Are Roadblocks Constitutional?

[uscitizen]

If you are refering to DUI checkpoints, yes they are federally constitutional, .

Of course, they are , They are also constitutional in Cuba and similar police states .

The bastards inside the DC beltway have completely obliterated , decimated, annulled the 4th Amendment.

Heil Hitler.

Hey lets not forget the bastiches in our own states and communities as well.
and those ladies in church that belong to MADD.

 

[Immanuel]

Our little two-horse town is allegedly going to be conducting a comprehensive roadblock campaign this upcoming weekend, stopping everybody who is unfortunate enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time to be assessed for alcohol levels. They must be really hard up for money. Natch, I had plans to attend someone's BD party, replete with live band and, of course, 'potent' libations.

This whole thing strikes me as a blatant disregard for the 4th amendment. Your thoughts?

I have a suggestion.

When you go to the birthday party, take a designated driver or a cab.

I wouldn't risk the DUI charge on taking such a case all the way to the Supreme Court.

Immie

 

[uscitizen]

This isn't Stuporbowl sunday is it?

 

[Article 15]

What is their probable cause to stop me?

?

 

[lawbuff]

What is their probable cause to stop me?

Probable cause is the standard for arrest, not necessarily a detention. I know you don't agree with that though.

 

[Article 15]

What is their probable cause to stop me?

Probable cause is the standard for arrest, not necessarily a detention. I know you don't agree with that though.

So a cop can pull over any car he or she wants to for no reason whatsoever?

 

[Modbert]

don't let them evil government agents stop you when you drive home from your party drunk. switch off the lights and put the pedal to the metal. you will make it through the roadblocks, probably. live free or die.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z88U915uq8]YouTube - Thelma & Louise:Ending Scene[/ame]

 

[lawbuff]

What is their probable cause to stop me?

Probable cause is the standard for arrest, not necessarily a detention. I know you don't agree with that though.

So a cop can pull over any car he or she wants to for no reason whatsoever?

DUI checkpoints are controlled, not random, there is a constitutional difference.

 

[Modbert]

So a cop can pull over any car he or she wants to for no reason whatsoever?

Sure can. And if they find any drugs or suspect drugs, they can take your car. They can also take any $$$ you have on you and pretty much anything else.

Or something along the lines of that screwed up line.

 

[lawbuff]

So a cop can pull over any car he or she wants to for no reason whatsoever?

Sure can. And if they find any drugs or suspect drugs, they can take your car. They can also take any $$$ you have on you and pretty much anything else.

Or something along the lines of that screwed up line.

I assumed he was refering to DUI checkpoints about pulling over. If we are talking otherwise, say stopping a motorist for any reason, no, they can't legally.

 

[Article 15]

DUI checkpoints are controlled, not random, there is a constitutional difference.

So a cop can pull over any car he or she wants to for no reason whatsoever?

Sure can. And if they find any drugs or suspect drugs, they can take your car. They can also take any $$$ you have on you and pretty much anything else.

Or something along the lines of that screwed up line.

Man ... that's whack.

 

[Modbert]

Man ... that's whack.

Sure is.

But it gets even "better":

Police Officers Can Search Your iPhone Following Arrest For A Traffic Violation | Techdirt

Adam Gershowitz writes "I am a criminal law professor from Houston, Texas and I have recently finished an article about the ability of police officers to search the contents of a person's iPhone at a traffic stop. In brief, under what is referred to as the "search incident to arrest doctrine," police can search through any container found on the body of a person who has been arrested. It does not matter that the arrest was for running a stop sign, or speeding, or some other seemingly minor traffic infraction

In short, the article explores ways in which the police can search through the thousands of pages of data on individuals' wireless technology even if there is no probable cause or other suspicion of illegal activity."

 

[lawbuff]

Man ... that's whack.

Sure is.

But it gets even "better":

Police Officers Can Search Your iPhone Following Arrest For A Traffic Violation | Techdirt

Adam Gershowitz writes "I am a criminal law professor from Houston, Texas and I have recently finished an article about the ability of police officers to search the contents of a person's iPhone at a traffic stop. In brief, under what is referred to as the "search incident to arrest doctrine," police can search through any container found on the body of a person who has been arrested. It does not matter that the arrest was for running a stop sign, or speeding, or some other seemingly minor traffic infraction

In short, the article explores ways in which the police can search through the thousands of pages of data on individuals' wireless technology even if there is no probable cause or other suspicion of illegal activity."

I live in Ohio and our SC has ruled, just about 2 weeks ago, that such a search, unless there is exigent circumstances, violates the federal constitution.

 

[Modbert]

I live in Ohio and our SC has ruled, just about 2 weeks ago, that such a search, unless there is exigent circumstances, violates the federal constitution.

Good for Ohio. Doesn't matter for Art here though.

 

[lawbuff]

I live in Ohio and our SC has ruled, just about 2 weeks ago, that such a search, unless there is exigent circumstances, violates the federal constitution.

Good for Ohio. Doesn't matter for Art here though.

In can link it if anyone wants to read it, as it discusses different jurisdictions that treat such a phone as a "closed container" and searchable upon arrest. Ohio has said different and since it was based on the federal constitution, and not soley Ohio's, it is appealable to the US SC.

 

[bobbcat]

The ignoble shortcut to conviction left open to the State tends to destroy the entire system of constitutional restraints on which the liberties of the people rest. [n11] Having once recognized that the right to privacy embodied in the Fourth Amendment is enforceable against the States, and that the right to be secure against rude invasions of privacy by state officers is, therefore, constitutional in origin, we can no longer permit that right to remain an empty promise. Because it is enforceable in the same manner and to like effect as other basic rights secured by the Due Process Clause, we can no longer permit it to be revocable at the whim of any police officer who, in the name of law enforcement itself, chooses to suspend its enjoyment. Our decision, founded on reason and truth, gives to the individual no more than that which the Constitution guarantees him, to the police officer no less than that to which honest law enforcement is entitled, and, to the courts, that judicial integrity so necessary in the true administration of justice

What does that mean in English? I'm sorry, but I suck at legalese. Ditto for that second paragraph of your post (which I did not paste here) that also turned my brain into mush (but don't get me wrong, I appreciate the input).

I gather it all boils down to the fact that these people can do this and get away with it. Update: 225 extra cars with 50 K-9s are descending (also one helicopter, I understand) this weekend. Tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of sales are expected to be lost by the area's restaurants and bars this weekend due to all of this. Gee, thanks.......

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What is their probable cause to stop me?

Cause your a dumb ass liberal, works for me anyway. )

 

[Gadawg73]

Someone a while ago correctly told us that a nation that values security over freedom deserves neither.
Anyone that does not know that we violate too many citizens rights, arrest too many people, fine too many people and send too many people to prison has not been in a court lately.
We have too many laws.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Our little two-horse town is allegedly going to be conducting a comprehensive roadblock campaign this upcoming weekend, stopping everybody who is unfortunate enough to be at the wrong place at the wrong time to be assessed for alcohol levels. They must be really hard up for money. Natch, I had plans to attend someone's BD party, replete with live band and, of course, 'potent' libations.

This whole thing strikes me as a blatant disregard for the 4th amendment. Your thoughts?

Implied consent, when you get your driver's license and choose to use it on the public highways, allows for such things,

I think....

 

[lawbuff]

Implied consent, when you get your driver's license and choose to use it on the public highways, allows for such things,

I think....

IC only applies when a person is under investigation for DUI, not simply because they wrere stopped at a roadblock and briefly detained.