"No Refusal" checkpoints going on in Ohio tonight (1 Viewer)

[fatness]

I'm partially being a smart acre here, and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. The fact these are advertised as to time and location shows more transparency from government than we normally get. Those who wish to (stupidly) drink & drive have a clear opportunity to choose another route.
Sadly, a good many people still don't get it. I wouldn't mind seeing those tax dollars instead rolled into free/discounted public transportation or some other means of trying to get people someplace to sleep it off. I also understand education and awareness can only do so much.

They run ads here in PA about the cost of drunk driving - increased insurance, lawyers fees, etc. Couple with that are the "buzzed driving is drunk driving" and I think we're making progress on this front. IMO it is not theproblem it was 20-30 years ago. In order to achieve each next increment of improvement, it gets more and more expensive; the debate is whether that money is wisely spent.

I can't find too much to disagree with there.

There's more that could be done, too, but some of it's unlikely to happen. Cops could simply watch cars leaving bars and stop the ones that are weaving, speeding, etc. I may be wrong but I don't think that's legal to do. Even if it was legal there's somewhat of a partnership between government and bars/restaurants/liquor stores -- the government wants the money they get from taxes/fees/permits from those establishments and those establishments don't want to be cracked down on too much and lobby accordingly.

Linking ignition switches to breathalyzers sounds good, but is more likely to result in waste of money on hardware/software that doesn't work and can be circumvented easily. And the alcohol industry would oppose it, so again $$$$.............

Thanks for the explanation, by the way.

 

[fatness]

Next up door to door house searches to make sure you're not beating your spouse. Each interview will only take 2-3 minutes so no big deal and don't worry they will stop at every house in your neighborhood so it's perfectly legal.

If you don't like it, it's pretty simple. Don't beat your wife.

What you've suggested is completely ridiculous. And it's also quite similar to the traffic stops.

Yeah, I know there are differences --- the roads are public and your house is private, but the government(s) can get over that little hurdle bit by bit.

 

[cstu]

At a checkpoint in Centerville last month there was only one OVI arrest out of 888 drivers contacted.

So treat 887 law-abiding citizens like criminals so they can catch one drunk driver.

Let's call this what it is - lazy policing.

This demonstrates a common misunderstanding of police work. The primary purpose is not to catch criminals, it is to prevent crime all together. This is why patrol cars are highly visible; if the goal was to catch criminals all cops would be undercover.

These check points aren't about catching drunk drivers. They are about keeping people from driving drunk. Otherwise they would be unnannounced, etc.

Announced check points seem intended to teach drunk drivers to use smart phones.

 

[Tom Servo]

If you drinking knuckleheads don't do that and people stop dying because of it, I'd bet they go away.

Here's an idea: arrest the drinking knuckleheads breaking the law, and leave other people alone.

And if you didn't drink and drive, there's nobody to "harrass".

I don't think you're getting it yet, Tom. Most people don't drink and drive, yet lots of them get stopped in checkpoints for no reason.

So, by that logic we shouldn't set up dragnets to catch a most wanted criminals since the majority of drivers are innocent, amirite?

That's kind of silly and you know it. One criminal being search for at traffic stops or elsewhere is very specific. City-wide or county-wide dragnets, stopping everyone, with a general hope of catching someone for something are quite another thing. I understand that you're against drunk driving, but the arguments you're making here are terrible. And the dragnets you're supporting are basically failing at catching many drunks and are succeeding at harassing many innocent people. The tradeoff is poor, it's not accomplishing what you'd like to see accomplished, and the underlying argument that "if everyone would all just be good, then they'd leave us alone" is pretty fear-driven and unsupported by reality.

I'm partially being a smart acre here, and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. The fact these are advertised as to time and location shows more transparency from government than we normally get. Those who wish to (stupidly) drink & drive have a clear opportunity to choose another route.Sadly, a good many people still don't get it. I wouldn't mind seeing those tax dollars instead rolled into free/discounted public transportation or some other means of trying to get people someplace to sleep it off. I also understand education and awareness can only do so much.

They run ads here in PA about the cost of drunk driving - increased insurance, lawyers fees, etc. Couple with that are the "buzzed driving is drunk driving" and I think we're making progress on this front. IMO it is not theproblem it was 20-30 years ago. In order to achieve each next increment of improvement, it gets more and more expensive; the debate is whether that money is wisely spent.

Then what purpose are they serving?

No one said drunk drivers are smart.

Care to answer the question?

 

[Christo]

Here's an idea: arrest the drinking knuckleheads breaking the law, and leave other people alone.

And if you didn't drink and drive, there's nobody to "harrass".

I don't think you're getting it yet, Tom. Most people don't drink and drive, yet lots of them get stopped in checkpoints for no reason.

So, by that logic we shouldn't set up dragnets to catch a most wanted criminals since the majority of drivers are innocent, amirite?

That's kind of silly and you know it. One criminal being search for at traffic stops or elsewhere is very specific. City-wide or county-wide dragnets, stopping everyone, with a general hope of catching someone for something are quite another thing. I understand that you're against drunk driving, but the arguments you're making here are terrible. And the dragnets you're supporting are basically failing at catching many drunks and are succeeding at harassing many innocent people. The tradeoff is poor, it's not accomplishing what you'd like to see accomplished, and the underlying argument that "if everyone would all just be good, then they'd leave us alone" is pretty fear-driven and unsupported by reality.

I'm partially being a smart acre here, and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. The fact these are advertised as to time and location shows more transparency from government than we normally get. Those who wish to (stupidly) drink & drive have a clear opportunity to choose another route.Sadly, a good many people still don't get it. I wouldn't mind seeing those tax dollars instead rolled into free/discounted public transportation or some other means of trying to get people someplace to sleep it off. I also understand education and awareness can only do so much.

They run ads here in PA about the cost of drunk driving - increased insurance, lawyers fees, etc. Couple with that are the "buzzed driving is drunk driving" and I think we're making progress on this front. IMO it is not theproblem it was 20-30 years ago. In order to achieve each next increment of improvement, it gets more and more expensive; the debate is whether that money is wisely spent.

Then what purpose are they serving?

No one said drunk drivers are smart.

Care to answer the question?

Can't do it?

 

[chauncey]

I have noticed a growing movement of wannabe lawyer nerds going through these things with cameras, and only rolling their window down an inch.

They do the same nonsense at border patrol checkpoints in the southwest. These people should be shot in their manginas.

 

[Gandalf the Grey]

I have noticed a growing movement of wannabe lawyer nerds going through these things with cameras, and only rolling their window down an inch.

They do the same nonsense at border patrol checkpoints in the southwest. These people should be shot in their manginas.

Why?

 

[Toe Cutter]

In Australia, you can get pulled over for absolutely no reason for a random breathalyzer. It was very odd the first time it happened to me on a Wednesday afternoon around 2PM.

the bronze love getting the booze bus on the main drag for bombed out hoons