A lesson in how to handle a DUI checkpoint

[RunninInGA]

I'm interested in hearing what you guys have to say about this one. I've got a pretty strong opinion, but interested in hearing what you guys / ladies have to say.

LiveLeak.com - DUI Checkpoint Refusal

EDIT - Sorry, I tried to embed, but for some reason it won't allow me. If anyone can help, I would be appreciative.

 

[ndcent]

A certain N.W.A. song comes to mind.

 

[RunninInGA]

A certain N.W.A. song comes to mind.

yeah - dude definitely has bruised thighs from those brass balls he carries.:gun6::gun6::gun6::gun6:

 

[RonMAIDEN]

Sometimes people go through life with a personal mission to be a douche;just answer the question and move on instead of wasting my tax dollars and other driver's time.

 

[02SE]

It would appear that the person knows their rights as stipulated in the Constitution.

I will add that I don't drink anymore, and I have absolutely no sympathy for drunk drivers.

However, I believe that these checkpoints are unconstitutional, (the last time I checked there were ten States that agreed) and that there are more effective and constitutional methods of targeting drunk drivers. Such as saturation patrolling wherein they observe poor driving, and can then pull them over with cause and reasonable suspicion.

 

[Hepar]

Interesting. Not sure it would have had the same results if he smelled of alcohol.

 

[RunninInGA]

Interesting. Not sure it would have had the same results if he smelled of alcohol.

that would equal probable cause.

 

[Hepar]

that would equal probable cause.

Exactly my point. So the only reason to do this is if you're stone sober. In which case you're just doing it to make a point and holding up the line for the rest of the people trying to get through.

 

[RunninInGA]

Sometimes people go through life with a personal mission to be a douche;just answer the question and move on instead of wasting my tax dollars and other driver's time.

one could argue it's a waste of tax dollars and illegal under the constitution of the united states.

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.

 

[RunninInGA]

Exactly my point. So the only reason to do this is if you're stone sober. In which case you're just doing it to make a point and holding up the line for the rest of the people trying to get through.

Right, but it would be naive to think that the only reason for this type of checkpoint is for DUI offenses, right?

Rights which are never exercised are lost...forever.

 

[RunninInGA]

I'm not trying to start a pissing match - I'm interested in what you guys think and the reasons behind your thought process. The consensus so far seems to be that you should give up your rights (if you're sober) so you don't inconvenience the people in line behind you. Am I understanding correctly?

 

[Hepar]

I'm not trying to start a pissing match - I'm interested in what you guys think and the reasons behind your thought process. The consensus so far seems to be that you should give up your rights (if you're sober) so you don't inconvenience the people in line behind you. Am I understanding correctly?

I definitely hear your side. I do like knowing my rights and I can't say that if I come across a DUI Checkpoint and I'm in a bit of an ornery mood, that I won't try the same thing. I like the fact that he filmed it and then posted it to show others what their rights are too. I guess to me there's a time and place to voice your opinion.

In your opinion, what does this accomplish? I'm not trying to start a pissing match either. I'm genuinely curious.

 

[RunninInGA]

I definitely hear your side. I do like knowing my rights and I can't say that if I come across a DUI Checkpoint and I'm in a bit of an ornery mood, that I won't try the same thing. I like the fact that he filmed it and then posted it to show others what their rights are too. I guess to me there's a time and place to voice your opinion.

In your opinion, what does this accomplish? I'm not trying to start a pissing match either. I'm genuinely curious.

Better have a camera handy - I bet it played a larger role than any of us realize.

In my opinion, this serves the purpose of education and reminding us that we as citizens have certain rights guaranteed to us by the constitution. I can't say I would do what this guy did either, in fact I would most likely say no in hopes of being let go and on my merry way. We are taught to trust our government implicitly - however read my signature and you'll understand I'm going through a paradigm shift in my way of thinking personally.

 

[Thai]

Does the Constitution even comes into play since these checkpoints do NOT automatically search your car?? They just do a quick interview...as seen on the video. Is that illegal?? (I honestly don't know.) And with alcohol on board, these interviews can be quite effective i imagine!

I have no idea if these checkpoints work, but if they do, then i am all for it! Hey, a person caught could save a lot of innocent lives. This is kinda like the TSA argument. I got nothing to hide...i don't mind. I do mind the folks who want to make a scene (or Youtube video!) to waste time.

