DWI checkpoints

[rebelray84]

To be able to travel down a road freely is a right;to do so while driving a motor vehicle is a privilege.This has been upheld more than once in more than one court room.

 

[charlie12]

First I HATE drunk drivers.
I've been through three DWI checkpoints all have been in Walker at the old Winn Dixie on La. 447. Two times I was traveling south and they only check the people going north. So I could have been as drunk as a skunk and nothing would have happened. The one time I was going north I went through the checkpoint I spent my couple of minutes talking Sigs with the Trooper, no problems I showed him my DL and CHP he was very nice.

Now for the money spent on checkpoints I don't think they get much in return. It much cost a hell of a lot to get LEO's from different agencies out there for hours working probably overtime plus the cost of setting up the thing. And what sometimes you read they got three or four DWI's in the checkpoint? Again I'm happy when any DWI goes to jail.

My deal would be that EVERY Sheriff and or Police Chief get every one of their road people trained and CERTIFED to do Standardized Field Sobriety Test and Intoxilyzer so they could have coverage 24 hours a day 7 days a week all over the parish or city and not have to depend on LSP to have a Trooper free do handle their DWI's for them.

I've heard too many times when a local has a 98 stopped and wants to know if a Trooper wants a "package" only to be told the Troop is 10-6. Then it oh **** what we going to do with him/her and I do mean her, lots of drunk females out there now.

But now we get to the part if all that were to happen and LE did their part something needs to be done with the court system or they are right back out there doing the same thing again.
LE can only get them off the road for that night.

Did I mention I hate drunk drivers?

 

[Nolacopusmc]

FYI, a lot of the time when a SO or PD calls for a Trooper for a 98, it is not because they are not trained, it is because that is what Troopers do. A DUI takes a mimimum of 2 hours to porcess, and most SO/PD's are extrememly overbooked with "real crimes" like fights, domestics, thefts, burglaries, etc. They try to pass off the traffic stuff to the people who specialize in that.

In JPSO, most of our DUI checkpoints were manned by Reserves I would say 70/30 reserve/full-time. the full time guys were working on a federal DUi grant, and reserves were working for free. The Sheriff was in the process of getting every road deputy certified through our instructors to be SFST certified.

Only LSP does the intox certification, and getting a seat is like trying to get your prom date to drop knickers before 10PM.

The bottle neck is in the training. trust me, most cops would love to book a drunk when they find them, but there simply is not enough man power to go out there looking for them. When we have a checkpoint, we have people that are not already on the road who can focus on DUI. The money and time is definitely worth the effort.

 

[charlie12]

FYI, a lot of the time when a SO or PD calls for a Trooper for a 98, it is not because they are not trained, it is because that is what Troopers do. A DUI takes a mimimum of 2 hours to porcess, and most SO/PD's are extrememly overbooked with "real crimes" like fights, domestics, thefts, burglaries, etc. They try to pass off the traffic stuff to the people who specialize in that.

Maybe in your area but I'm talking out in this area. LEO can't do the 98 and nobody on the shift can so what do you do with them? They need to be trained. LSP can't do it all when you only have one or two Troopers in the parish.
Something really needs to be done with amount of time and paper work involved

 

[LACamper]

+1 Cat for the car seat comment! I've seen car seats save kids too many times.

I'll agree that 20 minutes to get to a checkpoint would be annoying. They either need to increase staffing or stop every 3rd car or something...

I spend a lot of time on the road. I've called in dwi's many times. Only once did I see LSP manage to get a car onto the drunk driver.

I would much rather see LSP manning DWI checkpoints than giving soccer moms speeding tickets for 7 mph over the limit...

Giving DWI's is worthless if they're getting them 'fixed' on the back end. I know too many that have avoided any penalties other than paying their attorney.

 

[Emperor]

Forget about checkpoints, did any of you get stuck on I-10 West in B.R. Saturday because of the St. Patrick's Parade? If random chckpoints don't catch enough drunks, they should have camped out on Perkins Road near the end of that parade.

100's of drunks driving Saturday night!

 

[david mitchell]

Any fatal accidents on Saturday night in that area?

 

[James Cannon]

If you think that taking drunk people off the road has not stopped single fatality, then seriously,m you are more retarded then your recent series of posts reflect. Are really going to ask that juvenile of a question?

My question wasn't that simple. I might've stated it poorly.

My question was whether or not taking 3 or 4 officers and cruisers and sitting them in one place, warning the public where* this will be MORE or LESS effective than having those same officers patrolling the area.

I also disagree -strongly- with the ban on staking out right outside a 'bar strip'. I don't even know what to hate. It just seems like they aren't doing it right either way. You either rule them "ok" and put them wherever they are -effective- or you rule them a violation of rights, whether it be via a freedom of movement, entrapment, whatever. The system is messed up and broke because it doesn't seem to serve -either- side of the argument on the issue. Like most bureaucratic cluster****s, it just serves to half-crap on everyone, rather than crap on some, and serve most. I'd be happier simply sucking it up if I thought the checkpoints were effective - even if I disagreed with them.

