Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Are DUI Checkpoints, or checkpoints in general Unconstitutional?
Yes 62 52.10%
No 57 47.90%
Voters: 119. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-31-2013, 07:10 AM
 
Location: TX
6,486 posts, read 6,371,847 times
Reputation: 2628

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
I think that's what we need to stop and target.

Many things are passed for special interest but the full ramifications for changes in the law aren't always thought through.
Such as "If a cop stops your vehicle and starts questioning you without reason to suspect you of a crime, it's an unlawful stop... unless you put a small building beside him"?

Last edited by Vic 2.0; 05-31-2013 at 07:41 AM..

 
Old 05-31-2013, 08:09 AM
 
Location: TX
6,486 posts, read 6,371,847 times
Reputation: 2628
Here are some crim pro notes deserving of one hearty "Huh?"

Quote:
§ 5.04 Drug Interdiction Checkpoints
A highway checkpoint established for the purpose of detecting possession and/or use of illegal drugs has been held to violate the Fourth Amendment. City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32 (2000). As opposed to border and sobriety checkpoints, which are “designed primarily to serve purposes closely related to the problems of policing the border or the necessity of ensuring roadway safety,” the drug interdiction checkpoint was aimed at detecting evidence of ordinary criminal activity not related to the checkpoint. Thus, when non-specific crime control is its aim, a checkpoint must be based on individualized reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing.
Criminal Procedure Capsule Summary - Chapter 5

Is being high while driving not dangerous too?
 
Old 05-31-2013, 08:19 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 59,660,138 times
Reputation: 24861
I have been stopped and questioned by local police to see if I was intoxicated. As I do not drink and then drive I answered his questions and then proceeded to drive home. I resented his intimidating actions (bright lights on cop car) and manner (swagger with very obvious firearm displayed but not held) but cooperated anyway. I am not stupid enough to challenge an armed man when I am unarmed. That would be simply foolish.

Actions like this do not increase my respect for small town police or engender any increased respect for authority.
 
Old 05-31-2013, 08:30 AM
 
Location: USA
13,255 posts, read 12,100,383 times
Reputation: 4228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0 View Post
Here are some crim pro notes deserving of one hearty "Huh?"



Criminal Procedure Capsule Summary - Chapter 5

Is being high while driving not dangerous too?

Marijuana Users Are Safer Drivers Than Non-Marijuana Users, New Study Shows

Marijuana Smokers Are Safer Drivers than Drinkers? | EURweb - Part 1

Study: Weed Smokers are Slower, Safer Drivers | PropertyCasualty360



There's a difference IMO between being over and under the limit of whatever your own. Prescription meds are no different.




To me, that's why its very important to catch those who are a danger to others. It would almost be more effective to be able to report wreckless drivers than to have checkpoints. But that makes too much sense. And wouldn't give the prison industrial complex and courts revenue.
 
Old 05-31-2013, 08:34 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,608,492 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
I am fine with DUI checkpoints in areas that have had a high number of drunk drivers.

Me too.

Checkpoints tend to really bother those who drink and drive.
 
Old 05-31-2013, 08:54 AM
 
1,614 posts, read 2,067,945 times
Reputation: 804
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
They do violate the 4th.

The 10th
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This is a clear violation of the 4th, since it is prohibited in the constitution.
DUI checkpoints are activities performed by state and local governments, so what does the 10th have to do with it?
 
Old 05-31-2013, 08:58 AM
 
1,614 posts, read 2,067,945 times
Reputation: 804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0 View Post
"The courts" are free to explain how a checkpoint in the middle of nowhere, with both sides of the checkpoint calling for the same level of security, is reasonable, if they ever get around to it. They are also free to explain how this is any different from individual police officers pulling someone over without reason to suspect a crime while just out patrolling, again, if they ever get around to it.

They have explained it, go read the cases.

