DUI screening stop

JeffDG said:
So, you will infer suspicion from someone refusing to answer questions?
Click to expand...
In the context of that video, yes. The kid started off with an attitude , and like he was trying to hide something. To me that is suspicious behavior. You really think the police officer is any more happy wasting time in the DUI checkpoint then you are being stopped. You think giving him a hard time makes any sense. And if you give him a hard time, then you complain that he did not treat you like a prince. Oh please. I realize I was 15 and acted like a 15 year old, but by the time I was 21 I knew better enough when acting like a jerk was fine, and when saying yes sir was fine. Where I was when I was 21 if I pulled one tenth of that crap with the local police force the Nawlins police would have taken me to a back alley and played football with my head.
 
I get it. The 5th Amendment is inconvenient for police...here's a hint: It's meant to be inconvenient for the state. But that's cool, you're free to ignore it if you wish.
 
comanchepilot said:
The beauty of these checkpoints is the right to remain silent. USE IT.

There is is zero reason or requirement to answer questions, and - the best part - if you refuse to answer - and they pull you over for further inquiry - you will prob be found not guilty because they require some suspicion other than standing on your rights to pull you over for further 'examination.'

The right to not perform like a monkey on a field sobriety test that sober people cannot 'pass' because there are no pass / fail standards.
Click to expand...

Yep, the one I went through the only questions I was asked was "where are you coming from" and "where are you going?"

I responded with "that way" and a point either behind or in front of me:D
 
When I first started flying my people into Wyoming they had drive in windows at bars. Maybe it was Montana.
 
kgruber said:
When I first started flying my people into Wyoming they had drive in windows at bars. Maybe it was Montana.
Click to expand...
New Orleans had them too, also drive through daquari joints.
 
Most of the individuals who do not corporate on my stops/checkpoints are hiding something. Leads to suspicion. Most of the time. It's a susp lic, warrant. Sometimes it's just someone being difficult. The I"know my rights" type who actually have no clue what they are talking about. Educate yourself people. Learn YOUR state laws and requirements. Do not go off of hearsay because I can assure its wrong. Go to lexis-nexus.com a read your states code for whatever law you THINK you know about. Know that there are municipal codes as well as state codes. In GA municipal codes are allowed to be more strict than the state code but cannot be less. So know both.
 
I just ask if they have an express line for people who haven't had a drink since Bush was president.
 
An interesting thing to do is to go for a ride-along. Some PDs have a 'citizen's academy' that lets you get a lot of behind the scenes experience.

I rode with a cop friend of mine one Saturday night in a college town.

'Everybody lies' is an understatement.
 
Corpsmaide said:
Just be thankful that they are out there being proactive and getting drunks/drugs/wanteds off the street. Those you saw in cuffs could have been the ones who kill you or your loved ones that night.
Click to expand...

I have a close friend who was killed in an alcohol related crash, just over a year ago.

Yet I do not support police being 'proactive'. The supreme court disagrees, but I believe that DUI checkpoints violate the bill of rights. Same goes for boating. In my opinion, any stop and search without probable cause is not reasonable.
 
comanchepilot said:
Once the police as a group argued that they can lie, cheat, and even behave like criminals while doing their job, they lost my respect as a organization because I can never count on a police officer telling me the truth. Neither can you. No matter what they may say.
Click to expand...

Yep, agree 100% with this.
 
DWT is becoming a serious problem around here. I know jammers are illegal but would love to have one just to mess with their heads.

dell30rb said:
I have a close friend who was killed in an alcohol related crash, just over a year ago.

Yet I do not support police being 'proactive'. The supreme court disagrees, but I believe that DUI checkpoints violate the bill of rights. Same goes for boating. In my opinion, any stop and search without probable cause is not reasonable.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
DWT is becoming a serious problem around here. I know jammers are illegal but would love to have one just to mess with their heads.
Click to expand...

its illegal now here in NC but that did not change anything.

When I was growing up my mom and a friend's mom would take turns driving us to school. The friend's mom was a high strung attorney from california. She had a clipboard on the steering wheel of her dinged up volvo and would talk on her giant 90's cellphone while taking notes on the clipboard and listening to NPR. A pioneer in distracted driving.
 
dell30rb said:
I have a close friend who was killed in an alcohol related crash, just over a year ago.

