out of 50 charges issued.

waste of taxpayer money?

you decide.....

Quote :

" By NBC17, NBC17, 15 hours, 19 minutes ago WAKE COUNTY, N.C. - A DWI checkpoint was held Saturday night at Highway 70 and Guy Road. Police issued a total of 50 charges, including two DWI charges. Other charges handed out to motorists included driving while license revoked (3 the news reported). Eighteen other drivers were issued a no operator’s license charge"

aren't there more productive things the police can be doing.

12/15/2008 12:01:16 AM

umm

i think charging 2 people with DWI is pretty good. keep them off the road that night.

12/15/2008 12:05:11 AM

I mean they'd be on duty anyway probably, just would you rather them be running a dui checkpoint or cruising around wasting gas looking for trouble

odds are they'd probably just be chilling somewhere anyway

12/15/2008 12:30:12 AM

so you don't think that the ~25 officers involved in this roadblock could have pulled in more than 2 DWI's driving around wake county????

12/15/2008 12:30:30 AM

25 officers? what the fuck?

The checkpoints I've been through in the past had 2-4 max.....

12/15/2008 12:31:29 AM

2-4 officers at a 4 way intersection dwi checkpoint. apparently you have never been through a real wake county DWI checkpoint b/c they def have more than 2-4 officers......

they usually have 2-4 officers per lane and sometimes have the DWI bus that tests BAC on site.

The whole point is they caught 2 people suspected of DWI who are more than likely going to get off since it was a checkpoint and they weren't pulled over (no probable cause).

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 12:43 AM. Reason : ....]

12/15/2008 12:38:04 AM

Quote :

"aren't there more productive things the police can be doing."

damned if you do damned if you dont. i have learned nothing we do will satisfy the public, so i just try to find my own personal satisfaction. when you help someone your never thanked, when you do well you are rarely noticed, but God forbid your involved in something that makes the news, like a shooting, you will be seconded guessed and drug through the mud by people who have never walked in your shoes. the Monday morning armchair quarterbacks will tell you what you should or should not have done despite the fact that they know nothing about what its like to be in a situation like that. the same person who complains we didnt respond quickly enough is the same person who calls to complain if they see a cop speeding without lights on...like it never occurred to them that not all calls warrant lights but still may require a quick response. people expect cops to instantly solve a problem that took years to create, to raise their kids for them, or to fix their marriages. people expect the impossible from us as well as perfection, forgetting that we are just people. like god forbid a cop takes a break and sits in a restaurant to eat for 15 minutes, people think "look at that lazy cop"....like we dont deserve a break on a 12 hour shift. our breaks are not even breaks anyways because as soon as a call goes out we have to leave anyways. yes, few respect the police despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of cops are honest and helpful. why are cops jaded, maybe its because we devote a career to helping people who dont appreciate or give a damn about us. and yet, most cops do it because they genuinely want to help people, and put dangerous people away and try to keep the community a decent place to live.

anyways, flame away because nothing you say bothers me cause i have already heard it and dont really give a damn anyways...i just felt like venting and this seemed like a good place

12/15/2008 12:41:01 AM

^ Nice post, thanks for putting a few things in perspective.

12/15/2008 12:45:38 AM

Quote :

"^^Nice post, thanks for putting a few things in perspective"

12/15/2008 12:46:51 AM

^^^I think that was really well said. I have a lot of respect for cops. I wish the news would report more of the good things though that cops are doing, instead of being quick to report any kind of "mistake." I've never really had a problem with checkpoints anyways. If you're not breaking the law, it shouldn't be a problem. Usually they're fairly quick-moving anyways. The few I've been through took less than 5 minutes tops. Any cars with problems, they pulled to the side to keep traffic moving. It's an inconvenience, but if it gets 2 more unsafe drivers off the road, then I'm satisfied.

