Politicians in Wa state want to implement police check points

Being from Washington this story really upsets me. Washington is normally on the progressive side of issues and looking out for the public, but this is a horrific idea reminiscient of the old communist police states. Being able to randomly stop people whenever for no cause is the worst idea ever, IMO and I hope that we can stop this before it ever gets started.

Random sobriety checkpoints? Lawmakers look to act next year

seattletimes.com...

CB328
Being from Washington this story really upsets me. Washington is normally on the progressive side of issues and looking out for the public, but this is a horrific idea reminiscient of the old communist police states. Being able to randomly stop people whenever for no cause is the worst idea ever, IMO and I hope that we can stop this before it ever gets started.

Random sobriety checkpoints? Lawmakers look to act next year

seattletimes.com...

Welcome to the wonderful world of "21st Century democratic rule"...you were warned it was coming...

reply to post by CB328


Hmm, I figured people have the right to be left alone.
/shrug Is drinking and driving a some sort of hardcore problem out your way?

reply to post by CB328


This *IS* what the ultra Left does.

It's called totalitarianism.

Get ready for more.

Legislative staff is drafting language for a new bill to authorize checkpoints, which would stop drivers even if they have done nothing wrong. The controversial idea that would likely require a constitutional amendment.

reply to post by CB328


I'd kill for a checkpoint that sits still where I can just drive around it or armor my vehicle to run right over it if absolutely necessary... in my neck of the woods the cops will just randomly pass a bunch of cars, slam to a halt in front of them, and give everyone the business as they come through.

reply to post by CB328


This is nothing new for us...

Our work causes us to travel all the time and in a few states like Louisiana, Mississippi and Arkansas for example, we've been stopped and checked hundreds of times at check points over the years.
No big deal

Usually they check for drivers license, your insurance, if you're from a state that requires inspection stickers -it will be checked to see if it's up to date- seat belts, as well as checking for drunk drivers.


Only one time did we get pissed at a cop, because when we got off work, which was late and went through a roadblock the cop instantly claimed he smelled beer --which we don't drink -- and I told him our blazer may smell musty but there has never ever been any beer what so ever in the truck. Finally he let us go but it was so irritating, the false implication.

Most of the time, the cops are nice overall and don't over step the line.
Just making sure every one is legit and NOT drunk, which is definitely a good thing IMO.


But yeah, roadblocks are a nuisance but needed......unfortunately

=========

ETA: Especially since 9/11 ..... we've noticed 'spot' checks on the increase

Nephalim
reply to post by CB328

 

Hmm, I figured people have the right to be left alone.
/shrug Is drinking and driving a some sort of hardcore problem out your way?

If the LE community would come out and say "heck NO, we ain't Nazi Germany!"

But, then again that would take putting HONOR and INTEGRITY before the paycheck and pension.

FAT CHANCE!

reply to post by CB328


OMG!!! You must be having a personal epiphany. Progressive is the less frightening word for "communist". Look up the history and don't say that people who really believe in freedom haven't been warning you of this for years - decades, even.

We've had R.I.D.E. programs here in Canada for probably at least 20 years. Doesn't really seem to bother anybody as it doesn't get abused, at least not overtly. Has it made a difference in drunk driving? I would hazard a yes on that so by that metric it's a good thing.
Would I recommend it in the US? Probably not as you seem to have a problem with LEO's overstepping their authority and abusing the rights of citizens. Not to say we don't have bad apples also as anyone paying attention to the news up here would know some of the abuses we've recently had.

reply to post by CB328


I grew up in Maine, a very blue state back then, and hardly a bastion of conservatism today. We had those checkpoints back in the 80's and they didn't do jack squat. Relying on the fact that it was 25+ years ago I'll admit to having gone through them, underage, and drunk. They stopped me, asked me where I'd been and where I was going, and sent me on my way. Still driving drunk and underage. Absolutely useless.

Anyways, that's what progressive is all about, man, they're doing it for "the greater good", right?

CB328
but this is a horrific idea reminiscient of the old communist police states. Being able to randomly stop people whenever for no cause is the worst idea ever

We've had random breath testing in Australia for many many years now, and most people here would probably say they're a good idea since they've certainly reduced the number of drunks on the roads.

In practise, the concept does not even remotely approach the "old communist police states" that you think of. Because the idea is to test as many drivers as possible, you dont even get asked to produce any documentation, paperwork, or even get asked your name or anything else. The police like to run them through as quick as possible so at the end of the shift they can say they tested 2000 drivers.

