News Tribune

	Central Missouri's information you need! advanced
	Login \| Contact Us \| Site Map \| Archives \| Photos \| Alerts Sunday, July 05, 2009

Print this story | Email this story |

Comment (No comments posted.) |

Rate |

Text Size

Patrol conducts DWI checkpoint

Advertisement

Published: Wednesday, October 1, 2008 4:54 PM CDT

Members of the Missouri Highway Patrol's Troop F in Jefferson City announced the results of a DWI checkpoint held in Cole County on Saturday.

During the operation, a total of 130 vehicles were stopped.

The following is a list of enforcement contacts during the operation: driving while intoxicated, five; speeding, 3; other hazardous moving violations, 1; seat belt violations, 8; non-moving violations, 1; careless/imprudent drivers 1; driver license violations, 6; misdemeanor drug arrests, 2; and warnings issued, 51.

Anyone who observes an impaired driver is urged to call the Missouri Highway Patrol Emergency Hotline at 1-800-525-5555 or *55 on a cellular phone.

On the Web:

Missouri Highway Patrol


Political signs stolen		Jay homecoming traditions

Article Rating

Advertisement

Before commenting read the News Tribune Forum's policies and procedures.
Thanks.

TheRickster wrote on Nov 9, 2008 11:08 PM:

" Good golly, how did this subject get sooo far off?
Hey Mr. Editor, maybe you can set up an open comment column. Small remarks that people would have from time to time. You could see an exaple in Columbia Tribune in trib talk. "

JCpatriot wrote on Nov 2, 2008 5:12 AM:

" Lou, Lou,
I'm actually a busy person, i'm not going to let this knucklehead walk on me... He does not have respect for other peoples opinions on here. The time I want to spend on here is intentionally to be stimulating, I guess I have to take the good with the bad on here.

I do respect your opinion, and I support your last comment. I cannot speak up for some of the Idiotic comments. Sorry just standing my ground with my christian armour on ...

I'm a republican but I do want positive change for everyones tax money. I might have to flip a coin Tuesday morning? lol "

LouLou6 wrote on Oct 28, 2008 8:50 AM:

" Not trying to be rude but you guys have way too much free time on your hands. How about instead of talking about how our state government doesn't do their job.Do something about? Just some food for thought. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:08 AM:

" Shiny,
If you don't wear a Badge for a living then quit try to act like a officer. you just admitted your not a LE officer.

Most important your not in a Prison officers or Police officers shoes. So you really don't know LE on the job professionalism. Your ignorant to the fact as a Idiot with a messed up Idiom ego. Be quiet and go away... "

snoopdog wrote on Oct 20, 2008 12:40 AM:

" They are not all teens doing the stealing and whatever, it is a drug ring, I am sure. The teens can't think of all of this. And they are not all from Russellville. I think the drug ring is just trying to make people believe it is all teens in Russellville, the teens are good kids in Russellville. Go after the drug rings, you would be surprized who are behind them. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 15, 2008 8:41 AM:

" Just for the record, JCP
"Nutzi" is a play on words; as in, Nazi's are NUTS....NUTZI's.
GEEEZ. Who'd have thought I'd have to explain THAT!?
...AND BELIEVE ME, I could not be LESS jealous of you. I'm glad you're making a living. Maybe if they pay decent wages, they'll attract quality employees. Not sure how you came to the (incorrect) conclusion I'm JCPD. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 11, 2008 6:03 PM:

" I understand completely his ethics,I'm on E-squad as a Team Leader. I feel the same way about ethics & keeping code of conduct highly professional as a total team. Thats what I'm all about , I even enstill it in my children in ways, but I have to come home & keep it seperate its two different worlds your Dad know s exactly what I mean.... "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:55 PM:

" Sorry about the double post - something wierd happened! "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:54 PM:

" JCPat - I seen some of this stuff, and heard it from the very people / person involved who was scared they were going to get fired over it. Never did.

My dad's retired corrections, investigator. He wasn't involved in any of this stuff - he's a good man. Did alot of things, dog teams, e-squad, etc.

I think his ethics is what makes me so angry about all of this. It is totally against what Dad is like and taught to me. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:53 PM:

" JCPat - I seen some of this stuff, and heard it from the very people / person involved who was scared they were going to get fired over it. Never did.

My dad's retired corrections, investigator. He wasn't involved in any of this stuff - he's a good man. Did alot of things, dog teams, e-squad, etc.

I think his ethics is what makes me so angry about all of this. It is totally against what Dad is like and taught to me. "

Boscoe wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:50 PM:

" Sure there are a lot of bad corrections officers, same as there are a lot of bad state employees in other agencies. For what they pay- who could expect them to be able to attract and retain skilled professionals easily?

You get what you pay for, and for being #50 in state worker pay- I think Missourid should be pretty happy with what they have to work with here. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:42 PM:

" Lump , I probably know some of your friends I moved around the Dept alittle in my 12 yrs. to promote etc. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:39 PM:

" nospin, okay I'll look it up ,maybe i seen it spelled with a z could be slang like on cartoons etc.

Lump,
Nurses , Teachers, volunteer chaplins staff do make up things. When you rove multi-zones you tend to here alot of gossip rumors that they make up & exzaggerate alot of times. I can tell you all kinds of info that will make you just shake your head & laugh.... "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:32 PM:

" Cont-
I only know of one Incident of a Caseworker & FUM (custody Cert to search) help us out with mass shakedowns a housing units during a e-squad shakedown. Those two plain clothes(custody cert. to pat down if needed) only help ed due to that Hall Officer needed help with too many inmates. When us e-squad arrived we would take there poistion immediately.

At Msp shakedowns I done numerous times, the inmates all were moved to evening meal us e-squad & c-star had all the contraband &trash out in the Isles. Custody trained casworkers were pushing the broom s that was all I seen plain clothes staff ever do in my 12 yrs. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:31 PM:

" Guess you can't be everywhere.
Many things are hushed -

I know that there are really good men and women working in corrections. I do have friends that work in institutions that have good morals and values and work ethics.

I also know some that do not have these qualities, and the instances I spoke of were far more than just rumors.

What frustrates me is the fact that it continues.

However we disagree - I do respect your service to our nation in the armed forces. "

nospinzone wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:28 PM:

" geesh in Websters jc look it up "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 11, 2008 2:19 PM:

" Lump,
The one statement in your list, I disagree.

One) I never seen a Trans officer of any Institutions I worked in my 12 yrs, leave a Dentist Office, doctors offices. without being relieved doing these types of Outcounts; Each officer would not leave the room . we would post at inside doorway to stay out Doctors way ..

Also there was always a floating Officer to relieve the officers when there a big outcount with alot of Inmates & usually 3 -4 officers depending how many inmates on certain trips...

2)Also iv'e been on E-squad, C-star numerous shake downs. I never seen a civilian non-cert or non custody shakedown or Pat down inmate(s).

cont. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 11, 2008 7:44 AM:

" Lump, your right there is corrections Officer like tha, but i think your exaggerating on some of your statements.Some of your statements are false rumors.

But they usually get fired. I try to ignore alot of that anyhow,there supervisors usually do security checks & Iam a rover utility officer, I 'll let my zone supervisor know & go check on certain officer if it gets out of hand for most part...

Also there officers that I seen sleeping in the patrol cars on midnight shift. There's bad apples in every LE. branch. They eventually get fired. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 11, 2008 7:36 AM:

" nospin, Thats funny Geezh is spelled with a z in the middle.

Last part of your sentence IE: s to a or eea sounds like your trying to make a rap song? lol

Hey Bud, I just want you to admit its still a grammar error? "

nospinzone wrote on Oct 10, 2008 11:14 PM:

" sorry jc pat, geesh is correct spelling for the slang term, aee was see typo next letter to s is a . So you were 50 per cent right is that a passing grade.? call it like it is bro "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:12 PM:

" From what I have seen of corrections - if you do wear your uniform in pride - and you do maintain a professional manner - you are one of the few guards that do.
To many guards are to happy living their social lives on state time. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:06 PM:

" Disappearing on state time while accompanying inmates out of the institutions.
Leaving inmates in an unsafe, unsecure enviroment. Perhaps even causing inmate to become seriously ill.
Making disparaging remarks about other guards - officers - in front of inmates. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 10, 2008 9:02 PM:

" For instance:
Leaving assigned areas.
Sleeping on the job, while guarding inmates.
Sleeping - while civilian workers have to pat down and secure inmates.
Leaving inmates unattended while out in the public, (dentists, doctors, hospitals).
Sleeping while having inmates out in the public (dentist, doctors, hospitals).
Bringing food out of the institution that was meant for the inmates.
Bringing out other items, either dispensed to inmates or taken away from inmates.
Using taxpayers money to make long distance phone calls on state time.
Instead of correcting, guarding, or securing inmates: using the institutions as a dating service. Creating havoc in the institutions when these romances fail - breaking up marriages.
Staff threatening other staff members - how many inter-office memos/write ups concern sexual harrassment. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 10, 2008 8:51 PM:

" JCPat - Since you take pride in being a professional Corrections Officer, how do feel about other "correctional officers" who do not act so professional, and who continue to taint the reputation of your job? I would really like to know how you deal with them day to day. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:34 PM:

" Why Thank you Joy ,you are "awesome" too.

I earned every penny of it , Both of my professional Careers. I only owe 41 k on the House,and 14k on the vehicle. Could mister Jeff city's finest out do that. Plus my college is paid for already.
How about Shiny what does he have to show what he earn being highly professional copper... "

joytotheworld wrote on Oct 10, 2008 6:11 PM:

" JCP wrote:"With my Corrections officers pay & my US.Army retirement ,plus Va payment I make 4,600. 00 a month clear take home. I own 125,000.00 house, drive a 30,000. vehicle."

Your awsome. :) "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 10, 2008 4:15 PM:

" ODF ,
Thanks , I was a highly professional & decorated Army soldier before I was a highly professional Corrections Officers. This is just another retirement while I serve the public here at home. :) I get recieve my 2nd. retirement at 54 yrs old buying out my military time , How about shiny?

Thanks for the encouragement, don't worry it doesn't bother me at all. I like constructive BS. from Idiots & find it humerous.... lol later "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:37 PM:

" Correction: Jeff City's finest. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:36 PM:

" Nospin : two corrections on your last blog: Its: Geezh & whats " aee" ?
New word Bro ?

I call it like I see it ... lol

Ps: Thank you for your advice anyhow, Its well taken. Undertsand I learn everyday, How about Jeff City finest?

Atleast my College Management 4 yr. Degree & 20 yrs in the US. Army taught me to keep my ego out of my 4 point of conact like some on here ?

Iam a professional just like Jeff City's finest. He started whole mess putting down Corrections Officers in the first place. "

ODF wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:22 PM:

" JCP - Don't let them goad you into defending yourself on an anonymous, public comment board. Friends and family that know you know who/what you are and those that don't, don't really matter.

BTW, in case I haven't said so....Thank you for your service!

TGIRSF - Thank God It's Red Shirt Friday! "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:16 PM:

" Oh no correction: whos to judge. sorry "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:15 PM:

" Joy,
Thanks for your mannerly comment, nobody is perfect on here , who to judge, or be judged?

I could go back and correct everyones mistakes on past blogs ,it would take awhile to format. But i'll do it to prove a point...

Are these two paragraphs simple enough to understand? lol "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 10, 2008 1:03 PM:

" Lump,
You misspelled & make grammar mistakes all the time. BTW, your last blog judging you has 3 mistakes. 2 misspelled words, 1 runon sentence, I guess your a failure too.