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 12:47 AM. Reason : ^^]

12/15/2008 12:46:58 AM

yeah, I don't mind my civil liberties being trampled on so that it is possible that they may find some douchebags under the influence.

^would it matter any if they found 0 DWIs?

12/15/2008 12:50:28 AM

^Why is it that your civil liberties are being trampled upon by a simple checkpoint?

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 12:55 AM. Reason : ]

12/15/2008 12:51:51 AM

check points are constitutional. no one said driving was a right, its a privilege. so driving through a check point and being asked to show a valid license is not a violation. if you dont like it dont drive

12/15/2008 12:53:42 AM

yea the bac testing on the spot kinda rubs me the wrong way. and getting 2 drunk drivers off the road is great, but issuing tickets for like expired registration via a roadblock (i mean is that what happens?) or like expired inspection also rubs me the wrong way.

i respect cops, i wouldn't want their job. its not their fault. our legal system is really really messed up to begin with.

12/15/2008 12:55:43 AM

Quote :

"yea the bac testing on the spot kinda rubs me the wrong way"

they only do that if they have PC to suspect impairment, which is no different then being pulled over

12/15/2008 12:57:54 AM

i actually was hoping to hear from you republican, or any otherr law enforcement on here.

I am not sure if you can answer this or not but somewhere like Cali where I read on here that they must provide info on checkpoints to avoid illegal search and seisure. Do you feel checkpoints are a waste a time or not. Most (i'd say 90%) of the people I know who got a DWI at a checkpoint got off with a good lawyer (as long as they didn't blow on the breathalyzer). Are checkpoints in place to feed off of the poor and/or ignorant that can't afford the help? (i know that any officer of the law can't really answer that on a public forum even though I have had friends who are in law enforcement that have confirmed this)

I am in no way hating what you guys do republican just asking.....

^yeah but if a person is not swerving/speeding/driving erratic then there is no PC... As a police officer can you pull over a random car and question them? B/c that basically is what a checkpoint is. Innocent until proven guilty is thrown out when you have to stop and show license and explain yourself to an officer without doing anything to get pulled over

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 1:03 AM. Reason : ...]

12/15/2008 12:57:58 AM

^^^fact remains that you're out riding the roads with a expired inspection sticker though

12/15/2008 12:59:09 AM

but the fact remains that the police need PC to be able to catch you with that sticker....

Quote :

"like it never occurred to them that not all calls warrant lights but still may require a quick response."

however anytime you are putting the public in danger,yeah i think that is how the last speeding ticket was issued to me, there should be lights going on your car. I don't see a difference btwn a crown vic barreling 70 mph down gorman st and a unmarked police crown vic without it's lights on doing the same thing. Either way they are operating a vehicle at an unsafe speed yet the unmarked could be "going to a call" or "home" or wherever. Regardless for safety to the public the lights should be required to be on

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 1:09 AM. Reason : /...]

12/15/2008 1:04:09 AM

^^^There are some pretty strict guidelines to setting up a checkpoint, but one of the ways to make it constitutional is that it's not random. Like, you MUST have a system for choosing which cars to question and which to let go through. Either it's like every other car, every car, or every third car. You can't just pick and choose. And that's already chosen by the time the checkpoint is started. It's not a decision made on the spot.



[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 1:08 AM. Reason : ^]

12/15/2008 1:06:39 AM

KeB, the way I look at DWI is like this....I dont care what happens in court. If i arrest someone who was driving while impaired, i look at it as having gotten them off the road before they hurt someone. its the DAs job to win in court, all I do is make sure the PC was there and that i followed the process right. if they get off then good for them, they paid a lawyer and were inconvenienced but at least they didnt kill someone that night. so in that sense i think checkpoints are good because even if they get off in court then we got them off the road. the governors highway safety program likes to see good DWI stats anyways. As for the officers finding more drunks by riding around....who knows. we have an entire unit of like 10 officers who all they do is look for drunk drivers, and they post good stats. every now and again though the brass decides to do coordinated checkpoints in a high traffic area where they are likely to get some DWIs. and when you have seen the wrecks i have, youd understand that DWIs kill people and its totally preventable, so Im all for getting them off the road

