Friday, March 9, 2012

Sobriety Checkpoints: Making Streets Safer or Violating Constitutional Rights?


As most of us probably know, the highway can be a very dangerous place at times. It can be especially dangerous on holidays such as the 4th of July and St. Patrick’s Day when many people choose to consume large amounts of alcohol and drive. As a result, many of us have probably been forced to stop at a sobriety checkpoint. Though some argue that they are unconstitutional, I believe that the benefits out weigh the costs.
According to lawinfo.com, sobriety check points are roadblocks set up on anonymous highways with the purpose of catching drunk drivers. Generally, law enforcement will announce ahead of time that a road block will be taking place, but they will not announce where it will be. Law enforcement also usually sets these roadblocks up during the night, weekends, or on holidays in the belief that there will be more people driving impaired at these times. Another key aspect of a sobriety checkpoint is randomness. The method of determining who gets stopped and who does not must be completely random in order to ensure fairness. Some jurisdictions solve this by stopping everyone; others select every 12th car, for example.
There are many potential benefits to sobriety checkpoints. In announcing when there will be sobriety checkpoints, but not where, it seems that law enforcement is hoping that there will be a deterrent effect. It makes sense that if people knew that they would be more likely to be pulled over, they would be less likely to drive under the influence. Another benefit to sobriety checkpoints is that they effectively remove impaired drivers from the road. This makes the roads much safer for everyone, and helps to prevent accidents before they happen. Another good aspect of sobriety checkpoints is the fact that they are random. If law enforcement is instructed to stop everyone, then there is no room for prejudice or discrimination, which makes it more just for everyone.
According to duicheckpoints.org, the argument against sobriety checkpoints centers on the 4th amendment. The 4th amendment protects citizens against unreasonable searches and requires that law enforcement have probable cause to arrest or to search private property. Some people consider sobriety checkpoints to violate this because officers do not have probable cause to pull all drivers over. The Supreme Court has ruled that, while checkpoints do violate this constitutional right, the state’s authority to decrease drunk driving outweighs this minor encroachment on citizen’s rights. Though the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of sobriety checkpoints, many states have taken it upon themselves to declare them illegal either due to violating the federal constitution or the state constitution.  Currently, sobriety checkpoints are conducted in 38 states, including Illinois, and prohibited in 12. (For a complete list click here ). In a few states, it is also law that citizens do not have to respond to officers if they ask whether they have been drinking because this would violate the 5th amendment, which guards citizens against self-incrimination.
To summarize, sobriety checkpoints do infringe on the rights of citizens, but in the eyes of the Supreme Court, the benefit of removing impaired drivers from the roads and deterring them from driving altogether outweighs this infringement. Though sobriety check points can be frustrating, as evidenced by the YouTube video, most people accept them, and are glad they are conducted because they make the roads safer for everyone.  

References
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCJFI07sO3k
http://resources.lawinfo.com/en/Articles/drunk-driving-defense/Federal/the-constitutionality-of-sobriety-checkpoints.html
http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/checkpoint_laws.html
http://www.duicheckpoints.org/legalitysobrietycheckpoints.html

12 comments:

  1. This was a very interesting post, that i agree with 100 percent. Sobriety check points are a great way to obviously get drunk drivers off the road, but also ensure the safety of other drivers. So what if it's infringing on the rights of the constitition, its also against the law to drive under the influence but that hasn't stopped certain people from doing it. I think these are a great idea especially on drinking holidays such as the fourth of July like you mentioned as well as St. Patricks day and new years. Its not violating any rights in my opinion if it is keeping other drivers safe. This goes back to the utilitarian ethics that we studied earlier in the year regarding these sobriety checkpoints yielding the greatest good for the greatest number of people by getting hammered drivers off the road and keeping the sober ones safe.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree that the use of sobriety check points is a great tool used by police. The check points allow officers to check vehicle occupants and determine if they have been drinking. The check points are not invasive, and for the most part, are passed through fairly quickly. Whenever I have driven through a check point it has not burdened my time by much more than a couple of minutes. I feel safer when the police are out in the public eye screening for dangerous or intoxicated drivers. The use of check points may deter some drivers from acting recklessly by driving under the influence. I also agree that they are beneficial during the holidays when drinking is more abundant. Any tool that is not very invasive and protects public safety should be used as a resource by law enforcement.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I believe these checkpoints are making streets safer. If you know you're not supposed to be drinking and driving, then just don't do it. This isn't a violation of constitutional rights, in my opinion. The police are SO predictable with these blockades, however. People drink every night of the week and the police only make these blockades on holidays. Throw one of these on Willow St. on a random Thursday/Friday/Saturday night, and the police will nab 15+ DUIs.