BTW: With my Corrections officers pay & my US.Army retirement ,plus Va payment I make 4,600. 00 a month clear take home. I own 125,000.00 house, drive a 30,000. vehicle. Boy I'm a real loser let me tell ya... "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:50 PM:

" Nospinzone,
who is Shiny & lumps to say? They misspell words & use improper grammar many times.
Atleast I correct myself. I could name the entry times if you want. Niether of them our English teachers or perfect ...

BTW: these are small 125 word texts, alot of times you have to cut some of your sentences short or abbreviate.

I've been out of college for 12 yrs now excuse me. Also let me point out nobody's perfect on here. Others mentioned make alot of grammar & spelling errors, also correct them?

I will make sure to "

nospinzone wrote on Oct 9, 2008 10:44 PM:

" failing ..geesh I caught jc patriots disease "

nospinzone wrote on Oct 9, 2008 10:43 PM:

" jcpatriot , you have many good points but shiny and lumps are correct , most of your posts would be of ailing grade level , in text, grammar and spelling, your message is lost many times because of this .
Seriously , they are bad and hard to follow many times
example see a unprofessional..is aee an unprofessional
misamenors ..is misdemeanors , outnumber should
be outnumbered , street smart inteligences??????
sorry bro call em like I see em "

Boscoe wrote on Oct 9, 2008 9:46 PM:

" JC Patriot-

Don't forget that JCPD cops get free meals through the drive-throughs, get to talk to their concubines on their cell phones all day while driving around on taxpayer's gas, do not have to obey speed limits, and give each other professional coutesies on the way home from TJs or Bones at 1:45 in the morning. "

joytotheworld wrote on Oct 9, 2008 9:22 PM:

" JCP...there you go with the attacks again because someone is smarter than you. Open your mind and you may learn something.

And yes, your grammer needs work as I've stated before . Not bashing, but it's hard to follow you most of the time. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 9, 2008 8:57 PM:

" Shiney, it pretty much proves my point. Obviously, whatever his degree was in, he failed. Apparently, since his pulse registered, he can now wear his polyester uniform with pride.

JCPat - Tsk, tsk. Spelling and grammatical errors. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 9, 2008 5:53 PM:

" Shiny,
I'll agree with you on the monkey theroy, but all you do is chase the same monkeys over, over,over again,but I get paid alot more with better retirement plan ?plus my Army vetran retirement is more than whay you make on the force.Sounds like your jealous most robocop are...

You also have alot of idiotic nerve about my College English 101 . You can't even spell Nazi correct for a cop.Give me a break.If you read my blogs I corrected myself for my grammar & spelling without your assitance. Your just kuncklehead robocop probably get sued or commit suicide, Jeff city Finest . BS!
PS: Your ego in your 4 point of contact by the way! typical ego maniac ! "

Parrothead911 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 11:23 PM:

" Well said, Shiny. You are a credit to the profession. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 8, 2008 10:40 PM:

" We are just cogs in the wheels of justice. I don't pretend to be more than that. I do my job well and you probably do too, but our jobs are very different. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 8, 2008 10:37 PM:

" JCP
Of all the wacky things you've written, the fact that you claim to actually have a 4 year degree, FLOORS me!
Honestly, how the heck did you ever pass English 101?
Everybody has their jobs and we obviously need prison guards to make the system work. We are not the same, but that doesn't mean I'm better or you're better. Your job is to simply keep the monkeys in the cage. My job is to try to identify bad monkeys and figure out how to send them to the zoo. "

live77 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 9:59 PM:

" I really don't have time to sit and read every blog that is posted here in these forums. Most of them are not relevant to the things we discuss. I understand that people wander from the subject, and that is Ok. I was just wondering, I guess the easy way to say this is, who cares. Checkpoints are a violation of my rights. Nothing makes that any better. "

Mac1974 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 7:31 PM:

" ~~~~~Another weekend driving rip roaring drunk in Jeff City. They really don't patrol downtown. I stopped my mini van in the middle of high street to vomit for a good five minutes. Thanks for the jeager shots Spectators!! "~~~~~

lolololol, he said minivan. Dangerous, but hilarious picturing it. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 8, 2008 6:07 PM:

" Downtowner: they really don't patrol heavy over there due to off duty officers of all kinds, they drink at Bones & Mike corner pocket, Patty Malones etc. when I went through my divorce out with my friends we drink meet other officers at these places.

Shiny, yes they do because I use to drink heavy with some of them. Guess what there still on the force today... "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 8, 2008 5:58 PM:

" Correction: 7 should be &,

BTW I have two friends that are police officers here in Cole cty. So you got me all wrong about cop hang ups. Maybe you have Corrections Officers hang ups, Plus we make more than you reg. officers city & county both,but we earn it in a dangerous Felon environment. Come work in a prison see much testicles you really got work with us & inmates.

Read my blogs I said there's good officers on JCPD ,CCSD etc. I'm talking about the rookie Robocops bad apples, BTW we have those types of officers too.I'm really done with you & I don't have to prove anything to you. I know the deal & difference...BRO "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 8, 2008 5:42 PM:

" Shiny,
First,
Lets get things straight here I don't have hang ups on cops when I see a unprofessional one I say it like it is. Also in my 12 yrs with Dept of corrections I've 6 ex- Mo. police officers doing time in prison, that says alot to my main point. We both have proved points so what?

There really is not a difference between being a prison officer vs. Street Officer. Both write Misamneanors 7 felony violations,We get shank or hit with homemade weapons by violent known criminal you encounter once maybe & might get shot at maybe. We are also out number by experienced known criminals majority of the time, you have a squad car to hide in,I don't. cont- "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 8, 2008 5:33 PM:

" Live77, Corrections on words I was ina hurry that day: Bubba, Been, In the long run.

Also the prison guard thread was started by Ms. Indep. She ask me if the Prisons Guard or prison cop get offend by nicknames? If you would of read my & her blogs you would of not ask that question... "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 8, 2008 4:20 PM:

" Downtowner=Job Security
See you soon! "

ODF wrote on Oct 8, 2008 1:41 PM:

" Heck with downtowner's license & registration, I just want his bar schedule so I can be as far away from them as possible! LOL!! "

online_editor wrote on Oct 8, 2008 1:02 PM:

" ODF: Wow. You just spotted something I was unaware of. It had commenting when it was current, but not after it was only in the archive. Okay, that explains a lot. The politics_and_elections directory is configured oddly. Make that wrong. "

naturally wrote on Oct 8, 2008 12:53 PM:

" downtowner2 - er...license and registration please "

msindependent wrote on Oct 8, 2008 12:42 PM:

" Downtowner, rotllmao, nice post, thanks. Hope your feeling better. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 8, 2008 12:04 PM:

" Downtowner2: Not cool. But I do think it's cool if they bust you and loose your license, your insurance rates go sky high. That would be really cool. "

Parrothead911 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 12:03 PM:

" You must be very proud. "

downtowner2 wrote on Oct 8, 2008 11:46 AM:

" Another weekend driving rip roaring drunk in Jeff City. They really don't patrol downtown. I stopped my mini van in the middle of high street to vomit for a good five minutes. Thanks for the jeager shots Spectators!! "

ODF wrote on Oct 8, 2008 11:04 AM:

" Question for Rick Brown (if you happen to see this)...why do some stories show # of comments in parenthesis in the listing, but when you click on it there are none shown or even a place available to make comments? I'm referring specifically to the "Report: Bond..." story lower in the list. "

ODF wrote on Oct 8, 2008 11:00 AM:

" This did not occur in Cole County, but an adjoining county. "

ODF wrote on Oct 8, 2008 10:58 AM:

" MisI - I think he was looking for any reason to bust ANYONE'S chops, not just mine. The whole story is funny because the guy he was really looking for passed me, going the other way, about a mile ahead of the deputy. We had almost identical trucks so I knew when the deputy did a 180' that he thought I was the other guy. I told the deputy about the other guy still heading the other way...but he seemed more interested in pestering me at the time. Even more funny, it was in late October and I was in costume for a Halloween party! LOL!! You just can't make that shtuff up! :) "

msindependent wrote on Oct 8, 2008 10:40 AM:

" ODF, it sounds authentic to me, a lot of officers do bristle at someone who knows their rights, the good ones, it's like water off a ducks back. And of course anyone can have a bad day, sounds like he was looking for any reason to bust your chops and none was available...whew! "

online_editor wrote on Oct 8, 2008 8:40 AM:

" I removed some off-topic comments that were fueling personal sniping. --Rick Brown, online editor, News Tribune "

ODF wrote on Oct 8, 2008 8:39 AM:

" He ran my ID again (this made the 2nd time) and let me sit in the truck for close to 5 minutes and finally walked back up, handed me my license and told me to have a safe evening. I was very polite throughout the entire stop regardless of how ticked I was...and the SOB had me stopped for probably close to 15 or 20 minutes....after he had already admitted I was not the correct vehicle. He was purely trying to intimidate me and see if he could come up with anything. In the end, he walked away empty handed and I continued on my merry way. "

ODF wrote on Oct 8, 2008 8:37 AM:

" MisI - The one incident I referred to was a a situation where he shined his light around my truck, I answered all his questions, I allowed him to look under the cover of my truck bed and I even opened my cooler so he could see what was in there. All legal. THEN, he asked if I minded if he looked inside my truck. I told him he had, I was stopped for no reason (he mistook me for a similar vehicle they were looking for) and I would not consent to having my truck dismantled. That's when he got nasty. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 8, 2008 8:17 AM:

" Nothing wrong with knowing and exercizing your rights. I agree with ODF and Live on this one, stand up. I would also suggest you be respectful with words and tone while explaining your rights (he/she knows them anyway) to the officer attempting to intimidate you. I never consent, ever, whats in my trunk, glove box of out of sight is none of their business. Also to be fair other than an additude when you refuse them (sort of taken aback) I've never had any problems with any Police Officer after I have refused their request to search. "

ODF wrote on Oct 8, 2008 8:16 AM:

" I'm not sure why "cop" is considered offensive. Granted it may not be as respectful as Mr. Officer, but don't believe it is considered offensive. Check out snopes if you're interested in their version of the origin of the word. "

ODF wrote on Oct 8, 2008 8:08 AM:

" live77 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:43 PM:
The few times I have been pulled over by police and they have asked to search my vehicle, I have told them no. Why?, not because I am hiding something. It's because I am an american, and it's my right to do so.

Exactly! I even had one get up in my face and told me he could get a search warrant. I told him he probably could and if he felt it was necessarily that he should go ahead. He finally let me go....without searching my car and without getting a warrant. Standing up for your rights does not mean you are guilty of anything. "

live77 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:43 PM:

" How did this end up a prison gaurd thread? Anyway, I don't know any prison gaurds ( or whatever they like to be called), but how did calling a cop become something that offends? I would understand how pig or flat foot, or some other remark would be found offensive. Maybe the next time I'm sitting in a checkpoint, having my rights violated by asking me for an id when I am a passenger, I'll ask them what offends them. The few times I have been pulled over by police and they have asked to search my vehicle, I have told them no. Why?, not because I am hiding something. It's because I am an american, and it's my right to do so. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 7, 2008 6:56 PM:

" shiny, BTW I'm a prison guard with a 4 yr degree in management. College smarts only get you so far inside with real thugs. Yes experience I've learned in 12 1/2 yrs. You have to be Street smart Inteligences also, College don't teach that. I cannot describe in words. BTW: We are certified State LE agency, we are in the Procesess to further are steps with same Cert.& extra level like MSHP. You need our new policies with your college Education Bro... "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 7, 2008 6:47 PM:

" Shiny,
Your right, you don't get it, you don't have a clue... Go work with violent 3-4 Prison with Known Criminals 8 hrs a day for 12 1/2 yrs. straight, Then come and tell us CO.'s about it, If you really last the long... With your attitude Budda would have you strung out in his cell, seasoned CO' like myself would have to safe you... Ben there done that! Then they call in sick& quit in a week sceen alot of that too... "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 7, 2008 6:38 PM:

" 2206,
You just describe East Germany 20 yrs ago. Look where it ended after the cold war with "Russia" it got then nowhere bud! Know its back to a democracy as whole country" Germany". Is just like USA now. Go figure those apples... "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 7, 2008 6:33 PM:

" Correction: I go home safe & 1 day closer to retirement.