Quote :

"Regardless for safety to the public the lights should be required to be on"

im going to assume you have never driven 10-33, but i assure you its far more dangerous than a police car simply speeding to get to a call. the general driving public are complete idiots who never move over to the right or yeild at intersections. i have had people simply jam on breaks in front of me. in fact i have had tons of almost accidents driving 10-33 and none just driving fast. people just dont know what to do wen a police car comes up with lights n siren on

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 1:14 AM. Reason : .]

12/15/2008 1:10:22 AM

I have never seen a checkpoint where they let cars go through w/o stopping.

^and from an officers point that is all you should be worried about IMO. I have no problem with issuing DWI's just the fact that so many get thrown out the way they do which is really out of your hands. It just seems that the system is set up for failure when a lawyer can go in and say you never saw my client driving drunk so you have no case.

and^ i def can understand the danger lights or no lights. Regardless of what is going on outside the car, so people just don't pay attention
[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 1:14 AM. Reason : .]

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 1:17 AM. Reason : b/c they are on the cellphone]

12/15/2008 1:11:23 AM

Driving is not a right? I wonder what the founders would think if dumbass douchebag cop at the time had told them that driving a wagon was not a right.

FYI, people have the right to have as much freedom as possible allocated to them by default. Thus, people aren't beholden to the government for every little "privilege," you sad excuse for a republican.


[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 1:14 AM. Reason : .]

12/15/2008 1:12:26 AM

whatever bro, driving isnt a right. its far more dangerous than driving a wagon. and im not a republican anymore

12/15/2008 1:16:53 AM

i am all for getting drunk drivers off the road too, it is just the other stuff that comes as a consequence that bothers me. like the inspection sticker that NEVER would have been noticed had the person not gone through the check point.

i mean i guess breaking the law is breaking the law and that is what it comes down to. and that person should have had their inspection taken care of. whatever. i just don't like it.

12/15/2008 1:17:54 AM

Quote :

"ighteen other drivers were issued a no operator’s license charge"

ahahahha more $$ for the city

12/15/2008 1:18:02 AM

12/15/2008 2:24:19 AM

Quote :

"damned if you do damned if you dont. i have learned nothing we do will satisfy the public, so i just try to find my own personal satisfaction. when you help someone your never thanked, when you do well you are rarely noticed, but God forbid your involved in something that makes the news, like a shooting, you will be seconded guessed and drug through the mud by people who have never walked in your shoes."

This kind of public reaction and, to some extent, attitude towards their police force is almost essential, I think for the system to work. It's the only mechanism for policing the police that's even remotely reliable. Even if most cops do genuinely want to help people, they are, as you say, human -- and thus cannot be trusted for a second to keep their own house in order.

Look at the CIA. Theoretically, it had congressional and presidential oversight on everything it did. Realistically, it largely policed itself and has been consistently characterized by incompetence and corruption as a result.

The general public can't really watch what the CIA does, but we can damn sure watch the police, and we want to make sure that nobody gets off easy because they're a member of the force that is supposed to investigate crimes. It doesn't help that the force in question is a fairly tight-knit fraternity of like-minded coworkers. They may be willing to do their job in policing their buddies, but I doubt that many are eager, and certainly there are some who simply refuse.

The problem is, as with most things, the public is pretty stupid and frequently gets up in arms about the right things. It also has a habit of directing its ire at the face they associate with the problem -- the police -- rather than some other factor that actually causes the problem -- the legislature or attorney general's office, more than likely. This is counterproductive because it not only accomplishes nothing good, it also manages to degrade the relationship between law enforcement and the public to a greater extent than necessary.

