Subscribe
Shop Local
Magazine
Gas Prices
Today's Poll!Abbreviated checkpoints still net 19 violations
Monday, December 10, 2012
The Cole County Sheriff’s Department ended its Friday sobriety checkpoint early due to rain, but still checked 601 cars and found 19 violations, including one DWI arrest.
The checkpoints were part of the statewide “Drink and Drive and Get Arrested” efforts and were in cooperation with the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT).
“Checkpoints like these are about high visibility and using high visibility as a deterrent against drunk drivers,” Sheriff Greg White said. “When the drivers and passengers of those 601 cars went through, they knew, had they been drinking and driving, they would have been arrested, so the next time they drink, they, hopefully, won’t get behind the wheel.”
The checkpoint started a night of focused DWI enforcement that included DWI saturation enforcement throughout the county.
Marry Me
Comments
Paroquet 6 months, 1 week ago
Said differently, .006% of vehicles detained without cause resulted in one arrest for the purpose of the enforcement effort. No mention of the driver's indicated level of intoxication--it very well could've been the previous 0.1 limit, or suspicion of another substance causing the intoxication.
Eighteen other unspecified violations were also found, but there is no mention of citations being issued for the violations tangential to the purpose for the checkpoint. Could've been for seatbelt use, which is a secondary violation and is NOT probable cause for a stop. The same for not having a valid license on you, or failing to provide proof of insurance, or a violation by a passenger not related to either vehicle or driver.
Time and again, resources are wasted upon checkpoints for DUI enforcement where saturation patrols have been consistently more successful in DUI arrests.
yamahamian 6 months, 1 week ago
Check your math there, professor Paroquet. 1 out of 601 is .00166, or .166% Unless you can otherwise explain how .006% was derived, you may need to avoid any checkpoints in the next couple hours lol.
Still a very small percentage though, I agree.
JCLifer 6 months, 1 week ago
Yeah, but these checkpoints are great ways for law enforcement employees to earn extra overtime pay to help buy their families, spouses, and girlfriends Christmas presents. It is easy work standing around with a flashlight. Gotta love the system and how it looks out for itself.
Mr_Grimm 6 months, 1 week ago
Hey Lifer, most of those guys were reserves....meaning not paid. I wonder if that 3 day old baby who lost her whole family coming home from the hospital and was hit by the drunk driver thinks these are a waste of time???
JCLifer 6 months, 1 week ago
I would not presume to know what a 3-day old baby thinks.
The point is that there are probably more efficient and effective ways to get drunks off the road, than hassling a whole bunch of innocent citizens. The system is flawed, because even when LE catches them, the offenders get a little slap on the wrist and are released so they can continue to drink and drive. I fail to understand how there can even be a 4th-time offender. Seems like after 3 DUIs they would permanently be off the roads forever. Serving extended period behind bars would be very appropriate.
The present methods are not working. Why can't we do something different?
dokeus6 6 months, 1 week ago
Because there is no money in doing something different! That's what this country is all about. MONEY MONEY MONEY!!!
newone 6 months, 1 week ago
Even if they prevented one person from being killed by a drunk driver it was well worth the resources!!! Good Job Cole County Sheriff’s Department!!
And I really don't consider it "hassling" people when they are trying to save lives, maybe if they would have done this 16 years ago my friend who was killed by a drunk driver would still be alive today.
JCPSDad 6 months, 1 week ago
Very glad there is one intelligent voice amongst the madness......... Many people can disassociate themselves what what is really the objectives here just because they feel "inconvenienced"... Loose a child or another loved one, then see if they would still use words like "hassle"......
eileen10 6 months, 1 week ago
I agree with doing what ever it takes to get drunk drivers off the roads. I do, however, wish the laws were harsher when dealing with drunk drivers. I've never been stopped at a check point but if I were I don't care how long I'd have to wait while the police were doing their job. If it were up to me a first offense for driving drunk would be a year in prison and if i had to pay more taxes I would gladly do it versus the mating habits of a turtle or what ever taxes are being used for that is a bag of feces.
Paroquet 6 months, 1 week ago
Eileen10,
They tried that, "doing whatever it takes", from 1920-1933. In return, they gave us organized crime. The U.S. is still dealing with the hangover from that sober soiree.
The taxes for studying animals is usually a dedicated 1/8 cent levy for conservation that is sometimes paired with federal grants specific to a stated purpose. Legislature can't touch it.
Oh, and don't forget they quit early on account of rain. What do you want to bet the impaired drivers did too? ;-)
eileen10 6 months, 1 week ago
Well. The more I read from you the more I realize I don't know squat but thanks to you I learn things. The bad part is that my memory likes to take vacations. How on earth can you remember all those statistics? I'm lucky to remember what I did yesterday. Um. Hmmm. Okay, We'll skip that because ????? It must have been a boring day.
