PSA - DUI check point

[sirbob]

Beach and Orange ave

Nov 3

The Anaheim Police are conducting a DUI and Driver’s License Checkpoint on Nov. 3 (New Santa Ana)

  ANAHEIM, Calif. (October 18, 2023) – The Anaheim Police Department Traffic Unit will be conducting a DUI/Driver’s License Checkpoint on November 3rd, 2023...

l.smartnews.com

 

[FCT]

I think it’s BS they even announce it.

 

[4Waters]

I think it’s BS they even announce it.

They have to or it would be considered entrapment. Simi PD announces the day it will be happening but not the location

 

[Backlash]

With all of the rideshare options available today from Uber, Lyft and local taxis, in addition to "Friends," (Who choose to skip drinking to be a designated driver), I'm SHOCKED with the number of folks who continue to drive under the influence. I just don't get it.

 

[Member: 71]

http://www.duiblock.com/dui_checkpoint_locations/california/

 

[FCT]

They have to or it would be considered entrapment. Simi PD announces the day it will be happening but not the location

I understand that but I still think it’s BS. IMO if you drive drunk you should have the book thrown at you and your license revoked. Dont like the consequences? Don’t drink and drive

 

[H20 Toie]

Yeah we went thru a DUI checkpoint years ago and Tank was working it, we were messed up ( i know surprise surprise, ) but Tank never gave us warning not to drive on harbor so could have been a bad day, only thing that saved us was i had rented a limo. he seemed less than impressed with lisa yelling for him . to me it was funny

 

[Orange Juice]

PSA. Clean your ash tray of “roaches”.

 

[JB in so cal]

Yeah we went thru a DUI checkpoint years ago and Tank was working it, we were messed up ( i know surprise surprise, ) but Tank never gave us warning not to drive on harbor so could have been a bad day, only thing that saved us was i had rented a limo. he seemed less than impressed with lisa yelling for him . to me it was funny

Well, that's a good thing

 

[was thatguy]

Where’s the PSA for family’s to avoid drunk drivers?

 

[sirbob]

PSA - avoid drunk drivers…

Especially if you’re with your family.

 

[185EZ]

We've been making a few trips recently to san diego
I have a hard time driving sober on those roads
Can't imagine doing it after a few beers

 

[DrunkenSailor]

Thanks for the heads up. Is that Dunkin donuts where all the Hookers hang out at still at that intersection? Sounds like the perfect spot for a dui checkpoint. Might be a good time to grab a six pack and watch the fun from the parking lot.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

Where’s the PSA for family’s to avoid drunk drivers?

Fascinating isn't it? No consideration to sober vehicles full of kids. Just warn the drunks.SMH.

 

[FCT]

PSA - avoid drunk drivers…

Especially if you’re with your family.

Is this your attempt at trying to be funny on a subject that’s not funny at all?

 

[RiverDave]

I think it’s BS they even announce it.

I think it’s BS some asshole judge said even though it’s a violation of our rights it’s worth it.

Regardless of opinions our rights shouldn’t be infringed.. ever.

 

[Orange Juice]

We've been making a few trips recently to san diego
I have a hard time driving sober on those roads
Can't imagine doing it after a few beers

In the old days, all it took is practice.

 

[Angler]

There was a DUI check point right by Hilton Hawaiian Village on Wednesday evening, drinking but not driving.

 

[sirbob]

Is this your attempt at trying to be funny on a subject that’s not funny at all?

It is in fact my attempt to be sarcastic about the captain obvious statement of families avoiding drunk drivers.

Of course we all want to avoid drunk drivers. Every day. I certainly don’t want to have a situation that involves a drunk driver - but the reality is (other than talking the keys of a drunk friend) when on the road, you are at the mercy of luck and gods divine intervention regarding another driver who is drunk and hits you.

 

[FCT]

I think it’s BS some asshole judge said even though it’s a violation of our rights it’s worth it.

Regardless of opinions our rights shouldn’t be infringed.. ever.

Freedom of speech is our right as well correct? You moderate that on here. What’s the difference? There isn’t. Don’t be a hypocrite.

I bet you would change your tone if your wife and kids were killed by a drunk, selfish asshole.

 

[BingerFang]

Freedom of speech is our right as well correct? You moderate that on here. What’s the difference? There isn’t. Don’t be a hypocrite.

I bet you would change your tone if your wife and kids were killed by a drunk, selfish asshole.

Mic drop!

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

I think it’s BS some asshole judge said even though it’s a violation of our rights it’s worth it.

Regardless of opinions our rights shouldn’t be infringed.. ever.

So you think you have a constitutional right to drive impaired? Where do your rights end and others rights begin?

Freedom of speech is our right as well correct? You moderate that on here. What’s the difference? There isn’t. Don’t be a hypocrite.

I bet you would change your tone if your wife and kids were killed by a drunk, selfish asshole.

