DUI checkpoint

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: KD0AXS
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: The_Eric
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
I say there should be MORE DUI check points.
The more they catch, the safer the roads.


And the more you give up. In my opinion, it's in no way, shape or form, a fair trade.


Give up what?


Your freedom to not be stopped and detained by the police without them having reasonable suspicion that you have broken any laws.

It's a pretty clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

(on red light cameras)One of our city council members stated, "Matters of public safety should not be voted upon by the public."

Things like that statement and "Homeland Security Checkpoints" that are nowhere near defense contractor facilities or near stadiums on game day* but suspiciously close to bars, make me wonder about their true motives.

* the stadiums are pretty much DWI checkpoints naturally. You are going to be stopped for long periods of time anyway.

 

[The_Eric]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: The_Eric


And the more you give up. In my opinion, it's in no way, shape or form, a fair trade.


Give up what?




Originally Posted By: KD0AXS


Your freedom to not be stopped and detained by the police without them having reasonable suspicion that you have broken any laws.


Originally Posted By: Spazdog

It's a pretty clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

(on red light cameras)One of our city council members stated, "Matters of public safety should not be voted upon by the public."

Things like that statement and "Homeland Security Checkpoints" that are nowhere near defense contractor facilities or near stadiums on game day* but suspiciously close to bars, make me wonder about their true motives.

* the stadiums are pretty much DWI checkpoints naturally. You are going to be stopped for long periods of time anyway.




KD0AXS and Spazdog pretty well summed it up. If you want to welcome more and more check points, they'll come right on in and you (and everybody else) will be stopped and/or detained without reasonable suspicion. They can then become much more common place, as they use them for additional purposes.

It's already been stated that check points aren't all that effective for the money spent. How much money can you justify, especially when it's not uncommon to see cities "in the red". Do you want them burning up money they don't really have using poor methods to catch maybe one or two drivers under the influence? What about using methods that are more effective and don't violate our rights in the process?

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: KD0AXS
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: The_Eric
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
I say there should be MORE DUI check points.
The more they catch, the safer the roads.


And the more you give up. In my opinion, it's in no way, shape or form, a fair trade.


Give up what?


Your freedom to not be stopped and detained by the police without them having reasonable suspicion that you have broken any laws.


Driving is not a right. It is a privilege. Feel free to park the vehicle and walk.

Every check point I've been through they look in the car and smell you. No open containers, no booze breath, no being detained.

 

[Trajan]

Originally Posted By: Spazdog


It's a pretty clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

(on red light cameras)One of our city council members stated, "Matters of public safety should not be voted upon by the public."



And the US Supreme Court has ruled on that? Federal District Courts nation wide have said that?

Went through one tonight. So why is it there if it's a "violation" of the 4th? How about the redlight cameras I see?

How about the checkpoints you see at times when they're looking for some escaped felon?

 

[Shannow]

Red light cameras do nothing to you if you aren't breaking the law...they don't impede your progress, subject you to any inconvenience at all...they have similar for licence plate violations, noise violations, speed violations

A checkpoint when they are looking for an escaped felon...they've got a known felon, who has escaped...there is a known criminal, and they are looking for them...a doorknock campaign in the district is similar...there's a criminal at large.

A roadblock, similar to the ones I've described near here, are a fishing campaign, there's no target (except that lawbreakers are everywhere, and you could be one of them)...and like the one that I described, where they purposely slowed the highway with a fake roadworks, and stopped everyone for a week, 4,500 breath tests, for 5 or 6 charges (not convictions)....they are hopelessly inefficient at using Police resources...unless you want people used to being stopped and showing papers.

 

[hpb]

Shannow, you've mentioned the authorities wanting to get people used to being stopped and showing their papers a couple of times in this thread, but what "papers" do we carry in Australia? All you are required to produce at a traffic stop is a current drivers licence.

 

[Shannow]

Correct...stop everyone on a highway and ask to see their "papers"...like I said.

Under Keating, it was going to be the "Australia Card", which was your universal identification...I tried to do my tax this year and had to do a whole centrelink registration thing, over and above my TFN.

It's all "getting people used to" it...Surely blocking a highway for a week, and stopping 4,500 people to collect a handful of DUIs makes no sense from a law enforcement point of view.

 

[hpb]

Agreed, 4,500 stops for a few exceed .05's seems like a poor return for effort. No argument there.

So by "papers", you mean "licence"? That's been a requirement since I started driving in the 80's, it's hardly something we need to get used to.

I well remember the Australia Card. And I don't think it's dead yet! Pretty sure Queensland already has "chipped" licence cards, it's only a matter of time before all the states do. I can imagine a time in the very near future when all Government agencies, i.e Centrelink, Medicare, Australian Tax Office, etc. share data and it all gets recorded via your drivers licence. Cops will simply swipe it, and that unpaid child support you had in Western Australia back in 2009 will show up...

I wasn't being at all argumentative, just wondered exactly what you meant by papers. Cheers!

 

[Shannow]

yep, you always have had to present a valid drivers' licence...when pulled over.

