Do
DUI Roadblocks Work? (Part II)
Information
courtesy of Lawrence Taylor - DUIblog
As
I discussed in yesterday's post, the fatalities statistics used
by MADD and government agencies to justify DUI checkpoints are flawed.
In fact, the statistics can be viewed as indicating quite the opposite.
Well,
all right, so checkpoints may not reduce fatalities -- but, according
to MADD, they certainly result in more DUI arrests.
Wrong
again. The simple fact is that checkpoints are largely wastes of
police resources and taxpayer money -- not to mention unjustified
invasions of privacy. In fact, in the United States Supreme Court
decision (Michigan v. Sitz) upholding their constitutionality, a
dissenting justice pointed out the "the findings of the trial
court, based on an extensive record and affirmed by the Michigan
Court of Appeals, indicate that the net effect of sobriety checkpoints
on traffic safety is infinitesimal and possibly negative".
(Emphasis added) This is confirmed by National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration studies, which conclude that "the number of
DWI arrests made by the roving patrol program was nearly three times
the average number of DWI arrests made by the checkpoint programs".
Then
why do we have DUI roadblocks? Consider a local news story from
last week:
PENNDOT
GRANTS TOTALLING $1 MILLION FUND SOBRIETY CHECKPOINTS STATEWIDE
....Chester
County officials said recent recommendations from the national
headquarters of Mothers Against Drunk Driving have been implemented
by area police departments for years. Among the recommendations
are an increased focus on prevention tactics such as sobriety
checkpoints.
"We
work with MADD and will continue to work with them to reduce the
incidents of drunken driving in Pennsylvania," (DOT spokesperson
Jenny) Robinson said....
|