I'm in agreement with you here.

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

So you think you have a constitutional right to drive impaired? Where do your rights end and others rights begin?




I'm in agreement with you here.

Between road soda 3 and 4.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

It is in fact my attempt to be sarcastic about the captain obvious statement of families avoiding drunk drivers.

Of course we all want to avoid drunk drivers. Every day. I certainly don’t want to have a situation that involves a drink driver - but the reality is (other than talking the keys of a drunk friend) when on the road, you are at the mercy of luck and gods divine intervention regarding another driver who is drunk and hits you.

Well then why would you warn the drunks about a checkpoint?

"Gods devine intervention" ...or a DUI checkpoint.

 

[RiverDave]

Freedom of speech is our right as well correct? You moderate that on here. What’s the difference? There isn’t. Don’t be a hypocrite.

I bet you would change your tone if your wife and kids were killed by a drunk, selfish asshole.

Your constitutional rights don’t apply to a privately owned forum.. your rights protect you from the government..

So there’s that?

 

[FCT]

Your constitutional rights don’t apply to a privately owned forum.. your rights protect you from the government..

So there’s that?

So you’re saying your no better then CNN, Facebook, twitter etc. Got it as long as it’s in your benefit it’s ok.

 

[Singleton]

I think it’s BS some asshole judge said even though it’s a violation of our rights it’s worth it.

Regardless of opinions our rights shouldn’t be infringed.. ever.

Driving is not a constitutional right, it’s a privilege!
The judge ruled, you need probable cause to pull someone over and check-points don’t allow for that. However check-points are allowed due to public safety and by announcing them, anyone that enters is giving consent to be searched. Also supports those that turn before entering from being pulled over automatically.

Drink and drive, due the time!
I have zero patience for drunks driving the roads and putting my family and friends at risk.

 

[was thatguy]

I think it’s BS some asshole judge said even though it’s a violation of our rights it’s worth it.

Regardless of opinions our rights shouldn’t be infringed.. ever.

Our rights end when they infringe in another’s rights.
Endangering another person(s) while in the commission of a criminal act (drunk driving is a criminal act in every state) means forfeiture of your rights during the commission.
I’m the biggest advocate on here when it comes to our rights vs LE. Lol
The cops hate me.
But even I know drunk drivers are criminals.
I used to be one until that fateful night back in 2000 or so.
Thank God those cops stomped my ass and cured me of it before I could kill anyone.

If you research dui checkpoint laws and actually delve into it, you’ll see there are loopholes (sort of) that mean you don’t have to comply.
People can say no and maybe drive away.
By then the cop can tell if your drunk or not anyway, and sometimes aren’t interested in a constitutional showdown on the side of the road.
But beware, Joe trooper doesn’t really care sometimes, he has a 2” thick book that outlines how to circumvent your rights after all. (Right FBT? Lol)
I’m not preaching here. You’ve seen me drink a beer and drive away from your house and your store.
I’ll have 3 beers max when boating. No exceptions.
That’s not a criminal act.

But to the point, cars are not domiciles.
Driving is not a constitutional right.
You don’t want to deal with a dui checkpoint? Don’t drive.
This from the guy that rally’s against police heavy handedness at every step.
I highly recommend keeping a decent breathalyzer on you when going out for dinner or whatever.
They’re pretty cheap on Amazon.

 

[was thatguy]

Freedom of speech is our right as well correct? You moderate that on here. What’s the difference? There isn’t. Don’t be a hypocrite.

I bet you would change your tone if your wife and kids were killed by a drunk, selfish asshole.

About 28 people a day are killed in drunk driving crashes.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

Our rights end when they infringe in another’s rights.
Endangering another person(s) while in the commission of a criminal act (drunk driving is a criminal act in every state) means forfeiture of your rights during the commission.
I’m the biggest advocate on here when it comes to our rights vs LE. Lol
The cops hate me.
But even I know drunk drivers are criminals.
I used to be one until that fateful night back in 2000 or so.
Thank God those cops stomped my ass and cured me of it before I could kill anyone.

If you research dui checkpoint laws and actually delve into it, you’ll see there are loopholes (sort of) that mean you don’t have to comply.
People can say no and maybe drive away.
By then the cop can tell if your drunk or not anyway, and sometimes aren’t interested in a constitutional showdown on the side of the road.
But beware, Joe trooper doesn’t really care sometimes, he has a 2” thick book that outlines how to circumvent your rights after all. (Right FBT? Lol)
I’m not preaching here. You’ve seen me drink a beer and drive away from your house and your store.
I’ll have 3 beers max when boating. No exceptions.
That’s not a criminal act.

But to the point, cars are not domiciles.
Driving is not a constitutional right.
You don’t want to deal with a dui checkpoint? Don’t drive.
This from the guy that rally’s against police heavy handedness at every step.
I highly recommend keeping a decent breathalyzer on you when going out for dinner or whatever.
They’re pretty cheap on Amazon.

