DUI Checkpoints in the US. Do you support them or think they're constitutional?

Your friend on Facebook is speaking imprecisely. If you're driving, police can stop you for probably cause and require you to produce your driver's license. Not having it on you in that case is illegal. If you're not driving a vehicle for which you have a license, you are not required to carry identification unless you live in Arizona. DUI checkpoints have been upheld as Constitutional by the SCOTUS since 1990.

I am in favor of these check points; I would rather this than someone get get seriously killed or injured. If you lost someone you love to a drunk driver you would realize there is good reason for it. I did not see you put what the 4th amendment is and that would be helpful in responding to your question. I don't know them by heart without looking it up. I suggest you copy and paste this in paranthisis or quotations so we know can better address this question.

No. After all the violation of rights, they very rarely catch anybody drinking and driving.

probable cause is all thats needed to stop a driver, a little swerve to the right or left is all thats needed and anything that will stop an impaired or drunk driver from killing a family or a car full of children im all for. now if your talking about profiling thats another matter in itself. if a checkpoint saves just 1 life it's worth it and if the people being a little inconvenienced dont like it tuff, how would they feel if it were someone in their family getting killed.

DUI checkpoints don't work the way they should. The only drunk drivers they'll catch are ones who have no friends. If I just left the bar after drinking Coca-Cola all evening and I see a DUI checkpoint on Government Way, I'm going to call my friend and tell her not to go on Government Way between this street and that street because there's a DUI checkpoint there. She calls John, John calls Marti, Marti calls Frank...next thing you know, no one's going down Government Way. Instead of catching a couple hundred drunk drivers, they catch 10. That's better than none, but not as good as a couple hundred. I wish the cops would set up a burned-out headlight checkpoint. They need one.

I actually do support DUI checkpoints. Especially because the only time they are set up is during holidays where there tends to be a higher amount of drinking. In everyday life, of course, I wouldn't agree with it then. But when there is a holiday where drinking and driving is much more probable then yes I support it. As for someone being stripped of their ID for not taking a breathalizer test, I agree with it as well. If they really aren't under the influence then there is no reason to deny the test. Plain and simple. Drinking and Driving isn't only illegal but its deadly. I would definitely prefer the police 'protect us' around those times of year when drinking happens more often then to risk myself or someone I care about getting extremely hurt or killed.

No, I do not support these checkpoints as they violate have no basis in probable cause and really amount to an illegal search. They also have those immigration checkpoints looking for illegals, and some of those are hundreds of miles away from any borders. These things are in violation of our rights and suggest that we are living in a police state where the authorities are now demanding our papers. If something violates the Constitution, then it is not there to protect us, it is there to control us.

Since you and most others in this thread pretty much echoed what I think about it, and since I have already commented in a number of other's responses...I will only add my concurence with you. It is unconstitutional, period.

Funny you should mention checkpoints. We've had those going on in my and surrounding areas lately. They announced when it was going to be too. Some people were still stupid enough to drive drunk even with warning. As someone who spent at least nine months in a body cast as a child because of a drunk driver, I'm not sure how I feel about it.

I have always felt that DUI checkpoints were unconstitutional ever since they started setting up half a block from a popular club in my hometown back in the 80's. There is no probable cause when you're stopping every car on the road. It is my understanding that the AZ law does not instruct law enforcement to stop suspected illegals without probable cause...but we all know that a cop can come up with any half baked reason for stopping someone if he/she wants to.

When I first hit the big 2-1 was about the time that my town really started going crazy with their DUI checkpoints. I never supported them. And not because I was a drunk driver. I never drove at all, much less while drinking. But I always thought they were doing it the wrong way. I'm not sure how the checkpoints are set up in other places, but in my town, they would set them up on the main strip at around 11pm, or on the busiest bypass on weekend afternoons, etc. The vast majority of drivers were sober, obviously, but everyone had to drive through and stop. And yeah, if you decided to turn around and skip it, they would chase your azz down with not only the town car, but a K9 unit and immediately let the dog out. I always thought if they wanted to do it, then set up right outside of a bar with a couple of cars and target the places drunk drivers are leaving - make sure you cut down on the actual bad element. They could use just the threat of having a cop car parked near to cut back on drunk driving better than setting up on the drag. Sure, people drink in other places and drive, but randomly stopping people seems a lot more intrusive and definitely more counterproductive than systematically going after drivers likely to be drunk.