I think its a fantastic idea.

Especially this time of year.

In NY, you'll go through blanket holdups where they'll check for current registration as well as seatbelts. Why they don't do DUI checkpoints I'll never know, (If they do, it should be more frequent)but yes, something like this WILL save lives and get some drunk ass off the road before he kills me or someone I care about.

Does it violate people's personal freedoms? I don't think so, because its ILLEGAL to get into a car after having been drinking. Once you commit a crime, you state that you're not willing to follow the laws of the state you're in, and are subject to punishment. Plus, don't the police have the right to search for people who are in violation of the law? Where else do you search for drunk drivers but the road? But what about me, the guy who hasn't had a drop to drink in months, waiting in a traffic stop while they check someone to see if they've been drinking?

Its annoying, but the odds of me getting home in one piece because they pull one or two people off the road have just increased, and I like that. Hell, I'll probably thank the police officer when I get the green light.  

I figure that the law on this one differs from state to state. As far as I'm concerned, if the police want to haul you out of the car after they've caught you drinking, and beat the hell out of you with a mag-lite, have at it because you're threatening the lives of the people around you, the same as if you're standing in a mall with a gun.  

I make these comments not as someone whose ever lost a loved one to a drunk driver, but as someone who has been pulled over after leaving a bar, with two friends and my now-wife in the car. Its a long story, but I was let off and refuse to come close to making that mistake again after realizing what a jackass I was. The police probably had every right to haul my ass to jail, taze me, take my lisence away, and get me thrown out of the education department in college. They didn't, and after thanking every diety I could find on wikipedia, I've decided that any and all laws that they want to pass to prevent a willing idiocy like driving while intoxicated, I'm all for, so check away.  

I'm not really familiar with these checkpoints through pesonal experience, but do the police forcefully allow themselves to search through your car, or do people allow them to look through their posessions and then whine about it later, or do the cops simply look in through your windows and guage your responses and go from there?

And do they really have these checkpoints on weekday mornings when most people with respectable jobs go to work?

Mephistopheles wrote: People eating and driving are a cause of accidents and deaths. Thus food should be banned in America. We need checkpoints to assure that there is no food in their system. Fascism is acceptable so long as it's hidden behind the guise of protecting us from us, and safety for our children. There's a reason why all of our rights are eroding faster than Niagara Falls. Idiotic people saying "Well if you aren't doing anything illegal you have nothing to hide" and just bend over willingly. The ignorant masses are so eager to hand over their rights for the illusion of safety that simply isn't there. This is just another example of showing how you have no rights. You are only allowed to be "free" until they want to **** with you, then you have to take it.

lol

Blue lights flashing, they had traffic stopped 
And Highway 11's done turned into a permanent road block 
I wasn't driving, my wife was my D.D. 
And she hadn't drank a drop, still got hassled by the J.P.D. 
And I said hey dude can't you just leave her alone 
She ain't done nothin' wrong man and we just want to go home 
Woah-woah 

And I was mad as hell, thinking <screw> the po-po 
and they wonder why folks don't trust 'em no more 
Woah-hoah 
And I'm not gonna let this go, so I'm singing <screw> the po-po 

Bunkered wrote: gardy90 wrote: if you havent done anything wrong then dont worry about it. would you rather have a mild delay or be dead... Honestly, what makes you think you'd be any more dead than if there were no checkpoints? You're more likely to be involved in a car crash not on the highway, but on surface roads. I've never seen a checkpoint on a sidestreet. I really think it's funny that every time someone gets killed by a drunk driver, it's automatically the drunk person's fault. Shouldn't whoever pulled out in front of the drunk guy and got t-boned have been paying attention to other traffic on the road? I'm not justifying drunk driving or anything, but people really just need to pay more attention while driving. When you stop at a light, look both ways. I don't care if the light turn green, that doesn't mean some jackass isn't flying down the road with his lights off, running red lights.

Haha. Emperical proof marijuana deteriorates logic and reasoning in the brain?

lol. To think that argument does anything but take away from your credibility is silly. Acting like it is the fault of a sober driver because they aren't making every precation possible to avoid a drunk driver is ridiculous, especially when all of the fault lies on the drunk driver. The fact remains that had that person not been driving while intoxicated, the risk of something like that happening is exponentially lower.

Not to mention it matters little whether or not the drunk drivers affect us at all, but rather if they affect anyone with their intoxication. This isn't like privacy, and even if it was, DWI is endangering other people, and warrants police action, regardless of how much some stoner dislikes talking to cops, or how some mis-guided individual views these stops as infringing on personal privacy.

Question for those opposed to the check-points: Is it wrong for border patrol to check incoming cars for illegal aliens?

Bunkered wrote: I'll just throw a random speculation out that I bet just as many people get in car accidents NOT involving alcohol as the ones that do.

What does that change?

Just wait until you lose someone close to you who was killed by a drunk driver.  Maybe then you won't complain about them.

The Guy wrote: ....The only people who go through those are people that have nothing to hide.

If that was true, they wouldn't ever hand out DUI's in checkpoints, because all the smart drunk drivers would see the checkpoint and take a different route..

Bunkered wrote: If I find myself drunk

lol

You just happened to be drunk?  Just randomly?  Through no doing of your own?

See, this is the central problem with drunk driving.  Failure to plan.  Before you had the first drink, you should have realized "hey, I drove here".  If you want to drink, don't bring your car.  If you brought your car, don't drink.

I still do it rarely, but I can honestly say that I'm not going to get in a wreck doing 25 (speed limit) on roads that I know like the back of my hand.

Even if that were true (which it is not), that still won't stop you from running over the old lady on the side of the road.  Drunk driving has less to do with being able to keep the car on the road than it has to do with being able to take in and react to new information.

Is some drunk driving more dangerous than other drunk driving?  Sure - but don't delude yourself into believing that you aren't a menace to society.

Hysteria wrote: And yes, I do drive better when I am intoxicated because I am more careful and more aware of my surroundings.

This is the #2 reason why drunk drivers are so incredibly dangerous - their alcohol-induced self-confidence (which in some people apparently carries over to their sober state). 

When you are driving impaired, you are just that - impaired.  You don't become any less impaired just because you are thinking about how impaired you are.

There are countless studies of the effects of alcohol on various behaviors, and there are two findings that are pretty consistent:  (1) Alcohol impairs your ability to do just about anything, and (2) alcohol impairs your judgement about your ability to do just about anything.

Subejcts in studies consistently rank their own performance on various tasks as quite good when impaired, despite the obvious-to-the-observer awful performance.  Few things are funnier than watching drunk guys trying to pretend they aren't drunk, because they actually think they are doing a good job of hiding it. 

Congratulations, Hysteria - you are a menace to society.

Hysteria wrote: Susan Storm wrote: Congratulations, Hysteria - you are a menace to society. I am glad to know that driving slightly intoxicated at four in the morning down back roads on which I never see anyone is bad enough to put me in a group with child molesters and rapists.

I am quite sure that is not what I said.  But now that you suggested it, I'll go ahead and agree.

So yes - you are a menace to society.  Death by drunk driver is a much - MUCH - more common disaster in this country than death by child molesters or rapists.

While drunk drivers may not be as evil as rapists, they are far more dangerous.  Your casual attitude about engaging in publicly reckless behavior is downright awful.

The US is embarassingly behind on this.  Many other countries have punishments that fit the crime - in many countries DUI carries a lengthy jail sentence and huge fines, even if nobody gets hurt.  Heck, there are even a couple of countries, I believe, where DUI carries the death penalty.