Also, I only have 11 yrs left before my state retirement. Also you don't see Older seasoned officers messing with people unesessarily looking for write -up? Why because they learned through experience of 12-20 yrs on the force. The gungho's they get burned out alcoholism, suidcides, Divorces etc. i know i 've been there myself.
Time & experience make Officers wise & seasoned with alot of respect on the streets or inside a prison or County Jail.Ask any vetran officer with 4-5 stripes on his or her sleeves,they will tell you the same... "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 7, 2008 6:21 PM:

" Yes,
I agree your comments, "Cops" is a old school nickname, I guess I'm old school my uncle was 36 yr. vetran it doesn't bother him. He's the real thing it only offends Modern ROBOCOPs mainly. Yes ,I teach my children to say police Officers mainly.

BTW: as a Corrections Officer it doesn't bother me when called a Guard,CO,Turn key,screw etc.It really don't bother me I go home safe & retires. In front of visitors & guest yes, Its Officer. Inmates know,you have to keep it real for most part anyhow. I seen robocops co's come & go. tripping on the unnesessary little things & getting in a legal wreck losing there job or commiting suicide. It does not bother most of us. "

q man wrote on Oct 7, 2008 5:52 PM:

" I think that any soldier who spends 1 year in Iraq puts themselves in more danger than a Police Officer does in their whole career. Agree or disagree? "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 3:10 PM:

" naturally wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:30 PM:
Once when I heard one say 'po-po' they thought I'd been posessed.

Too funny...because my son thought I'd been possessed the ONE AND ONLY time he made the mistake of using that term. LOL!! "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 3:03 PM:

" I don't know where I compared "traffic" cops to anything. Look through here and let me know.... "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:59 PM:

" Now, if you'll just quote me we'll be done Lumpy. Hi 74, stay out of it, Lumpy's on the ropes. I don't understand his haterd of CO's , and I've never compaired them to Traffic cops, I hope his last entry isn't his best effort or we may need to start a separate discussion 74 Kinda wierd, I'm conservative, so is Lumpy, don't know why he insists on compairing CO's and traffic cops, since ther isn't one, go figure. Hey 74, gotta cut out for a few, pick a topic, I'll join U in a bit. Loved the dino crack :>) "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:55 PM:

" Mac - Spelling correctly would have been nice. Also, I dropped some grammar lessons, as well. :) "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:51 PM:

" Apparently, the minimum requirements for a guard is a having a pulse. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:48 PM:

" You can find the minumum requirements for a trooper:

mshp.dps.missouri.gov/MSHPWeb/PatrolDivisions/HRD/Trooper/minRequirements.html

Please don't belittle the time and effort these men and women put forth to become a trooper. "

Mac1974 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:43 PM:

" ~~~~~~I'm not sure I feel safe knowing that a guard who doesn't realize dinasours are extinct is responsbile for keeping the dangerous criminals from escaping."~~~~~~

In addition to knowing they no longer exist, should they also know how to spell "dinosaur" correctly, lumps?

lol "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:42 PM:

" Show me Lumpy where I compaired the 2 U R dilusional. Common, quote me sweety, I'll wait>>>>> "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:41 PM:

" We agree, there is no comparison between a Correctional Officer and a traffic cop. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:40 PM:

" Naturally, that's exactly what I thought.

My nephew has been busting his butt study criminal law - he was planning a career in the Highway Patrol. To compare all the time, work, and effort that he has put in to a measley weeks work of training is, basically, ignorant. "

naturally wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:34 PM:

" lumps - 'tag' you're it. I guess she really did get bored with ODF. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:33 PM:

" I guess it was somewhere down the line when you starting comparing people who mop the floor one day to wearing a badge the next day and thinking they were hot stuff.

No comparison - "

naturally wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:30 PM:

" JCPatriot - we need your help here. Is it offensive to call them 'Prison Guards'? C.O. is what O.A. calls them but they also have other titles that aren't used informally. I'd be afraid to see what they'd call me after to PC police got ahold of it.
Oh, and for Police Officers, if I ever called them 'cops' I'd get a well aimed back-hand across my mouth. It was always Police Officer and that's how I corrected my kids. Once when I heard one say 'po-po' they thought I'd been posessed. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:29 PM:

" Hey lump, how many escapes you read about lately? What the attrition rate of a Correctional officer in Mo?
When did these dinasaurs become exstinct?
When did you first recognize you were smarter than the rest of the world?
Why are you a paradox? "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:21 PM:

" What is sad about the prison system, is they keep the guards on payroll who continually put the public, other guards, and other prison staff in danger.

Chopping a few heads to clean up the system, and make it safer, would certainly result in a better reputation.

And lets make high school diplomas a requirement, no grandfathering. I'm not sure I feel safe knowing that a guard who doesn't realize dinasours are extinct is responsbile for keeping the dangerous criminals from escaping. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:20 PM:

" So do cab drivers Lumpy, and convience store workers, and statistically they have a higher chance of dying on the job. Again, lets not be over dramatic, I support LE, I support the compensation they get. I do agree there is an element of risk from time to time that most people do not experience, however it's not LA, and they are not all in a Starsky and Hutch episodes on a DAILY basis. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:16 PM:

" Hey shinymcshine! If we happen to disagree on a subject in the future, and I call you "Master of all Time, Space, and Diminsion" - remember you wanted that name! :) "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:14 PM:

" msin - Everyday that an law enforcement officer puts on that uniform, he puts his life in danger.

Do you think that the criminals call in and make an appointment when they are going to have a stabbing, shooting, hostage situation, or whatever?

While there is an element of danger in the prisons - the most guards have to worry about: is whats free for breakfast, lunch or dinner, who said what about who, and trying to count past 50 with out calling reinforcements.

I agree that you get what you pay for, and its not much in alot of cases. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 2:12 PM:

" It's ok, shiney we can disagree. At least we agree that traffic cops and their efforts to enforce traffic laws. I think traffic cops around here do a great job at traffic check points. I've raised my kids to respect traffic cops when they are out raising money for their respective community. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:53 PM:

" Sorry. I don't think the analogy holds water; A racial slur vs. accurate description. I know they like C.O. better, but just because I prefer Master of all time, space, and diminsion doesn't make it accurate. (LOL) What is so offensive with prison guard? SPECIFICALLY?
I guess I just don't get it. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:50 PM:

" ODF, I did enjoy our fun, don't be so hard on yourself, your not that hard-headed or opinionated.

:>) "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:46 PM:

" Shiny wrote "I see nothing wrong with using the most accurate term for the job. Its an honorable job, but prison guard describes it best. "

Shiny, I don't mean to jump on it, but maybe this analogy will help.

African Americans are brown, why not call them brownies, it's a legitimate color, accurate, and it describes them best?

A- Because it's offensive to them.

Get it? "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:46 PM:

" I'm a hard-headed, opinionated, a** ....never denied it or claimed to be anything else! LOL!!

I'm willing to bet even MissI will agree with me on THAT statement! LOL!! "

kingfishstevens wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:40 PM:

" ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:44 PM:

" Oh BTW King .... I always enjoy a good debate. Helps you open your mind a little and every once in awhile I'll even learn something. Unfortunately, not everyone has the skills for it! D'OH! LOL! "

ODF, learning something, now that is debatable!
D'oh!! he he he. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:38 PM:

" I know its off subject, but why is "Prison Guard" so offensive?
They work in the prison.
They guard the prisoners.

With recidivism at about 90%, they're not "correcting" anyone. They are not commissioned (requirement for "officer" status)

I see nothing wrong with using the most accurate term for the job. Its an honorable job, but prison guard describes it best. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:32 PM:

" I wasn't compairing them Lumpy. I was concerned over your dispairaging them all. Like any profession they have bad apples. Correction Officers (not Guards) do a difficult job, constantly surrounded by less than desirable individuals all day long. That they are less educated, fine. Another point I was making is until you pay and raise requirments you get what you pay for, less money, less quality applicant. However that should not take away from those who work hard and put in a quality effort in their difficult and pretty much thankless profession. AS far a LE putting their "Butt on the Line DAILY" it's a nice line, I support them all, but common, lets-not-be-over-dramatic. "

naturally wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:27 PM:

" regardless of why prison guards are there, I'm glad they are. I'll bet they get an education every day that my degree won't even touch. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:45 PM:

" Didn't mean to repeat the comparison part, sorry. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:44 PM:

" Msindependent - Law enforcement officers go into that line of working because they have a calling; they make law enforcement a career, continual training, and placing their butt on the line daily.
I am they must have a minimum I.Q. requirement, too.

Some prison guards are just looking for a job because the local coat factory shut down or they don't like mopping the schools floors.

There is no comparison.

There is no comparison. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:44 PM:

" Oh BTW King .... I always enjoy a good debate. Helps you open your mind a little and every once in awhile I'll even learn something. Unfortunately, not everyone has the skills for it! D'OH! LOL! "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:42 PM:

" I don't remember King, I've slept since then. LOL!
I believe it was at the lake...so if I had to guess I'd say LOPD and/or Camden or Miller County. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:40 PM:

" I don't doubt your story ODF. Not every cop out there completely understands the finer points of spotchecks and may have overstepped OR he may have seen something that hinked him up. Its impossible to say.
The bottom line is as long as you hire humans to do the job, perfection will always be elusive. "

kingfishstevens wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:38 PM:

" No MsI, I was just glad to see ODF move on. Looks like you both enjoyed your little tussle. I agree on the Prison Guards, a few bad apples has given them a bad rep.

Podunk County? Where's that ODF? Lol There he goes again, MsI - rotf "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:33 PM:

" I don't care how we stop them. Either from fear of arrest and them getting a Designated Driver, or by an actual arrest works for me.
The goal is fewer occurences of the act. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:33 PM:

" Shiny - If I remember correctly, the one where I was asked for ID was run by county officers....nobody in the car was drinking....no suspicious movements (that I'm aware of, but can't tell what it looked like from behind) and they never searched the car as if they believed they were hiding something. Simply acquired ID's, ran them, then we were free to go. I questioned why I was being asked for an ID as a passenger...the officer "bristled" and I relented rather than pushing it. There's certain fights to pick...but 11:00 at night in PoDunk County, MO is not the place to make your stand! LOL!! "

Msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:32 PM:

" Lumps them all together, hardy a fair assessment of CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS. Lower pay and you get what you pay for, but many do a thankless job, and do it well.

