Seat Belt and DUI Checkpoints

This is how revenue is raised without saying the "T" word -- MA is famous for doing this. It keeps the sheep happy with whom they voted for, & it ensures their re-election time, & time, & time again. (I.E. Fat Teddy K.)

Hey, great! We have lower taxes!(HYPOTHETICAL) Yaaay for the state goverment! Then you take a ride to try & earn a paycheck & get hit with a $200 ticket because your not driving an $80,000 piece of euro trash... The $200 isn't the bad part.....that's just the foreplay. The inurance co.'s ram it home with A 6 YEAR SURCHARGE!!! This state has made THOUSANDS off of me, & has kept me in the lower class up until very recently. The way things are going, I'll be back where I started (TAXachusetts).

As soon as you start reading gloom & doom in the newspaper, begin training yourself to use all your mirrors, & scan every driveway & parking lot, because you know the fellas are gonna be sittin' somewhere....

cookieman wrote:I agree with Richard, these DUI checks are unconstitutional! I live in N/E Ohio and checks are very common. There was an article in the local newspaper about a month ago that the DUI checks were partly responsible for two restaurant/bars closing. Our area has been hit very hard by the recession. We don't need any small business closings due to these Gestapo like tactics The drunk drivers need to be stopped, but there has to be a better way

For years, the town of Cedar Grove,N.J., had the highest per capita rate of DWI arrests in the state. They were very tricky. At around 9:00PM on the weekends, they would go around to the local bars and put a piece of electrical tape on one headlight of each car. Then about 01:00 AM, they would sit out on the main road out of town, and watch for cars with tape on their lights.

SuperBeetle wrote:I was in Berks County earlier today visiting my daughter. I saw 3 PSP Troopers on I-81 and 2 on I-78 on the way there. On the way back I saw 1 on I-78 and 2 on I-81. Seems like they were out today watching and waiting. Everyone seemed to be on good behavior for a change. Saw one Trooper on US 15 on the way back as well. Haven't been stopped at a checkpoint in a few years. It's somewhat annoying I suppose but, then again I have nothing to hide.

I had this argument with a NJ state trooper once, about speed traps. His argument was that they save lives, by slowing people down. I argued that they were a monry maker, and nothing more. My argument was that, to slow people down, and save lives, they need to be out and visible. They don't do that. They hide in the bushes.

When New York first began to introduce a seat belt law, the public was up in arms about the possibility of check points being set up just to check seat belts.

The head of the New York State Police at the time assured everyone that they would not be doing that.

Of course when the bill was passed, no such prohibition was placed within the bill.

Now some 15 or so years later, they do it all the time.

Thei motto is "To Server and Protect", it really should be "To Intimidate and Enforce".

The stops are a little tricky. I have been through a seat belt check in MA and a DUI check in ME. Neither one asked
for papers. The seat belt check was painless. No chit chat, "thanks have a nice day", the DUI stop in ME was more involved.
Three cops, 10-15 and 20 yards apart in a line on the road. You stop at the first one, and he looks you over all kinds of serious
trying to see and smell what he can. He tells you to drive up to the next, in a really low voice, so you have to ask him to repeat. The next guy, tells you to stop, then quickly go on. The third guy tells you to stop, gives you the little paper with
the blurb about protecting the road ways, move on!
The set up was pretty slick, and if you had a buzz on, you were going DOWN. The uneven stops were designed to screw you
up, and could easily stone cold sober. With a buzz......no way, you were meat for the court.
As far as the stops being legal, they are. Why should myself and my family be at risk because some Joe Blow is too stupid
not to drink and drive? Should the same dumb ass be allowed to hide behind the constitution to cover for his bad behavior? Driving is not a right. But even if it were, the constitution would protect the innocent, not the criminally negligent. The police have a fighter pilot mantra when it comes to drunk driving. They hunt and stalk drunk drivers, recording arrests/kills with the
stickers on the cars. Many have made ACE, which tells you a little something about the prevalence of drinking and driving.
The seat belt law is a non issue. It would be fine not to have them if every one covered there own medical costs. They
do not, so the belts must be on. You want to crush yourself, fine, but I do not want to pay for it.

We grew up in Albany, NY. (1960's) My brother had a tall tale about his friend who rigged a simple hidden switch under his dashboard, that killed one headlight. He would drive around until he got pulled over and then turn the headlight on just to confound the officer.

Interesting timing on this thread. I just read an article in my Smithonian mag. about the invention of the seat belt. 2 different studies, 1975 and 1981 reached the conclusion that there was no overall decrease in fatalities on the highways. This is because the security of the seatbelt made people take more risks so they ran over more pedestrians! But the gov. still intrudes into our lives and keeps up the buckle up or ticket mantra.

