General Harley Davidson Chat Forum to discuss general Harley Davidson issues, topics, and experiences.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Sobriety Checkpoints

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #11  
Old 07-23-2009 | 07:59 AM
masterblaster's Avatar
masterblaster
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,961
Likes: 258
From: Conroe Texas
Default

Its UN-AMERICAN.

**** like, Commie like action period.
 
  #12  
Old 07-23-2009 | 08:07 AM
shooter537's Avatar
shooter537
Cruiser
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: Missouri
Default

Originally Posted by Eyeball Kid
Great, they break the law to make sure we don't.

Where is the "Reasonable Suspicion" we are pulled over for?

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The "Reasonable suspicion" derives from this dialog;

Good evening sir/ma'am, I'm Officer So-and-so from the Wherever Sheriff's department. Where are you heading this evening? I'm just on my way home officer. Have you been drinking this evening Mr Whomever? I had a drink/beer at dinner (or maybe you say) I've had a couple of drinks. You have just allowed that officer to determine your level of impairment because you have admitted to drinking, and now you are observed to be driving. That officer is "assuring the safety of the motoring public" by removing intoxicated drivers. There are a number of reasons why a person may have bloodshot eyes, have a slight slur in thier speach or fumble through thier wallet/purse for a driver's license. But once you have answered the "Have you been drinking tonight" with an admission, and you add that to any of the aforementioned oservations, you are going to get pulled to the side. If you don't admit to drinking, then he/she will tell you to have a good evening!
 

Last edited by shooter537; 07-23-2009 at 08:17 AM.
  #13  
Old 07-23-2009 | 08:36 AM
xxxflhrci's Avatar
xxxflhrci
Extreme HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,033
Likes: 25
Default

Threads pop up raising hell about a drunk driver killing a biker at least weekly. Then, a thread pops up about an effort to get a few drunks off the road and some guys bitch about that...Amazing.
 
  #14  
Old 07-23-2009 | 08:44 AM
overhead's Avatar
overhead
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,673
Likes: 15
From: Norfolk, VA
Default

Originally Posted by shooter537
The "Reasonable suspicion" derives from this dialog;

Good evening sir/ma'am, I'm Officer So-and-so from the Wherever Sheriff's department. Where are you heading this evening? I'm just on my way home officer. Have you been drinking this evening Mr Whomever? I had a drink/beer at dinner (or maybe you say) I've had a couple of drinks. You have just allowed that officer to determine your level of impairment because you have admitted to drinking, and now you are observed to be driving. That officer is "assuring the safety of the motoring public" by removing intoxicated drivers. There are a number of reasons why a person may have bloodshot eyes, have a slight slur in thier speach or fumble through thier wallet/purse for a driver's license. But once you have answered the "Have you been drinking tonight" with an admission, and you add that to any of the aforementioned oservations, you are going to get pulled to the side. If you don't admit to drinking, then he/she will tell you to have a good evening!
Problem being of course you legally do not have to answer any of those questions and the fact that you do not answer cannot be officially used by the officer as the cause of his/her suspicion. At my stop I would only crack the window enough to provide my ID, insurance and registration.....then the fun began. I had not had a drink in weeks, but I just hate this sort of thing.

I was pulled to the side for refusing to answer the questions. I am sure if I pushed the issue the officer would have just said he smelled what he thought was alcohol. Making friends and influencing people as usual. It would have been easier on all of us if I had just answered the questions and gone on my way. But, I just cannot do it.
 
  #15  
Old 07-23-2009 | 08:48 AM
SBRob's Avatar
SBRob
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,380
Likes: 4,350
From: Missouri City,TX
Default

Originally Posted by xxxflhrci
Threads pop up raising hell about a drunk driver killing a biker at least weekly. Then, a thread pops up about an effort to get a few drunks off the road and some guys bitch about that...Amazing.
+1...
 
  #16  
Old 07-23-2009 | 08:54 AM
shooter537's Avatar
shooter537
Cruiser
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
From: Missouri
Default

Originally Posted by SBRob
+1...
I totally agree!