Why would anyone that would argue the discussed points even care what their BAC is enough to buy a pocket breathalyzer?

 

[RiverDave]

So you think you have a constitutional right to drive impaired? Where do your rights end and others rights begin?




I'm in agreement with you here.

Nobody said that

 

[Singleton]

Nobody said that

Post #16 reads like you did

 

[Gelcoater]

Post #16 reads like you did

Nah.
He’s saying stopping everyone that drives down a road is violating all of our rights. And he is correct.
Is a slippery slope when they say we are going to violate your rights to protect you.

Next thing you know they are stopping everyone to verify their vaccination status, etc.

 

[was thatguy]

Why would anyone that would argue the discussed points even care what their BAC is enough to buy a pocket breathalyzer?

They’ll care after they go to jail.

 

[Singleton]

Nah.
He’s saying stopping everyone that drives down a road is violating all of our rights. And he is correct.
Is a slippery slope when they say we are going to violate your rights to protect you.

Next thing you know they are stopping everyone to verify their vaccination status, etc.

Maybe - But driving is not a right!

In certain cases, law enforcement can search a person or property without the need for probable cause or a warrant. For example, in Nevada, police can make DUI arrests without having to meet the probable cause standard if they have set up a legal DUI checkpoint.

In Arizona - Although many people believe an officer needs probable cause to pull someone over, the actual standard is “reasonable suspicion.” Cause law supports someone leaving a bar as reasonable suspicion.

 

[Mr. C]

Maybe - But driving is not a right!

In certain cases, law enforcement can search a person or property without the need for probable cause or a warrant. For example, in Nevada, police can make DUI arrests without having to meet the probable cause standard if they have set up a legal DUI checkpoint.

In Arizona - Although many people believe an officer needs probable cause to pull someone over, the actual standard is “reasonable suspicion.” Cause law supports someone leaving a bar as reasonable suspicion.

Playing along here. So leaving a parking lot that has a liquor store could be considered reasonable suspicion that you bought booze and drank it before you left. Where does it stop

 

[was thatguy]

Nah.
He’s saying stopping everyone that drives down a road is violating all of our rights. And he is correct.
Is a slippery slope when they say we are going to violate your rights to protect you.

Next thing you know they are stopping everyone to verify their vaccination status, etc.

There is a difference.
Dui is a criminal offense, and Driving is not a constitutional right.
Police do checkpoints for all manner of things.
Had a quagga mussel drain plug search yet?
Hell in some states I’ve read about random dna swabs in search of suspects.

I’m the one who typically challenges all things relating to police intrusion. Just ask them.
But why would anyone warn about a dui checkpoint unless they are warning drunk drivers?
Simply to avoid the hassle?

FBT has said that they have a manual that details how to legally get inside your car in any given circumstance.
I believe him.
As an active proponent of personal rights who keeps bail money set aside and an attorney on semi retainer, and has zero fears or qualms about jail or arrest, I’ll say straight up that DUI checkpoints is NOT the hill to make a stand on.
It’s not a philosophical matter, it’s a real problem with real tragedy attached.

 

[Gelcoater]

Maybe - But driving is not a right!

In certain cases, law enforcement can search a person or property without the need for probable cause or a warrant. For example, in Nevada, police can make DUI arrests without having to meet the probable cause standard if they have set up a legal DUI checkpoint.

In Arizona - Although many people believe an officer needs probable cause to pull someone over, the actual standard is “reasonable suspicion.” Cause law supports someone leaving a bar as reasonable suspicion.

No one said drinking is a right?
Although some of the lushes around here could probably make a pretty good case for life liberty and happiness

The key words there in what you posted above is “someone” as it pertains to a search.
This the case of searching everyone.

 

[RiverDave]

So you think you have a constitutional right to drive impaired? Where do your rights end and others rights begin?




I'm in agreement with you here.

Hey if ya got nothing to hide it’s ok if they search your house right?

I mean if you aren’t doing anything wrong it’s ok if they listen to your phone conversations right?


I didn’t say driving drunk is a right.. I said stopping every citizen for the possibility or “potential” of a crime being committed goes against pretty much everything our founding fathers stood for..

The rest is all stuff you guys added not me.

RD

 

[RiverDave]

So you’re saying your no better then CNN, Facebook, twitter etc. Got it as long as it’s in your benefit it’s ok.

I’m not 100% sure you understand what I said.. or are even attempting to understand it because it feels like more emotion than logic.

You do know that even with the first amendment there are things you aren’t allowed to say and do.. right?

Not to side track the conversation because right now we are talking about some other ones, 4th being the main.

RD

 

[was thatguy]

Hey if ya got nothing to hide it’s ok if they search your house right?

