The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Non-Tulsa Discussions => Chat and Advice => Topic started by: DolfanBob on January 08, 2015, 09:31:58 am



Title: DUI Checkpoint
Post by: DolfanBob on January 08, 2015, 09:31:58 am
Ya right. Not sure how they do it in Boca. But I'm sure Officers here and across the Nation would probably respond a little differently. Watch this video and see if it seems on the level of what you would expect.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2901428/The-controversial-viral-video-shows-away-drunk-driving.html


Title: Re: DUI Checkpoint
Post by: TeeDub on January 08, 2015, 11:29:42 am

Like any cop, it most likely depends on what kind of day they are having and what you look like.


I would imagine the results vary greatly between the 22 year old with a car load of people in a 1995 Nissan Sentra and the 60 year old white guy driving alone in the Lexus GS.


Title: Re: DUI Checkpoint
Post by: cannon_fodder on January 08, 2015, 01:18:46 pm
Quote
'It's not the example we want to set for our youth. we want them to learn how to do the right things,' she said.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2901428/The-controversial-viral-video-shows-away-drunk-driving.html#ixzz3OG6rnrVS
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

(http://obeygiant.com/store/images/P/offsetobey.jpg)

Safety checkpoints are legal primarily because they can "check your papers" in a minimally invasive way. DUI arrests are really ancillary to that goal. If they check your papers and do not have probably cause, they cannot search any more. This attorney's method accomplishes that. The police have checked the citizen's papers and have observed the vehicle, if it safe - the "safety" checkpoint has achieved its goal!  Yay!

We all know the real purpose is to thwart the 5th Amendment and to assume everyone is guilty of DUI or some other offense, and thus the police are able to stop and search every citizen that passes. But they can't say that legally. Though the departments themselves forget that and basically acquiesce to that fact.

I firmly oppose drunk driving. I'm a fan of DUI enforcement as well as DUI prevention (UBER, Lyft, cabs, public transit, DD programs, NOT arresting people who choose to walk home, social stigma, etc.). A citizen does not have a duty to consent to a police search. Assuming  "doing the right thing" means "following government instructions" is a simplified lesson and frankly, un-American.


Title: Re: DUI Checkpoint
Post by: patric on January 08, 2015, 06:39:14 pm
I firmly oppose drunk driving. I'm a fan of DUI enforcement as well as DUI prevention (UBER, Lyft, cabs, public transit, DD programs, NOT arresting people who choose to walk home, social stigma, etc.). A citizen does not have a duty to consent to a police search. Assuming  "doing the right thing" means "following government instructions" is a simplified lesson and frankly, un-American.


But they only stop every fifth car...which makes roadblocks legal...somehow...or at least, easier to skip some cars and not others, and alcohol isnt a drug because drug checkpoints arent legal...hey my dog told me he smells something criminal...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqEXTVe7MCQ[/youtube]


The method was designed by a Florida lawyer to protect drivers from being falsely accused of DUI at police checkpoints.
Using a plastic bag handing out of the driver-side window, the driver provides all documents police ask for in a stop. 
The video shows the driver pulling up to a checkpoint, officers looking at the bag, and then waving him on without asking a single question

Boca Raton lawyer Warren Redlich is the person who wrote the guidelines for the flyer, and says he's just trying to prevent drivers from being wrongly accused of DUI and doesn't encourage drunk driving.

'It's not designed for drunks and I don't think it really works for drunks because you have to follow instructions and drunks aren't good at that.'

http://fairdui.org/


OTOH, he is hawking his book.


Title: Re: DUI Checkpoint
Post by: patric on September 27, 2015, 02:41:30 pm
Safety checkpoints are legal primarily because they can "check your papers" in a minimally invasive way. DUI arrests are really ancillary to that goal. If they check your papers and do not have probably cause, they cannot search any more. This attorney's method accomplishes that. The police have checked the citizen's papers and have observed the vehicle, if it safe - the "safety" checkpoint has achieved its goal!  Yay!

We all know the real purpose is to thwart the 5th Amendment and to assume everyone is guilty of DUI or some other offense, and thus the police are able to stop and search every citizen that passes. But they can't say that legally. Though the departments themselves forget that and basically acquiesce to that fact.

I firmly oppose drunk driving. I'm a fan of DUI enforcement as well as DUI prevention (UBER, Lyft, cabs, public transit, DD programs, NOT arresting people who choose to walk home, social stigma, etc.). A citizen does not have a duty to consent to a police search. Assuming  "doing the right thing" means "following government instructions" is a simplified lesson and frankly, un-American.


A follow-up, from CBS:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QhlAmwr2Vk


Title: Re: DUI Checkpoint
Post by: Vashta Nerada on April 29, 2017, 09:34:54 pm
TULSA, Oklahoma - Public intoxication might soon be treated differently in Tulsa. During his budget announcement, Mayor G.T. Bynum said he allocated money to fund the operation of a public inebriation center.
He said it would be more cost-effective than jail, free up valuable police and court time, and requires an innovative approach to getting a better overall outcome for Tulsa.

We would be foolish to think the city -- any city --  would do away with a tool police have relied on to arrest someone where the only requirement is the officer's desire to arrest someone.
Havent broken any laws but insulted a cop?  Busted for Public Intox.  No breath test, no blood test, just the word of honor of someone with a thin skin and an inflated sense of self worth.

Not going to happen, G.T.