We can talk about the U.S., or we can talk about other countries, like DH Scherocha's Australia. The basic principle of law enforcement is the same. You don't catch criminals with randomness, whether it be checkpoints or RBT. Effectivness is precluded by the simple principle of passivity. That passivity is essentially guessing and hoping you catch someone. Good policing is patrolling, not guesswork. Effective policing requires the skill and knowledge to identify those situations.
DH, I've looked at your figures (and others) and concluded that Australia achieved gains in the '80s and early 90s, but those achievements leveled off, or even reversed, the past 15 years. Your initial massive education campaign of the '80s was good & got casual drinkers off the road, but hard cord drunks persist. Your RBT reality TV show notwithstanding, it seems that the gains you made might be due more to a focused campaign than any randomness. You don't catch criminals with randomness.
DH, Your Australian sources generally make no distinction between using RBT at checkpoints & RBT for individual stops as the result of saturation patrolling. Your general method & machine is PBT (preliminary breath testing). The main U.S. issue is that saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints. You never addressed this issue in my research. You also need to address why RBT is still intensely used, but alcohol crashes in Australia have levelled off or even increased lately..
DH, Your figures are from the 1970s to 1990s and don't reflect the leveling off, and even increases, in the last 15 years. The info you present even doesn't even control for other factors that contributed to reductions: "Initiatives have included mass media campaigns, school-based education
programs, rehabilitation programs for convicted offenders, and modifications to
the physical and social environments." (Homel 1988) Your info certainly does not distinguish between RBT & roving patrols.
DH, Your own quotes don’t even make a connection between RBT and reductions. Your quote: “Offending levels have decreased progressively since 1990 however that decrease seems to have flattened out at the end of 1993 and began a slight increase during 1994.”///Your quote: “…which continued until the 1980's when that reduction levelled out.” Your own government even has charts showing drunk driving has leveled off in the 2000s or even risen. Your statistics are from the 1980s and 1990s.
DH, I have more research about your country (such as RBT being the least cost effective measure), but we are talking about the U.S. The video was, after all, taken in the U.S. Have you ever lived in the U.S.? Have you even been to the U.S.? Have you studied this issue?. Your unwillingness or inability to even understand all the research posted still tells me you are speaking from emotion. The Costa Mesa Calif. police chief even said that he wants to eliminate checkpoints. Google it.
DH, I have more research about your country (such as RBT being the least cost effective measure), but we are talking about the U.S. The video was, after all, taken in the U.S. Have you ever lived in the U.S.? Have you even been to the U.S.? Have you studied this issue?. Your unwillingness or inability to even understand all the research posted still tells me you are speaking from emotion. The Costa Mesa Calif. police chief even said that he wants to eliminate checkpoints. Google it.
DH, You claim "penalties" are "significant" in Australia, but the very first study I see finds no correlation between higher penalities and deterence. The research concludes, "Despite substantial variation in the fines imposed by magistrates on drink-drivers, no significant deterrent effect from higher fines was found."
British Journal of Criminology; Sep2011, Vol. 51 Issue 5, p789-803
@jamesjohnson19701970 "Since its introduction in 1976, but particularly since its re-structuring in 1989, we have witnessed a dramatic reduction in drivers killed over the legal blood alcohol limit which in Victoria is 0.05 per centum. In 1977, 49% of all drivers killed were found to be in excess of 0.05%. In 1992 that figure was reduced to an all time low of 21%." - driveandstayalive dot c o m
@jamesjohnson19701970 "Immediately following the implementation of Random Breath Testing, an immediate and significant reduction in driver/rider death over .05% was measured which continued until the 1980's when that reduction levelled out... Driver/Rider death over .05% dropped from 113 in 1989 to 49 in 1994. This was a reduction from 49% of all drivers/riders killed over .05% in 1977 to 24% in 1994. It went as low as 21% in 1992...."
@jamesjohnson19701970 "Blood Alcohol Levels of all offending drivers from 1989/90 (fiscal year) to 1993/94 indicated significant reductions overall but particularly in the highest level, namely the 0.150% and above category.... An examination of all offending age groups indicated that since 1990 all groups had returned significant reductions in terms of numbers. The largest group,the 20 - 24 year olds, were amongst the greatest reduction..."
@jamesjohnson19701970 "... Offending levels have decreased progressively since 1990 however that decrease seems to have flattened out at the end of 1993 and began a slight increase during 1994. This may be due in part to the introduction of the Drager 7110 Automated instrument into Victoria on 1.8.94..."
@jamesjohnson19701970 "...the initial impact of RBT ranged from 48% for fatal accidents in New South Wales to 13% for all serious accidents in Western Australia. Only for single-vehicle night-time accidents in Queensland was it not possible to establish a significant effect for RBT, and this almost certainly reflects the combination of relatively low accident frequencies and the shortness of the series." - infrastructure dot gov dot au
@jamesjohnson19701970 "In New South Wales and Western Australia the impact of RBT on single-vehicle night-time accidents was clear, with a 26% initial reduction that appeared to be sustained on an indefinite basis, although in New South Wales the effect declined to only 3% in 1989, reflecting the decay in the Introduction effect that had not at that time been counteracted by the effects of the increase in enforcement from late 1987...."
@jamesjohnson19701970 "...The reduction in single-vehicle night-time accidents achieved by RBT increased again to 22% in 1992, reflecting higher enforcement levels...." - You can find detailed tables and statistics on that GOVERNMENT website showing sometimes hugely reduced numbers of fatal accidents involving alcohol, as well as skyrocketing numbers of people prosecuted for drink driving, since the inception of RBT units nationwide.
This video pumped me up so much. Good on you, uploader. DUI checkpoints infringe, encroach, and entrap on so many levels it makes my blood boil. It also makes my blood boil when people drink and drive, but a DUI checkpoint is the equivalent of using a napalm bomb to get rid of a mosquito.
If you're willing to trade freedom for "security" then you don't belong in the United States.
They seem like nice, polite and professional officers. Why wouldn't you respond in kind? Why do you fear them? I hope you get you head bashed in with the wrong cop and he smashes you phone afterwards for being a liberal pansy limpdick. I'm pretty sure it's happened already too. Enjoy your vegetables.
@DennisAJC The job of the police is not politeness. They are law enforcment, not Welcome Wagon. They are not doing their job. They are sitting there waiting for criminals to approach them. It's passive policing. They are also not professional. They told the driver, "You HAVE to answer the question." That is not true, hence not professional. And it looks like there wasn't much fear from the driver.
Police should stop bashing citizens over the head with this nonsense. Government is inefficient and often takes the path of least resistance. That is the case here. Imagine being paid to root out crime but all you do is wait for criminals to approach you. If you can't take straightforward criticism of your ineffective methods, then get out and let somebody else do the job.
@utahlibertarian1 Common sense. Motor skills are impaired whilst driving drunk. The statistical probability of ending up in a serious accident increases exponentially the higher your blood alcohol level, therefore with DUI checkpoints getting people off the road with sometimes many times the legal limit, any logical, reasonable individual would deduce that they'd have to save lives. Go look for data, I'm not your teacher.
@DHScherocha You made the claim. Prove it. You can't deduce anything without evidence. Do you know this city of Costa Mesa California just markedly reduced checkpoints in favor of more effective saturation patrols? Do you know that Utah is working on a bill to abolish checkpoints because they think patrols work better? Do you know the FBI itself said, in 2003, that patrols are better than checkpoints? You're not the teacher, but you sure made a pedantic and firm claim. Provide evidence.
@DHScherocha You claim that checkpoints save lives, but the exact opposite is true. Saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints. Every checkpoint means lack of a police officer looking for drunks. That means more deaths. A more accurate statement is CHECKPOINTS COST LIVES.
@jamesjohnson19701970 You are spouting nonsense that runs contrary to all common sense and logic. They don't have the numbers to have patrol cars pacing every street in every city, so they setup checkpoints on heavy traffic roads. Every single time they net a drunk driver, which is often, they potentially save a life. Please don't ever breed, you deluded fucking spastic.
@DHScherocha Please explain your logic of how a checkpoint actually comes in contact with more cars than those same officers on saturation patrol. Police know better. The FBI study in Jan. 2003 found that saturation patrols are the single most effect means of apprehension. The Costa Mesa CA Police just reduced checkpoints because they know saturation patrols work better. Utah is considering banning checkpoints because patrols work better. Please present your evidence. You've presented none.