I think the way they are implemented is terrible. There is no radius-distance for our rights.

Also, nolacopusmc, I specify rights not guarenteed by the Constitution, state or federal, because our rights don't come from paper. They aren't on paper simply because they haven't been selected to be protected by Constitutional decree, yet. That does not mean they don't exist. That's a minor bitch though, as I understand how contentious that 'right' is.

Also, I'll take my tongue lashings if I say stupid ****. I count on you for it, lol. It's how I learn. I'm bull headed sometimes. I might need an occasional reality check to keep from mixing emotion and logic. Like I said, I -know- this is one issue where I follow my gut and just -try- to justify it later... which pretty much delivers failure any time that happens.

Edit-to-Add: I also have a problem with the system because I have every bit of a sense that these are put on as a Dog and Pony Show, and not to be as effective as possible (even with the chains the court puts on them) They don't hold them at high accident areas, they don't put them on common throughways from the bar areas, they specifically avoid poor black neighborhoods and rich neighborhoods. They put them where they are able to be seen from a long distance away, and easily circumvented with main streets. It's like they just set up here in Lafayette to be seen and be able to say "LOOK MA, WE'RE DOING STUFF"

*In Lafayette they merely state "there will be one" and not the street, block, intersection, etc, anymore, so it's not like you can plan for it like most places I've been where they tell you the block # of such-and-such street.

 

[Emperor]

Any fatal accidents on Saturday night in that area?

Is that the measuring stick for drunk driving?

 

[DuckYou]

You are willing to sacrifice your rights because 8.90456885 × 10-3 %

Of Louisiana die from "Alcohol Related Deaths" a year. That is a tiny fraction of our population.

If it has truly been approximately 400 a year from 1982-2008, I doubt the check points are saving any lives.

I am not against the drive through ones, but I do not like getting stopped and asked for all my info.

For the record, I have been through several DUI Check points, 2 DEA checkpoints (on the interstate), and several Insurance Check Points.
s
The DEA were the worst, as they make you step out, sometimes sit in a van and wait, while they conduct a thorough search of the vehicle. Then they write you any ticket they can to make it a search with cause. Took about 30 minutes.

The DEA Check points were in TN at the exit I would get off to go to our Hunting Club, it happens to be the main route for drugs running from Florida into the upper states. They have big signs that say, Drug Check Point 5 miles ahead (with only one exit in those five miles), therefore you are guilty if you try to get off on that exit. For the record there is no actual check point on the interstate, but they did have the National Guard stationed all through the woods watching drivers when they came into view to see if they were moving around a lot (hiding the drugs before hitting the checkpoint).

 

[jimdana1942]

Check points used to be prevalent in the USSR, now, they are prevalent in the U.S.

What does this mean?

 

[James Cannon]

Check points used to be prevalent in the USSR, now, they are prevalent in the U.S.

What does this mean?

Holy ****.

I don't know you well so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that's a joke that you mentioned it.

 

[general mills]

I appreciate that everyone has an opinion on this subject, but after reading 112 posts of opinions, my question that originated this still has not been answered. Nolacopusmc in one reply said

"We are not allowed to do that "TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS" NO ****...I am serious. For the same reason that we are required to announce the location of checkpoints. Kind of defeats the purpose...but we always get a couple anyway....funny how that works"

That is the closest I've seen to an answer here. It seems they are required to announce the location of checkpoints, where can I get that information?

 

[Tulse Luper]

I appreciate that everyone has an opinion on this subject, but after reading 112 posts of opinions, my question that originated this still has not been answered.

Welcome to BS, general mills.

Would you mind if a ran that as my signature for a while?

 

[general mills]

No kidding Tule luper, I need to figure out how to put that at the bottom of all my posts.

 

[charlie12]

I appreciate that everyone has an opinion on this subject, but after reading 112 posts of opinions, my question that originated this still has not been answered. Nolacopusmc in one reply said

"We are not allowed to do that "TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS" NO ****...I am serious. For the same reason that we are required to announce the location of checkpoints. Kind of defeats the purpose...but we always get a couple anyway....funny how that works"

That is the closest I've seen to an answer here. It seems they are required to announce the location of checkpoints, where can I get that information?

Don't about the one for DWI checkpoints but here's on you can read. LRS 32:295.4

295.4. Guidelines for seat belt and motor vehicle liability security checkpoints; law enforcement agencies

All law enforcement agencies involved in traffic enforcement shall establish guidelines for the operation of seat belt checkpoints and proof of compulsory motor vehicle liability security checkpoints. Such guidelines shall include but not be limited to the following provisions:

(1) The location, time, and duration for seat belt and compulsory motor vehicle liability security checkpoints shall be established in written form by supervisory or other administrative personnel of the law enforcement agency rather than the field officers implementing the checkpoint.