King, was I to harsh with ODF? "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:31 PM:

" I don't know that ANY announcement is required for any of them, but the goal isn't to arrest every drunk out there. Its to get drunks to change their ways. If we announce we're out there and targeting them, some WILL change (even if just for a little while. Hey, we'll take whatever little successes we can get! LOL).
I think announcing that we're going to be out there is important. Not specific locations like some have done (that's just dumb!), but to strike some fear of detection is the first step in minimizing the frequency of offense. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:26 PM:

" Shiny - you may know the answer to this....do saturation patrols have to announced like they do the actual checkpoints?

Friends of mine in LE that do road patrols are much more sold on the wolfpacks then the checkpoints...they feel it is much more effective and they have a much higher success rate. Other thing, IMO, I think folks will take alternate transportation when they know there will be a checkpoint...but the next week they are back to their old ways. "

kingfishstevens wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:25 PM:

" Nice high road ODF. We have robo cops, as all angecies do, but most are professional as you described. MAC74, stay away from my gal MsI, she mine all mine. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:24 PM:

" You can not compare prison guards with real law enforcement officers.
There are guards who do not have a high school diploma, and can barely read.
They can not get their counts correct, without help.
They do not understand how to follow policies and procedures.
They sleep on the job.
Frankly, some are little better than the people they are guarding.

It makes me sick to see some strutting scum bag prison guard acting like hes a hot shot because he has a uniform.

You give a fool a uniform and utility belt, put him in a position of some power, and lord, look out. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:24 PM:

" Might a passenger be asked for ID? Sure. If there's a lot of suspicious movements as the car was pulling up or perhaps if the passenger wasn't wearing a seatbelt or other such violation. If the driver is under 21 and they smell alcohol, the passenger is going to be ID'ed. There's a variety of reasons why you might ID the passenger(s), but as a general rule, they probably would not be. "

naturally wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:22 PM:

" ok shiney the more I look at that, you don't even need to answer. As much as my buddy would disagree, the HP did not intrude on his civil liberties. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:21 PM:

" Shiny - I did not personally sit in the one in Morgan County..it was set up after I went through. My brother was in it for almost 45 minutes and said they had to move the checkpoint mid-stream because of the traffic backed up and near collisions. I talked to friends I was supposed to be meeting that were in it for almost an hour. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:19 PM:

" All the checkpoints I have gone through operated by Mo HP or JCPD/Cole County have been professionally operated and I was through them in a matter of minutes. However, that does not change MY opinion of their constitutionality and/or effectiveness.

I agree with following statement by Justices Brennan and Marshall on this, although I dsagree with their statement about "right to be left alone" as I feel it's an unreasonable "search":

"We should be suspicious of giving up constitutional rights, no matter how insignificant they may be perceived, to fight "momentary evils." Drunk driving is a momentary evil and the Court is not protecting the publics "most valued right" the right to be left alone." "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:19 PM:

" I completely agree ODF. If you sat for an hour, that is completely unreasonable. Whoever ran the checkpoint missed that bulletpoint in the class. LOL
It has to be minimal intrusion. It has to be in an area that has been a high dwi area, and there has to be a written plan. Those I'm involved in DO adhere to those standards, but I've seen some that don't. Those give the others a bad name and run the risk of creating case law that could hurt future efforts. "

naturally wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:17 PM:

" Getting back to their other point though; shiney, do you think there are abuses of civil liberties to the passengers?

When I was MUCH younger and dumber; a buddy of mine and I were riding in a car that got pulled over. As he was getting out of the car, he spilled MY beer that I had hidden between us. He was didn't drink alchohol but searched because I was careless (and he reeked after the beer bath). I guess there was probable cause there. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:14 PM:

" I'm just saying I'm not locked in on spotchecks either. Saturations are signifgantly more effective, but upper mgt has to buy off on them. Its hard to get them to change from what they did as a young road dog.

If you regularly put a group of officers out specifically targeting impaired driving, then used the media to remind folks that "we're out looking for you" if you're driving while impaired, you'd have some noticeable results. Utilize those officers that have shown they have a nack for identifying DWI offenders.
It would work. The biggest challenge is to convince top brass to give it a chance. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:11 PM:

" I agree shiny...we probably agree more than disagree on this subject. The only checkpoints I'm aware of that I feel rose to the level of intrusion not allowed by the court are the one held in Morgan County on a Memorial Weekend Friday night on Highway south of Versailles. I have friends that sat for close to an hour in that check point. The court specifies it must be "minimal" intrusion...an hour is not "minimal. The other checkpoint was where I was a passenger and was asked for ID. I might add that I do not believe either was conducted by Mo HP. "

naturally wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:10 PM:

" 'D'OH' I thought you said "my" shiney but you said "any" "

naturally wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:07 PM:

" shinymcshine wrote "I'm all for any new technique to locate and remove drunk/drugged drivers from the road. "

ok now you've got my attention. can you share or is it still in development phase? "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:56 AM:

" I guess the question one could ask themselves as to how effective a spotcheck is, is:
If I had a reasonable expectation that there was a spotcheck going on in the area, would that effect my decision as driving after drinking or not.
I think for the vast majority, it does, and therefore, they are effective in what they're intended to do.

I'm all for any new technique to locate and remove drunk/drugged drivers from the road. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:47 AM:

" turned them loose to watch for signs of impaired driving, you'd be far more successful.
But you're trying to change the spotcheck paradigm. Every cop in the world despises the phrase, "we've always done it that way", but that's really what keeps spotchecks alive. I've nearly been run over several times at these things. We don't like them either. Believe me. I'd rather be innovative and successful than what the spotchecks mandate. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:44 AM:

" lmaorotf, good one. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:44 AM:

" ODF, I'm in agreement, the spotcheck IS a minor inconvenience. As was said before, its effectiveness has to be judged on not just how many are caught, but how many choose alternate ways of getting home rather than driving drunk. That's an elusive number but its just as important as the number of arrests.
I'm a big believer in minimal govt intrusion. I think we agree more on this than you might realize, and spotchecks are NOT the best way to catch drunks, but they do catch some. I'm certain if you took the manpower allocation afforded a spotcheck and just (cont) "

boxergal wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:41 AM:

" When is the wedding?? "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:39 AM:

" Mac74, I admit it, I like you. Craziest thing I every wrote in this forum. Did you enjoy the Octoberfest? "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:38 AM:

" ODF, here's the real issue, you had a run in with the cops back in the 80's or 90's and smarted off. Your ears got slapped back by the cops and you've had a chip on your shoulder ever since. Your never wrong, because your smarter than everyone and your bitter because you can't understand why the "stupid" people appear happy when the SKY IS FALLING cluck cluck. In summary, your a hater ODF. Those simple "stupid" people who follow the rules, support common sense enforcement, punish the lawless pot smoking DWI getting criminal, are happy and sleep well every nite. "

Mac1974 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:37 AM:

" ~~~~~~" Truth is I was getting bored with you, mac 74 you aint. "~~~~~~~~

I never get bored with you Ms.

I think we should meet for coffee.

;) "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:31 AM:

" JCP
You don't have to worry about me drinking and driving. It doesn't happen. I don't believe for one second you got a ticket for 33 in a 30.
I'm not sure what's got you so spun up, except you've got some sort of hangup with cops.
And you sure as HELL don't want to go down the "who gets jammed up more" road regarding police officers vs. prison guards.
Your posts make my points better than I can. Just keep writing. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:14 AM:

" Truth is I was getting bored with you, mac 74 you aint. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 11:13 AM:

" And I rest my case, ODF and his reasonable insult free comments have spoken.

There you go again, false accusations allegeing false accusations, maybe I don't understand all the highfalootin lawyereez, how can you use words like rights, and violated, then deny that you don't think it's legal?

Now you say it's legal, I agree with your statement and you come back with "typical", let me tell you what's typical pal, your trying to categorize me and other conservatives with your dissmissive word choices. I sure aint' worried about you kiddo.<---word choice. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:59 AM:

" ...and there you go again...diverting attention and slinging mud all while not answering the question(s) I posed. Typical.

YOU threw the first punch, YOU posted false/incorrect information and now you want to run to the corner and cry that mean 'ole ODF is picking on you. ROFL!! "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:22 AM:

" I can agree with your last statement. Let stop now where scaring the kids. :>) "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:21 AM:

" There you go again ODF, insults and expertice, folks, I give you ODF. Go get some sticky, you earned it. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:16 AM:

" Before I get mischaracterizied (is that a word?) again. I'm all for DWI enforcements THAT WORK and do not violate civil liberties. I believe shiny and/or winky mentioned the saturation (ie wolf pack) patrols. Great! I'm all for those...people are driving impaired and are pulled over for a legit reason (weaving, crossing lane markings, etc.) Get drunks off the road...but let's do it legally without infringing on the VAST MAJORITY of citizens that are legal passing through these checkpoints. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:12 AM:

" MisI - Read the entire thread, every post from the bottom up. With the exception of one remark, this was a very civil debate until you showed up and "stuck your gourd" into it. go figger.... LOL!!! "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:09 AM:

" Show me where I "stuck my gourd" into YOUR personal conversation prior to you addressing a post towards me.
You are typical of a couple of others on here that like to MAKE UP things as you go to suit your needs. Then when yo can no longer debate you take the low road. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 10:07 AM:

" EXCUSE ME, MisI?? You are completely delusional. Do you not remember this comment:
Msindependent wrote on Oct 6, 2008 4:04 PM:
Typical liberals, mac 74, ODF, if your not doing anything illegal, why are you so schrill about a few questions from a police officer?

I did not "stick my gourd" into your conversation, YOU addressed a personal attack towards me and a couple of others, completely unprovoked. Sheesh, not only are you childish you apparently can't even remember/recall what YOU wrote. You dish it out, but clearly can't take it. Typical! LOL!!

BTW, this IS a public comment board and I have a right to comment...or do you want that right taken away from citizens as well. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:52 AM:

" Shiny,
Wait til you get busted by Cole Cty or MSHP. driving drunk when you leave your favorite cop bar on a Holiday sometime in the future. Cops like you think your slick & do get busted eventually. We get your type in prison too, you don't fool me for one second Bro...

I think its Ironically funny when i see ex-cops scared poop-less in ADSEG having Robocop nightmares & such.
IT's not the respect of the Badge its the persons character & Honor that makes the Badge respectful,remember that next time you get an authority Complex. My uncle use to say that... He retired 36 yrs on Chicago police force as detective, started as Street cop w/dog on Southside... "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:34 AM:

" Easy there Charlie Brown, I was having a conversation with another when ODF stuck his gord into the mix, he gave and took, and I enjoyed it all, I hope he did the same, nothing like a healthy debate in a free country. "

naturally wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:28 AM:

" GOOD GRIEF, MsI! Not exactly a people person are you?

Sometimes you make good points and sometimes I agree with them. Its the delivery that's all wrong. You can tell me the sky is blue, but if you're b-slapping me at the same time I probably won't hear you and will think you're wrong. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:27 AM:

" "Your kind" Wow, now he's labeling us, the truth comes out, the left just has to stick you in a category. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:25 AM:

" More name calling tisk tisk. Sacastic "intelligent" "your kind"<--WOW who's the 2 yr old???

I didn't say they can stop you without probable cause ODF, the SC said it was an exception of the 4TH amendment in the case of checkpoints. I didn't say they should be able to search you, just ask reasonable questions to develope the suspcion to strip you out and find that pipe. Where here to help you with your addiction(s). Maybe when you go to court you can request treatment. Drive safely honey, their waiting just over the hill. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:21 AM:

" Shiny,
Why can't you see my point how JCPD operates around here.I was doing 33 mph in 30 mph zone,no break because he stated he has to meet his quota,I knew him as a prison guard,my son seperate checkpoint violation of Memorial Day weekend, no warning to the youngman come on thats not reality? Its RoadNazi tactics Hey bud your sniffing glue & getting delusional in your dreamworld...
Btw: I support most JCPD officers.Except Gungho Roadnazi. Cole County deputies are better by far! JCPD needs to mentor Sheriff Whites format...