@jamesjohnson19701970 In an area of 5 square blocks, are the police going to apprehend more drivers and be utilised more effectively by 5 separate patrol cars lucking upon one who's driving is so obviously impaired that it warrants investigation; or by setting down a single checkpoint in the main thoroughfare of those blocks, and as they do, apprehending drivers even slightly over the limit who otherwise wouldn't have been perceived as having an impediment?
@DHScherocha Provide evidence. Real world numbers don't support your hypothesis. Police in Worcester CO. Maryland did both patrols and checkpoints Aug. 27, 2010. There were 739 cars at the checkpoint and zero arrests. The patrols stopped 32 cars and made 2 arrests. The FBI compared saturation patrols vs. checkpoints in OH, TN, and MO. Saturation patrols resulted in more arrests. That's not "luck." See the Checkpoint USA website forums for similar evidence like this.
@jamesjohnson19701970 By your logic, at borders, police would be utilised more effectively by just letting all drivers through then having patrols randomly pull over motorists to check if they have illegals or drugs, rather than border checkpoints which in the same manner of DUI checkpoints acts as a filter to which the largest number of violators are logically (and proven in practice) going to be caught. Think about it.
@DHScherocha Nation borders are different, but your scenario is actually the logic of DHS. A recent report (GAO report # 09-824, Aug. 2009) stated, "The federal role is to detect and apprehend 30% of major illegal activity [at the border].” The 70% is not successful at INTERANAL checkpoints.// Tucson sector: Actual BORDER interdictions per agent=116, but INTERNAL checkpoint interdictions per agent=8. // Nationally: It took 4% of agents to make 2.4% of the interdictions at INTERNAL checkpoints.
@jamesjohnson19701970 After asking me to provide evidence, you refer me to a non-governmental, massively baised website that proclaims "dedicated to confronting roadblocks to freedom wherever they may arise", saying I should check their FORUMS, for similar "EVIDENCE"? Are you retarded?
@DHScherocha Space here is limited, so my suggestion is for people to confirm the evidence I cited. Yes, the site is advocacy, but you will find the cites there & then independently verify them The info is from police documents, research, etc. I did the research. And I'm still waiting for you to post ANY evidence regarding your theories. You make claims, but you have posted nothing. You've looked up nothing. You also seem to suggest that only government provides legit information.
@DHScherocha Space here is limited, so my suggestion is for people to confirm the evidence I cited. Yes, the site is advocacy, but you will find the cites there & then independently verify them The info is from police documents, research, etc. I did the research. And I'm still waiting for you to post ANY evidence regarding your theories. You make claims, but you have posted nothing. You've looked up nothing. You also seem to suggest that only government provides legit information.
@jamesjohnson19701970 Just stating what I see to be self-evident. You're posting through ultra-libertarian flavoured goggles and would still argue the point in the face of statistical data showing the opposite position. I only have to watch a single episode of RBT here in Aus and see the fucktons of people apprehended or penalised to know that the impact would be significant, not to mention the downward trend in deaths here in Aus since their implementation.
@DHScherocha Your assumptions of the U.S. are based on some Austrailian reality TV show?! You claim that checkpoints work, but haven't provided any evidence. You claim self-evidence because you are unwilling/unable to comment on the long list of evidence I've provided (evidence is on the first few pages of these comments & the forum section of Checkpoint USA website). Your profanity suggests your reasoning is emotionally based. You provide no numbers.
@jamesjohnson19701970 My position is that of common sense. You haven't provided evidence or a source beyond some smack propaganda site, and numbers that don't even provide a correlation to your assertion. 739 cars? Is this a single case study of a single night be a single checkpoint, that is supposed to be indicative of the overall impact in all cities nationwide? I use profanities when somebody is exhibiting idiocy that makes me want to facepalm.
@DHScherocha The site merely HOUSES the information. Did you bother to look @ the numberss? 739 cars @ a checkpoint & no arrests. 32 cars on a saturation patrol & 2 arrests. Arrest rate for checkpoint=0%. Arrest rate for saturation patrol=8%. This matches the numbers found in the study by the FBI. The study concluded, “Overall, measured in arrests per hour, a dedicated saturation patrol is the most effective method of apprehending offenders.” (FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Jan '03)
I guess everyone here who are bashing the police can do a better job of keeping the public safe. There are no easy solutions to DUI. The police do the best they can. Most of the negative posters here would shit their pants and cry like litttle babys if they experienced half of what an average officer does. The job sucks, the pay sucks and a good majority of the people who second guess the officers actions don't know what the hell is going on. Go ride a long with the police a you will see.
DUI checkpoints and cops (especially the DEA) in general are fucking bullshit! In the 70's and 80' s you could actually go out and have fun, get hammered and have an ashtray full of roaches. Now these loser fucks want to ruin the fun for everyone, put bars out of business and more. Now they tell people they can't smoke in a plane, in a bar, etc. One can only hope that a giant semi driver falls asleep and rams a DUI checkpoint!
You are a FUCKING DOUCHE BAG. Just cooperate with the officer. They have a hard enough job to do with out ASSHOLES like you making it harder for them.
@scrapinbuy Why cooperate? He was stopped with no suspicion of any criminal activity. He wanted to drive through without stopping, but couldn't, and so he made them stick to the same laws that he is required to abide by. Nothing wrong at all with that.
And yes, they have a hard job. They should be out getting criminals instead of setting up warrantless checkpoints. If they don't want it harder for them, then have a reason for stopping people.
@arthurkitchen WOW, I guess you have been busted for a DUI or more like several DUI's. They are necessary for your safety you idiot. They save lives. I hope some day you have a loved one killed or seriously injured by some dumb drunk. You will change your tune, You have never been a victim of a crime or been the victm of a DUI wreck, Grow up.
@scrapinbuy No, amazingly I have never been arrested for anything but have certainly driving hammered many times and still do, just not as often due to the police state. I also have been hit by a drunk driver that rammed me from behind and really hurt my neck but I still don't care to stop drunk drivers. We have FAR too many restrictions already!
They are doing an illegal stop... He can be a dick all he wants to. No one is on the cops case for doing the illegal roadblock. this guy doing this and them letting him go proves everyone is wrong with their opinions into the matter. He was let go BECAUSE HE IS RIGHT. He's not in cuffs, so it's not wrong.
Its funny how this guy exercises his constitutional freedom amidst an illegal exercise and all you puppets are all over his case. he didn't do a damn thing wrong. It's exactly how the founding fathers wanted an American to be. Informed and exercise your freedom.
@codyhop193 He's going about it completely the wrong way though by just being absolutely silent. If he were to say that he didn't have to answer the question, that'd be one thing. But he's sitting there in silence, just being a general jerk.
"A third big deal is that these stops are often much longer than the advertised 1-2 minutes"
yes, and doing what he did saved a lot of time. You idiot, your logic makes no sense except for the fact that you can google "dui checkpoints" and see how many people get caught doing it. This guy was an idiot. You really showed them! Saying "no officer, I haven't. Thanks for keeping my city safe though" would just mean you are conforming to society! OH NOEZZ
@megamands 1. This entire incident was less than 2 minutes. That is much shorter than many stops, especially the ones in Calif.; 2. I don't have to "google" anything. I've been researching this for several years. I look at actual police reports, studies, & related documents. Those documents show checkpoints don't result in substantial arrest rates. They don't deter drunks.; 3. The city is actually less safe w/ checkpoints.; 4. Why the namecalling? Are you mad? Do you not have an argument?
I would like to know how this is good policing. The police sit it one spot while all the people at bars alert their friends. The burglars are breaking into houses. Where is the active policing that requires good skills and training?
My state and some Mormons are pretty skewed on alcohol issues, but even we are looking at stopping checkpoints. The legislators are currently considering a bill to ban these checkpoints.
Cops and soldiers shouldn't let themselves drag into the paranoia some politicians try to seed because they're failing in the administration of the or parts of the country - and therefore need to divert on fake-internal and fake-external threats.
man you got lucky!, vegas cops are the biggest dicks. I've had my friend yanked from a black jack table and bullied by a group of officers who "thought" he gave them a bad look and was talking shit about them. they threatened to arrest him until everyone else around the black jack table started booing the officers.
People assume that checkoints work without doing the research. I have looked into this for years. Checkpoints do not work. Please see my comments or the webiste Checkpoint USA for some of this research.
People might be interested in knowing that two states has just proposed bills to outlaw these checkpoints. The two states are Utah and New Hampshire. The UT bill made it out of committee. Please email your legislator regarding these bills.
