Sobriety Checkpoints

[IndyDave1776]

I think they should do what they can to stop drunk drivers. To many people drive drunk...everyone thinks it is no big deal until one of their family members or friends are killed by a drunk driver. There is absolutely no reason to drive drunk. I think they work...went through one once about 1 am and there was about a dozen people in the bus.

I doubt that anyone here supports drunk driving, but rather don't accept it as an excuse for violating the rights of one and all. I am in agreement that the problem is not solved by violating the Fourth Amendment rights of anyone who is so brazen as to drive after dark, but rather must be solved in the court room. Generally, a drunk driver in court, even after causing damage, injury, or perhaps even death is given the equivalent of the judge rubbing one index finger over the other as he says 'shame on you' (and collects a modest amount of revenue for the local government). Therein lies the problem.

 

[JollyMon]

I have been through 4 checkpoints in the last 5 years living here. I do not believe they are constitutional.

I also believe they are a waste of funds. 20-30 police, plus prosecutors, standing around, maybe getting 1 or 2 people a night (unless it was a jimmy buffett concert night).

Hamilton County, Indiana / Sobriety Checkpoint Data

 

[IndyDave1776]

I have been through 4 checkpoints in the last 5 years living here. I do not believe they are constitutional.

I also believe they are a waste of funds. 20-30 police, plus prosecutors, standing around, maybe getting 1 person a night (unless it was a jimmy buffett concert night).

Hamilton County, Indiana / Sobriety Checkpoint Data

All true, but if they catch a couple they have broken even, and if they catch more than a couple, they have made a net profit for the night, never mind whatever else they may 'accidentally' discover while whizzing all over the Fourth Amendment.

 

[lizerdking]

It would be political suicide for anyone to oppose sobriety checkpoints. It's like saying you want more drunks on the road.

That being said, the views expressed thus far, as well as poll results, are restoring my faith in the general public's intelligence. Why can't you all be around when I'm arguing with the opposition that these things are a bad thing?

 

[IndyDave1776]

It would be political suicide for anyone to oppose sobriety checkpoints. It's like saying you want more drunks on the road.

That being said, the views expressed thus far, as well as poll results, are restoring my faith in the general public's intelligence. Why can't you all be around when I'm arguing with the opposition that these things are a bad thing?

Because we are at opposite ends of the state!

Seriously, the same thing applies here that applies with most government overreach. It is packaged to appeal to the emotions of people who are not critical thinkers and it is extremely difficult to force people to think over their own objection. Just think of all the evil done under the justification 'it's for the children'.

 

[Rookie]

So what do you INGOers do when you come up on a checkpoint? I have never encountered one.

Turn.

Exactly. Every time I come up to one, I turn off right before and then get back on the road I was on immediately after.

 

[88GT]

I doubt that anyone here supports drunk driving, but rather don't accept it as an excuse for violating the rights of one and all. I am in agreement that the problem is not solved by violating the Fourth Amendment rights of anyone who is so brazen as to drive after dark, but rather must be solved in the court room. Generally, a drunk driver in court, even after causing damage, injury, or perhaps even death is given the equivalent of the judge rubbing one index finger over the other as he says 'shame on you' (and collects a modest amount of revenue for the local government). Therein lies the problem.

The drunk that hit us just before Christmas blew 3x the legal limit at 1:00PM!!!!!

All true, but if they catch a couple they have broken even, and if they catch more than a couple, they have made a net profit for the night, never mind whatever else they may 'accidentally' discover while whizzing all over the Fourth Amendment.

I was going to make a big stink over the statistics of sobriety checkpoints and their results (but instead opted for the one line snarkiness). I found an interesting tidbit that in Pima County, AZ (I do not know the time frame), of the 280+ arrests from sobriety checkpoints, only 75 successful prosecutions have been made. The remaining cases have been dismissed. Not a very profitable effort to my way of thinking.

