If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"Sobriety Checkpoints"
As my fellow Coloradoans are aware, they just wrapped up their holiday
weekend "The Heat is On" campaign. This may have been answered elsewhere, if so, point me in the right direction. How exactly does the state get away with stopping motorists at a 'checkpoint'? Seems to me they have to have 'probable cause', and I'm not sure the mere act of driving late at night constitutes that. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Lutz wrote:
> How exactly does the state get away with stopping motorists at a > 'checkpoint'? Seems to me they have to have 'probable cause', and I'm not > sure the mere act of driving late at night constitutes that. IIRC, making "random" stops negates the need for reasonable suspicion or probable cause. The last time I complained about it (though a post on a local newspaper's "submit your opinion on this story"), I basically was lambasted for "failing to support the police." |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Arif Khokar wrote:
> Bob Lutz wrote: > >> How exactly does the state get away with stopping motorists at a >> 'checkpoint'? Seems to me they have to have 'probable cause', and I'm >> not >> sure the mere act of driving late at night constitutes that. > > > IIRC, making "random" stops negates the need for reasonable suspicion or > probable cause. The last time I complained about it (though a post on a > local newspaper's "submit your opinion on this story"), I basically was > lambasted for "failing to support the police." Fascist state, Fox News mentality: you must "support the troops and our glorious leader" in times of war, otherwise you're a traitor. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Arif Khokar wrote:
> Bob Lutz wrote: > >> How exactly does the state get away with stopping motorists at a >> 'checkpoint'? Seems to me they have to have 'probable cause', and I'm >> not >> sure the mere act of driving late at night constitutes that. > > > IIRC, making "random" stops negates the need for reasonable suspicion or > probable cause. The last time I complained about it (though a post on a > local newspaper's "submit your opinion on this story"), I basically was > lambasted for "failing to support the police." Fascist state, Fox News mentality: you must "support the troops and our glorious leader" in times of war, otherwise you're a traitor. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Lutz wrote:
> How exactly does the state get away with stopping motorists at a > 'checkpoint'? Seems to me they have to have 'probable cause', and I'm not > sure the mere act of driving late at night constitutes that. IIRC, making "random" stops negates the need for reasonable suspicion or probable cause. The last time I complained about it (though a post on a local newspaper's "submit your opinion on this story"), I basically was lambasted for "failing to support the police." |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Don't blame the cops for this. Blame the legislators for making the
penalty for DUI a fine instead of the madatory prison sentence it should be. As long as DUI penalties are so light, the criminals will keep on driving drunk and the rest of us will have to suffer thru these checkpoints. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in message ups.com... > Don't blame the cops for this. Blame the legislators for making the > penalty for DUI a fine instead of the madatory prison sentence it > should be. As long as DUI penalties are so light, the criminals will > keep on driving drunk and the rest of us will have to suffer thru these > checkpoints. > How does the level of penalty change the method/type of enforcement? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"James C. Reeves" > wrote in
: > > "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in > message ups.com... >> Don't blame the cops for this. Blame the legislators for making the >> penalty for DUI a fine instead of the madatory prison sentence it >> should be. As long as DUI penalties are so light, the criminals will >> keep on driving drunk and the rest of us will have to suffer thru >> these checkpoints. >> > > How does the level of penalty change the method/type of enforcement? > > > It seems to me that the police need probable cause or a warrant to stop a person for questioning,regardless of mode of travel. If one goes by the letter of the Constitution,which the police and courts have departed from. -- Jim Yanik jyanik at kua.net |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"James C. Reeves" > wrote in
: > > "Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in > message ups.com... >> Don't blame the cops for this. Blame the legislators for making the >> penalty for DUI a fine instead of the madatory prison sentence it >> should be. As long as DUI penalties are so light, the criminals will >> keep on driving drunk and the rest of us will have to suffer thru >> these checkpoints. >> > > How does the level of penalty change the method/type of enforcement? > > > It seems to me that the police need probable cause or a warrant to stop a person for questioning,regardless of mode of travel. If one goes by the letter of the Constitution,which the police and courts have departed from. -- Jim Yanik jyanik at kua.net |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
>James C. Reeves Jan 6, 7:57 pm
>How does the level of penalty change the method/type of enforcement? Hey stupid. If DUIs knew they'd get prison time, they wouldn't drive drunk and we wouldn't need checkpoints. And those few that still did drive would find themselves in prison and no longer on the highways. STOP BEING A CRIMINAL CODDLER. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|