These checkpoints are not as simple as meets the eye. Checkpoints are to be of limited scope. The interaction should be for the primary purpose of the checkpoint. What happens, though, is that things get muddled in the street. Primary purposes turn secondary. Limited scope turns expansive.
People should know that there are many other types of checkpoints. They exist for license, registration, insurance, child safety seats, seatbelts, and fireworks. Yes, you heard that last one right. Fireworks.
People wonder why the motorist does not answer the question. The real question is for law enforcement. Why do offenders roam free when the cops interact with people minding their own business? Why does an admission of drinking (e.g., 1 beer at lunch) result in a sobriety test? Why do so many of these checkpoints go beyond the promised 30 seconds? The simple upshot is that roadblocks do not work. They don't deter drunks. They don't result in arrests.
People concerned about drunks should know that these checkpoints do not work. Research consistently shows that checkpoints result in low arrest rates compared to roving patrols. Roving patrols always work better. Checkpoints are also not a deterrent to drunk driving. There is not enough space here to post the research, so please visit the website Checkpoint USA, particularly the forums page. My comments section also has research. You can just click my name.
I'm a libertarian of the fiercest order. Obama is a madman. Our country has gone from wild west frontier of promise to a drab clinic waiting room. Yet, until you idiots vote for someone who would build private roads out of local jurisdiction (haha) you submit to the law of the land and you always will. Obviously, here's the irony: the ones dumb enough to barrel down a highway after 5 Jack and Cokes probably don't know who the vice president is right now. Hence, the endless cycle...
Hopefully one day there will be technology that instantly lobotomizes anyone who powers on a vehicle with a BAC over .08. Because as much as I hate the fact that these cops are little state workers and these checkpoints do nothing, the number of responsible people who are killed by the chemically addicted, socially insecure, self-loathing, soulless losers who HAVE to get blitzed and VROOM VROOM means they DESERVE their freedoms stripped just as any other human who threatens to rob me of my life.
People keep asking, "What is the big deal about answering a question?" The big deal is that lawbreakers roam free while the police just sit there interacting with mostly law-abiding citizens. Another big deal is that any admission of drinking (e.g., a glass of wine at dinner) will result in a sobriety test. A third big deal is that these stops are often much longer than the advertised 1-2 minutes. Bottom line research: Checkpoints don't catch drunks. They are not a deterrent.
Notice how the sargeant lies. She says that Tim "has" to answer the question. Not true by a long shot. This is the state of law enforcement in America.
"To date, there is no evidence to indicate that this campaign, which involves a number of sobriety checkpoints and media activities to promote these efforts, has had any impact on public perceptions, driver behaviors, or alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes and injuries. This conclusion is drawn after examining statistics for alcohol-related crashes, police citations for impaired driving, and public perceptions of alcohol-impaired driving risk. (Source: Health Promotion Reports, 7-1-09)
All you morons siding with the cops need to STFU. Millions of people have died fighting for the freedoms we have today. It's disgusting how people tuck their tails around cops. More people need to stand the f**k up against bs like this.
@doeanaheim If you have "no idea" about the definition of a roving parol, how would you know anything about these statistics? I'm also not sure where you got the term "pseudo random pull over."
Good luck trying that in another state... I think you got lucky in Vegas that night too... It's good stand up for your rights but that easily good have ended with a tazing... or worse.
@birdoprey5 I keep hearing that! I wonder if that would happen in Vegas if there weren't people keeping the cops in check. If you think asserting your right to refuse to answer questions in your home state would result in your being tazed, I strongly suggest you start trying to change that. SCARY!
@birdoprey5 Why would this guy be "tased or worse?" That would be the use of a weapon. Use of a weapon(s). is restricted to self defense or physical threat to an officer(s). Are you saying that refusing to answer questions (5th amendment) would be a reason for an officer to tase someone or worse? I'm probably wrong, but I would consider use of a "taser or worse" to be excessive force, and officer misconduct in this situation. OMG Where did I go wrong???
@birdoprey5 Most of the time, the cops will have the person stop and get out of the car. After some time of not being cooperative, the driver will be on his/her way. No tasers involved (usually) if the driver just sticks to the right to remain silent and doesn't consent to those field sobriety tests (walk the line, etc.).
What a fucking tool. The location and the time of DUI checkpoints are announced in advanced. That means you sought out this checkpoint just to be a douchebag.
I'm a retired LEO....Officer telling the man that he 'has' to answer the question is inappropriate...I actually wish more people would know their rights. I hated nonsense like this when active...but we did not do many...
I'm a retired LEO....Officer telling the man that he 'has' to answer the question is inappropriate...I actually wish more people would know their rights. I hated nonsense like this when active...but we did not do many...
@TomValedro Why not just leave law-abiding citizens alone? Saturation patrols are grounded in the method of reasonable suspicion. They work. Checkpoints do not work.
@TomValedro It's the point. To me (An I'm guessing timf343) checkpoints like this are 100% UN-American. I understand checkpoints where the cops are looking for a specific person, like after a bank robbery or something. But, in NC it's illegal for a cop to pull someone over for no reason, so why can they block the whole damn road an stop EVERYBODY?? On the plus side after you've gone through you can pretty drive like a bat outta hell b/c all the cops are at the checkpoint!
The FBI itself did research on checkpoints and found they did not work. They researched checkpoints in Ohio, Missouri, and Tennessee. They found saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints. Other research confirms this. Why would one use an inferior technique?
The research I cited is from FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, January 2003.
Checkpoint USA has quite a bit of research showing how checkpoints do not work. Checkpoints often fail to arrest one single driver. Research on Maryland's Checkpoint Strikeforce program shows checkpoints are not a deterrent.
Saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints. Officers sit at checkpoints waiting for lawbreakers at checkpoints. That is poor policing. That is not going to get it done.
If you look at statistics, statistics will probably tell you a saturation patrol is more successful…” said Lt. David Kloos, barrack commander for the Maryland State Police Hagerstown barrack. A typical checkpoint uses about 10 troopers for five hours and costs about $2,000, he said. During the last State Police checkpoint in Hagerstown, held Oct. 31, troopers stopped 880 cars and made three DUI arrests, Kloos said.
.........“Saturation patrols watching alternate routes around the checkpoint made one additional DUI arrest, he said. A saturation patrol without a checkpoint requires only three or four troopers and costs a fraction of what a checkpoint costs. The troopers work four hours of overtime, usually from 11 p.m. until 3 a.m., and each aims to make three to four stops per hour, Kloos said. (Source: Hagerstown Herald Mail December 28 2008)
Jesus the guy in this video is a complete dick...The officers are just doing their job trying to keep his community a safer place and he is just harassing them because of their uniform. Fuck you tim.
Interesting how people think these checkpoints work when they have been a great failure for 30 years. Roving patrols always work better. Maybe that is just too hard for the police. I guess it would be easier if you just sat in spot all day dealing with grandmas and soccer moms.
congrats on your "win". you successfully proved you were a douche and wasted peoples time. Will your heroic act change anything? I'm pretty sure we all know the answer to that good sir.
People will cite the Supreme Court as allowing checkpoints, but checkpoints still violate the spirit of the 4th amendment. James Johnson is right on about guilty until proven innocent. Heil Hitler!!
What is even more annoying, Kosorovich, is the taxpayer money spent on a technique that is ineffective. Research consistently shows that checkpoints are ineffective. They are not a deterrent.
What is even more annoying, Kosorovich, is the taxpayer money spent on a technique that is ineffective. Research consistently shows that checkpoints are ineffective. They are not a deterrent.
Checkpoints assume that everyone who encounters one is assumed to be doing something wrong until they can prove they are not doing anything wrong. I can't think of too many things more un-American than that.
The FBI compared saturation patrols vs. checkpoints in Ohio, Missouri, and Tennessee. The study showed that, “Overall, measured in arrests per hour, a dedicated saturation patrol is the most effective method of apprehending offenders.” (Source: FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, January 2003)
Say "yes, I have had a lot to drink and proud of it", if you had not anything to drink. Then they will be embarrassed when they find out what you had to drink was water.
If saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints, why would anybody use checkpoints?
From the American Beverage Institute: “They [saturation patrols] are very effective, they are highly visible, and hopefully accomplish the same goals without having the legal loop holes that you might run into with a DWI checkpoint.”
- Wilmington, DE Police Corporal Joseph Fitzgerald
“Roving patrols would have given us more arrests.”
