Sobriety check points and the 4th amendment

  • Thread starter Thread starter 7960
  • Start date Start date
The fact that you haven't yet raped a woman doens't mean that if we let you continue having a penis it's guaranteed that you won't rape a woman along the way. It's a preventative measure. If they take you to jail or castrate you, you won't have an opportunity to cause damage. I shouldn't even have to explain this but some of you are either ignoring this fact or pretending like it isn't a possibility.
 
To be clear, are you saying that you find it to be a seizure (thus necessitating reasonable suspicion) because it is a means of generating evidence of a crime?

If that's what you're arguing, then ethically speaking you could probably sell me on it. I hadn't really considered the matter outside specifically constitutional bounds. And I'm not familiar with any constitutional correlation between (A) the distinction between seizure and voluntary lawful contact, and (B) law enforcement obtaining incriminating evidence.



I guess the thrust of my argument, which I believe would strike your above comparatives, is that driving into a checkpoint is a voluntary act on the part of the motorist. The checkpoint is there, and you'd know it long before you get there - enter at your own risk, fully aware of the consequences.

This is as opposed to a policeman showing up at 1:45 outside a bar and issuing citations, where essentially a trap is set, or a search of your home (7960's comparison) where you have (I assume?) an unprovoked invasion of privacy, initiated by law enforcement.
 
i just want to be able to drive drunk. my social life has taken a dive lately since I had a few close calls.
 
Yes it fucking is. It is exactly the legal definition of a search and seizure. You are SEIZED (stopped and not at liberty to leave without permission) and SEARCHED (he sniffs the air coming from your window, looks at you for signs of intoxication, and questions you, all in an attempt to gather evidence to arrest you).
 
Driving, in a very literal sense, cannot be a right. Implicit in the concept "driving" is a driven object (e.g. a car) - without some driven object, one can't drive. There is no, and can be no, right to property - only the right to earn and keep it.
 
The majority opinion said that it's a violation of 4th Amendment, but it's such a minor violation that it's no big deal.
 
So the act of driving on saturday night on the busiest street in the city constitutes probable cause that every single individual on the road is driving drunk?
 
Neither have I... Although I've only been in a state that has them for like 4 or 5 years.

I did hear about someone who came across one, and to fuck with the cops he took the detour to avoid it. And got pulled over shortly after. Apparently for no other reason other than him avoiding the checkpoint. (Although I'm sure the cops conjured up some BS reason to make it legal on paper)
 
You don't have a right to a vehicle. But you have a 'right to drive' in the sense that you have right to use any property that you possess.
 
I think that's very reasonable.

If I'm operating the vehicle unsafely (ACTUALLY operating it unsafely, not some BS "unsafe by definition because you were drinking" standard), then pull me over and cite me. If I harm somebody and it can be shown that alcohol was a contributing factor (again, ACTUALLY a contributing factor, not "automatically your fault because you were drinking"), then nail my ass to the wall.

But if I'm obeying the speed limit, all signs and signals, and maintaining my lane and maintaining a safe following distance, then leave me the hell alone.

I'm not ranting at you in particular, but to the law.
 
Not sure how I feel about it. Like guns, I think the way to deal with the "drunk driving problem" is to actually punish the drunk drivers instead of harassing everyone else
 
Should I copy/paste my post about how his leads to it being legal for me to fire a bullet inches over your head, because "if I don't hit you, there is no victim"?
 
You see, under the American criminal justice system, we punish people for what they HAVE DONE, not what we think they MIGHT DO.
 
if everyone avoids the checkpoint they wont have enough chase cars. it needs to be a team effort
 
Back
Top