Btw: A JCPD officer lives down the street,another Deputy around corner, they both have great Character & families there not Robocops either. Rest my case done here! "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:19 AM:

" Let's see you and Byron start calling names first, I respond in kind and you come back with more stupid name calling. Wow...how "intelligent" on your part.

What's funny is that is typical of your kind....when you can't argue facts and debate civilly (or start losing) you start name calling, flinging insults and trying to divert attention away from the actual subject at hand.

I am hardly an expert on everything...or even anything for that matter, but I can at least debate civilly without acting like a 2 year old. Too bad you can't say the same. LOL!! "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:10 AM:

" Well lets just agree that were stupid and your a condesending expert on everything. Of course in this case the Supreme court agrees with the stupid, and the condesending expert of everything just has a bug in his...over cops finding his pipe.

ODF, your wrong....ahhh no wait you were right, saying that does make me feel better. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 9:04 AM:

" MisI - I generally respond to the way I'm treated...when you come on here making stupid comments and accusing people of being criminals simply because of their opinions don't start whining when you get the same treatment back. But hey...have a great stupid assupmtion kind of day! LOL!!

Look, this is not a difficult concept...I'm not talking about driving being a right...you are both clearly clueless or just playing stupid. It's called unreasonable search, lack of probabe cause. Read the ruling...or don't and stay clueless...either way I'm done.
BTW...saying I'm wrong does not make it so, but if it makes you feel better go for it. Either way makes me no never mind! LOL!! "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:54 AM:

" Yes Byron, ODF is wrong. "

Byron W. wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:51 AM:

" My-point-is-DWI-checkpoints-are-a-violation-of-rights

Your point is wrong. Driving is a privilege not a right. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:47 AM:

" ODF said "The Supreme Court stated it is an intrusion on our rights, but has allowed them, so obviously they are legal."

Thanks ODF, I'm done, everyone now knows the checkpoints are legal, even ODF the local ACLU expert agrees.

and now, here's ODF's rebuttal of legaleeze and insults. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:43 AM:

" You ACLU types are the one that have ruined it. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:42 AM:

" Here are some more, you gonna lawyer out of this with sematics?? give ME a break.

even worse is when the checkpoints are extended to the passengers in the car. That is a blatant violation of the intent of the DRIVING while intoxicated checkpoints. "

Bottom line is that the checkpoints ARE a violation of rights...the court admitted so and there effectiveness
is borderline.

my rights trampled on by the govt

I got News for you, one of MY ancestors did participate in founding this country. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:39 AM:

" All your words

"How many passengers were asked for ID, etc.. Were the drug arrests from drivers or passengers? How were the drugs located, was it a result of arrest for DWI or just a hunch and pat down? "

How a passenger's identity or destination is the business of LE conducting a DRIVING while intoxicated checkpoint is beyond me. "

Govt. is supposed to protect all citizens... there is this little thing called the Constitution that protects all citizens from the govt. It's called unreasonable search w/o probably cause. Just because I'm driving down the road does not give the govt. the right to stop me for no reason to see if there is cause for arrest

My-point-is-DWI-checkpoints-are-a-violation-of-rights "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:18 AM:

" MissI please show me where I have said they are "illegal"? YOU CAN'T, because I haven't. Get a grip and learn to read AND comprehend. The Supreme Court stated it is an intrusion on our rights, but has allowed them, so obviously they are legal. Are you really this clueless or just playing the part? Wow..... "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:17 AM:

" One last post here...to MsI...do you always make stupid assumptions about everyone you have never met? You automatically assume because I am against having my rights trampled on by the govt and LE that I am a pothead? WOW...all I can say is thank GOD your kind was not prevalent when this country was founded because that is just an asinine (and WRONG) conclusion...but then I suspect you have a lot of experience in that area. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:15 AM:

" Hey ODF, if the checkpoints are so illegal, why don't you drive through one and make a fortune in a cival suit?

Reason, they ARE legal, been vetted, approved, vetted by the court and continue today. In this day and age of video, audio and gotcha journalism, they must for fear of suits follow procedure and court vetted practices. Of course there are humans on both sides of the equation, nothing is perfect.

It boils down to the backseat type worrying about his crack or pot pipe being discovered during one of these stops. Too bad lawbreaker, you take your chances, you may get caught. Follow the rules and the laws of our society, and move along, it's-just-that-simple. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:04 AM:

" As a PSA I believe they are effective, but in actually removing drunks from the road they are not. I can't remember seeing a checkpoint in the last 3-5 years where DD constituted more than 5% of the total tickets. So are we okay trampling on the rights of 95% of Americans to arrest a few? Another point, what other program in any organization with an effectiveness of 5% success would ever be continued?
With that, I'm departing this story...it's always the same people, same arguments, etc.. If folks are okay giving up their rights, I guess that is their choice. But remember the old saying... those that give up liberty for security will have, nor deserve, either. "

ODF wrote on Oct 7, 2008 8:00 AM:

" naturally wrote on Oct 6, 2008 3:58 PM:
The issue with your posts ODF seem to be that you compare being killed by a DD equivilent to a texter.

Somewhat, naturally. My point is they are both intentional acts by the driver. Fact is there was just a study released that showed texters have slower reaction times than drivers impaired by alcohol or marijuana. Texting, racing, running red lights is all just as premeditated as drinking and driving. Bottom line is that the checkpoints ARE a violation of rights...the court admitted so and there effectiveness is borderline. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 7, 2008 6:00 AM:

" Live, spare us the histroy lessons, your not some great crusader of cival liberties, and reasonable search and ceasure, what police can and can't do has been established. Your correct the ACLU has thier place, however protecting law breakers who are asked resonable questions at LEGAL checkpoints is not one of them, they have been over the top for years. No one supprts a police state "robo cops" or searchs without probable cause, or resonable suspition. If your rights are violated whne they find your pipe in the backseaty of your drunken friends car, then by all means sue the police or defend yourself in court, but get off your holy cival liberies horse. You took the bait dear :>). "

Parrothead911 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:29 AM:

" Yes, speeding, running red lights, tailgating, etc. are all potential killers, too. A loved one getting killed still stinks in any type of accident.

Getting behind the wheel when drunk really constitutes premeditation to speed, tailgate, etc. The fact is you are a lot more dangerous behind the wheel drunk than sober. This simple truth CAN'T be that hard to grasp.

Yes, sober people speed. A sober person would also be more able and willing to avoid an accident if he/she sees a potential one coming up than a person who is too geezed to notice.

Hopefully all those reading this will continue to get home safely, even if they get inconvenienced at a checkpoint. (Unless you're caught by the checkpoint!) "

winky615 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:05 AM:

" Finally, for those of you who truly feel your rights have been "trampled on" by being asked unreasonable questions, being searched without probable (NOT probably) cause, or whatever during a sobriety checkpoint, I am interested to know how your civil rights lawsuit pans out. Because you are filing one, right? Since it was such an egregious infringement of your rights... "

winky615 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 1:00 AM:

" ODF: Speeders do cause a lot of death and destruction. Which is why, in addition to alcohol-related operations, the state also provides funds for speed enforcement (our department puts out 4 officers twice a month devoting several hours to nothing but speed enforcement). In addition to the ongoing operations, the state also funds commercial motor vehicle operations, Click it or Ticket operations, hazardous moving violation operations, etc. To imply other traffic-related offenses are being overlooked is simply wrong. In fact, MORE time is devoted to these other operations. "

winky615 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:56 AM:

" I do agree that DWI saturations can be more effective than checkpoints, which is why I work in a department that deploys both at the same time.

I think it's unfair to base the value of all sobriety checkpoints on this one checkpoint. What number of DWI arrests will satisfy you? 10? 20? 50? "

winky615 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:54 AM:

" Second, if a sobriety checkpoint nets even one intoxicated driver, then it's a success. That's one less individual that's a threat to the safety of any one of us on the roadway (assuming YOU'RE not the arrested individual).

Additionally, it's hard to measure the success of a checkpoint due to the deterrent factor. Truth be told, some individuals are deterred from driving while intoxicated and it's impossible to get a measure on just how many DWI incidents are prevented. "

winky615 wrote on Oct 7, 2008 12:52 AM:

" To begin, sobriety checkpoints aren't a violation of your rights due to the US Supreme Court upholding the constitutionality of these operations. The checks and balances system has tested these operations and deemed them to be lawful. So any claim that checkpoints, when conducted properly, are a "violation of your rights" is merely your opinion and nothing more. "

lumpsinthesandbox wrote on Oct 6, 2008 11:06 PM:

" Frankly, I don't care how they catch and STOP drunk drivers, I am just thankful that they do.

And please do stop my daughter and her boyfriend. Feel free to harrass them. Maybe that will help them to remember that driving is not only a priviledge, but can also be very dangerous. My daughter has been told she had better ride responsibly as much as her boyfriend had better drive responsibly.
Whatever it takes to ensure my children, and yours, can and do travel the roads safely, I am all for it.
I don't give a hoot whether they are caught pulling out of a bar, swerving, or at a checkpoint. "

live77 wrote on Oct 6, 2008 10:46 PM:

" You know, the aclu can be right about some things. This just happens to be one of them. I think it was nazi germany that believed that guns were not needed and there should be a "constable on every corner." I like my freedom. I shall not have my civil liberties infringed upon. Also, I don't bait into arguments with the "he must be on drugs" thing. Thanks though "

msindependent wrote on Oct 6, 2008 10:37 PM:

" The ACLU has spoken, now put the hooka down live and go get some rest. "

live77 wrote on Oct 6, 2008 10:18 PM:

" wheee, a smoking debate and a civil liberties debate, all in one day. It is a complete and total violation of my civil rights to ask me for my ID or ask me who I am when I am riding in a car that has been stopped for no violation of the law, just being on a street where there happens to be a checkpoint. It is the same as going into a bar, asking for ID's and seeing whose drunk. If your drunk in a bar with keys in your pocket, I guess that is DWI. You cannot search me or my person without probably cause. What is their cause for doing so in a checkpoint, Loitering from sitting there so long. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 6, 2008 7:00 PM:

" Hey Nat, Mac admits it, whats a matter I get a little to close to reality for U? Forked tounge, looks whos mane calling now dear. "

msindependent wrote on Oct 6, 2008 6:58 PM:

" Not sure where you are going Mac, I'm conservative, Republican, have an opinion on legalization, unlike the democraptic party we do have diversity in the GOP. Not interested in third party candidates, never heard Bob Barr speak at length, looks kind of strange and appears very dull.

Oh and I'm for checkpoints, keep up the good work JCPD, MSHP, or whomever does that task, nice to see you out and about. "

Mac1974 wrote on Oct 6, 2008 6:27 PM:

" What are your thoughts on Bob Barr, Ms. Independent?

Also, I am convinced that Republicans and Libertarians are historically the parties who fight sobriety checkpoints because of their infringements on rights.

Is this not true? If it is true, does it not make ODF the only REAL conservative among you? "

Mac1974 wrote on Oct 6, 2008 6:21 PM:

" ~~~~~~Your potheads is my guess, and until we legalize this sustance, you'll maintain your fear of getting caught breaking the law, and rip on DWI checkpoints.~~~~~

lolol, the truth finally comes out.....