- Niagara Falls, NY Police Traffic Div. Ctn Salvatore Pino
If saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints, why would anybody use checkpoints?
From the American Beverage Institute: “When you set up a checkpoint in this day and age of technology, it’s just a network of communication and everybody knows where the police have set up. Saturation patrols are more effective.”
States with infrequent checkpoints claimed a lack of funding and police resources for not conducting more checkpoints, preferred saturation patrols over checkpoints because they were more "productive," and used large number of police officers at checkpoints." (Source: Accident Analysis and Prevention, November 2003)
First, I thought checkpoints are a form of saturation patrol. And no idea what you mean by roving patrol. However, assuming u are trying to compare check points to pseudo random pull overs and your point is that the latter is better, then your statistics work against you. If 700 drivers are checked and 0 was drunk, then you have higher probability no one was drunk that night. If only 30 were checked and already 2 are drunk, thats not very good. The goal here is prevention.
@worshiphotgirls If you have "no idea" about the definition of a roving parol, how would you know anything about these statistics? I'm also not sure where you got the term "pseudo random pull over."
See the website Checkpoint USA regarding the case of Terry Bressi. Terry won his case against an illegal Arizona checkpoint. He has sued for damages. The case is ongoing.
Legislation for checkpoints was defeated last year in Washington, Texas, and Oregon. Utah and New Hamp have just just proposed legislation banning checkpoints. The Utah bill is now out of committee.
Police comments about checkpoints: "I'm no big fan of them," Chief Deputy Pat Butler said about checkpoints. (KC Star, 7-8-08) Other quotes at the website of the American Beverage Institute.
Ok, the usage of his civil rights is cool and all, but I think the story here is that the cops actually stuck to their limitations within the law. I tip my imaginary cowboy hat to them.
@StubbornFreak No, they did not stick to their limitations. The sargeant says, "You just HAVE to answer the question, and you'll be on your way." The question is misleading, if not lying.
@Kosorovich The sargeant says, "You just HAVE to answer the question, and you'll be on your way." I would submit that is not doing very well. The question is misleading, if not lying.
@Kosorovich What is even more annoying is the taxpayer money spent on a technique that is ineffective. Research consistently shows that checkpoints are ineffective. They're not a deterrent.
@Kosorovich taken participation in something that violates the 4th amendment is doing very well? They are violating their sworn oath as LEO in do so and hence making a mockery of the oath that gives them their jurisdiction.
You DO NOT have to answer questions. You do not have to tell them where you are going, coming from, whats in your trunk, if you have consumed alcoholic beverages, if you masturbate, if you are a vegetarian, if you just killed someone. Refusal to answer questions is not a reason to have suspicion that a crime has been committed.
@kirby4d I don't understand how I was being a nazi. Are you sure you read what I wrote correctly? I was saying don't disobey the police when what they're doing is harmless. Would you rather have a drunk driver go and kill your kids than have the police do random stop checks?
@Batmannerz Yes, I would rather they live life free, and with some dangers, than enslaved and perfectly safe. I will ask you why you think checkpoints are the only way to catch drunktards on the roads?
props to the police for handling this well. This might have resulted in a beatdown in a lot of places. The cops assessed the situation, saw there was no threat, and let them go. That's how a free society should work
That's awesome.. to bad its illegal, at least here anyway. Illinois, where its illegal to video tape police in any situation. Were a cop can shoot a man, and the person going to jail is the one taping
Here it is if you feel eager to inform yourself before labeling 80 million people and a foreign, souvereign, democratic, modern Western State as Nazis again: gesetze-im-internet . de / englisch_gg / index . html (By the Department of Justice, current version, translated into English) ^.^ Enjoy :)
If they would be no drunk driving on the streets, the cops wouldn't have to do this controls. This cop asked normal and not lilke a rambo... You could have answered his questions...
We can talk about the U.S., or we can talk about other countries, like DH Scherocha's Australia. The basic principle of law enforcement is the same. You don't catch criminals with randomness, whether it be checkpoints or RBT. Effectivness is precluded by the simple principle of passivity. That passivity is essentially guessing and hoping you catch someone. Good policing is patrolling, not guesswork. Effective policing requires the skill and knowledge to identify those situations.
jamesjohnson19701970 27 minutes ago
DH, I've looked at your figures (and others) and concluded that Australia achieved gains in the '80s and early 90s, but those achievements leveled off, or even reversed, the past 15 years. Your initial massive education campaign of the '80s was good & got casual drinkers off the road, but hard cord drunks persist. Your RBT reality TV show notwithstanding, it seems that the gains you made might be due more to a focused campaign than any randomness. You don't catch criminals with randomness.
jamesjohnson19701970 39 minutes ago
DH, Your Australian sources generally make no distinction between using RBT at checkpoints & RBT for individual stops as the result of saturation patrolling. Your general method & machine is PBT (preliminary breath testing). The main U.S. issue is that saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints. You never addressed this issue in my research. You also need to address why RBT is still intensely used, but alcohol crashes in Australia have levelled off or even increased lately..
jamesjohnson19701970 52 minutes ago
DH, Your figures are from the 1970s to 1990s and don't reflect the leveling off, and even increases, in the last 15 years. The info you present even doesn't even control for other factors that contributed to reductions: "Initiatives have included mass media campaigns, school-based education
programs, rehabilitation programs for convicted offenders, and modifications to
the physical and social environments." (Homel 1988) Your info certainly does not distinguish between RBT & roving patrols.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 hour ago
DH, Your own quotes don’t even make a connection between RBT and reductions. Your quote: “Offending levels have decreased progressively since 1990 however that decrease seems to have flattened out at the end of 1993 and began a slight increase during 1994.”///Your quote: “…which continued until the 1980's when that reduction levelled out.” Your own government even has charts showing drunk driving has leveled off in the 2000s or even risen. Your statistics are from the 1980s and 1990s.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 hour ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DH, I have more research about your country (such as RBT being the least cost effective measure), but we are talking about the U.S. The video was, after all, taken in the U.S. Have you ever lived in the U.S.? Have you even been to the U.S.? Have you studied this issue?. Your unwillingness or inability to even understand all the research posted still tells me you are speaking from emotion. The Costa Mesa Calif. police chief even said that he wants to eliminate checkpoints. Google it.
jamesjohnson19701970 11 hours ago
DH, I have more research about your country (such as RBT being the least cost effective measure), but we are talking about the U.S. The video was, after all, taken in the U.S. Have you ever lived in the U.S.? Have you even been to the U.S.? Have you studied this issue?. Your unwillingness or inability to even understand all the research posted still tells me you are speaking from emotion. The Costa Mesa Calif. police chief even said that he wants to eliminate checkpoints. Google it.
jamesjohnson19701970 11 hours ago
DH, You claim "penalties" are "significant" in Australia, but the very first study I see finds no correlation between higher penalities and deterence. The research concludes, "Despite substantial variation in the fines imposed by magistrates on drink-drivers, no significant deterrent effect from higher fines was found."
British Journal of Criminology; Sep2011, Vol. 51 Issue 5, p789-803
jamesjohnson19701970 11 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 "Since its introduction in 1976, but particularly since its re-structuring in 1989, we have witnessed a dramatic reduction in drivers killed over the legal blood alcohol limit which in Victoria is 0.05 per centum. In 1977, 49% of all drivers killed were found to be in excess of 0.05%. In 1992 that figure was reduced to an all time low of 21%." - driveandstayalive dot c o m
DHScherocha 8 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 "Immediately following the implementation of Random Breath Testing, an immediate and significant reduction in driver/rider death over .05% was measured which continued until the 1980's when that reduction levelled out... Driver/Rider death over .05% dropped from 113 in 1989 to 49 in 1994. This was a reduction from 49% of all drivers/riders killed over .05% in 1977 to 24% in 1994. It went as low as 21% in 1992...."
DHScherocha 8 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 "Blood Alcohol Levels of all offending drivers from 1989/90 (fiscal year) to 1993/94 indicated significant reductions overall but particularly in the highest level, namely the 0.150% and above category.... An examination of all offending age groups indicated that since 1990 all groups had returned significant reductions in terms of numbers. The largest group,the 20 - 24 year olds, were amongst the greatest reduction..."
DHScherocha 8 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 "... Offending levels have decreased progressively since 1990 however that decrease seems to have flattened out at the end of 1993 and began a slight increase during 1994. This may be due in part to the introduction of the Drager 7110 Automated instrument into Victoria on 1.8.94..."