I mean if you aren’t doing anything wrong it’s ok if they listen to your phone conversations right?


I didn’t say driving drunk is a right.. I said stopping every citizen for the possibility or “potential” of a crime being committed goes against pretty much everything our founding fathers stood for..

The rest is all stuff you guys added not me.

RD

Except cars are not protected domiciles, and public streets are not personal property.
Do you know the rules for parking lots? Driveways? City streets? State hwys?
What about keys in ignition?
They’re all different, and the different cops rules are different too.

Bottom line is that they can and will legally stop you and search you whether it’s you they are after or not.
This is EXACTLY the point I’m always going on about, and what I’m always arguing with them about.
It isn’t the stop, it’s the interaction after the stop that concerns me, and that’s where the violation of rights generally starts.
When you leave your home or office or anywhere really and get in your car you are, in fact, giving up some privacy.
They’ll stop whomever they want, they’ll set up checkpoints whenever they want.

 

[Singleton]

Playing along here. So leaving a parking lot that has a liquor store could be considered reasonable suspicion that you bought booze and drank it before you left. Where does it stop

No.
But leaving a bar / restaurant could be.

Almost everyones POV changes on this once you know someone killed by a drunk. My son lost a good friend in high school - drunk walked away from accident with no injuries, 17yo kid dead.

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

Hey if ya got nothing to hide it’s ok if they search your house right?

I mean if you aren’t doing anything wrong it’s ok if they listen to your phone conversations right?


I didn’t say driving drunk is a right.. I said stopping every citizen for the possibility or “potential” of a crime being committed goes against pretty much everything our founding fathers stood for..

The rest is all stuff you guys added not me.

RD

That's not a parallel argument RD. The reason why the DUI checkpoints are legal, is the same reason YOU have complete editorial powers here and people constitutional rights mean ZERO. I could use the same "nothing to fear" argument here on why you have editorial freedom here. But I cannot, because this is your business, not mine. Its a private site, not the town square. It is NOT a constitutionally protected activity (driving) and my home is specifically enumerated as protected.

And BTW, "they" can listen to any phone conversation they wish to. "They" can look at any text they want, "they" can penetrate your "secure" site, any time they wish.

Edward Snowden gave up his freedoms and now lives in exile to warn America about the monster HE HIMSELF created.

 

[RIVERBORN]

After reading all this arguing… I need a beer. Good thing I’m at home

 

[Gelcoater]

It isn’t the stop, it’s the interaction after the stop that concerns me, and that’s where the violation of rights generally starts

I think I would agree with that in the case of an individual. Or a group of them.
But when we start talking about everyone Nazi Germany comes to mind.

 

[pixrthis]

This forum is obviously a sensitive subject and it reads as a bunch of misunderstandings. I doubt there is anyone that approves of people driving drunk.

 

[FCT]

I’m not 100% sure you understand what I said.. or are even attempting to understand it because it feels like more emotion than logic.

You do know that even with the first amendment there are things you aren’t allowed to say and do.. right?

Not to side track the conversation because right now we are talking about some other ones, 4th being the main.

RD

I understand completely what is being said. I believe you are failing to understand the points that everybody is making because you see it your way. To each their own. I just pray that it never affects your family. Because if it ever came to that, I’m sure it would open your eyes and you might see things a little differently. Enjoy your weekend

 

[Skinny Tire AH]

This forum is obviously a sensitive subject and it reads as a bunch of misunderstandings. I doubt there is anyone that approves of people driving drunk.

I want to agree with you. But what possible reason does one have for warning of a DUI checkpoint?

 

[was thatguy]

I think I would agree with that in the case of an individual. Or a group of them.
But when we start talking about everyone Nazi Germany comes to mind.

So let’s examine this from a different perspective.
As of last year about 28 people per day are killed in dui crashes/ events.

So that amounts to about a small or average sized school classroom.
What would the opinion of the RDP mob be if a school shooter went in and killed a classroom full of kids and adults EVERY SINGLE DAY of the year?
The same people calling for 4th amendment rights for drivers of vehicles have and will continue to call for further restrictions on new gun sales…even though that solves not one damned thing.
The mob has and would call for the skinning of the perpetrators, and the public hanging of the parents.
The store owner who sold the gun would be gutted in the town square, and anyone who knows the killer would be killed just because they didn’t see it coming.
None of this is hyperbole, it’s all been said here on this very forum.
But…when it comes to DUI…the RDP narrative seems to change?
The 28 daily deaths become secondary to the sudden championing of rights (rights that do not actually apply 100%).

Why is that?
Is it because the mob is a bunch of drunk drivers, but not school shooters?
Just thinking out loud.

 

[Roosky01]

Not a fan of the drunk driving, but where is the same level of outrage for the "technology impaired" driver that kills a bunch of people while texting, watching TikTok, etc.?