Libertarians crack me up. They became disgruntled because their party (republican) spent too much money and therefore joined a new club. They advocate EXTREME conservatism, the right to free will, and the right to grow marijuana.

Tell me I'm wrong Ms. Ind., go ahead... tell me... lol "

naturally wrote on Oct 6, 2008 4:10 PM:

" guess she missed the Winning Friends and Influencing People 101 class too. "

naturally wrote on Oct 6, 2008 4:08 PM:

" speaking of shrill, MsI's forked tongue and her baseless accusations are back "

Msindependent wrote on Oct 6, 2008 4:04 PM:

" Typical liberals, mac 74, ODF, if your not doing anything illegal, why are you so schrill about a few questions from a police officer?

Your potheads is my guess, and until we legalize this sustance, you'll maintain your fear of getting caught breaking the law, and rip on DWI checkpoints. Typical selfish self serving opinion at the expense of the general good. Oh and before we go down that road, I'm conservative, but support legalizing, regulating, and taxing weed, go figure. Guess that ball can roll now. "

naturally wrote on Oct 6, 2008 3:58 PM:

" but you see, I haven't seen anyone argue that the checkpoints ARE effective. The issue with your posts ODF seem to be that you compare being killed by a DD equivilent to a texter. You're arguement that checkpoints are ineffective is agreed.
While it is true that once the deed is done you cannot undue it and the killer is guilty by either means of delivery, this checkpoint is an attempt to reduce DD. What we should focus on is a more effective means of stopping drunk drivers. I'm all for stopping all the other stupidity too but evolution is slow. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 3:41 PM:

" I just get tired of people trying to throw emotion into an argument to justify trampling on rights. If a family member is killed by a stray bullet I am not going to advocate for the elimination of the right to bear arms and house searches for guns. If a family member is killed by knife, I'm not going to advocate for "knife checkpoints". If someone is killed by a street racer should we be stopping all these import "hotrods" and seeing if they are streetracers? Dead is dead regardless of the cause. "

Mac1974 wrote on Oct 6, 2008 3:03 PM:

" ~~~~~~~Oh, I get the humor, but I also get why some don't see it as funny. If you don't regularly see first hand the devestation of DWI, it probably an easier stretch to get to LOL-land.~~~~~~~~

You have an excellent point ODF. One could replace "DWI" in the above excerpt with "coulrophobia" and make Shiny's claim sound ridiculous.

This is always an interesting argument. I think I'm on board with ODF though. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:43 PM:

" Justice Brennan wrote, "That stopping every car might make it easier to prevent drunken driving...is an insufficient justification for abandoning the requirement of individualized suspicion."

The Court's justification for the exception rested on the assumption that DUI roadblocks are necessary and effective. However, there is some controversy as to whether this is true. The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently released data on alcohol-related deaths in 2003 and 2004. There was a decline in such fatalities in 2004, and most of the drop occurred in states that don't use sobriety checkpoints. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:40 PM:

" ..even worse is when the checkpoints are extended to the passengers in the car. That is a blatant violation of the intent of the DRIVING while intoxicated checkpoints. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:38 PM:

" I agree shiny...and if I'm stupid enough to driver after drinking and get a ticket, I deserve it. I am not trying to make an excuse for or state driving while drunk should be tolerated. My point is DWI checkpoints are a violation of rights and as a citizen we should not accept govt. intrustion into our rights. Those rights are very important and there to keep the govt. in check. When the govt. tramples on our rights, with the approval of the court, everyone suffers. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:36 PM:

" ...and before y'all start...I know that DUI means driving under the "influence" of any impairitive (if tht's a word) substance. But my point is, everyone always wants to throw drunk driving out there to flame the emotions...what if it was YOUR family member killed by a drunk driver, etc.. My question is, what does it matter if it was a drunk driver, inattentive/distracted driver or just a bad driver? IMO, it doesn't matter one bit WHY they are dead. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:35 PM:

" Oh, I get the humor, but I also get why some don't see it as funny. If you don't regularly see first hand the devestation of DWI, it probably an easier stretch to get to LOL-land.
I get where both of you are coming from. I take DWI seriously and am unapologetic about it. Some others might not see it that way, but I'll never have to say I'm sorry for doing the right thing. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:34 PM:

" Bus driver in CA just got arrested for driving under the influence of "something" (they don't know yet) and killing people. He was driving an UNLICENSED bus. Why was an unlicensed bus on the road? Do the families of those killed, crippled or injured not have a right to be traumatized and heart-broken because the driver wasn't drunk? "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:31 PM:

" However, all this quibbling has detracted from my original intent. Please, someone, tell me how a DWI death is any more traumatic or preventable than say a death from street racing, texting, changing the radio, being tired or simply inattentive driving. Trying to fuel emotions based on the drinking aspect is simply that....an emotion based argument. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:30 PM:

" JCpatriot wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:10 PM:

...wait til you get a speeding for doing 2mph over

You sir, are delusional. Why use facts when you can make up crazy stuff?

Could your kid have gotten a taillight ticket from a spotcheck? Sure, but in my years of doing this biz, I've never seen it. You'd like to portray cops as jackbooted thugs, living to harrass you. What in the world do I have to gain by that? Its a job and a job we try to do as well as possible. Its easy to blame others for your mistakes, but you really push the limits of reason. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:29 PM:

" Dogpile away...I'm used to that mentality anyway! LOL (sorry if that LOL offends anyone)! :)

I know naturally...I'm not always the most creative or colorful person. I just find it interesting some of the humor that's gone on and then I make a "LOL" (which actually was geared more towards JCPD than the DWI issue) and even the more stoic Byron gets bent. Whatever, it's all good...what's the old saying...opinions are like butt*****, everyone's got one!! LOL! (again, sorry if the LOL offends) Hey, maybe that should be my new signature line! "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 6, 2008 2:10 PM:

" King, I meant JCPD as LAPD metaphoric comparsion, read my other blogs. They act like its LA,It not! Jcy mo has only 48 k this is my whole point. My 17yr old stepson had taillight out at a checkpoint, most officers give you a warning. They wrote him a ticket it was out before he new it. come on where are you trying to defend some these gungho knuckleheads...wait til you get a speeding for doing 2mph over or taillight out. I rather have Bufford T Pusser hit it with a Two by four... "

naturally wrote on Oct 6, 2008 1:59 PM:

" ODF - we weren't ganging up on you. The humor I got and yes it was funny. Made me think of some of the 'compeition' we had when we were old enough to know better but too young to care.

The analogy between offenses though was kind've dry. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 1:32 PM:

" Another thing that cracks me up is folks like you, shiny, were just on here awhile back talking about using morbid humor to deal with issues. Yet I use a little "LOL" in relation to police maybe having to deal with more serious crime in our communtiy and all the sudden everyone can see Byron's point. Interesting.

So let me get this straight, it's okay to make fun of others' traumatic events in some circumstances, but use of it in other situations where no specific event is mentioned is off color (especially if it's related to the subject of DWI or DWI deaths)?? Very interesting. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 1:25 PM:

" What's funny shiny is that "jerk" is the nicest thing I've been called today. So if folks on here think it's a dig to get under my skin, I just laugh...they have no idea how thick my skin has to be day in and day out. Sticks and stones and all that jazz!!! "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 1:19 PM:

" Shiny - I'm just saying that some folks don't see traffic offenses as a crime. To them, it's no different than a speeding ticket, C&I, what have you. By definition, ANY violation of the law is a crime, including speeding etc..

Look, y'all can argue all you want about DWI deaths but bottom line, if a family member is killed by a speeder, street racer or texter, they are JUST as dead and it is JUST as traumatic as if they were killed by a drunk driver. Differentiating and trying to place special importance on someone dying due to DWI vs. dying from other stupidity is just ludicrous. "

L D wrote on Oct 6, 2008 1:16 PM:

" Well, if we have DUI checkpoints, we oughta have suicide checkpoints just to check and see if anyones thinkin bout suicide seeing as how more people die from suicide than drunks on the road. I got an idea, if you wanna write DUIs, watch the people that come stumbling out of bars. Heres a tip, they werent just playin checkers in that bar. Honestly, do we NEED checkpoints? Expensive. Annoying. Harassment. Bottom line. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 6, 2008 12:38 PM:

" if we were all emotionless robots, you'd be right. I don't like to see it go to name calling either but my suspicion is he's got some personal experience with a DWI incident effecting his life in a negative way. When someone minimizes the event ("DWI isn't REAL crime"), its bound to stike a nerve. "Jerk" is probably the nicest word he could think of, with that in mind. "

nospinzone wrote on Oct 6, 2008 12:30 PM:

" you can make an excuse for why some get more upset than others on this issue but it does excuse anyone from civility "

nospinzone wrote on Oct 6, 2008 12:28 PM:

" Byron
I agree with all your posts on the significance of dwi, and need for stings
but you know as well as anyone, when you call someone a jerk or whatever name
calling your post and credabilty goes way down hill "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 6, 2008 12:18 PM:

" I don't know Byron, but I know folks that have personally touched by DWI and they ARE particularly "touchy" about it. They have a right to be. When some idiot destroys the lives of peope you love, it tends become personal.
Those that only know the sting of a DWI from a personal experience of an arrest often want to make excuses or minimize the event. I suppose that's human nature. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 6, 2008 12:14 PM:

" Oh, ODF! I gotta call you on that one. DWI is indeed a crime and a crime that claims roughly 500 lives each year in Missouri. Its particularly troubling since its a self imposed impairment that is completely preventable.
If someone decided to ram their car into a crowd of people, would you call that a "traffic offense"? Indeed, DWI is traffic related, but to discount it as secondary is dismissing the facts of the crime. "

naturally wrote on Oct 6, 2008 11:41 AM:

" BYRON W! - what happened to our rational Spock-like debater?
I guess you are human with emotions and DWI must be a trigger for you. "

Byron W. wrote on Oct 6, 2008 11:32 AM:

" ODF wrote "BTW - I might be mistaken, but I believe that DWI is a traffic offense unless a wreck, property damage or death occurs."

You are mistaken. "

Byron W. wrote on Oct 6, 2008 11:31 AM:

" ODF wrote "BTW...nice name calling.....I love it when folks can't have a civil debate."

The point is you were making light of DWI and the people that die because of it. That deserves a label. It appears that you are a heartles indvidual. Maybe one day someone you know may be killed by a drunk driver. I wonder if you'll change your tune if that happened. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 10:08 AM:

" BTW - I might be mistaken, but I believe that DWI is a traffic offense unless a wreck, property damage or death occurs. So in many instances simply driving while intoxicated is a traffic offense and not considered "crime" in the same category as rape, robbery, assault, etc.. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 10:05 AM:

" Byron - So is running red lights, shooting, robberies, assaults....but we don't see police setting up stings for those type of situations.

BTW...nice name calling.....I love it when folks can't have a civil debate.

Running red lights, speeding, street racing and inattentive driving has taken many lives also....so do you have a point or just come on here to name call? "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 10:02 AM:

" People have come to learn that if they are rearended it is automatically the other person's fault...and they also know there can be a big paycheck for claiming neck/back injuries. Between that and just being in a hurry or rude and have "must be in front" mentality they CAUSE wrecks and innocent drivers have no recourse unless there are people willing to stop and be a witness. "

Byron W. wrote on Oct 6, 2008 10:01 AM:

" ODF wrote "You're right Byron, they don't...because then they would have no reason to set up checkpoints or sit along roads leading to/from bars at night. Whatever would they do...fight real crime? God forbid! LOL!"