Yet I do not support police being 'proactive'. The supreme court disagrees, but I believe that DUI checkpoints violate the bill of rights. Same goes for boating. In my opinion, any stop and search without probable cause is not reasonable.
Click to expand...

Actually for boating there is no probable cause required to do a safety inspection to see if you have all your gear. Now if you have all your gear out on deck and nothing else in plain view, there's no further they can go without PC.
 
douglas393 said:
Yeah scary stuff. He gave the police officer an attitude, and expected what the police officer to tell him to have a nice day. He got exactly what he wanted, and then has goes and complains about it. Personally, I feel he is the doofus, and did this just to set up the police. For all I know it was all an act anyhow, but in any case, what harm was there in dropping the window a couple of inches. Act suspiciously, the expect to be treated like a suspect. Life is too short to waste time over something like this.
Click to expand...


If life was too short they'd have released him. Cops shouldn't be able to make up the law as they go. The violated the guy's Constitutionally protected rights over and over, and then joked about it. Police shouldn't be above the law. Apparently they've decided they are and now have cheering sections. Welcome to Amerika the Police state. Papers please.
 
Henning said:
Actually for boating there is no probable cause required to do a safety inspection to see if you have all your gear. Now if you have all your gear out on deck and nothing else in plain view, there's no further they can go without PC.
Click to expand...

Right, but the 'safety inspection' is a stop. They can't board your vessel, but its just like being pulled over in the car. License, registration, life jackets, horn etc.. all must be shown.
 
Alexb2000 said:
I really like to hear Comanchepilot's take on this.

Seems like he did exactly what is being suggested here.
Click to expand...

And what the cops did was 100% illegal . . . a civil rights complaint against the department should have been brought.

Ask 100 lawyers and you will see virtual unanimous agreement that this video was a clear violation of the videotapers 4th amendment right.

I would love to see the ACLU enter into a settlement where police agree to answer the question - when a citizen if they they are being detained the officer must state yes or no - and the grounds therefore.

We have all these silly rules we have to follow to enforce our constitutional rights- things we have to say specifically - and yet law enforcement does not have to answer specific questions which trigger behavior in citizens - and thats wrong.

This would be the perfect case in this video -
 
dell30rb said:
Right, but the 'safety inspection' is a stop. They can't board your vessel, but its just like being pulled over in the car. License, registration, life jackets, horn etc.. all must be shown.
Click to expand...

They most certainly can board your vessel.
 
Corpsmaide said:
Most of the individuals who do not corporate on my stops/checkpoints are hiding something. Leads to suspicion. Most of the time. It's a susp lic, warrant. Sometimes it's just someone being difficult. The I"know my rights" type who actually have no clue what they are talking about. Educate yourself people. Learn YOUR state laws and requirements. Do not go off of hearsay because I can assure its wrong. Go to lexis-nexus.com a read your states code for whatever law you THINK you know about. Know that there are municipal codes as well as state codes. In GA municipal codes are allowed to be more strict than the state code but cannot be less. So know both.
Click to expand...

The statute is meaningless without the interpretation of it by the State's highest court . . . . you can read the 4th amendment until you cannot see the words anymore - without the case authority the words are meaningless unfortunately
 
douglas393 said:
In the context of that video, yes. The kid started off with an attitude , and like he was trying to hide something. To me that is suspicious behavior. You really think the police officer is any more happy wasting time in the DUI checkpoint then you are being stopped. You think giving him a hard time makes any sense. And if you give him a hard time, then you complain that he did not treat you like a prince. Oh please. I realize I was 15 and acted like a 15 year old, but by the time I was 21 I knew better enough when acting like a jerk was fine, and when saying yes sir was fine. Where I was when I was 21 if I pulled one tenth of that crap with the local police force the Nawlins police would have taken me to a back alley and played football with my head.
Click to expand...

The police have guns, and the courts basically believe every thing the cop says. Can't we, as a society, expect them to act like adults and not react all emotionally when someone asserts their rights?

Explain to me why the cops get a pass acting inappropriately, but the citizen, whom they serve, is required to kiss their azz?

Thats completely upside down.
 