(2) Provision for advance warning to the approaching motorists with signs, flares, and other indications to warn motorists of an impending stop and to provide indication of its official nature as a police checkpoint.

(3) Provisions to ensure detention of motorists for a minimal length of time.

(4) The use of a systematic, nonrandom criteria for stopping motorists.

Acts 2003, No. 374, §1.

 

[Cat]

Holy ****.

I don't know you well so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that's a joke that you mentioned it.

The great thing about Jim is that he's either flat out crazy or he's incredibly smart and jacking with all of us. I haven't figured it out. But we'll keep him either way.

 

[Tulse Luper]

No kidding Tule luper, I need to figure out how to put that at the bottom of all my posts.

I think I have it figured out.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

I appreciate that everyone has an opinion on this subject, but after reading 112 posts of opinions, my question that originated this still has not been answered. Nolacopusmc in one reply said

"We are not allowed to do that "TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS" NO ****...I am serious. For the same reason that we are required to announce the location of checkpoints. Kind of defeats the purpose...but we always get a couple anyway....funny how that works"

That is the closest I've seen to an answer here. It seems they are required to announce the location of checkpoints, where can I get that information?

JFC


State law requires the President of the local chapter of the Black Panthers to send every citizen a registered letter by mail....


There is no set in stone way to notify. Generally the day before they run it in the paper and announce it on the news. Then of course the radio stattions pick it up from there and further the spread. It is retrded, but it is another example of people who are concerned with what they think are "rights" hamstringing American law enforcement and then whining when their little girl gets killed by a drunk driver. They want all the security with none of the sacrifices. It simply does not work that way.

Go search here for all your legal answers. Anything else is a lazy ass attempt to be spoon fed information and you deserve whatever you get as a result.

http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/tsrssearch.htm

________

DUI checkpoints work. We know that because arrests result. Are they 100% effective? No, of course not. No technique is.
Would those officers' time be better spent patrolling your neighborhoods or writing speeding ticket? Depends on the value you place on human life and how realistic or educated you really are versus how much you think you are about what really happens on the street at night while you are sitting on your sofa eating Blue Bell. Your able to do that because other men who really do know what is going on out there are manning a checkpoint, clearing a burglar alarm, stopping a broken taillight, or answer the pleas of a woman being beat by her boyfriend.

No one is asking anyone to like checkpoints. However, stop your ignorant ass whining about what has become a necessary evil as a result of the decline of morals and values in this society. We as a society have basically bred and trained people to do **** like get 7 DUI's because we would rather talk about safety than actually achieve it through following through on our criminal justice system. We continually create laws that are unenforceable and then wonder why people break them and when caught get no punishment.

We are back to the numbers game. Things like article 894, expungements, probation, etc all create a criminal justice system that promotes repeat offenders. I understand there are times to cut someone a break, but that is when these programs are used as tools to save someone. CURRENTLY, they are used as a matter of administrative course to keep the system flowing. As such, they lose their altruistic value and become a revolving door of recidivism.

Checkpoints are here to stay as long as people drink and drive or break the law. It is an effective enforcement tool. Is it the best or only one, no, but it works enough to make it viable. Until a specific crime affects you personally, you have no idea. Let one of your family members be affected by a DUI, and I promise your tone will change.

 

[rooster]

Don't about the one for DWI checkpoints but here's on you can read. LRS 32:295.4

295.4. Guidelines for seat belt and motor vehicle liability security checkpoints; law enforcement agencies

All law enforcement agencies involved in traffic enforcement shall establish guidelines for the operation of seat belt checkpoints and proof of compulsory motor vehicle liability security checkpoints. Such guidelines shall include but not be limited to the following provisions:

(1) The location, time, and duration for seat belt and compulsory motor vehicle liability security checkpoints shall be established in written form by supervisory or other administrative personnel of the law enforcement agency rather than the field officers implementing the checkpoint.

(2) Provision for advance warning to the approaching motorists with signs, flares, and other indications to warn motorists of an impending stop and to provide indication of its official nature as a police checkpoint.

(3) Provisions to ensure detention of motorists for a minimal length of time.

(4) The use of a systematic, nonrandom criteria for stopping motorists.

Acts 2003, No. 374, §1.

This covers any checkpoint. So yes, prior notice must be given. In State v. Jackson, 764 So.2d 64, they make it clear that acording to the Louisiana consititution, no distenction can be made when talking about checkpoints but in order for it not to violate the 4th amen. the above steps must be followed.
This is not my opinin but the law.
With that said, please don't ever consent to a field test. You should never trust a LOE to decide if you are over the limit and if you refuse a field test there is no penalty for doing so.
Now forcing you to take a breath test or blood test is another legal problem not so clearly defined by the courts.