Stop. Blow in the tube for a few seconds. Be on your way.
But thats Australia.
American police on the other hand, will probably just start shooting random drivers because they own a dog.

Looks like its a republican drafting this bill actually.

I'd hardly call the GOP progressive.

Well as many like to say, "if you have nothing to hide, then....". I guess it only applies to others. Until it applies to you......then it is a problem?

reply to post by Spookybelle


I'd just like to add that I don't see much difference between the "progressive" democrats and the republicans these days.

I think they are both scared of the american people these days, that have seen the havoc they have done to this country in the last 30 years.

Progressive democrats wanted communism last week, republicans want communism tomorrow.

Yeah, we're used to that here in KY, I am not a fan of "commonwealth" states.

reply to post by Krakatoa


I'm just paraphrasing, but we all know the old adage:

First, they came for the disabled and retarded - but I'm not retarded,

Then they came for the homosexuals - but I'm not a homosexual,

Then they came for the elderly infirm - but I'm not an old sick person......

xuenchen
reply to post by CB328

 

This *IS* what the ultra Left does.

It's called totalitarianism.

Get ready for more.

Legislative staff is drafting language for a new bill to authorize checkpoints, which would stop drivers even if they have done nothing wrong. The controversial idea that would likely require a constitutional amendment.

Rep. Brad Klippert, R-Kennewick, said this week that his staff is drafting language for a new bill to authorize the checkpoints, which would stop drivers even if they have done nothing wrong.

Kirkland Democrat Roger Goodman, the chairman of the state House Public Safety Committee, said he plans to hold a hearing on the proposal.

Both lawmakers said they don’t know whether their colleagues would support the idea, which if framed as a constitutional amendment would need support from two-thirds of each chamber.

So Mr. Klippert is a member of the "ultra left?" You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Ever heard of Stop-and-Frisk? Seems like under the Republican mayor of NYC, hundreds of thousands of people a year are unjustly searched regardless of the lack of probable cause. You may ask, what is the legal justification for infringing upon the 4th amendment rights of these freedom loving citizens of our great nation? Well I'm glad you asked!

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous."[1]

source (WP)

Guess who the Chief Justice was? Republican Earl Warren, the same guy who as Attorney General was behind putting American citizens of Japanese descent in internment camps during WWII.

Getting back to DUI check points. I'm of the opinion that as with Stop-and-Frisk, check points infringe upon our 4th amendment protections against unlawful searches due to insufficient probable cause. I'd point to the 1979 SCOTUS ruling in Delaware v. Prouse to which Nixon/Reagan Chief Justice William Rehnquist filed the dissenting opinion. Just another fun fact, Rehnquist also wrote the dissenting opinion to Roe v Wade, was a supporter of state-sanctioned school prayer and voted against desegregation programs.

I just moved back to Washington from Idaho, and at least these sobriety checkpoints have some thought behind them.

Over in Idaho, the police department does not following any rules regarding anything. I was already pulled over 10 or more times during the past year for makeshift reasons in order to do sobriety testing, including taking tests for drunk driving, which I passed because I was sober.

All of my friends and even my parents, as well, and my P.S.R. worker at the time. One of my room-mates had a court date that was changed on him without being notified, and when I drove him there, he was immediately arrested because he had a bench warrant. It was for a D.U.I. -

The next time we had to court was to turn in his paperwork, but when we got there, we found out that his court date did not exist in the system - and talked to the county clerk, and she told us we simply had to pay his fine, which had been outsourced to a private company.

Low and behold, a month and a half later, the police come with a warrant to arrest my room-mate for not turning in his paperwork...

My point is, Idaho is harder for me to deal with - because the police department there doesn't seem to be following any kinds of predictable protocols, I mean, not reporting my contraband on the police report? Reporting the wrong stuff?

Maybe it's just more easy-going over there. But it's so unpredictable!

They could just be doing their job and really care about everyone's well-being, and I never had trouble with the police department being a problem, I mean I just answered their questions and was good to go when I got pulled over for random sobriety testing.

At least in Washington State, though, things are predictable and in some kind of order.

--

But you know, I'm not really sure what to think, I can't make heads or tails of any of it.

I'm just going to go ahead and say that we need a lot of law enforcement reform across the board.

reply to post by theantediluvian


I don't think any of us believe the check points are just looking for drunk drivers. They are looking for anything - and they've got all the info they need by your driver's license, or car plates.

"republican" bloomberg in NYC is a fine example of the republican communists.

Hilarious to see people partisan shilling about these things...when are people going to wake up?