Henning said:
They most certainly can board your vessel.
Click to expand...

Correct, CG can board.

Although I have been stopped several times by state wildlife officers and they never boarded the boat. As you said earlier, if all of the safety gear is out on the deck and they have no probable cause to do anything else, can the coast guard or wildlife officers still board the boat?
 
dell30rb said:
Correct, CG can board.

Although I have been stopped several times by state wildlife officers and they never boarded the boat. As you said earlier, if all of the safety gear is out on the deck and they have no probable cause to do anything else, can the coast guard or wildlife officers still board the boat?
Click to expand...

Sure, wildlife can board with no problems actually if you have any fishing gear, that's PC to look for illegal fish.
 
Henning said:
Sure, wildlife can board with no problems actually if you have any fishing gear, that's PC to look for illegal fish.
Click to expand...

Right, but can they do it for a safety inspection?

The problem I have with the safety inspection is that it is a ruse for a sobriety test or search without any probable cause. No, they can't administer a sobriety check without probable cause. But once they stop you for a safety check, probable cause can be easily falsified with no consequences to the officer.

Boarding is really not that relevant to the discussion, but in my mind once someone boards the boat, its a search.
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
Right, but can they do it for a safety inspection?

The problem I have with the safety inspection is that it is a ruse for a sobriety test or search without any probable cause. No, they can't administer a sobriety check without probable cause. But once they stop you for a safety check, probable cause can be easily falsified with no consequences to the officer.

Boarding is really not that relevant to the discussion, but in my mind once someone boards the boat, its a search.
Click to expand...

You have nothing to hide. So make a friend.

It is not a search just because an officer boards your boat. I'm no boat police but I'm sure the definitions are the same. Plain view=scope limited, consent=scope limited(most citizens don't know this and parameters are not set), probable cause=search inventory=inventory
 
Last edited:
Suppose I've hit my quota for friends, then what?

I shouldn't have to suck up to the guy with a gun looking to write me up for some random violation, but that's the system we have.

Corpsmaide said:
You have nothing to hide. So make a friend.
Click to expand...
 
The turns of this thread are really starting to bother me. Whether it's a DUI check, or aircraft, or boat, or any vehicle out in public; what's wrong with them? I would rather see the police checking for drunk drivers than running a speed trap.

If I am drunk and get stopped, then I should man up, take it as a wake-up call, get some serious help, and more than anything be thankful I didn't kill any innocent person on the road. Encouraging people that the right reaction is to pass a card out the window, call my attorney, and try to weasel out of it is just wrong to me.

I thought pilots believed in taking responsibility for their actions?
 
Alexb2000 said:
The turns of this thread are really starting to bother me. Whether it's a DUI check, or aircraft, or boat, or any vehicle out in public; what's wrong with them? I would rather see the police checking for drunk drivers than running a speed trap.

If I am drunk and get stopped, then I should man up, take it as a wake-up call, get some serious help, and more than anything be thankful I didn't kill any innocent person on the road. Encouraging people that the right reaction is to pass a card out the window, call my attorney, and try to weasel out of it is just wrong to me.

I thought pilots believed in taking responsibility for their actions?
Click to expand...

Yes, and in that case, what do you have against speed traps. Perfectly sober people speeding cause plenty of fatal accidents.
 
Henning said:
Yes, and in that case, what do you have against speed traps. Perfectly sober people speeding cause plenty of fatal accidents.
Click to expand...

As for me, I have nothing against speed traps. You have to actually do something wrong to get stopped.
 
I'd rather see them run a speed trap. At least, in that case, they're stopping folks who've already broken the law.

Alexb2000 said:
The turns of this thread are really starting to bother me. Whether it's a DUI check, or aircraft, or boat, or any vehicle out in public; what's wrong with them? I would rather see the police checking for drunk drivers than running a speed trap.

If I am drunk and get stopped, then I should man up, take it as a wake-up call, get some serious help, and more than anything be thankful I didn't kill any innocent person on the road. Encouraging people that the right reaction is to pass a card out the window, call my attorney, and try to weasel out of it is just wrong to me.

I thought pilots believed in taking responsibility for their actions?
Click to expand...
 