It's a new invention to stop everyone on a road and have to present a valid drivers' licence...or an old idea renewed

 

[Silk]

I can't remember when I was last asked to produce my license....by a cop. ID for other things, but not to drive a car or ride a bike. One thing different in NZ - our cops don't carry guns, so there is no intimidation, they don't totally have the upper hand. There is frustration for sure, but if someone gets agro or antsy then there will be suspicions. We have a long way to go before we lose as much freedom as the USA.

 

[hpb]

Gun, no gun, really makes no difference to me. I'd rather not be capsicum sprayed or tasered either, thanks! Agree with what you're saying though, carrying on will only raise suspicion, and rightly so. I just go with the flow - licence check, vehicle check, breatho, gone. I've driven in every state and territory of Oz, and never seen anything like the several hours of waiting as reported by others in this thread. That [censored] just wouldn't be allowed here, quite frankly.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: Silk
We have a long way to go before we lose as much freedom as the USA.

You are allowed to defend yourself by carrying a concealed handgun (legally?) Like in the U.S.

I keep tryhing to figure out what freedoms I don't have that I would possibly want here in the U.S.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: Silk
We have a long way to go before we lose as much freedom as the USA.


Sadly for us Americans, you're probably right.

 

[Spazdog]

Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: Spazdog


It's a pretty clear violation of the 4th Amendment.

(on red light cameras)One of our city council members stated, "Matters of public safety should not be voted upon by the public."



And the US Supreme Court has ruled on that? Federal District Courts nation wide have said that?

Went through one tonight. So why is it there if it's a "violation" of the 4th? How about the redlight cameras I see?

How about the checkpoints you see at times when they're looking for some escaped felon?


The Supreme Court of Texas has ruled on that. That is why they are technically not DWI/DUI checkpoints here. They are INS/ICE or Homeland Security Checkpoints.
Thusfar we have caught exactly Zero dangerous terrorists at these checkpoints.

The redlight cameras are only quasi-legal. They cannot issue a criminal charge or a traffic citation. It is only a city ordinance civil citation. It's not even really enforceable if you don't pay it. You just have a $75.00 mark (+ addl. fees) mark on your credit report.

To the city's credit, they did their homework on this. You can contest it but you have to jump through so many hoops to do so that it is often more cost effective to just pay the darn thing.

I was just offended that my councilperson said that, "Matters of public safety should not be voted upon by the public."

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Meanwhile while they are violating the 4th amendment, my apartment is being broken into. When I call the police, I'm told there is nothing they can do until the burgulars break into my apartment.

 

[jimbrewer]

In my area pedestrian fatalities are rising sharply and steadily. Very little publicity and attention. Why? Because there's no obvious quick fix. There is no money to be made through red light cameras or speed cams.

The issue can be addressed, but through probably a half dozen little things that won't get you on TV or money, either one.

 

[Silk]

Originally Posted By: Al
You are allowed to defend yourself by carrying a concealed handgun (legally?) Like in the U.S.


Reasonable force is the official rule. Basically like for like. So if someone is threatening your life with a gun, you can defend yourself with a gun. If you don't have a license for that weapon you will be charged for using an unlicensed weapon. Does happen here, but very rare and unlikely in everyday life, we don't have to walk around armed in fear of someone attacking us. That's the sort of personal freedoms we enjoy.

 

[Kiwi_ME]

Originally Posted By: Al
Originally Posted By: Silk
We have a long way to go before we lose as much freedom as the USA.

You are allowed to defend yourself by carrying a concealed handgun (legally?) Like in the U.S.
I keep trying to figure out what freedoms I don't have that I would possibly want here in the U.S.

That's exactly the attitude I consider myself lucky to be far from. My impressions after 30 yrs living in the US and 15 yrs in NZ is that Silk is correct in many ways, and that is primarily that individuals are respected by government authority. For example adults are not required to carry ID and can drink anywhere we want (other than zones specifically designated alcohol-free.) Our cops treat people with respect, even those obviously offending - behaving like more like parents. And as Silk said, cops are non-threatening and are expert at defusing situations verbally. No we can't "carry" but why on earth would anyone choose to take on such a responsibility if they don't need to for personnel safety? I'm so happy I don't have to worry about someone pulling a firearm on me. It does happen once in a while, but is rare. There is no TRW credit rating following my every financial move and my privacy is respected by businesses, by law. A fourth-grader could fill out our tax form, but many people aren't required to anyway. I am nearly anonymous in this country and am perfectly free to do anything I like that does not affect the welfare of others. The only thing i need to arm myself with is sunscreen.

 

[97tbird]

OK, so DUI checkpoints = loss of freedom.
So according to those against DUI checkpoints, the drunk drivers can/should keep driving until they cause an accident and possibly kill a few people. Because that should be the only way to detect them, huh? AFTER the fact?

LET'S ALL FIGHT FOR THE FREEDOM OF DRUNK DRIVERS TO ROAM FREE !!!!

I guess while we're at it, let's stop all airport screenings, too, so terrorists can freely carry weapons into planes. ... because checking/screninng those who are NOT terrorists = Loss of freedom ! LOL!

Great.

(B. S.!!)

 

[DBMaster]

^Hmm. I think this thread has run its course.

Apples and oranges.