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.
The Supreme Court also ruled that slavery, segregation, and several other now banned practices completely constitutional for decades, even centuries. They're not gods, merely flawed mortals just like the rest of us.
No, they are not gods, but they decide what is constitutional and what is not, and in this case they ruled that the DUI stops are constitutional.
Do you guys believe that DUI checkpoints are unconstitutional? What gets me is that they don't have any reason to stop you, the 4th amendment protects us from unreasonable search and seizure. I'm thrilled to see no threads like this have ever been started here in the "Great Debates" forum.
Yes. It violates the principle of "innocent until proven guilty".
No need to stop cars, just create a maze of cones on the roadside and make cars drive through during drunk checks. Knock down a cone and you get stopped.
Don't they need to announce where and when checks will be conducted?
Then again if most people don't know who the VPOTUS is, they probably aren't going to know wher ethe checkpoints are.
wonder how many drunks they get at these checks?
More importantly, what other crimes are discovered vs drunk drivers?
"If just one life could be saved" liberal solution applied, it wouold be justified by their version of the constitution and of course the 'its for your own good' and when pressed they would would say, 'we had to stop you to see what was in you".
while these stops were accepted in the old days, a new generation of activists uses it as an excuse to apply sunjective justice that hides the real intent of the stop and protects the police from 'illegal' stops.
With the latest government abuses seen at the highest levels, we have known for years that many municipalities are even more corrupt or if you like, legally corrupt, by interpretation of written law. They bend it like a willow branch and what appears unethical becomes legal corruption.
No, they are not gods, but they decide what is constitutional and what is not, and in this case they ruled that the DUI stops are constitutional.
So what? Doesn't mean they weren't wrong, and it doesn't address the point of my question, "What makes it reasonable to stop people at random in the middle of nowhere just to see if they've committed a crime?"
Furthermore, what's the difference between this and a cop just selectively choosing people to pull over on the highway, with no reason to suspect they've been drinking?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0
This is just another way for all the racists and sexists to pick on certain demographics without being identified as easily.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VLWH
Now Dui checkpoints are racists and sexists? That's a new one.
I'd be surprised if this complaint is new. I suspect that women who are reasonably attractive, blacks, and especially Hispanics who live around a few of these checkpoints would agree that the cops there "randomly" stop them more often than white men.
But even if we were so naive to think that they're not being misused this way on a daily basis at at least a few locations in the U.S., it doesn't mean they couldn't be very easily. That's actually the whole point in the 4th amendment, to keep people from being harrassed for some BS reason under the guise of concern for the law/safety.
Driving is a privilege but doing it drunk is using that privilege to possibly commit murder. While I do not know if it lands under constitutional, it serves as a good deterrent to those who normally wouldn't worry about their irresponsibility of getting behind the wheel impaired. They usually aren't worried about killing anyone--just getting caught.
I don't see how a check point could be considered unreasonable search and seizure. You are required to have a drivers license to drive, they have a right to stop you and find out if you have a drivers license. They can also stop you to check the equipment in your vehicle to make sure it is working correctly. There are people who would like to think police are violating your constitutional rights if they stop you, but if you think that you are mistaken.
Where is your papers.... Very Socialistic Hitler like tactic. Social engineering.
To do what you are suggesting, there has to be probable cause and a judge would have to issue a warrant to check an individual.
The Kings men did that and did it often, before the shakedown.
So what? Doesn't mean they weren't wrong, and it doesn't address the point of my question, "What makes it reasonable to stop people at random in the middle of nowhere just to see if they've committed a crime?".
It answers the question in the title of the thread. The answer is "YES, DUI checkpoints are constitutional". You can read the Supreme Court arguments if you are interested in learning why they rules that way.
I think every vehicle ought to be manufactured with a built-in brethalyzer that the driver must blow into in order to start the car. Voila--no more drunk driving. I would gladly trade the 10 additional seconds before each drive for the security of knowing there are no drunk drivers who might mow down me or my family.
When you have a society full of "I can do whatever I want" then you need others stepping in.
It doesn't take too many bad apples to cause everyone to be subject to enhanced laws.
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.
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.