Alexb2000 said:
The turns of this thread are really starting to bother me. Whether it's a DUI check, or aircraft, or boat, or any vehicle out in public; what's wrong with them?
Click to expand...

They violate the fourth amendment of the Constitution. If they weren't against the law I wouldn't mind. But they are.

This argument can easily be extended. Why shouldn't police have the right to stop and search you at any time? Why shouldn't they have the right to just barge into your house and conduct a search? It would certainly make their job easier.

Problem is I'm not interested in making the job easier for LEOs. In a free society the job of an LEO is more difficult. Too bad, it's the price you pay for freedom. That's why it's written into our highest law.
 
Alexb2000 said:
I thought pilots believed in taking responsibility for their actions?
Click to expand...

The trampling of the fourth and fifth amendment by law enforcement agencies has nothing to do with someone being responsible for their own actions.
 
Henning said:
Sure, wildlife can board with no problems actually if you have any fishing gear, that's PC to look for illegal fish.
Click to expand...

Does carrying a hunting rifle in the woods while wearing a bright orange jacket with a hunting license displayed on your back during big game season give a game warden probable cause to suspect and detain you for any firearm-related activity in the jurisdiction? Gun == gun crime just like tackle == illegal fish?

'You may beat the wrap, but you won't beat the ride." Just because you're accurate (the protector of the little guppies will board your boat) doesn't mean you [or s/he] is right.
 
Yes, if the game warden is looking to make some new friends.

DJTorrente said:
Does carrying a hunting rifle in the woods while wearing a bright orange jacket with a hunting license displayed on your back during big game season give a game warden probable cause to suspect and detain you for any firearm-related activity in the jurisdiction?
Click to expand...
 
steingar said:
If life was too short they'd have released him. Cops shouldn't be able to make up the law as they go. The violated the guy's Constitutionally protected rights over and over, and then joked about it. Police shouldn't be above the law. Apparently they've decided they are and now have cheering sections. Welcome to Amerika the Police state. Papers please.
Click to expand...
You are right that the cops handled this in less then an appropriate fashion, and I am not trying to defend them as much as saying if you want to spend half an hour playing patsy with cops by all means give them a hard time at the next DUI check point you go through. For me, it is easier to just deal with it as in inconvenience. I have gone through at least four of five of them, and each time it was all of 30 seconds, and no ego trips or power struggles. I can certainly be a jacka$$ and give the cops a hard time and play dime store lawyer, but at the end of the day, I will be going on my way, and by cooperating and playing the game with them I will lose nothing and gain a lot. I realize that some of us feel this is a terrible violation of our civil rights, but in the grand scheme of things I am not too sure it is as terrible as it seems, and to tell you the truth if doing these checkpoints prevents even one unnecessary DUI death or injury, then so much the better.
 
DJTorrente said:
Does carrying a hunting rifle in the woods while wearing a bright orange jacket with a hunting license displayed on your back during big game season give a game warden probable cause to suspect and detain you for any firearm-related activity in the jurisdiction?
Click to expand...

Depends. In Wisconsin, if you are deer hunting with a rifle in a shotgun only zone, then yes, they can stop you and detain you for a firearm-related activity.
 
douglas393 said:
You are right that the cops handled this in less then an appropriate fashion, and I am not trying to defend them as much as saying if you want to spend half an hour playing patsy with cops by all means give them a hard time at the next DUI check point you go through. For me, it is easier to just deal with it as in inconvenience. I have gone through at least four of five of them, and each time it was all of 30 seconds, and no ego trips or power struggles. I can certainly be a jacka$$ and give the cops a hard time and play dime store lawyer, but at the end of the day, I will be going on my way, and by cooperating and playing the game with them I will lose nothing and gain a lot. I realize that some of us feel this is a terrible violation of our civil rights, but in the grand scheme of things I am not too sure it is as terrible as it seems, and to tell you the truth if doing these checkpoints prevents even one unnecessary DUI death or injury, then so much the better.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The ends do not justify the means. And when I think about the terrible sacrifices made by veterans of our armed forces to defend our freedoms the thought of "spending a half hour playing patsy with the cops" seems like a really small price to pay. If more of us were willing to slightly inconvenience ourselves to defend our freedoms, minor autocratic authorities would have more trouble arbitrarily relinquishing us of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top