Yes, we touched on this point in the other thread. I'll copy and paste my reply here:

...But if this were an administrative search predicated on general welfare and not a criminal investigatory search, seems to me they'd have to let those caught driving drunk or with drugs in the car go without penalty.

Why would they have to let them go? Apprehending drivers who are under the influence is the point of the checkpoint. I believe I already answered that question, regardless.

http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/...0&context=ealr, page 198 (or "15 of 28")

In the other thread, you skipped to the issue of the expectation of privacy at this point. Here is the link:

DUI Checkpoints, Unconstitutional?

In the conversation that ensued this post, you told me your crim pro notes said that the lowest expectation for privacy applies to vehicles and pedestrians but didn't answer my question as to what these notes were based on. Further, I saw nothing from you to suggest that even this "lowest expectation" wasn't still enough to make otherwise unlawful stops and unreasonable searches constitutional.

Those notes are based on court cases. I didn't skip it, you just didn't like the answer.

Vehicular Searches :: Fourth Amendment--Search and Seizure :: US Constitution :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia


I want to see something by which The People can know they're not being singled out, stopped primarily because of the color of their skin, their sex or age, etc. An officer who pulls a Hispanic or African-American man over "just to chat" would be this questionable. Why wouldn't an officer at one of these checkpoints?
If you would actually read up on this, you would know the checkpoints have to be conducted in such a way that people aren't being targeted (every car must be stopped, or every third car, things like that).
 
Old 05-31-2013, 09:06 AM
 
1,614 posts, read 2,067,945 times
Reputation: 804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0 View Post
Here are some crim pro notes deserving of one hearty "Huh?"



Criminal Procedure Capsule Summary - Chapter 5

Is being high while driving not dangerous too?
You should read the case, the court outlines the difference between a sobriety checkpoint and the searches that were being conducted here.

You really need to read the cases, they would answer your questions.
 
Old 05-31-2013, 09:26 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
8,396 posts, read 9,426,996 times
Reputation: 4070
Default Are DUI Checkpoints Unconstitutional??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
What is your opinion of DUI checkpoints? Do you feel they violate the 4th amendment?
DUI isn't addressed in the constitution.

It's a public safety issue.

You'd be well advised to avoid driving drunk.

It isn't complicated.
 
Old 05-31-2013, 10:02 AM
 
Location: USA
13,255 posts, read 12,100,383 times
Reputation: 4228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvmycountry View Post
KUchief25, I often agree with your points on CD. However, you and other posters here are spinning this topic so far off course i need an anti-emetic medicine ASAP. To even compare the atrocities drunk drivers have caused with some old ladies dog is completely asinine. Myself, having spent the last 17 years of my career as an ER/Trauma RN can count the number of times an old lady and her dogs activities in the car have killed people with only half of one hand. Now, the number of bodies, and limbs of babies and children I have had to lay in the street to match with the right child is a different story altogether. Sadly, I can't count the number of deaths I have witnessed in my career related to drunk drivers.

The check-points are a hopeful deterrent to those who are thinking of going out and getting drunk. The fear of incarceration would be a hopeful deterrent, as many don't consider the consequences of killing people to be enough. Sadly, that is a fact as another poster stated, often its not the first DUI the drunk has had. I must ask you and the OP what are the constitutional rights of the family who's lives were just ripped away in less than 10 seconds by some drunk? Are you serious to even consider the constitutional legalities of a check-point without even mentioning the rights of the dead family(s)?

The breathalyzer is a great idea. However, the inebriated driver would just get a sober person to blow into the breathalyzer to get the car started. KC, I don't mean this post to be just at you. I just cannot fathom the posts on here with people so worried about the logistics of a check-point without even considering the constitutional rights of the dead sober family.

If we're talking about risk then its a very valid comparison. It could be just as dangerous as an alcohol impaired driver.

DUI Laws are some of the toughest in the country, yet other risks are punished lightly or not punished at all. Is it not about knowingly putting others at danger? Is that not what we're discussing?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:56 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top