File photo
The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s Santa Clarita Station will be conducting a DUI/Driver’s License Checkpoint on April 24 at an undisclosed location within the City of Santa Clarita, between the hours of 6 p.m. and 2 a.m.
The deterrent effect of DUI checkpoints is a proven resource in reducing the number of persons killed and injured in alcohol or drug involved crashes. Research shows that crashes involving an impaired driver can be reduced by up to 20 percent when well-publicized DUI checkpoints and proactive DUI patrols are conducted routinely.
In California, this deadly crime led to 802 deaths in 2012 because someone failed to designate a sober driver. Nationally, the latest data shows nearly 10,000 were killed by an impaired driver. “Over the course of the past three years in the contract cities policed by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, DUI collisions have claimed 33 lives and resulted in 898 injury crashes harming 1330 of our friends and neighbors,” said Sgt. Daniel A. Dail of Traffic Services Detail.
Deputies will be looking for signs of alcohol and/or drug impairment with officers checking drivers for proper licensing delaying motorists only momentarily. When possible, specially trained officers will be available to evaluate those suspected of drug-impaired driving. Recent statistics reveal that 30 percent of drivers in fatal crashes had one or more drugs in their systems. A study of active drivers showed more tested positive for drugs that may impair driving (14 percent) than did for alcohol (7.3 percent). Of the drugs, marijuana was most prevalent, at 7.4 percent, slightly more than alcohol.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, checkpoints have provided the most effective documented results of any of the DUI enforcement strategies, while also yielding considerable cost savings of $6 for every $1 spent. Nearly 90 percent of California drivers approve of DUI checkpoints.
DUI Checkpoints are placed in locations based on collision statistics and frequency of DUI arrests affording the greatest opportunity for achieving drunk and drugged driving deterrence. Locations are chosen with safety considerations for the officers and the public.
Drivers caught driving impaired can expect the impact of a DUI arrest to include jail time, fines, fees, DUI classes, other expenses that can exceed $10,000 not to mention the embarrassment when friends and family find out.
Funding for these operations is provided to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, reminding everyone to ‘Report Drunk Driver – Call 9-1-1.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Tweet This
Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
RSS
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
49 Comments
Stopping any vehicles without probable cause that those specific drivers have done anything wrong is a tactic used by totalitarian societies.
It is NOT a proper tactic for free and democratic ones.
James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association
Revenue checkpoints
If it keeps drunks off the roads, I’m all for it
But it doesn’t keep drunks off the roads.
But it doesn’t keep drunks off the roads.
It just keep the drunks out of that area
Well that helps,mi don,t mind at all.
The majority of tickets that comes out of these checkpoints are driving without a license or on a suspended license
Where ?
Kris Carrion Susie Neri
I need to show this to Dee
I need to show this to Dee
Yea for wolfs towing
Alessandro Ferro
Dankeshoen mein freund
Good
Taylor Morales
Welcome to Germany!!
Most people are beyond ignorant to our constitution and are brain washed to believe this is a good thing
Welcome to Germany!!
Tish Videgain Coffey Christine Michele Videgain-Tucker
Tish Videgain Coffey Christine Michele Videgain-Tucker
Laura Tellez
We’ll see if they will even tow anybody’s car for no license because they are afraid of being called racist. ..
Papers please!
Papers please!
Here is the basic principle. You are driving toward a DUI checkpoint, and you as the driver are totally sober and in violation of no traffic or other laws. There is NO probable cause to stop you.
Is it OK, or not, to stop and delay you with NO probable cause that you have done anything wrong?
The National Motorists Association says NO. What do you say, and why? Does the goal of finding a tiny percentage of wrong doers justify the wrongful delay and search of the overwhelming percentage of sober and lawful drivers??
The NMA says NO. What do you say? Homeland Security seeks a nationwide database of EVERY WHERE your car goes and when – for permanent retention. Is that OK with you?
These are all related issues. How much privacy are you willing to give up to arrest a very tiny percentage of wrong doers? The NMA says not very much – if you believe in the Constitution.