DWI is a real crime. It has taken many lives. That is real funny, jerk. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 10:01 AM:

" Naturally - I rear-ended someone like that about 2 years ago while vacationing in another state...and I got the ticket. First ticket in about 10 years and first accident in about 25. She pulled out of a parking lot on a 4 lane road, 45-50 mph traffic. I was in the left lane, she went from right lane, to my lane to a center crossover/turn lane and STOPPED (partially in my lane). Absolutely nothing I could do and nailed her about 40 mph....yet I got the ticket for failure to maintain safe distance. I had a safe distance from the car in front of me...until SHE pulled into that space. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:57 AM:

" Be safe out there shiny! "

naturally wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:55 AM:

" then there IS the 'just plain stupid' category that see a little hole between you and the car in front of you (just big enough to follow safely, ok shiney? ;) they can't wait for the endless void behind you, they just gotta be in front of you. There goes your safe zone and they're still not going any faster than before. I swear it makes me want to have something to 'paint' them with so the HP can see I am following an IDIOT.

please excuse my left-over road rage...just had to get that off my chest. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:38 AM:

" For what its worth, ODF, texters that are all over the road are an automatic ticket from me. Its a pet peeve for the very reasons you just mentioned.
It IS dangerous. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:25 AM:

" kingfishstevens wrote on Oct 5, 2008 9:24 PM:
There was a time when it was a sport...

This post cracked me up because it reminded me of a time back in college. Bar owner put in one of those 25cent BAC machines where you could check your level of intoxication. Well, as college students usually do, we took it the completely OPPOSITE direction and proceeded to see who could get the HIGHEST reading. Bar owner took the machine out shortly after that. LOL!! "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:23 AM:

" I agree with most of your last posts shiny. But wreckless, speeding, redlight runners, texters, eaters, radio changers and the like are also "self-imposed". How many texters really text ONCE and then go back to paying attention to their driving??!! C'mon now..honestly!! LOL!
I got ran onto the shoulder last week by some 16-18 year old chick that couldn't text and stay in her lane. Thank God I was paying attention and had room on the shoulder to avoid her stupid "you-know-what".
It don't matter to me personally...I either drink at home or take a cab/DD. I got too lucky in college and am slowly outgrowing "stupid"...contrary to some's belief! LOL! "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:09 AM:

" You can become a non-speeder, texter, etc on the spot. A drunk is drunk until he sobers up, hours later. A speeder doesn't be the nature of his offense, have impaired judgement as well. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:05 AM:

" The difference, ODF, is a drunk driver is dangerous due to self imposed "stupidity". Poor judgement plus physical impairment is a presciption for disaster. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:44 AM:

" I'm not going to come on here and try to defend spotchecks. The Supreme Court already has. The criteria is they have to be set up in an area that's been determined to be a high DWI/accident location.
I absolutely agree that road texters are dangerous. Presciption drug users that drive while impaired are definately on the rise and they are definately a major problem.
As it stands, DWI spotchecks are legal. There's other court decisions I don't like, just like you. If they banned spotchecks tomorrow, it would be fine by me. "

kingfishstevens wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:39 AM:

" JCpat wrote "Don't get me wrong, there is good few police officers on the force,I had one tell me its his adminstrators is the problem with the overkill situations,not the street cop in the trenchs. UH? Go figure that? "

Dont worry we undeerstand you perfectly, don't be a hater. A cop doing his/her job and writing a ticket for headlights out, DWI, etc, it's the law, it's to maintain safety, keep your vehicle in good running order and don't drive drunk, really not rocket science. And again this aint LA. "

kingfishstevens wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:35 AM:

" JCpatroit wrote "King, I'm not a cop hater by all means but when officers go beyond reasonable searches its call overkill, LAPD has these officers in overkill mode alot of times."

This just in, were not in LA.

Oh and Cops have rules too, were talking about checkpoints not Nazi's, illegal searches etc, man you haters are excitable. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:17 AM:

" Shiny - Not sure what you mean by unverifiable. I have personally been a passenger in a vehicle through a DWI checkpoint and was asked for ID. If you don't believe me, that is certainly your choice, but simply because YOU haven't personally witnessed it does not mean it is "unverifiable". "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:14 AM:

" 911 - How is a loved one of mine that is killed by a stupid, wreckless speeding driver any less dead than one killed by a drunk driver? That argument is an old argument and stupid because it's designed to play to the emotions. What difference does it make WHY a loved one is killed? If your loved one is killed by a stray bullet are you then for abolition of all guns and home visits by the govt to make sure you don't have guns? "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:11 AM:

" Govt. is supposed to protect all citizens...but BEFORE govt. there is this little thing called the Constitution that protects all citizens from the govt. It's called unreasonable search w/o probably cause. Just because I'm driving down the road does not give the govt. the right to stop me for no reason to see if there is cause for arrest, any more than they could walk in my house to see if I'm doing anything illegal. "

ODF wrote on Oct 6, 2008 8:05 AM:

" Shiny - There was a study just released that showed people who text message while driving have a slower response time than drivers impaired by alcohol or marjuana. There's studies showing that drivers who are tired are just as dangerous as drivers impaired by alcohol. There all sorts of people driving around under the influence of prescription meds that are more dangerous than drunk drivers. So are you all for stopping all these drivers and checking for impairment and/or obtaining cell phone records to see if drivers are DWT (driving while texting)? "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 5, 2008 11:39 PM:

" King, I'm not a cop hater by all means but when officers go beyond reasonable searches its call overkill, LAPD has these officers in overkill mode alot of times.

BTW: I wear a badge in the prison system for long time, I do know the difference when Robocop or bad officers have issues & is looking for write in overkill mode,they usually get in a legal wreck lose there jobs,house, etc. Don't get me wrong, there is good few police officers on the force,I had one tell me its his adminstrators is the problem with the overkill situations,not the street cop in the trenchs. UH? Go figure that? "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 5, 2008 11:27 PM:

" Shiny,
Sometimes I like your valid points, but the personal attacks are uncalled for, You know there just Roadnazi's looking for a ticket to write. I hate to tell you they are also writing headlight & taillight & other misc. tickets at these checkpoints ; the tickets generate for revenue for JCY escroll accts. please save us the BS that there just trying to stop drunks & druggies.They do that patrolling the streets every nite.

BTW, The only thing I understand in your last blogs is that the points on your badge are starting to stink like your donut farts...lol sorry you need to buy a vowel this time Bud. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 5, 2008 10:26 PM:

" without probable cause, it isn't legal. Now of course, there will be a whole host of unverifiable stories about illegal searches at spotchecks. If the search was truly illegal, the case won't be prosecutable.
Jack-booted thug searches make for a good story, but in reality, searches that occur are done after probable cause has been established or permission granted. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 5, 2008 10:05 PM:

" If you're leaving a bar and drunk, I hope someone DOES see you ARRESTS you. I make no apologies for finding drunks any way I can, where ever I can. If you're not drunk and driving fine, you'll have no problems. I'm not looking to waste my time with sober people when drunk ones are just waiting to catch my attention.
If YOUR family was the one that was saved by the next drunk arrest, I doubt you'd care too much where or how we caught them.
Drunks aren't victims. They're perpetrators. Any confusion there? "

boscoe wrote on Oct 5, 2008 9:58 PM:

" So how is it legal for law enforcement to question and search passengers in DWI checkpoints? "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 5, 2008 9:56 PM:

" I'm for less govt too, but one of the primary responsibilities of govt is the safety of its citizens. As I've said, I'm not a proponent of spotchecks primarily because they're not that effective. The do serve a purpose in that drunk drivers have to worry that there MAY be a spotcheck around the corner, so SOME choose designated drivers. Not all, but some do the right thing.
If they said tomorrow, "no more spotchecks", I don't know of many cops that would be too upset. "

kingfishstevens wrote on Oct 5, 2008 9:24 PM:

" There was a time when it was a sport, the stats are in and drunk driving is out. I for one do not mind being stopped as part of making us all safer. Keep up the good work. 2206, Newbie, etc, your cop haters, get over it, you are part of a community, and this community does not condone lawlessness. Your attitude leads us to believe you may hav other issues going on in your life. Look at the deaths, injuries and tell me we don't need more effective enforcement, check points work...period. "

castigliano wrote on Oct 5, 2008 9:23 PM:

" Roadblocks are for Nazi's, Commie's and Totalitarian Regimes.

I am a true Republican when it comes to less government.

Why not save us all a little trouble and wait outside of the bars? When you see patrons leave, get in their cars and drive off, You can pull them over.

And you say, "we can not do that, it is against the law and unconstitutional". "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 5, 2008 4:58 PM:

" "Don't drink and drive and you've got nothing to worry about" is an abstract theory?
I can try to use smaller words if I need to, but I'm not sure how much simpler the message can be.

You're talking out of your arse, JCP (when I can actually follow what you're saying. Honestly, phone a friend. Buy a vowel. Do SOMETHING!). "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 5, 2008 2:48 PM:

" Naturally,
Your second point with shiny's abstract theroy. JCPD adminstration is the Leadership problem, its corrupt they will go against policy to get what they want, they don't care about public opinion or harrassing teenagers at checkpoints etc. I had 5 different officers tell me personally, its all about ticket revenue $$$$$$$ to fund them more toys & equipment,future salaries etc. So its a money thing vs. protect & serve, yeah right! "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 5, 2008 2:35 PM:

" 911,
Another point they can get 5 dwi's while patrolling on fri /sat nites Your stats doesn't make a difference compare to court reports on monday mornings its the same without the checkpoint,but only 5 less drunks off the road.Still wasting taxpayers money by having unessesary personell at these checkpoints.

Newbie, has a point with the checkpoints were designed to curve Holiday drinkers IE:Newyears eve, X-mas eve, etc. LAPD I mean JCPD half of that force drinks & drives leaving the bars off duty. I seen them leave spectators & bones. I use to drink with atleast 3 of . But its okay for them to entrapp & Harass our teenagers on a regular basis. Come on give us all break! "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 5, 2008 2:20 PM:

" FYI, Yes there should be officers stopping drunk driver highway killers. Majority of the time there harassing innocent family at the checkpoint, meanwhile the real killers are going around the checkpoint.

Shiny, Your right, they need to be patrolling the county & US.Highway.
So are the checkpoints really effective when you have 5 DWI's at the checkpoint thats pretty low/avg. stat on ,compare to 20-30 Drunk drivers get away? If the county would patrol the county roads heavy. JCPD setup checkpoint at County/city limits borders that would be effective. "

911oclock somewhere wrote on Oct 5, 2008 12:30 AM:

" The article states 5 DWI contacts were made. Congratulations and THANK YOU to the men and women out there working the checkpoint.

To those of you who oppose checkoints, I really hope a loved one of yours (or you yourself) would not be zipped up in a bodybag later that evening if Mr/Ms drunk wasn't pulled over.

If you have nothing to fear (or hide), a checkpoint meeting with an officer is usually quick and painless.

For those of you who hang at a bar, learn where the checkpoints are (and then avoid them), I truly fear you. You are likely driving impaired and are more concerned about being caught than the danger you pose to others. "

rojo wrote on Oct 5, 2008 12:21 AM:

" I'm glad they're doing checkpoints. The wisdom of announcing them in advance eludes me if the intent is to catch as many drunks as possible.

Maybe it's a "proactive" thing ?

