I generally agree with the idea of keeping government and local police out of the affairs of citizens unless they have cause. And I understand the slippery slope with stuff like this. Give an inch and they can try to take a mile. But standing on the side of the road with signs informing people of checkpoints ahead isn't solving anything. The majority of people who will be glad to see those signs and have that info are those who are under the influence and a possible danger to themselves and others. I don't have all the answers, but I have to think there is a better way to attack an issue like this if it's important to you.

When you come up with a better idea, I'm sure these folks will be all ears. Until then, your criticisms are empty air - precisely because you have no better solution to offer.

The point of this is to comment and my comments reflect what most people are seeing on the surface of this...of what it comes across as. It comes across as a bunch of yahoo's trying to help intoxicated drivers avoid detection. I can now see the message is deeper than that, but that is the image that is being portrayed here and obviously that can't be helping their cause. As for solutions...it's not something that I spend any time thinking about. It's not much of an issue to me at all. But I would imagine it would make more sense to get to the source of the funding for these programs.

Jim E, can you actually point to any evidence that supports your claim that the nullifiers support the idea of people driving drunk freely and without any kind of intervention? Did one of them say this? Was it written on a sign? Can you cite a quote from a news article or video?

George, I never claimed that.

George...

First impressions and appearance

When I looked at those pictures and there are signs that say "Cops Ahead, EXIT NOW!" & "WARNING, Checkpoint Ahead"...and a bunch of young people smiling for the camera, it creates the impression of what I said...that of a bunch of yahoo's trying to help intoxicated drivers avoid detection.

I can see that is not their goal, but if that is the impression and appearance it creates for a lot of people, than I can't imagine it is helping their cause.

I never got that impression and you can't seem to provide any evidence that lead a reasonable person to reach your conclusion.

I'm a reasonable person and so are a lot of the people commenting here. Good luck with your campaign George.

That's very kind of you but IIRC I'm not currently running any campaigns.

Oh, I assumed you were the same George Donnelly that turned up in a google search with a website and youtube channel of the same name, discussing this subject.

Jim E. -- Don't forget the "YoLo" (You Only Live Once) sign with the girl holding it rolling her eyes. That's the one photo that really drove home the lack of seriousness in their protest for me.

Yeah Marc...they look ridiculous. George can't see it because he is too close to this issue.

I stated this in the other article and I'll state this again directly in response to your post above:

A DUI checkpoint is not a stepping stone towards communism or zones where free speech is forbidden (as you specifically mention). And even if I can't convince you of this, what sort of timetable do you think they are using? I mean, it was 1990 when the U.S. Supreme Court declared that they were in fact not only legal but constitutional. If you only count from that point forward there has been no change in 22 years towards checkpoints of a more drastic nature. There haven't been marijuana checkpoints...illegal alien checkpoints... What kind of infringements are you thinking are SUDDENLY going to take place when they haven't progressed to anything more in over two decades? Nothing is marching over the horizon and you have no proof other than your own baseless speculation.

This is nothing more than fear-speak from a fringe political group. This is "sky is falling" scare tactics that prey on people who fear losing civil liberties only when the other party is in charge. These checkpoints are nothing more than officers upholding the law & keeping the streets safe from drunk drivers.

A suspicionless DUI checkpoint is not a stepping stone to anything. It IS fascist and against the principles of legal order that have been honored for almost a thousand years.

You know what's REALLY against the principles of legal order than have been observed for almost a thousand years? Drunk driving. Let's stop protecting the idiots who get behind the wheel drunk and start supporting the authorities who make an effort to stop it from happening. I'm sorry that you feel that your rights are being infringed upon when an officer stops you in a line of cars for 30 seconds. But I'd rather drive through a sobriety checkpoint every day than see my wife killed by a drunk driver. It is not fascism. Sorry to tell you that the SCOTUS has a different (and more accurate) interpretation of our Constitution than you do.

Comments here are broken. Patch.com you really need to fix this. I was logged in 5 mins ago. I write a reply, go to post it and it's lost because suddenly I'm not logged in.

Am I supposed to believe, Marc, that drunk drivers are magically attracted to this one little checkpoint and that they're all going to come out on just this one night every 1-2 weeks? Where do the cops get these magical powers? It must be so nice not having to patrol like they used to. They can just sit back and wait for the drunks to come to them.

And if that's not true, then we need checkpoints on every street corner 24/7/365. Half-measures simply will not do.

There you go again talking in baseless hyperbole and absolutes. I never said that "drunk drivers are magically attracted" to sobriety checkpoints. But do you honestly think that the police just pick random locations, or do you think that thought is put into it -- such as where most DUI offenders are caught or where most drunk driving accidents happen? Then you say "It must be so nice not having to patrol like they used to. They can just sit back and wait for the drunks to come to them." As if the police are NOT patrolling? Do you think that sobriety checkpoints suddenly mean no other officers are out driving around or stationed looking for not just drunk drivers but other crimes.

You talk of fascism but you propose, what? Anarchy? (Of course you don't. That would be foolish. But you can't honestly think that a DUI checkpoint is fascism either.)

Again, no one is saying that 24/7/365 checkpoints are needed at every street corner EXCEPT for those opposed to DUI checkpoints. No proponents are asking for anything like that, nor do we think that's a realistic possibility. But fear tactics like that help the Libertarians scare people into stuff like that. You can wave your Don't Tread on Me flag & yell about doom & gloom all you want...it doesn't mean any of it is true.

And if that's not true, then we need checkpoints on every street corner 24/7/365. Half-measures simply will not do.

Actually, Marc, yes, I am an anarchist. Look up Robert Murphy's book "Private Law" for one very promising model for how to handle law and order without a state.

My last post was an attempt to make you understand that a checkpoint is not effective. There is no guarantee that all the drunks are going to roll through that one little checkpoint. That regular patrols make more sense.

And if you really don't think a suspicionless checkpoint is fascism, then you should have no opposition to have one on every corner 24/7/365.

Have a nice day.

George: You say that there are no guarantee that all of the drunks will pass through sobriety checkpoints and I'm not sure whether you're saying that on purpose KNOWING that it is not the intent to catch ALL drunk drivers that way.

Let's look at a recent example: Here's when a University of Pittsburgh basketball player was arrested when he took off from a DUI checkpoint in Beaver Falls, PA.
http://www.lostlettermen.com/5-15-2012-carl-krauser-arrested/

Here's an article on a DUI arrests at a checkpoint while another DUI arrest was made that same night (proving that the checkpoints are not the ONLY way they are finding drunk drivers when the checkpoints are posted):
http://lowersouthampton.patch.com/articles/state-police-make-three-dui-related-arrests

You keep asking for proof for things -- so here's the proof.