DHScherocha 8 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 "...the initial impact of RBT ranged from 48% for fatal accidents in New South Wales to 13% for all serious accidents in Western Australia. Only for single-vehicle night-time accidents in Queensland was it not possible to establish a significant effect for RBT, and this almost certainly reflects the combination of relatively low accident frequencies and the shortness of the series." - infrastructure dot gov dot au
DHScherocha 8 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 "In New South Wales and Western Australia the impact of RBT on single-vehicle night-time accidents was clear, with a 26% initial reduction that appeared to be sustained on an indefinite basis, although in New South Wales the effect declined to only 3% in 1989, reflecting the decay in the Introduction effect that had not at that time been counteracted by the effects of the increase in enforcement from late 1987...."
DHScherocha 8 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 "...The reduction in single-vehicle night-time accidents achieved by RBT increased again to 22% in 1992, reflecting higher enforcement levels...." - You can find detailed tables and statistics on that GOVERNMENT website showing sometimes hugely reduced numbers of fatal accidents involving alcohol, as well as skyrocketing numbers of people prosecuted for drink driving, since the inception of RBT units nationwide.
DHScherocha 8 hours ago
Oops, sorry about the double posts.
jamesjohnson19701970 14 hours ago
This video pumped me up so much. Good on you, uploader. DUI checkpoints infringe, encroach, and entrap on so many levels it makes my blood boil. It also makes my blood boil when people drink and drive, but a DUI checkpoint is the equivalent of using a napalm bomb to get rid of a mosquito.
If you're willing to trade freedom for "security" then you don't belong in the United States.
sluggo163 1 day ago
They seem like nice, polite and professional officers. Why wouldn't you respond in kind? Why do you fear them? I hope you get you head bashed in with the wrong cop and he smashes you phone afterwards for being a liberal pansy limpdick. I'm pretty sure it's happened already too. Enjoy your vegetables.
DennisAJC 2 days ago
@DennisAJC The job of the police is not politeness. They are law enforcment, not Welcome Wagon. They are not doing their job. They are sitting there waiting for criminals to approach them. It's passive policing. They are also not professional. They told the driver, "You HAVE to answer the question." That is not true, hence not professional. And it looks like there wasn't much fear from the driver.
jamesjohnson19701970 2 days ago
Police should stop bashing citizens over the head with this nonsense. Government is inefficient and often takes the path of least resistance. That is the case here. Imagine being paid to root out crime but all you do is wait for criminals to approach you. If you can't take straightforward criticism of your ineffective methods, then get out and let somebody else do the job.
georgewashington2050 2 days ago 3
DUI checkpoints save lives.
DHScherocha 3 days ago
@DHScherocha Where is your evidence that checkpoints save lives?
utahlibertarian1 2 days ago
@utahlibertarian1 Common sense. Motor skills are impaired whilst driving drunk. The statistical probability of ending up in a serious accident increases exponentially the higher your blood alcohol level, therefore with DUI checkpoints getting people off the road with sometimes many times the legal limit, any logical, reasonable individual would deduce that they'd have to save lives. Go look for data, I'm not your teacher.
DHScherocha 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DHScherocha You made the claim. Prove it. You can't deduce anything without evidence. Do you know this city of Costa Mesa California just markedly reduced checkpoints in favor of more effective saturation patrols? Do you know that Utah is working on a bill to abolish checkpoints because they think patrols work better? Do you know the FBI itself said, in 2003, that patrols are better than checkpoints? You're not the teacher, but you sure made a pedantic and firm claim. Provide evidence.
jamesjohnson19701970 2 days ago
@DHScherocha You claim that checkpoints save lives, but the exact opposite is true. Saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints. Every checkpoint means lack of a police officer looking for drunks. That means more deaths. A more accurate statement is CHECKPOINTS COST LIVES.
jamesjohnson19701970 2 days ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 You are spouting nonsense that runs contrary to all common sense and logic. They don't have the numbers to have patrol cars pacing every street in every city, so they setup checkpoints on heavy traffic roads. Every single time they net a drunk driver, which is often, they potentially save a life. Please don't ever breed, you deluded fucking spastic.
DHScherocha 1 day ago
@DHScherocha Please explain your logic of how a checkpoint actually comes in contact with more cars than those same officers on saturation patrol. Police know better. The FBI study in Jan. 2003 found that saturation patrols are the single most effect means of apprehension. The Costa Mesa CA Police just reduced checkpoints because they know saturation patrols work better. Utah is considering banning checkpoints because patrols work better. Please present your evidence. You've presented none.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 day ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 In an area of 5 square blocks, are the police going to apprehend more drivers and be utilised more effectively by 5 separate patrol cars lucking upon one who's driving is so obviously impaired that it warrants investigation; or by setting down a single checkpoint in the main thoroughfare of those blocks, and as they do, apprehending drivers even slightly over the limit who otherwise wouldn't have been perceived as having an impediment?
DHScherocha 20 hours ago
@DHScherocha Provide evidence. Real world numbers don't support your hypothesis. Police in Worcester CO. Maryland did both patrols and checkpoints Aug. 27, 2010. There were 739 cars at the checkpoint and zero arrests. The patrols stopped 32 cars and made 2 arrests. The FBI compared saturation patrols vs. checkpoints in OH, TN, and MO. Saturation patrols resulted in more arrests. That's not "luck." See the Checkpoint USA website forums for similar evidence like this.
jamesjohnson19701970 18 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 By your logic, at borders, police would be utilised more effectively by just letting all drivers through then having patrols randomly pull over motorists to check if they have illegals or drugs, rather than border checkpoints which in the same manner of DUI checkpoints acts as a filter to which the largest number of violators are logically (and proven in practice) going to be caught. Think about it.
DHScherocha 20 hours ago
@DHScherocha Nation borders are different, but your scenario is actually the logic of DHS. A recent report (GAO report # 09-824, Aug. 2009) stated, "The federal role is to detect and apprehend 30% of major illegal activity [at the border].” The 70% is not successful at INTERANAL checkpoints.// Tucson sector: Actual BORDER interdictions per agent=116, but INTERNAL checkpoint interdictions per agent=8. // Nationally: It took 4% of agents to make 2.4% of the interdictions at INTERNAL checkpoints.
jamesjohnson19701970 18 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 After asking me to provide evidence, you refer me to a non-governmental, massively baised website that proclaims "dedicated to confronting roadblocks to freedom wherever they may arise", saying I should check their FORUMS, for similar "EVIDENCE"? Are you retarded?
DHScherocha 16 hours ago
@DHScherocha Space here is limited, so my suggestion is for people to confirm the evidence I cited. Yes, the site is advocacy, but you will find the cites there & then independently verify them The info is from police documents, research, etc. I did the research. And I'm still waiting for you to post ANY evidence regarding your theories. You make claims, but you have posted nothing. You've looked up nothing. You also seem to suggest that only government provides legit information.
jamesjohnson19701970 16 hours ago
@DHScherocha Space here is limited, so my suggestion is for people to confirm the evidence I cited. Yes, the site is advocacy, but you will find the cites there & then independently verify them The info is from police documents, research, etc. I did the research. And I'm still waiting for you to post ANY evidence regarding your theories. You make claims, but you have posted nothing. You've looked up nothing. You also seem to suggest that only government provides legit information.
jamesjohnson19701970 16 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 Just stating what I see to be self-evident. You're posting through ultra-libertarian flavoured goggles and would still argue the point in the face of statistical data showing the opposite position. I only have to watch a single episode of RBT here in Aus and see the fucktons of people apprehended or penalised to know that the impact would be significant, not to mention the downward trend in deaths here in Aus since their implementation.
DHScherocha 13 hours ago
@DHScherocha Your assumptions of the U.S. are based on some Austrailian reality TV show?! You claim that checkpoints work, but haven't provided any evidence. You claim self-evidence because you are unwilling/unable to comment on the long list of evidence I've provided (evidence is on the first few pages of these comments & the forum section of Checkpoint USA website). Your profanity suggests your reasoning is emotionally based. You provide no numbers.
Your research is a single TV episode.
jamesjohnson19701970 11 hours ago
@jamesjohnson19701970 My position is that of common sense. You haven't provided evidence or a source beyond some smack propaganda site, and numbers that don't even provide a correlation to your assertion. 739 cars? Is this a single case study of a single night be a single checkpoint, that is supposed to be indicative of the overall impact in all cities nationwide? I use profanities when somebody is exhibiting idiocy that makes me want to facepalm.