 

[Rhoadmar]

People under the influence alsoi commit domestic violence which often results in the death of innocents. Maybe we should start having random home inspections as well... I mean, hey, it's for the children, right.

And ban alcohol yeah that would work

 

[femurphy77]

If I'm not mistaken several states have outlawed these and seatbelt checks as well.

 

[B-lou]

I have owed my own business for 35 years, we have an alarm system and video surveillance but still have been broken into 21 times out of those 21 bugleries the sherriff has never even tried to catch the thieves once ,but have written me tickets 3 times for false alarms.....almost all the breakins have happened on a holiday or fri or sat night while law enforcement are to busy trying to catch drunk drivers...now I am all for keeping drunk drivers off the road but the bottom line is that it is about the money...a criminal cost the county money a drunk driver pays big.....

 

[IndyDave1776]

Exactly. Every time I come up to one, I turn off right before and then get back on the road I was on immediately after.

Isn't avoiding the police considered probable cause for stopping/questioning/search in Indiana?

The drunk that hit us just before Christmas blew 3x the legal limit at 1:00PM!!!!!

OK, not all drunks go with the averages.

I was going to make a big stink over the statistics of sobriety checkpoints and their results (but instead opted for the one line snarkiness). I found an interesting tidbit that in Pima County, AZ (I do not know the time frame), of the 280+ arrests from sobriety checkpoints, only 75 successful prosecutions have been made. The remaining cases have been dismissed. Not a very profitable effort to my way of thinking.

In the end, I would chalk it up to control, not that the money is not significant. You can rest assured that that those 75 cases made more than enough money to pay for the cost of throwing these parties, and that the remaining 205 still paid plenty to the lawyers who are driving forces in the process and its perpetuation.

 

[w_ADAM_d88]

Sobriety Checkpoints =

 

[IndyDave1776]

Sobriety Checkpoints =

I believe this is the flag you're looking for:

 

[mrjarrell]

Isn't avoiding the police considered probable cause for stopping/questioning/search in Indiana?

Nope. And they're supposed to set up in such a fashion that they can be avoided if a driver wants to.

 

[JollyMon]

Nope. And they're supposed to set up in such a fashion that they can be avoided if a driver wants to.

This is true, but if you avoid them, that is probably cause for a traffic stop.

(Snyder v. State, 538 N.E.2d 961 (Ind. App. 4 Dist. 1989). In the Snyder case, the court held that avoiding a checkpoint was sufficient cause to conduct a stop. )

 

[88GT]

If I'm not mistaken several states have outlawed these and seatbelt checks as well.

11, if the source I recently viewed this afternoon is still accurate.

 

[88GT]

Nope. And they're supposed to set up in such a fashion that they can be avoided if a driver wants to.

This is true, but if you avoid them, that is probably [sic] cause for a traffic stop.

(Snyder v. State, 538 N.E.2d 961 (Ind. App. 4 Dist. 1989). In the Snyder case, the court held that avoiding a checkpoint was sufficient cause to conduct a stop. )

Okay, is it or is it not PC?

 

[JollyMon]

Okay, is it or is it not PC?

They are setup so that you can avoid them, such as right after an intersection, so you can turn right or left and that its completely legal. But, from my understanding, if you make a blatant attempt to avoid them, aka U turn right before, that might be probable cause for a stop. But I'm not a lawyer.

They usually have roving patrol's too. So if you turn right or left, you might get followed by an officer, and if you make any swerve or speeding violation, they can stick their head in the window

 

[mrjarrell]

Okay, is it or is it not PC?

It's not PC, as we've been informed in previous threads by our resident LEO's and lawyers. That's why there's an out.

 

[JollyMon]

It's not PC, as we've been informed in previous threads by our resident LEO's and lawyers. That's why there's an out.

I stand corrected. Thanks for the correction. The court case that I found (and listed), is there an appeal or other ruling that finds it invalid.