Yes, you have a thankless and difficult job, but you knew what it would be going in -- there was a time before you wanted to be a cop, and you probably thought the same things about them as the rest of us. If you're an unusual character for whom that's not the case, then you saw how your friends thought. If you thought people were going to be showering you with hugs and free pies, you blocked out very large parts of your college and high school years.

Even after all that, though, I've got some sympathy for you. Your pay should be higher, you should have to deal with less bureaucratic bullshit. People should thank you when you come to the rescue. Other than that, well...you picked a job that is both essential for and a danger to free society.

12/15/2008 3:18:11 AM

If we knew what was good for us, we'd riot like the Greeks:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-12-14-voa18.cfm

Their cops are actually concerned with public reaction to their actions (not that the particular issue of this thread warrants reaction).

^ On top of that, people are always thanking the police. generally, outside of the bizarro world of TWW, most people have a reverence of the work cops do.

But cops do have a lot of power and responsibility, and the times they screw up are amplified equally to their responsibility. It's like with Gov. Blagojevich, plenty of people in various areas take bribes, but he doing it for a senate seat betrays the public trust. Likewise with cops, we can't, and they shouldn't, just look at it as just another job. A cop can't afford to make a mistake like many other professions, if they screw up, people lose their lives, and the only way to ensure this is to keep pressure on them to stay focused and rational.

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 3:29 AM. Reason : ]

12/15/2008 3:23:38 AM

Btw, only reasonable suspicion is needed for a traffic stop, not probable cause. As far as checkpoint, they are part public relations, part good faith effort.

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 6:32 AM. Reason : g/s/p]

12/15/2008 6:32:12 AM

RS to do the traffic stop, but PC to do any kind of a search (i.e. BAC test).

12/15/2008 8:28:36 AM

Quote :

"but the fact remains that the police need PC to be able to catch you with that sticker...."

probable cause to see something completely visible from outside the vehicle?








jesus people

12/15/2008 8:42:53 AM

Quote :

"RS to do the traffic stop, but PC to do any kind of a search (i.e. BAC test)."

Which is still not that hard to do. All they need to do is say that they smelled a whiff of alcohol.

12/15/2008 8:47:41 AM

ad long as you caught a few illegal mexicans then im fine with it

12/15/2008 9:02:55 AM

Quote :

"aren't there more productive things the police can be doing."

Yeah, because detering people from driving drunk isn't productive at all.

12/15/2008 9:03:37 AM

Quote :

"like the inspection sticker that NEVER would have been noticed had the person not gone through the check point."

You won't have to worry about this much longer. As of November 1st there are no longer inspection stickers, it will all be electronic and tied to your registration.

http://www.ncdot.org/dmv/vehicle_services/emissioninspection/nomoresticker/

12/15/2008 9:20:19 AM

^ yep. I just got my car inspected last week. no sticker. So if you plan to try driving drunk, make sure your inspection is up to date. Because cops will be able to check it by running your plates now, and it just gives them another reason to pull you over.

12/15/2008 9:23:00 AM

wow, that makes too much sense for a state run entity

12/15/2008 9:24:38 AM

accidental double post

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 9:25 AM. Reason : ]

12/15/2008 9:24:57 AM

thats clayton police for you.... thus, no there arent more productive things

they are sit in all the speed trap spots and have to issue the most tickets of any city....

since ive been here pretty much my whole life i know.... they are a joke and a waste of tax money...

on a side note, all the citations were prly given to mexicans

12/15/2008 9:25:20 AM

Well you have to know that this time of year they are going to ramp up checkpoints. With the holidays there are a lot of people traveling, and with holiday parties there are a lot of people traveling drunk.

12/15/2008 9:29:05 AM

Quote :

"umm i think charging 2 people with DWI is pretty good. keep them off the road that night."

not really. most times these people have left the bar from far away and are going back to a more suburban area where they live. by this point they've already driven a reasonable amount and are probably moving to a less congested area.

Quote :

"^Why is it that your civil liberties are being trampled upon by a simple checkpoint?"