I was merely trying my best to explain the reasonable suspicion question. I am by no means a hypocrite and don't condone drunk driving. I also live by the rule of "Two wheels' two beers". I don't know that I've ever been through a check point while riding, but I would never worry about a dui/dwi when I am.
 
  #17  
Old 07-23-2009 | 09:12 AM
jimmers1817's Avatar
jimmers1817
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,975
Likes: 11
From: NJ
Default

Wish they had them more often here. Once in a blue moon during a holiday weekend. When it comes down between inconveniencing a motorist for a couple minutes and saving lives, especially young lives, I'll go with the inconvenience every time.

People who bitch about their so called privacy rights should have to view the carnage drunk drivers cause or go along with an officer as he delivers the news to a parent that their precious child won't be coming home because some mfer with privacy rights killed them.
 
The following users liked this post:
DuciDay (03-25-2024)
  #18  
Old 07-23-2009 | 09:14 AM
2ForTheRoad's Avatar
2ForTheRoad
Road Master
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 2
From: Northeast Wisconsin
Default

Originally Posted by masterblaster
Its UN-AMERICAN.

**** like, Commie like action period.
I live in WI, probably the state with the worst drinking/driving problem. Is it more American to have people die daily because of drinking/driving? What ever it takes to convince this country it's NOT OK to load up on booze and then drive is OK with me.
 
The following users liked this post:
DuciDay (03-25-2024)
  #19  
Old 07-23-2009 | 09:14 AM
TequilaJohn's Avatar
TequilaJohn
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,666
Likes: 1
From: East TN
Default

Originally Posted by fevest
I am not advocating drunk driving, but my take on this entire mess is this. If you cause a wreck, what difference does it make how you caused it? If I rear end you while not having my full attention to my driving not much is going to happen. If I rear end you and cause the same damage but have been drinking, well all hell is going to break loose.
I feel that the penalty should be the same for the same result. Regardless of how you arrived at that result.
There was a kid that killed three people while text messaging, his penalty. He was on Oprah saying how bad text messaging was. Try and get that penalty if you had a drink.
I hear ya. My best friend was killed two years ago by a dumbass makin an illegal u-turn right in front of him. The dumbass wasn't drunk, and they just slapped him on the wrist. So, what we have is a guy that can't even drive responsibly sober...but hey, that's no concern...right? 'Least he wasn't drinkin...was "just an accident". My ****! The guy did sumthin illegal, and caused my bud's death. Ain't that the same thing? I mean, it's illegal to drive drunk...and, they throw the book at that offense. Why isn't the other illegal act punished? It'd be ok if it were the dumbasses that got killed in these wrecks...but, it's too often the other guy, and the dumbass is free to do it all over again. Sometimes I think I'm gonna go postal if I hear "It was just an accident" one more time.

As for the check points...technically speakin, I think they violate the "probable cause", "reasonable suspiscion", or whatever it's called clause. To me, it's like pickin a street, and then goin door to door demandin to interview private citizens and search their homes, regardless of whether they've done anything to provoke such an act. How many of us would tolerate that? And, before anyone gives me the "drivin is a privilege" horse hockey...so is ownin a home.
 
  #20  
Old 07-23-2009 | 09:39 AM
Mark g's Avatar
Mark g
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,139
Likes: 0
From: PA.
Default

Originally Posted by jimmers1817
Wish they had them more often here. Once in a blue moon during a holiday weekend. When it comes down between inconveniencing a motorist for a couple minutes and saving lives, especially young lives, I'll go with the inconvenience every time.

People who bitch about their so called privacy rights should have to view the carnage drunk drivers cause or go along with an officer as he delivers the news to a parent that their precious child won't be coming home because some mfer with privacy rights killed them.
So you deal with the mother F'er, not everyone on the road!!!!

This is where america is gonna run into trouble one day. When you push the common man, they will push back with revolution!

The Police think they have trouble now, when just the criminals want to shot at them. What ya gonna do when everyone wants to shot at ya???

This has happened in american history more then once and you know what they say about history, it's bound to repeat itself! especially when we don't learn from our mistakes!.
 



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:57 PM.