    The police need to be a little more unpredictable with this valuable tool. They shouldn't just throw a blockade down on St. Patrick's Day / 4th of July / Labor Day / Black Wednesday / New Year's Eve . . Again, people are drinking and driving every night of every week. Sobriety Checkpoints are underutilized, but VERY predictable at the same time.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This was an intriguing post, it had great information and I too believe that having random checkpoints are making the streets safer especially during holidays. I don't think it violates our rights, because if you are sober then you have nothing to worry about and they check cars randomly. I think its a great system and should be used more often.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This was a very well written and interesting article which I completely agree with. I feel that the benefits of sobriety checkpoints totally outweigh the disadvantages of their use. Drunk driving is a huge problem in today's society and I believe that any possible method or program that can be used to combat the issue should be utilized to their max potential. I am alright with taking a few minutes out of my night to go through these checkpoints as long as they are taking impaired drivers off the street. One of my good buddies has lost the use of his legs because a ignorant individual choose to drink and drive one night which makes this is an issue that I do not take lightly. I feel that there should be much more of these checkpoints and they should not be so predictable. The checkpoints are usually on the same streets at around the same time of year which allows many people to avoid them because they are aware of them. The police should utilize strategies that makes their use much more unpredicatable and random. In addition, I find it crazy that some states have taken it upon themselves to outlaw the use of checkpoints because they believe it violates the 4th amendment right. I feel that these states are being dangerously ingnorant to the severity of drunk driving.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Though I do agree that road blocks are a great tool to prevent and detour drunk driving, I also believe that some states are pushing the limits when it comes to infringing on citizen's rights. Now some states are testing out roadside blood draws by police officers. I personally think this is pushing the envelope a little too far. I think it is ironic that the supreme court would find road side blocks as violating our 4th amendment rights but ok because the benefit outweighs the minor encroachment on our rights, yet someone who has been charged with murder and proven to be guilty can walk free because the manner in which the evidence was gathered infringed on their rights. It just doesn't make any sense to me. But then again nothing in the criminal justice system makes any sense anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I believe that this is a great idea that the law enforcement has come up with.  If people know about this road block and still decide to drink and drive well then they deserve to go into jail and get all the fines. I think this method will help keep our roads safer and keep drunk drivers off the roads. I think if I was driving I would g frustrated just because it would cause traffic but if you real ly think about what it's helping and preventing then it is worth it. I think they should do it on road in towns a s well as the highways. When I was driving to Spring Break this year, the car I was in and every car around was got stopped for insurance, license, and seeing if there as any open alcohol in the cars. I think it's a great way to keep draft driving! 

    ReplyDelete
  8. I have been stopped at one of these check points like many other people have and I don't really have a problem with it. On holidays like the 4th of July and St. Patrick's day many people participate in drinking throughout the entire day. I think that if people want to do that they should not be driving and that the check points are probably a good deterrent not to do so. I know there are the arguments about these being unconstitutional and violating rights but I think it is worth it. I would rather be stopped in one of these on a day where drinking is heightened rather than risk someone being injured or killed by a drunk driver. I read in someone else's comment about how the check points are often in the same spots and therefore people avoid them. I agree that law enforcement should switch them around so the drunk people aren't just skipping that part of town. I also think that announcing that there will be check points is smart because when people are stopped in them they knew it was coming.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am a 100% for soberity checkpoints. For the amount of innocent people being killed every year from drunk drivers this seems to be a no brainer to have these checkpoints placed throughout the country. I believe they should have soberity checkpoints year round. Drunk driving happens every single day, and I believe the only way to attempt to lower the death rates related to drunk driving is to have soberity checkpoints established year round. I understand why some people may say it is violating their rights, but for those people picture yourself in somebody's elses shoes who has lost someone close to them from drunk driving. A lot of people may think it is unconstitutional, but what if a drunk driving accident affected them. I bet they would re-think their opinion on having soberity checkpoints.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I agree with most of the preceding points stated. I am 100% in favor of roadside sobriety/ safety checkpoints. Driving is a privilege, not a right. When citizens are issued a driver's license they should understand the rights they are being granted and that they can be taken away. Keeping our innocent citizens safe is the most important factor of this issue. The possible deterence drastically outweighs the potential fatalities that could result from drunk driving. For those people who argue that sobriety checkpoints but "dont drink and drive," then you should have nothing to worry about.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I will say that I'm all for these sobriety/safety checkpoints. I agree that announcing that these types of stops will be happening over big drinking holiday will deter people from even thinking about driving their vehicle. The people who aren't driving intoxicated receiving tickets for no insurance, license, or not wearing a seatbelt, driving is a privilege and you need to respect the rules of the road. People might get frustrated for having to stop at these checkpoints, but safety is the number one aspect and they are preventing a drunk driver from causing a death somewhere down the road.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I generally love the idea of sobriety checkpoints, and this is coming from a guy who lived off orlando, just past where they setup on main, for 2 years. I mean sure it was slightly inconvenient, but wow did i see them snag alot of people. It doesnt take long for them to see who is and who isn't problematic, but people seem to make it that way. It wasn't even that much of a nuisance, because at least here in Normal, the cops were surprisingly amicable and left me alone most every time. Occasionally they would just let me keep driving by and not even stop me. Only about half of the times did they shine the flashlight and take my id to see how i was doing. It could be because i do not drink, but i think we all can appreciate safety of our lives. I just know some are not too fond of the cost of the ticket tho =D

    ReplyDelete