DHScherocha 11 hours ago
@DHScherocha The site merely HOUSES the information. Did you bother to look @ the numberss? 739 cars @ a checkpoint & no arrests. 32 cars on a saturation patrol & 2 arrests. Arrest rate for checkpoint=0%. Arrest rate for saturation patrol=8%. This matches the numbers found in the study by the FBI. The study concluded, “Overall, measured in arrests per hour, a dedicated saturation patrol is the most effective method of apprehending offenders.” (FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Jan '03)
.
jamesjohnson19701970 11 hours ago
I guess everyone here who are bashing the police can do a better job of keeping the public safe. There are no easy solutions to DUI. The police do the best they can. Most of the negative posters here would shit their pants and cry like litttle babys if they experienced half of what an average officer does. The job sucks, the pay sucks and a good majority of the people who second guess the officers actions don't know what the hell is going on. Go ride a long with the police a you will see.
scrapinbuy 3 days ago
DUI checkpoints and cops (especially the DEA) in general are fucking bullshit! In the 70's and 80' s you could actually go out and have fun, get hammered and have an ashtray full of roaches. Now these loser fucks want to ruin the fun for everyone, put bars out of business and more. Now they tell people they can't smoke in a plane, in a bar, etc. One can only hope that a giant semi driver falls asleep and rams a DUI checkpoint!
arthurkitchen 3 days ago
166,000 views LOL. this is waaaaaay better than watching c.o.p.s on tv. lookout fox you got competition!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
unclecooker 4 days ago
You are a FUCKING DOUCHE BAG. Just cooperate with the officer. They have a hard enough job to do with out ASSHOLES like you making it harder for them.
DICK!!
scrapinbuy 4 days ago
@scrapinbuy Why cooperate? He was stopped with no suspicion of any criminal activity. He wanted to drive through without stopping, but couldn't, and so he made them stick to the same laws that he is required to abide by. Nothing wrong at all with that.
And yes, they have a hard job. They should be out getting criminals instead of setting up warrantless checkpoints. If they don't want it harder for them, then have a reason for stopping people.
Rayven10 4 days ago
@scrapinbuy u can live ur life being a submissive pussy but thats not for everyone!
HighAsCaptnKirk 3 days ago
@scrapinbuy FUCK YOU! A DUI checkpoint shouldn't be happening to start with. Let people drink and have fun loser! These cops aren't helping anyone!
arthurkitchen 3 days ago
@arthurkitchen WOW, I guess you have been busted for a DUI or more like several DUI's. They are necessary for your safety you idiot. They save lives. I hope some day you have a loved one killed or seriously injured by some dumb drunk. You will change your tune, You have never been a victim of a crime or been the victm of a DUI wreck, Grow up.
scrapinbuy 3 days ago
@scrapinbuy No, amazingly I have never been arrested for anything but have certainly driving hammered many times and still do, just not as often due to the police state. I also have been hit by a drunk driver that rammed me from behind and really hurt my neck but I still don't care to stop drunk drivers. We have FAR too many restrictions already!
arthurkitchen 3 days ago
What a fucking dick, should have been and should still be tased.
treier1 4 days ago
Nice.
skysky9898 5 days ago
You have the right to remain SILENT
codyhop193 5 days ago 2
They are doing an illegal stop... He can be a dick all he wants to. No one is on the cops case for doing the illegal roadblock. this guy doing this and them letting him go proves everyone is wrong with their opinions into the matter. He was let go BECAUSE HE IS RIGHT. He's not in cuffs, so it's not wrong.
codyhop193 5 days ago 2
What an ass. And douche. Ass douche.
froPhoenix 5 days ago
Its funny how this guy exercises his constitutional freedom amidst an illegal exercise and all you puppets are all over his case. he didn't do a damn thing wrong. It's exactly how the founding fathers wanted an American to be. Informed and exercise your freedom.
codyhop193 5 days ago
@codyhop193 He's going about it completely the wrong way though by just being absolutely silent. If he were to say that he didn't have to answer the question, that'd be one thing. But he's sitting there in silence, just being a general jerk.
froPhoenix 5 days ago
"A third big deal is that these stops are often much longer than the advertised 1-2 minutes"
yes, and doing what he did saved a lot of time. You idiot, your logic makes no sense except for the fact that you can google "dui checkpoints" and see how many people get caught doing it. This guy was an idiot. You really showed them! Saying "no officer, I haven't. Thanks for keeping my city safe though" would just mean you are conforming to society! OH NOEZZ
megamands 6 days ago
@megamands 1. This entire incident was less than 2 minutes. That is much shorter than many stops, especially the ones in Calif.; 2. I don't have to "google" anything. I've been researching this for several years. I look at actual police reports, studies, & related documents. Those documents show checkpoints don't result in substantial arrest rates. They don't deter drunks.; 3. The city is actually less safe w/ checkpoints.; 4. Why the namecalling? Are you mad? Do you not have an argument?
jamesjohnson19701970 5 days ago
you would only get away with this if you haven't had anything to drink.
imagine this: cop asks you to step out of car he "detects the presence of alcohol"
then hes stuffing you in the back of the car for being a smart ass with him.
Vt3c1 6 days ago
I would like to know how this is good policing. The police sit it one spot while all the people at bars alert their friends. The burglars are breaking into houses. Where is the active policing that requires good skills and training?
soylentgreeification 6 days ago
My state and some Mormons are pretty skewed on alcohol issues, but even we are looking at stopping checkpoints. The legislators are currently considering a bill to ban these checkpoints.
utahlibertarian1 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Cops and soldiers shouldn't let themselves drag into the paranoia some politicians try to seed because they're failing in the administration of the or parts of the country - and therefore need to divert on fake-internal and fake-external threats.
partonace 6 days ago
man you got lucky!, vegas cops are the biggest dicks. I've had my friend yanked from a black jack table and bullied by a group of officers who "thought" he gave them a bad look and was talking shit about them. they threatened to arrest him until everyone else around the black jack table started booing the officers.
aguafiesta69 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People assume that checkoints work without doing the research. I have looked into this for years. Checkpoints do not work. Please see my comments or the webiste Checkpoint USA for some of this research.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People might be interested in knowing that two states has just proposed bills to outlaw these checkpoints. The two states are Utah and New Hampshire. The UT bill made it out of committee. Please email your legislator regarding these bills.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
These checkpoints are not as simple as meets the eye. Checkpoints are to be of limited scope. The interaction should be for the primary purpose of the checkpoint. What happens, though, is that things get muddled in the street. Primary purposes turn secondary. Limited scope turns expansive.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People should know that there are many other types of checkpoints. They exist for license, registration, insurance, child safety seats, seatbelts, and fireworks. Yes, you heard that last one right. Fireworks.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People wonder why the motorist does not answer the question. The real question is for law enforcement. Why do offenders roam free when the cops interact with people minding their own business? Why does an admission of drinking (e.g., 1 beer at lunch) result in a sobriety test? Why do so many of these checkpoints go beyond the promised 30 seconds? The simple upshot is that roadblocks do not work. They don't deter drunks. They don't result in arrests.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
People concerned about drunks should know that these checkpoints do not work. Research consistently shows that checkpoints result in low arrest rates compared to roving patrols. Roving patrols always work better. Checkpoints are also not a deterrent to drunk driving. There is not enough space here to post the research, so please visit the website Checkpoint USA, particularly the forums page. My comments section also has research. You can just click my name.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
I'm a libertarian of the fiercest order. Obama is a madman. Our country has gone from wild west frontier of promise to a drab clinic waiting room. Yet, until you idiots vote for someone who would build private roads out of local jurisdiction (haha) you submit to the law of the land and you always will. Obviously, here's the irony: the ones dumb enough to barrel down a highway after 5 Jack and Cokes probably don't know who the vice president is right now. Hence, the endless cycle...
toneeeeeee 1 week ago
@toneeeeeee Good point.
argy1182 6 days ago
Hopefully one day there will be technology that instantly lobotomizes anyone who powers on a vehicle with a BAC over .08. Because as much as I hate the fact that these cops are little state workers and these checkpoints do nothing, the number of responsible people who are killed by the chemically addicted, socially insecure, self-loathing, soulless losers who HAVE to get blitzed and VROOM VROOM means they DESERVE their freedoms stripped just as any other human who threatens to rob me of my life.
toneeeeeee 1 week ago
Just another indicator that the great experiment has failed.
