Sobriety check point, whadda think??

   / Sobriety check point, whadda think?? #51  
Double doggone darn interesting conversation we got going here.

Put me down on the "pro-checkpoint" column.

Here's why.

1. Checkpoints are no different in reality than back in the day having a cop pull you over because he knew you and your patterns. There are so many of us that we've had to develop rules of behavior solely because there are so many of us. We're strangers to them and they're strangers to us.

It's not unlike traffic or speed cameras as I see it. Back in the day you knew if you spun your tires or ran a stop sign word of it would beat you home. What's the difference between a camera saying you did it and the old bat who hated kids in cars on the corner telling your mom on you?

It's society adjusting for the circumstances.

2. If they only pick up one or two percent of the drivers for DUI that still makes the road safer. Think about all the money that's spent putting in dividers on the Interstates and how many actual places have been the scene of a fatal. I guarantee you it's less than one percent of the miles of roadway where we have or are going to put in the barriers.

3. The threat of the checkpoint reaches a lot farther than the grasp of a checkpoint. They're valuable if for no other reason the casual drinker who has had too many doesn't drive because they understand there might be a checkpoint.

4. Your right to swing your fist in my direction ends before you find my nose. When there are a ton of noses in the immediate area then you don't have a right to swing at all.

The crying about the loss of rights because there are so many of us anymore is irrational. If you want freedom then go where no one is. If you want to live and work where everyone is then you have to accept responsibilities. And anyone that's married or has kids understands that responsibilities always limit freedom.

I appreciate cops. I wouldn't want to do what they have to do. And what's really sad is most of the time the reasons a person wants to be a cop is the very reasons we shouldn't allow them to become officers. So I really appreciate the courts. They protect us from the small number of cops who become cops and shouldn't have.
 
   / Sobriety check point, whadda think?? #52  
Well put Harv,

First off, I stated before that I have nothing against the thin blue line, it is in fact a hard and under valued job. I have been associated with law/search and rescue for many years and most of the people I have worked with are very very good professionals.

I would counter some of it however.

I have lived in places that have speed, stop light and other cameras. With these devices as others have pointed out, you are guilty until proven innocent, by the way it is hard to prove that you did not do/or have something. This is in my mind polar opposite to innocent until proven guilty. Now when a police officer pulls someone over and was an eyewitness to what happened then the situation is set for the person to admit/go to court to say no I was not doing X. Fair enough. When a camera is used then you have to prove that you were not driving the car on Sunday the 11th of November. 2003 at 16:00 when it ran a light, hard to do, the assumption is that you are guilty. In my experience these "tools" morphed into revenue streams. Then they were privatized and the company were paid by the number of tickets that they wrote.

Does this mean this would happen here, no, could it, yes.

In Australia when you get in a check point they make you blow a test no matter what, I feel this is NOT acceptable. Will they start doing this here, I do not know, but I do not wish to see this happen. If it does, are we closer to being in the time of big brother?

When these oversights are put into place they are always a good idea for that exact thing, then the get morphed into something larger more restrictive, farther reaching than what it started to be. In interest in not having these types of oversight put on us I stand and say no, the old way is ok, not perfect but ok.

The drinking and driving problem has been very interesting to watch. Most of us are old enough to remember the town drunk, here come Harry, it looks like he is smashed again, funny huh, into a very seriously taken social problem in a very short period of time, say 20-30 years. I will be the first to say I do not have the answer. If in fact road blocks are the answer then maybe they should be printed in the paper, This week there may be road blocks at X, Y, and Z and then put them there or not. If what others have indicated is true it will not matter and the intoxicated people will show up anyway, at least then it is our decision to go there or not, but it cannot be argued that these road blocks are cupreous.

You stated to go where people do not have rights, I have, I do, I work in those countries, maybe that is why I am so adamant not to loose any.

I find it interesting that others like Bird, yourself and others I agree with 95% of the time. What is different here, I do not know, it may be a life of working where people don't have, or have lost rights that makes the loss of rights a hot topic with me.

Please wade in and show me why my thinking is defective.

Dane
 
   / Sobriety check point, whadda think?? #53  
Please wade in and show me why my thinking is defective.

I doubt I can show you any time or any place where thinking is defective. I happen to be one of those folks who believe thinking is much better than the alternative. : > )

I like the idea of the traffic cameras. Here's why.

1. We go after the source of the problem. That's the owner of the car. Camera violations go against the vehicle. It's not a criminal offense but a civil one.

2. They free officers to do police work instead of being traffic cops. We pay the same for traffic cops as we do for police officers, sad but true.

3. The camera catches every violator. The traffic cop only catches the ones they see and are willing to swear in court violated the law. My son just contested and won a seat belt violation. He was a passenger. The cop was sure he was right. He took an oath risking perjury that he was right. But when my son presented the evidence that the officer couldn't have seen what he thought he'd seen the officer and the city attorney got this stepped in it look on their faces.

I'd much rather take my chances with the camera than a human being.

4. We can't afford to have all the police on duty to properly monitor and cite all the speed and light violators. The next best thing to paying that price is to accomplish the same end and get some revenue instead.

5. A camera snapping a picture of your son running a red light in your car is no different from you receiving a phone call from a friend informing you of the same. Well, except for the cost. But that's cheap when you think of maybe losing a friendship over your reaction.

