actually prosecuted, then there would be less of a need for checkpoints as the deterrent effect of arrest , incarceration, and financial impact would be an actual deterrent. I arrested a guy for 7th offense DUI...I mean really. He was 35 BTW.

Why is he allowed to even be in a position to be able to drive? He should be in prison for the maximum time under that statute.
One DUI with no injuries...we all make mistakes.Two with no injuries...you are cutting it close. Sit in jail and decide how you want your life to be.

Three DUI's...batter batter out!

Couldn't agree more...this nonsense of taking classes and what not is worthless (I know someone who recently got a DWI)... 2nd offense jail terms would get the point across alot better.

Serious question though... why don't cops stake out bars and wait for drunks to walk out... is there something I'm missing here? God it seems like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

I personally think this "privilege" crap is nonsense... it can be applied to ANY THING... and that's the problem with it. The next thing is going to be "it's a privilege to be able to own a home", etc...there isn't an easy way to define what is a "privilege" and what is a "right".

That's why the bill of rights was meant to define certain rights, but not to limit them... just because it's not in the constitution doesn't mean it isn't a right ;-)

Aaron

It is very easy to define what is a right. you might want to stop posting and start reading...this is getting comical. That is the problem with this society, people like you think you have RIGHT and are ENTITLED to **** you are not entitled to.

You do not have many rights. You have ahandful of broad rights. Driving on paved interstate and intrastate roadways is not one of them. Having a hot meal is not one of them. Healthcare is not one of them.