Kevin

And Paulie, you don't pay for my insurance so not sure what the point is? Everyone has to be insured to drive now.

Sounds like a long night! As a kid, we did everything we could not to have anything to do with the cops. The idea of actually
"toying" with them never would have come up. Time spent on the side of the road being questioned was time away from
the pursuit of girls.

I don`t like or agree with the so called safety-dui stops but it has almost become a neccessary evil. The almost robot like attitude of some of the officers should be addressed. The worst thing I have heard of is a guy that I went to school with had a few drinks, left the club, then on the way home decided he was to the point where he shouldn`t drive. Being prudent he pulled off into the parking lot of a old store that is no longer there & went to sleep. In the morning a local cop pulled in & issued him a ticket for DUI even despite his passing a test. The judge said that because he admitted that he pulled over due to affects of alcohol that he admitted to DUI.

Theres many ways to go on this , well actually only two. the,"you dont pay my insurance" way is valid till the un-insured guy kills somebody..... the PITA dui stops suck, till someone you know or love is killed by a dui driver.

the seat belt thing has come almost full circle for me as the new 6 air bag cars do a dam good job instead if the ole collar-bone bruisers....

I have been on both sides of these two issues and the safe and healthy side is a better way to go

Dann757 wrote:We grew up in Albany, NY. (1960's) My brother had a tall tale about his friend who rigged a simple hidden switch under his dashboard, that killed one headlight. He would drive around until he got pulled over and then turn the headlight on just to confound the officer.

Not giving away anything that hasn't been published b4, but we used to have our cars (DEA) rigged up with the same switch so that we could turn on/off different lights at night to present different looks to bad guys in their rear-view mirrors when doing surveillance at night.

Hmm, maybe I was not clear about that. I was not suggesting that we should condone drunk driving. But to argue about paying for health costs because I dont wear one is silly. The cost of insurance did not go down to the consumer after the laws were enacted. IF there was a savings, it was put in the pockets of the insurance companies. The studies show that fatalities OVERALL did not decrease so the exposure to the insurance co. was not decreased. It just shifted to cyclist, pedestrians, etc. Of course, if you drive off after killing someone it helps your insurer out. Even more if you just wing em. The insurance companies NEVER do anything for the public good solely. It is all about risk lowering behavior for there profits. Sometimes this is seen as an improvement to our overall safety but it is a side effect only.
Stopping people for safety checks is just the government helping out the insurance companies on our dime. And the effects are marginal on really stopping the problem as years of history have shown us. But someone will invariably say,"If only one life is saved it has been worth it." and send us down the same road that takes away more of our personal liberties. Prosocute people that break the law, take away their privileges to drive etc., and accept that some will still do it and innocent people may be harmed. Nothing is 100% and accidents will still happen, but dont turn us into a police state because "this cant be allowed to happen ever again".
Just another thought, where do you stop with the idea that risky behavior should be outlawed or regulated out of existence? More peope are hurt on their stairs and in the bathtub then anyplace else. How about the recent ski death of the movie star? Should we ban skiing except in a blow up rubber suit with a neck restraint helmet in place? Has anyone seen the joke poster of the cowboy after OSHA got done with him and his horse? The article in Smithsonian went on to talk about how we are hardwired for risk and will seek it out. A look on YouTube will show a whole bunch of this kind of behavior. Getting way off topic, gotta end this ramble.

Kevin

Kevin

you are 100% right with all your points

more than 95% of dui folks drive without the "lisence" after .... at least a few times
all criminals using unlisenced guns didn't care about rules or regs.

I would think those taped headlight folks who were at the bar @ 1 am from 9p were buzzed enough to cause serious harm. sounds like a dirty trick but i bet it worked pretty good

there is no perfect answer to mankinds humanity flaws i guess.

I live minutes from the Canadian border and an indian reservation that spans the border. Roadblocks are a regular part of driving the roads up here it seems like there is one setup on one road or an other all summer (don't know if they catch more in the summer or if it is nicer weather to stand outside in all day) .Between the border patrol ,sheriff, state police, and the town police it seems like we are way overmanned in our sparcely populated area. Now I hear they are going to start to strickly enforce our traffic laws because of the increase of drug trafficing through the area.

Paulie wrote:Sounds like a long night! As a kid, we did everything we could not to have anything to do with the cops. The idea of actually
"toying" with them never would have come up. Time spent on the side of the road being questioned was time away from
the pursuit of girls.

Some girls like this lisa, need to be left on the side of the road!! caution drunk chick ahead