James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association
They should start in their own parking lot !!! LOL
If you want to catch someone breaking the law, surprise them…don’t run it by them first … Quit posting the day & hours of the checkpoints…
It’s our legal right to know
It’s either going to be by the mall or in canyon country.
Tax collectors!
Patrols are meant to catch active drunks, get them off the streets and prosecute them. Checkpoints are highly visible, highly publicized events meant to deter drinking and driving in the first place.
Patrols have little deterrent value, but high enforcement value. Checkpoints have been shown to have the potential to lower DUI fatality rates by up to 20 percent by virtue of their deterrence. People go through them, drive past them, hear about them via multiple grapevines and get the ongoing impression that drunk driving is dangerous, socially unacceptable, and that law enforcement is actively looking for it.
They are both good tactics and both should be in the arsenal of DUI combating tactics, along with others. In terms of catching drunks, nothing beats patrols. In terms of saving lives, nothing beats checkpoints.
The Constitution does not prohibit all search and seizure, just “unreasonable” search and seizure. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled (see Michigan v. Sitz, 1990) that sobriety checkpoints meet the Fourth Amendment standard of “reasonable search and seizure.” The Court is, by force of Article III of the Constitution itself, the final arbiter and interpreter of the Constitution. We may not agree with what they rule. But what they rule is law until reinterpreted by a later court. We can whine, but they win, not because of a left or right wing conspiracy, but because the Constitution itself says so. In addition, court rulings over the last 20 years have put more and more restrictions on checkpoints, leaving them less obtrusive and more transparent, with less chance of abuse.
Think about it. If it was to generate revenue, why would they publicize it? Keep it quiet so you can rake in more bucks, right? And as it being a revenue generator, the police normally get little and often nothing from the tickets they write. The CHP gets none at all. Cities get a little, counties get some, the courts get a pretty good share for building, operating and security, emergency medical services get some for cleaning up after crashes, the State gets some, there is some for getting DNA samples from those in jail, and the list goes on.
If you really want to protest the cost of a ticket, there is a foolproof way to do it, to thwart their evil, money grubbing intentions. Just don’t break the laws! No violation, no ticket, no revenue generated to the government! What could be simpler? Done deal. Starve them with compliance.
When people complain about checkpoints, calling them Nazi tactics, they are forgetting one thing. When those regimes “asked for papers,” that meant show me your state-issued internal passport that often said who you were, what job you had, where you were allowed to travel to, what restrictions on your movements had been placed on you, what religion you were. If you were someplace you weren’t supposed to be, you got arrested. At DUI checkpoints, they ask for your drivers license, which you must have to operate the vehicle you are driving. And they check to see if you show signs of impairment. That is vastly different than Nazi “show me your papers,” shows a lack of understanding of history as well as demeans what the people of Germany and Europe went through.
The NMA believes that Michigan versus Sitz was decided wrongly by the court. Stopping a driver with absolutely no probable cause they have done anything wrong is unreasonable.
I have lived and worked in two places with the totalitarian “Papers Please” methods – Russia and the Czech Republic. I fully understand what it means, and what it means is wrong.
James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association
They’re just doing their job people. Don’t drink and drive and you won’t have to worry about it.
Except that I get stopped and interrogated with NO probable cause. That is 100% wrong, regardless of the bad Supreme Court decision.
James C. Walker, Life Member – National Motorists Association
I agree with you Brian.
I agree with you Brian.
Grasias
To bad they don’t set up in Lancaster and palmdale to catch all the drunks out there.
How about drivers license and prove of insurance if they don’t have them tow the vehicles and sell them to pay for schools books street repairs. No they can’t buy them back !! And if illegal one way ticket to Iran so they come back!!!!!!!!!
How about drivers license and prove of insurance if they don’t have them tow the vehicles and sell them to pay for schools books street repairs. No they can’t buy them back !! And if illegal one way ticket to Iran so they come back!!!!!!!!!
How about drivers license and prove of insurance if they don’t have them tow the vehicles and sell them to pay for schools books street repairs. No they can’t buy them back !! And if illegal one way ticket to Iran so they come back!!!!!!!!!