Shithousedr 1 week ago
The civil libertarians hate this, but the family members of victims of deadly drunk driving accidents approve. There's two sides to this coin.
HeedAndSucceed 1 week ago
People keep asking, "What is the big deal about answering a question?" The big deal is that lawbreakers roam free while the police just sit there interacting with mostly law-abiding citizens. Another big deal is that any admission of drinking (e.g., a glass of wine at dinner) will result in a sobriety test. A third big deal is that these stops are often much longer than the advertised 1-2 minutes. Bottom line research: Checkpoints don't catch drunks. They are not a deterrent.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Notice how the sargeant lies. She says that Tim "has" to answer the question. Not true by a long shot. This is the state of law enforcement in America.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The cite directly below refers to Maryland's Checkpoint Strikeforce program. Checkpoints are NOT a deterrent or preventive.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"To date, there is no evidence to indicate that this campaign, which involves a number of sobriety checkpoints and media activities to promote these efforts, has had any impact on public perceptions, driver behaviors, or alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes and injuries. This conclusion is drawn after examining statistics for alcohol-related crashes, police citations for impaired driving, and public perceptions of alcohol-impaired driving risk. (Source: Health Promotion Reports, 7-1-09)
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
THAT WAS AWESOME!
LaBonSR 1 week ago
All you morons siding with the cops need to STFU. Millions of people have died fighting for the freedoms we have today. It's disgusting how people tuck their tails around cops. More people need to stand the f**k up against bs like this.
dlr9465 1 week ago
hahahaha that was badass! If i tried that here I'd get my ass beat
doeanaheim 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@doeanaheim If you have "no idea" about the definition of a roving parol, how would you know anything about these statistics? I'm also not sure where you got the term "pseudo random pull over."
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jamesjohnson19701970 Sorry, doeanaheim, that post was meant for another user. My apologies.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
Good luck trying that in another state... I think you got lucky in Vegas that night too... It's good stand up for your rights but that easily good have ended with a tazing... or worse.
birdoprey5 1 week ago
@birdoprey5 I keep hearing that! I wonder if that would happen in Vegas if there weren't people keeping the cops in check. If you think asserting your right to refuse to answer questions in your home state would result in your being tazed, I strongly suggest you start trying to change that. SCARY!
timf343 1 week ago 15
@birdoprey5 Why would this guy be "tased or worse?" That would be the use of a weapon. Use of a weapon(s). is restricted to self defense or physical threat to an officer(s). Are you saying that refusing to answer questions (5th amendment) would be a reason for an officer to tase someone or worse? I'm probably wrong, but I would consider use of a "taser or worse" to be excessive force, and officer misconduct in this situation. OMG Where did I go wrong???
ohannahdad 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@birdoprey5 in Texas, they'd just shoot you.
wiebelhausatgmail 6 days ago
@birdoprey5 Most of the time, the cops will have the person stop and get out of the car. After some time of not being cooperative, the driver will be on his/her way. No tasers involved (usually) if the driver just sticks to the right to remain silent and doesn't consent to those field sobriety tests (walk the line, etc.).
Rayven10 4 days ago
What a fucking tool. The location and the time of DUI checkpoints are announced in advanced. That means you sought out this checkpoint just to be a douchebag.
elchorizo 1 week ago
Well done!!!!
Sahadi420 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm a retired LEO....Officer telling the man that he 'has' to answer the question is inappropriate...I actually wish more people would know their rights. I hated nonsense like this when active...but we did not do many...
goodfortimf 1 week ago
I'm a retired LEO....Officer telling the man that he 'has' to answer the question is inappropriate...I actually wish more people would know their rights. I hated nonsense like this when active...but we did not do many...
goodfortimf 1 week ago
why not just answer the questions?
TomValedro 1 week ago
@TomValedro Why not just leave law-abiding citizens alone? Saturation patrols are grounded in the method of reasonable suspicion. They work. Checkpoints do not work.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
@TomValedro It's the point. To me (An I'm guessing timf343) checkpoints like this are 100% UN-American. I understand checkpoints where the cops are looking for a specific person, like after a bank robbery or something. But, in NC it's illegal for a cop to pull someone over for no reason, so why can they block the whole damn road an stop EVERYBODY?? On the plus side after you've gone through you can pretty drive like a bat outta hell b/c all the cops are at the checkpoint!
Sahadi420 1 week ago
@TomValedro Because he doesn't have to moron, we have something called "RIGHTS" in America.
dlr9465 1 week ago
Wow. I'm stunned. I don't usually say something like that, either.
I had no idea I could refuse to participate in a D.U.I. checkpoint. You kicked ass in that video, without even doing a thing, timf343.
Huntington12345678 1 week ago
The FBI itself did research on checkpoints and found they did not work. They researched checkpoints in Ohio, Missouri, and Tennessee. They found saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints. Other research confirms this. Why would one use an inferior technique?
The research I cited is from FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, January 2003.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
Checkpoint USA has quite a bit of research showing how checkpoints do not work. Checkpoints often fail to arrest one single driver. Research on Maryland's Checkpoint Strikeforce program shows checkpoints are not a deterrent.
Saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints. Officers sit at checkpoints waiting for lawbreakers at checkpoints. That is poor policing. That is not going to get it done.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
Checkpoints don't work. Consider from Maryland
If you look at statistics, statistics will probably tell you a saturation patrol is more successful…” said Lt. David Kloos, barrack commander for the Maryland State Police Hagerstown barrack. A typical checkpoint uses about 10 troopers for five hours and costs about $2,000, he said. During the last State Police checkpoint in Hagerstown, held Oct. 31, troopers stopped 880 cars and made three DUI arrests, Kloos said.
Continued in next post:
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
Continued from post directly above:
.........“Saturation patrols watching alternate routes around the checkpoint made one additional DUI arrest, he said. A saturation patrol without a checkpoint requires only three or four troopers and costs a fraction of what a checkpoint costs. The troopers work four hours of overtime, usually from 11 p.m. until 3 a.m., and each aims to make three to four stops per hour, Kloos said. (Source: Hagerstown Herald Mail December 28 2008)
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
Jesus the guy in this video is a complete dick...The officers are just doing their job trying to keep his community a safer place and he is just harassing them because of their uniform. Fuck you tim.
balluka11 1 week ago
@balluka11 Not very professional, Balluka. Please read my comments on how checkpoints actually makes streets less safe. They don't work.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
@balluka11 how is it harassment? he asks them for their name and number and says literally nothing else.
keslehrongo 6 days ago
Utah and New Hampshire currently have bills to ban checkpoints. Please write to your legislators supporting these bills.
doriskopeckyattorney 1 week ago
Interesting how people think these checkpoints work when they have been a great failure for 30 years. Roving patrols always work better. Maybe that is just too hard for the police. I guess it would be easier if you just sat in spot all day dealing with grandmas and soccer moms.
doriskopeckyattorney 1 week ago
how to be a douche 101. if you haven't had anything to drink. say no and continue your night.
opalockagoonie 1 week ago
Whilst he obviously has the right to refuse to answer any questions, he comes off as a bit of a dick.
EjvindDark 1 week ago
congrats on your "win". you successfully proved you were a douche and wasted peoples time. Will your heroic act change anything? I'm pretty sure we all know the answer to that good sir.
TheOady07 1 week ago
Comment removed
TheOady07 1 week ago
Comment removed
BreakingEggs 1 week ago
brb saying no and rolling by instead of wasting 2 minutes of my life watching this.
what a phaggot
lsu768 1 week ago
People will cite the Supreme Court as allowing checkpoints, but checkpoints still violate the spirit of the 4th amendment. James Johnson is right on about guilty until proven innocent. Heil Hitler!!
bookxtra 1 week ago
Didn't know that checkpoints don't work. Thanks for the info. People assume they work though.
greengreengrass2811 1 week ago 3
JUST ANSWER THE GODDAMN QUESTION
Thaddiousz 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What is even more annoying, Kosorovich, is the taxpayer money spent on a technique that is ineffective. Research consistently shows that checkpoints are ineffective. They are not a deterrent.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 3
What is even more annoying, Kosorovich, is the taxpayer money spent on a technique that is ineffective. Research consistently shows that checkpoints are ineffective. They are not a deterrent.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 5
Checkpoints assume that everyone who encounters one is assumed to be doing something wrong until they can prove they are not doing anything wrong. I can't think of too many things more un-American than that.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 10
This has been flagged as spam show
Checkpoints are ineffective:
The FBI compared saturation patrols vs. checkpoints in Ohio, Missouri, and Tennessee. The study showed that, “Overall, measured in arrests per hour, a dedicated saturation patrol is the most effective method of apprehending offenders.” (Source: FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, January 2003)
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 4
Say "yes, I have had a lot to drink and proud of it", if you had not anything to drink. Then they will be embarrassed when they find out what you had to drink was water.
nogoodtroll 1 week ago 3
This law police officer thinks that technology has made checkpoints ineffective. From the American Beverage Institute:
"Once folks see a stationary checkpoint, they call all their acquaintances and make sure they don't go to that point."