Do they let the new drug dog come along and play? Seeing him beside the road might make someone drink the bong water. "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 4, 2008 2:43 PM:

" There alot of good people with families around here, with good christian morals do you think we are going to let a ROBOCOP ruin are lives. I don't think so... "

don't drink and drive and you've got nothing to worry about. (I might add, Don't drink and post. Just sayin') "

naturally wrote on Oct 3, 2008 9:53 PM:

" thanks JCP, you do learn a little about the good things in life.

I agree with you shiney; you still have to follow the leader unless you have proof of poor leadership. (can come in many forms)
If a lot of these people would spend less time busting your chops and actually try to work with LE they may find a different outcome. "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:06 PM:

" Naturally,
Good comment the smart drunks stay at home,I learned that techinque in the Army to be a Disaplined drunk w/ buddy system & and there alot of ex-military here that are disapline alcoholics... BTW I quit drinking alcohol 8 yrs ago... "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 3, 2008 7:54 PM:

" Buffy,
Guess what off duty cops hang out there. Do really think there going to bust there fellow badges & friends when they pull out onto the BLVD. I doubt it... "

JCpatriot wrote on Oct 3, 2008 7:47 PM:

" Shiny,
You guys run around JCY like your LAPD in this town is under 100 thousand people low crime. You guys need to be busting these meth labs have some consideration not everyones a alcoholic & drug addict.

80 % JCY majority is state Government worker with no felonies that do urine test at 2-3 times a year 75% of of us are not going to throw away our State retirement to get busted by JCPD for drinking & driving... I think you guys watch the show "cops" alittle too much.There alot of good people with families around here, with good christian morals do you think we are going to let a ROBOCOP ruin are lives. I don't think so... "

shinymcshine wrote on Oct 3, 2008 5:34 PM:

" As much as some would like to believe there's a quota system, there simply isn't.
Any cop will tell you, the spotcheck is one of the LEAST efficient ways of catching drunk drivers. We hate working them but since some muckity muck in the ivory tower declares them "good", we have to.
You want to catch drunks? Put the 15 or so officers assigned to a spotcheck out on the road just saturating an area. You'll fill the jail, and as long as there's some sort of follow up with the media, the prohibitive effect is the same as a spotcheck's would be. "

naturally wrote on Oct 3, 2008 4:12 PM:

" There is something to be said for being old enough to stay home even on Saturday night.
I don't know if the good outweighs the bad with redundant checkpoints but its enough to make a quiet night at home inviting. kick back with a bottle of vino after the kids go to bed, yep can't wait for tomorrow night. "

ts20 wrote on Oct 3, 2008 3:28 PM:

" buffy --- your right -but just think -who all they would catch ....you know ---i know----- and they know .........it don't work that way // "

ODF wrote on Oct 3, 2008 2:29 PM:

" I agree live...there's been a couple LE types on here that argue checkpoints don't do this. I have gone through ones that have asked for everyone's ID in the car. How a passenger's identity or destination is the business of LE conducting a DRIVING while intoxicated checkpoint is beyond me. "

live77 wrote on Oct 3, 2008 1:32 PM:

" the reason that these checkpoints are a violation of people's rights are, when I am a passenger in a car, there is no need to ask me for my ID, nor run my name against your criminal database. It is the same thing as going house to house and asking your name and running it, just to see if you get a hit. They are set up for DWI, then the Law uses any excuse to issue a citation for thier quota. Pretty soon, they will be issuing loitering tickets for those that have to sit in line to long. Your freedoms are being stripped from you, wake up. Thankfully the bars in town announce where all the checkpoints are, so I can avoid them. "

ODF wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:09 AM:

" ooops...forgot to include you too Boscoe....I agree completely! "

ODF wrote on Oct 3, 2008 8:08 AM:

" You're right Byron, they don't...because then they would have no reason to set up checkpoints or sit along roads leading to/from bars at night. Whatever would they do...fight real crime? God forbid! LOL! "

Boscoe wrote on Oct 2, 2008 10:40 PM:

" Criminals OWN the streets in Jefferson City, and the only thing local law enforcement knows what to do is to issue speeding and parking tickets and make illegal search and seizures based on no probably cause and assuming a driver is guilty instead of presuming innocence.

Let's all hope and pray that the riots and crime-fests next week are not too bad with the homecoming. At least we won't be violating anyone's rights by profiling likely criminals. "

Boscoe wrote on Oct 2, 2008 10:37 PM:

" "Why don't we have permanant check points on all roads with in the state leading in out of communities. Everyone would need to have papers proving their identity and be subject to a search of themselves and their car. It would really be no different than being stopped for no probable cause in one of these check points."

Might as well implement this idea. That's where our country is headed as our freedoms continue to be eroded and as our once-democratic government and free market economy continues to take broad steps toward socialism with the $700 billion + PORK bailout.

The U.S. was a great country, even a few years ago. I HATE where we are headed. "

Byron W. wrote on Oct 2, 2008 6:42 PM:

" actually they don't want to run any bar out of business. "

ODF wrote on Oct 2, 2008 3:57 PM:

" It's called lack of probable cause. "

buffy wrote on Oct 2, 2008 3:53 PM:

" Why don't they have a checkpoint on Missouri Blvd where a sports bar is located. As soon as the car exits the parking lot and enters the Blvd - you can probably nail a whole bunch of drunks. "

downtowner2 wrote on Oct 2, 2008 3:44 PM:

" The Missouri Department of Transportion in conjunction with these Highway Patrol checkpoints really does issue a certificate for the Drunkest Person on Missouri State Highways. "

Byron W. wrote on Oct 2, 2008 3:36 PM:

" I am not sure why they would say checkpoints are a violation of anyone's rights. "

thnkr wrote on Oct 2, 2008 3:13 PM:

" ODF...... Absolutely. Not often that a court rules in favor of rights violations, but here it is completely worth it for the major offenders they are picking up. Having my rights stripped from me is OK, as long as I feel as safe as these checkpoints are making me feel. Thank you LE, thank you!!! "

ODF wrote on Oct 2, 2008 2:55 PM:

" thnkr - It is not a "potential" violation of rights...the court admits it's a violation, but yet they allowed it. "

ODF wrote on Oct 2, 2008 2:54 PM:

" I would also like to know what the court considers a "minor inconvenience". Have posted this before, but there was a checkpoint in Morgan County over Memorial Weekend that took some drivers almost an HOUR to get through, traffic was backed up so far it created a hazard and they ended up almost having a couple of wrecks and had to move the checkpoint to a different location. Sitting in a checkpoint for more than a few minutes is anything more than a "minor inconvenience". One day someone will get killed as a result of the checkpoint. "

thnkr wrote on Oct 2, 2008 2:28 PM:

" Not sure what the mentality is. They are doing a checkpoint almost every weekend now with the same stellar results you see in this article. It costs us tons of money, is a huge inconvenience, and a potential violation of our rights. In the meantime, Sam Bushman fears comming to his store every Monday morning because of weekend vandals, people are being robbed and shot at every week, drug deals are rampant in many areas of the city..... I'm pretty sure none of these criminals will be driving up to JCPD's open house. Glad to get drunks off the street but JCPD really need to reprioritize. This is just seems like laziness. "

downtowner2 wrote on Oct 2, 2008 2:21 PM:

" I was about fifteen deep and they waived me through the checkpoint. I even had a roadie in the cup holder. "

ODF wrote on Oct 2, 2008 2:01 PM:

" But what I really want to know is how do you write a speeding ticket at a checkpoint?? I have to say, I believe this is the first time I've seen a speeding or C&I ticket at a checkpoint!! LOL!! "

ODF wrote on Oct 2, 2008 2:00 PM:

" How many other crimes occurred during the checkpoint times?

You can disagree all you want, but bottom line the Supreme Court allowed checkpoints while acknowledging they are a violations of rights because the "minor inconvenience" was for the "greater good". What I want to know is what qualifies as greater good....is 3% success really a greater good? What about 1%? What about the one(s) Osage Beach held a couple of months ago that had LESS than 1%? Is it really justifiable to trample on the rights of 99 out of 100 people or 995 out of 1000 (% wise)?? "

ODF wrote on Oct 2, 2008 1:57 PM:

" What's up mommy! LOL!! You can disagree with me all you want...bottom line is, even the Supreme Court admits this is a violation of rights.

Let's see...a grand total of 3% success rate. WOW-WEEE! Maybe HP should help JCPD & Cole County clean up some of the crime areas. THat would make a bigger impact. I would love to have more info than the general BS they release. How many passengers were asked for ID, etc.. Were the drug arrests from drivers or passengers? How were the drugs located, was it a result of arrest for DWI or just a hunch and pat down? "

mommyof2 wrote on Oct 2, 2008 12:23 PM:

" newbie, not all of the law enforcement is at one location, please verify this before you make that statement. And I have the right to drive on any roadway and not encounter a drunk so I'm all for the checkpoints. Now, I'm waiting for ODF... ha ha Sorry ODF, we will always agree to disagree on this subject "

newbie wrote on Oct 2, 2008 12:03 PM:

" I am actually annoyed with all the checkpoints. It's entrappment. Yes, they do catch drunk drivers, but maybe if we had a few more cops on the roads that are heavy with traffic they could catch them just as easily. But instead, they all focus on this one checkpoint and all the enforcement is there, opposed to the whole city. "

2206 wrote on Oct 2, 2008 11:25 AM:

" Why don't we have permanant check points on all roads with in the state leading in out of communities. Everyone would need to have papers proving their identity and be subject to a search of themselves and their car. It would really be no different than being stopped for no probable cause in one of these check points. And I believe it's already been done, if history serves me correctly. "

To add your comments you must be registered and logged in

*Member ID:
*Password:

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

*Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
*E-mail Address:
*Year of Birth:
	(children under 13 cannot register)
*First Name:
*Last Name:
Company:
*Home Phone:
Business Phone:
*Address:
*City:
*State:
*Zip Code:

Return to: News Local « | Home « | Top of Page ^

Sports Poll

Online Poll

Related Stories

Local Headlines

e-Edition makes debut; daily paper online now

Robber pulls gun, still sought

Political signs stolen

Patrol conducts DWI checkpoint

Jay homecoming traditions

Train-traveling AARP members push health-care debate

McCaskill to vote for financial bill she doesn't like

No injuries in school bus accident

Church to gather hygiene kits for Gulf residents

CRMC hosts fall festival

Association hosts Harvest Festival

Prayer garden to be dedicated

RACS sponors exhibit at Truman Building

Wow the crowd with standout snacks

Senior celebration

Top Commented Stories (more)

Top Commented Stories (more)

Sports Headlines

e-Edition makes debut; daily paper online now

Robber pulls gun, still sought

Political signs stolen

Patrol conducts DWI checkpoint

Jay homecoming traditions

Train-traveling AARP members push health-care debate

McCaskill to vote for financial bill she doesn't like

No injuries in school bus accident

Church to gather hygiene kits for Gulf residents

CRMC hosts fall festival

Association hosts Harvest Festival

Prayer garden to be dedicated

RACS sponors exhibit at Truman Building

Wow the crowd with standout snacks

Senior celebration

All Contents Copyright © 2009 News Tribune Co. All rights reserved.
AP stories Copyright © 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Click for copyright details.
Comments or questions? Contact us.
Employees

Available Feeds
RSS	Political News
RSS	Press Releases
RSS	Local News
RSS	State News
RSS	Business
RSS	Sports
RSS	Entertainment
About RSS Feeds

Find out about our RSS feeds and what they are.

Copyright © 2009. All rights reserved.
Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.