I like the idea of everyone having to blow into the breathalizer. It protects each of us from being persecuted by a rogue cop. It also protects us from a drunk bypassing the test because they don't appear to be intoxicated or they are a friend of a rogue cop.

I do have a little of personal confusion about the issue of rights when it comes to drivers on the public highway. The highway is owned by the public. The public through our system of goverment has put into place rules.

It's not about rights. It's about rules. The only right you have from our wonderful and great Constitution when it comes to you rights under these rules is you can do your part to change them, the rules. But when you pull out onto our highway you engage in an agreement to abide by those rules for the privelege of using the highway.

If one of the rules is checkpoints and you don't like checkpoints then you have a couple of options. The most obvious is to not use our highways. You put on a shirt and shoes to go into a restaurant is that's what they require because that's the rule. The only difference between that rule and obeying traffic laws is the owners of the property (highway) is the public.

Even though you didn't mention it I see the habitual drunk aspect of checkpoints incidental to check points. They're in a minority of drinking population. And so many times the drunk driver that wipes out a carload of strangers wasn't a bad person or a habitual drunk driver. They happened to have had too much too drink that one time and there wasn't enough of a deterrent out there to stop them from driving drunk just this once. That's why I believe the importance of the checkpoints is more about the threat than the checkpoint itself.
 
   / Sobriety check point, whadda think?? #54  
Well, heck, what is a check point or two amongst friends huh?

Speed cameras are good for all the reasons that you stated, as long as that is the way they are used. If they get used as a source of income, that may not be proper. Keep it with the police department and don't allow third parties to run them, maybe.

It is interesting to think about, in many cases all of these start out as good ideas, then wind up not being in the long run.

For example, while I lived in Perth the government banned all weapons, and thousands of guns were turned in. The next month many of the guns that were turned in to the police turned up on the streets in other cities.

Then the bad guys started to use screw drivers as there weapon of choice and stabbings went through the roof. The effect the law had was to change the way the bad guys did their work, the crime did not go down, the number of murders and violent crime stayed the same, but the number of armed robberies dropped and was held up as proof that the mandatory ban of guns worked. Of course this was by definition only.

I guess sometimes the KISS method is best. Less rules, enforce the ones that you have.

Hmm.. gotta go think about your argument.

Dane
 
   / Sobriety check point, whadda think??
  • Thread Starter
#55  
MossRoad said:
I know check points are legal. That wasn't the question that was asked. The question was what we think about them.

Moss that's exactly right, I was curious to find out what others thought about the stops. Not whether they were legal or not.
 
   / Sobriety check point, whadda think?? #56  
Well, Mike what do you think? The ideas are on both sides and both have good arguments.

Dane
 
   / Sobriety check point, whadda think?? #57  
Speed cameras are good for all the reasons that you stated, as long as that is the way they are used. If they get used as a source of income, that may not be proper. Keep it with the police department and don't allow third parties to run them, maybe.

Hmmmmm, using that logic we'd have to outlaw private security services, right? After all, they're doing police work that we can't afford to have the police do, right?

We are a capitalist society here in the states. Capitalism is based upon opportunity to make a profit. We already tax vices like alcohol and tobacco use. Not as a source for profit but of income to offset the cost of doing business, government. If part of the fine ends up in the general fund of the government entity and funds having better streets or sidewalks, what's wrong with that?
 
   / Sobriety check point, whadda think?? #58  
JDGREEN4ME said:
I think its a good idea. Lost a good friend to a drunk driver several years ago.

The National Motorist Association would disagree with this and I tend to go along with their take on the subject.
----->>
 
   / Sobriety check point, whadda think?? #59  
Harv,

On this one I gotta disagree.

Society needs to pay for its own policing. When everyone helps pay for and through proper oversight in rule making the chances of fraud, manipulation and corruption are reduced. Even with the problems that occur with the police and emergency services as they are, I believe they are the best. If we go for profit I can not see an outcome that is as good.

We should as nation, expect to pay for these services, they are for the greater good of the nation.

If we go for contract services then $ becomes a major driver.

I strongly believe there are critical services and the military that, we as a nation owe ourselves, to keep out of the hands of contractors.
 
   / Sobriety check point, whadda think?? #60  
Time I throw in my 2 Cents I guess I am on the fence if you combine the 2 . I don't like traffic/Stop Light cameras but believe they can or should be used because it is an observance device no different than a Cop sitting there.

On the other hand stopping people and asking questions for no apparent reason is I feel going to far, I always feel like it is a check point asking for your papers please. It just does not feel right. As much as I despise Drunk Drivers and Drunks in general for all the harm and cost they reap on this Country I don't feel I should be required to give up the right of freely going about my business if there is no apparent wrongdoing being observed by an office a camera or a concerned citizen for that matter
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

2009 IC Corporation PB105 Passenger Bus (A48081)
2009 IC...
2007 Ford Crown Victoria Sedan (A50860)
2007 Ford Crown...
2010 Pontiac G6 Sedan (A48082)
2010 Pontiac G6...
2006 Ford F-250 4x4 Ext. Cab Pickup Truck (A48081)
2006 Ford F-250...
2014 KALMAR 4X2 YARD DOG (A50854)
2014 KALMAR 4X2...
2020 INTERNATIONAL LT625 DAY CAB (A50505)
2020 INTERNATIONAL...
 
Top