- Virginia State Police Sergeant Frank Pyanoe
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 5
If saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints, why would anybody use checkpoints?
From the American Beverage Institute: “They [saturation patrols] are very effective, they are highly visible, and hopefully accomplish the same goals without having the legal loop holes that you might run into with a DWI checkpoint.”
- Wilmington, DE Police Corporal Joseph Fitzgerald
“Roving patrols would have given us more arrests.”
- Niagara Falls, NY Police Traffic Div. Ctn Salvatore Pino
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 6
If saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints, why would anybody use checkpoints?
From the American Beverage Institute:
Checkpoints are “really a public relations campaign"
- Colorado State Patrol Sergeant Scott Elliott
“The problem is they are so incredibly labor-intensive. It just takes so many people and so much time.”
- San Marcos, Texas Chief of Police Howard Williams
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 5
If saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints, why would anybody use checkpoints?
From the American Beverage Institute: “When you set up a checkpoint in this day and age of technology, it’s just a network of communication and everybody knows where the police have set up. Saturation patrols are more effective.”
- Bristol, Virginia Police Captain Daryl Milligan
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 5
If saturation patrols always work better than checkpoints, why would anybody use checkpoints?
"Studies have shown that saturation patrols are actually better [than sobriety checkpoints] in taking drunk drivers off the street"
- Henrico, Virginia Police Sergeant A.J. Gordon
"We can cover more ground, observe more traffic with roving patrols."
- Stony Point, New York Police Chief Patrick Brophy
Source: American Beverage Institute
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 5
Checkpoints don't work:
States with infrequent checkpoints claimed a lack of funding and police resources for not conducting more checkpoints, preferred saturation patrols over checkpoints because they were more "productive," and used large number of police officers at checkpoints." (Source: Accident Analysis and Prevention, November 2003)
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 10
@jamesjohnson19701970 Oops. Please excuse the incorrect punctuation. The whole passage is a direct quote from the source.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
Saturation patrol vs. checkpoints in Worcester CO MD, 8-10-2010
Sobriety Checkpoint:
739 cars
0 DWI arrests
Arrest rate: 0%
Roving Patrol:
32 cars
2 DWI arrests
Arrest rate: 8%
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 6
@jamesjohnson19701970
First, I thought checkpoints are a form of saturation patrol. And no idea what you mean by roving patrol. However, assuming u are trying to compare check points to pseudo random pull overs and your point is that the latter is better, then your statistics work against you. If 700 drivers are checked and 0 was drunk, then you have higher probability no one was drunk that night. If only 30 were checked and already 2 are drunk, thats not very good. The goal here is prevention.
worshiphotgirls 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@worshiphotgirls If you have "no idea" about the definition of a roving parol, how would you know anything about these statistics? I'm also not sure where you got the term "pseudo random pull over."
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
See the website Checkpoint USA regarding the case of Terry Bressi. Terry won his case against an illegal Arizona checkpoint. He has sued for damages. The case is ongoing.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 7
Legislation for checkpoints was defeated last year in Washington, Texas, and Oregon. Utah and New Hamp have just just proposed legislation banning checkpoints. The Utah bill is now out of committee.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 3
Police comments about checkpoints: "I'm no big fan of them," Chief Deputy Pat Butler said about checkpoints. (KC Star, 7-8-08) Other quotes at the website of the American Beverage Institute.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 2
Checkpoints in Maryland's Checkpoint Strikeforce program were found not to be a deterrent for drunk driving.
(Source: Health Promotion Reports, July 1 2009)
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
LIKE A BOSS!
dakeypoo 1 week ago
American hero in that car!!!
ttripp69 1 week ago
Drinking and driving completely unnecessarily destroys families and takes lives. Good job in finding a loophole in DUI checkpoints though. *Applauds*
SureTheShot 1 week ago
I don't get it, why was this necessary?
traaaaant 1 week ago
Ok, the usage of his civil rights is cool and all, but I think the story here is that the cops actually stuck to their limitations within the law. I tip my imaginary cowboy hat to them.
StubbornFreak 1 week ago 2
@StubbornFreak Not really. They said "you have to answer the question". Blatant lie and an attempt to intimidate.
Pinworm4 1 week ago
@StubbornFreak No, they did not stick to their limitations. The sargeant says, "You just HAVE to answer the question, and you'll be on your way." The question is misleading, if not lying.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 5
Maybe the camera helped a little, but good job anyway
brokeass89 1 week ago
Yeah I aint gonna answer cause I'm kewl ? was that the point?
ttensu 1 week ago
Whoa, they just let him go? Dude, the Fifth Amendment kicks ASS.
Cuyut982 1 week ago
Here they would ask you the question, perform outhale alcohol test or take you to station to have your blood tested for alcohol.
Dumbberi 1 week ago
Sure, he doesn't have to answer their questions, but...he does seem a bit annoying. It won't hurt him. I thought those police did very well.
Kosorovich 1 week ago 5
@Kosorovich The sargeant says, "You just HAVE to answer the question, and you'll be on your way." I would submit that is not doing very well. The question is misleading, if not lying.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Kosorovich What is even more annoying is the taxpayer money spent on a technique that is ineffective. Research consistently shows that checkpoints are ineffective. They're not a deterrent.
jamesjohnson19701970 1 week ago 4
@Kosorovich taken participation in something that violates the 4th amendment is doing very well? They are violating their sworn oath as LEO in do so and hence making a mockery of the oath that gives them their jurisdiction.
chowner 1 week ago
You DO NOT have to answer questions. You do not have to tell them where you are going, coming from, whats in your trunk, if you have consumed alcoholic beverages, if you masturbate, if you are a vegetarian, if you just killed someone. Refusal to answer questions is not a reason to have suspicion that a crime has been committed.
gottitgood4me 1 week ago 3
Wow cops are nice in Vegas! In Ohio, GA and FL (states I've lived in) asking an officer their name alone REALLY pisses them off!
texxs01 1 week ago
@jas16899 what? If a male cop tells a female citizen to undress and perform a sex act on him, she should or else have her ass kicked?
andrewcalvarese 1 week ago
Cop was nice so was the sarge
martinsteele05 1 week ago
@kirby4d I don't understand how I was being a nazi. Are you sure you read what I wrote correctly? I was saying don't disobey the police when what they're doing is harmless. Would you rather have a drunk driver go and kill your kids than have the police do random stop checks?
Batmannerz 1 week ago
@Batmannerz Yes, I would rather they live life free, and with some dangers, than enslaved and perfectly safe. I will ask you why you think checkpoints are the only way to catch drunktards on the roads?
actop19 1 week ago
weird....
Oblic008 1 week ago
lol, nutbag. You couldve just said no and been on your way, but great job trying to be some amendment hero and holding up the people behind you.
rjsimons123 1 week ago
props to the police for handling this well. This might have resulted in a beatdown in a lot of places. The cops assessed the situation, saw there was no threat, and let them go. That's how a free society should work
flythegadsden2012 1 week ago
That's awesome.. to bad its illegal, at least here anyway. Illinois, where its illegal to video tape police in any situation. Were a cop can shoot a man, and the person going to jail is the one taping
Scruffylookin13 1 week ago
Fake.
AndroidBattleTrooper 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The officer was very sweet and the driver was being a jackass
HarlekinGer1 1 week ago 2
Here it is if you feel eager to inform yourself before labeling 80 million people and a foreign, souvereign, democratic, modern Western State as Nazis again: gesetze-im-internet . de / englisch_gg / index . html (By the Department of Justice, current version, translated into English) ^.^ Enjoy :)
MichaelMKoeln08 1 week ago
Right a simple "I call the Fifth" would have been quicker ... ;P
MichaelMKoeln08 1 week ago
If they would be no drunk driving on the streets, the cops wouldn't have to do this controls. This cop asked normal and not lilke a rambo... You could have answered his questions...
TheEagle1 1 week ago 2