Fourth amendment and fifth unreasonable search and that no warrants should be issued without probable cause from number 4. the paperwork they have to perform a checkpoint is essentially a warrant, but is issued without probable cause to an individual and forces you to provide the cop with an opportunity with which to search your car. I saw the fifth because you have a right not to bear witness against yourself but by are forced to engage with the officer while there, which could be used as an act of you bearing witness against yourself.

Quote :

"If i arrest someone who was driving while impaired, i look at it as having gotten them off the road before they hurt someone."

reducing the limit from .1 to .08 has resulted in no change in alcohol related deaths and only had a change in number of people arrested. despite this fact, if you have a .08 you still get arrested yet your being in custody has no benefit to society since the .08 and .09 level adjustments have had no impact on alcohol related accidents. thus its about money, pure and simple.

12/15/2008 9:48:10 AM

honestly, i would be more concerned with keeping unisured, unlicensed mexicans off the road than slightly inebriated insured people

12/15/2008 10:06:11 AM

Quote :

"not really. most times these people have left the bar from far away and are going back to a more suburban area where they live. by this point they've already driven a reasonable amount and are probably moving to a less congested area. "

i dont give a shit if they're riding around in the country by themselves, if they're intoxicated, they should not be on the road.

..and where did you get your "facts". did you just make them up?

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 10:12 AM. Reason : e]

12/15/2008 10:12:14 AM

i seriously hate this discussion because people who've had relatives or friends who were killed/injured by intoxicated drivers are gonna come in and start yelling at people and making biased comments.

12/15/2008 10:15:59 AM

Quote :

"but the fact remains that the police need PC to be able to catch you with that sticker...."

Not really, as has been said, since the sticker is clearly visible from the outside of the car, all they need to do is to see it. They can't pull you over for no reason just to check the sticker, but for a checkpoint set up for a legitimate reason, they're certainly entitled to look at the sticker.

With it going electronic, also, be prepared to get caught more often. I'm assuming police don't need any reason to run plates, and that they just do that as a matter of course at traffic lights? On the 4th of July this year, I was stopped at a traffic light, and a police officer pulled up behind me and, after about 30 seconds, turned the lights on. I pulled into a gas station and she came up and apologized, said she had run my plate with an incorrect digit and the car came up as stolen, but she had realized her mistake as soon as she turned the blue lights on. I was kind of surprised that my plate had been run for no reason...

12/15/2008 10:25:36 AM

I have gotten a DUI. And I am glad that I did, in retrospect. If I wouldn't have gotten caught, I probably would have continued driving drunk, and possibly injured/killed myself or someone else.

12/15/2008 10:26:15 AM

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 10:26 AM. Reason : fuck...delayed double post]

12/15/2008 10:26:19 AM

Quote :

"i seriously hate this discussion because people who've had relatives or friends who were killed/injured by intoxicated drivers are gonna come in and start yelling at people and making biased comments."

Because the only people who think drunk driving is a bad idea are people who have had someone affected by it

[Edited on December 15, 2008 at 10:39 AM. Reason : .]

12/15/2008 10:39:04 AM

Quote :

"With it going electronic, also, be prepared to get caught more often."

Also, you won't be able to renew your registration until your vehicle gets inspected. So I wonder if you get hit with a double whammy in that case? Expired tags and out of date inspection.

12/15/2008 10:40:03 AM

Quote :

"Fourth amendment and fifth unreasonable search and that no warrants should be issued without probable cause from number 4. the paperwork they have to perform a checkpoint is essentially a warrant, but is issued without probable cause to an individual and forces you to provide the cop with an opportunity with which to search your car. I saw the fifth because you have a right not to bear witness against yourself but by are forced to engage with the officer while there, which could be used as an act of you bearing witness against yourself."

I don't think you understand correctly how the Constitution applies to searching vehicles.

12/15/2008 10:44:35 AM