In the video, the cops could really pester the guy by keep asking him the questions over and over again and calling in different cops to ask him. In the end, who do you think just wasted time? The cops or the guy? Hey, the cops are paid to stand there....

 

[RunninInGA]

Does the Constitution even comes into play since these checkpoints do NOT automatically search your car?? They just do a quick interview...as seen on the video. Is that illegal?? (I honestly don't know.) And with alcohol on board, these interviews can be quite effective i imagine!

I have no idea if these checkpoints work, but if they do, then i am all for it! Hey, a person caught could save a lot of innocent lives. This is kinda like the TSA argument. I got nothing to hide...i don't mind. I do mind the folks who want to make a scene (or Youtube video!) to waste time.

In the video, the cops could really pester the guy by keep asking him the questions over and over again and calling in different cops to ask him. In the end, who do you think just wasted time? The cops or the guy? Hey, the cops are paid to stand there....

Your 5th amendment right guarantees that you do not have to make statements or answer questions that could incriminate you - in any way. Law enforcement also has to show probable cause in order to escalate that question into a legal search without a warrant.

 

[Dusty Driftwood]

I'm all for standing up for our rights, but obviously agree with the inherent dangers of drunk driving. I think the short video showed that citizens don't necessarily have to succumb to the will of government/police, albeit to protect our safety.

I know (most of) my rights, but also know that cops hate being told how much "I know" about my rights. As someone that chooses not to drink and drive, I would personally be pretty pissed if I had to wait in line to prove that I wasn't drinking and driving.

I'm sure there will be multiple checkpoints like this in St. Louis this weekend with Mardi Gras, but I choose not to be within 30 miles of that cluster, so don't think I have anything to worry about. It would however be an interesting experiment to try if I felt like being a PIA for the local cops.

I think he probably got away with it since he was recording it though. If he hadn't been, then its basically his word agains theirs if they decide they don't want to put up with his crap and haul him in

 

[BigFishAllDay]

I can't see the link from the computer I'm using, but I assume the synopsis would be: guy goes through checkpoint, argues legality & constitutionality of the process, holds up traffic.

IMO, just don't drink and drive. I live in NM, which has a major problem w/DWI. They have checkpoints on the main street I use to get to my house on roughly a quarterly basis. I don't mind them at all, because the rate at which someone is killed by a drunk driver in NM is roughly once/month. I believe the fear induced by the potential of running into a checkpoint helps prevent a drunk driver from making one of my loved ones a statistic.

When I pull up, I always hope they will stop me and ask, because I'm proud to be driving sober. When they ask if I've been drinking, and I say no, I drive away feeling like a responsible member of society. That feeling of having acted responsibly would not be increased by entering into a debate w/the officer to defend my constitutional rights. Also, a checkpoint is not the proper forum for discussing the matter or effecting any kind of change.

 

[Hepar]

Your 5th amendment right guarantees that you do not have to make statements or answer questions that could incriminate you - in any way. Law enforcement also has to show probable cause in order to escalate that question into a legal search without a warrant.

I think that was the key in this situation. He didn't come off as irate or upset in any way. He knew not to give them the excuse to make a bigger deal out of it.

 

[IanB]

The argument that unlawful searches and interviews should be OK because it is an effective tool in fighting drunk driving has "won't someone think of the children?" written all over it. There are also ways of doing things that don't trample on your personal freedoms, and everybody should have to play by the same rules, no matter which side of the law you're on.

 

[02SE]

When they were asking him the questions, they were closely observing the tracking of his eyes, general demeanor, his speech, and smelling for alcohol, marijuana, etc. to determine if he might be impaired.

They didn't notice anything suspicious in those areas, or he would have been ordered out of his car, to be further checked out.

It's my opinion that him (or anyone) being stopped randomly, and without just probable cause, (observed or reported driving erratically, etc.) is a violation of his Constitutional rights under the 4th Amendment.

I don't have a problem with him making the video. I DO have a problem with the police conducting their fishing expedition, which unconstitutionally detains citizens. The majority of which have nothing to hide.

It all reminds me of the Gestapo, in Nazi Germany..


One of this Countries Founding Fathers, Ben Franklin, is attributed with this quote:

In 1755 (Pennsylvania Assembly: Reply to the Governor, Tue, Nov 11, 1755), Franklin wrote: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."