Paroquet 6 months, 1 week ago
You know plenty, like most everyone I meet. We just make different picks as to what we choose to retain, or skip. I'll bet there's someone here that could tell you some sports statistics from July of 1994 without looking it up. I could tell you all about Shoemaker-Levy 9 for the same period, off the cuff, but couldn't tell you whether it was baseball or football season, I do know it was squirrel season, though.
Hey, if it weren't on top of the clothes hamper, I couldn't tell you what I wore yesterday, I forget my keys an average of twice while trying to leave for work, and I typically lose three coffee cups before lunch. We will not speak of my car keys. The elf did it.
eileen10 6 months, 1 week ago
Paroquet, you are a nice person. As I think about it, your right. I can remember things from years ago and from a few days ago or yesterday that stick out in my mind like how my dog took off out the door with my underwear in his yap last week. I know what you mean about car keys. And I put my eye glasses down and forget where I put them. Yep. The elf did it.
jdb 6 months, 1 week ago
I won't argue that organized crime existed before prohibition, but can you deny that organized crime did not grow and flourish because of prohibition?
jdb 6 months, 1 week ago
Graceful, you stated, " That doesn not change the fact that supply was reduced, the price increased and that as a consequence consumption was reduced."
Fact? Do you have a reliable source for that fact?
More importantly, are you trying to tell me that prohibition was a success?
jdb 6 months, 1 week ago
Graceful, if you were to argue that the benefits of prohibition were worth the costs to our government and society, you would be the only person I have ever encountered who argued that point.
Paroquet 6 months, 1 week ago
Graceful, tch-tch-tch;
Got any records of liquor sales for that time? You could probably get an estimate, but I highly doubt the mob handed over the whole of their books.
Truth is, nobody really knows exactly how much alcohol consumption increased or decreased during Prohibition. You should read-up on some of testimonies given to the sixty-ninth Congress in April of 1926.
Paroquet 6 months, 1 week ago
The statements in the form of a record of alcohol related arrests NOT pertaining to bootlegging or distribution given by Wm. S. Vare to the 69th congress show that the number of offenses for intoxication, intoxicated driving, and habitual drunkards nearly doubled for Philadelphia during prohibition. Hon. Cabel Bruce testified that, for prominent major cities, the smallest percent increase for arrests due to drunkenness was ~20%. That was in Seattle, WA. In Wilmington, NC it rose 51%, Chicago tripled, San Francisco octupled, St. Louis quintupled. As memory serves, in not one of the prominent cities listed in Judge Bruce's testimony did the incidence of drunkenness decrease.
Whereas you don't know of any such surveys, it seems that I do. Feel free to check my references. I can't be arsed with digging them all up.
newone 6 months, 1 week ago
I agree eileen10; the guy who hit my friend was on his 3rd offence, and then only got 7 years for killing her!! How's that for justice!
JCLifer 6 months, 1 week ago
Thanks for helping me make my point.
eileen10 6 months, 1 week ago
That's not justice. Not by a long shot. This kind of thing happens over and over and I don't know why the laws are so lax. Seven years is nothing and more than likely the killer didn't serve 7 years. Your friends life ended and for that I feel for you. I bet the only reason Charles Manson is still in prison is because of the publicity and because Sharon Tate was a public figure and pregnant as well plus some of the others his people killed were rich and there's the case of OJ Simpson who had a slew of lawyers and the list goes on. Killing someone wether it's by a knife, gun or a drunken driver has the same end result. Someone dies. Manson's in prison, Simpson walked and the person that killed your friend only got seven years. It shouldn't matter how many people were kileed by a person or group of people. The fact remains innocent people died and the law is all over the place and weather it was one person or 10 that died the end result should be the same for all which to me is life in prison for the death of innocent people and a minimum of one year in prison for D.W.I. which makes sense to me.
Paroquet 6 months, 1 week ago
It's not that at all JCPSDad. It's a proven fact that they catch more DUI offenders with saturation patrols than through the use of checkpoints. Plain and simple.
I think the record around here was something to the effect of 3% for a checkpoint on 50E. For saturation patrols, they're usually good for 20% and zero motorists being detained without cause--you get stopped for a legitimate reason.
Newone, I don't consider it hassling, and they were doing this 16yrs ago. I'm using proper vernacular for the action of stopping a motorist without probable cause. I'm also describing how checkpoints are a poor use of limited resources when another method is known and consistently demonstrated to catch more impaired motor-vehicle operators for the same effort.
Also, it is SOP for a DUI offender to be arrested and booked, unless they're someone "important".
eileen10 6 months, 1 week ago
Okay. Then I agree with the saturation patrols. Anything to get them off the roads. The someone "important" part of it is very disturbing. I know it goes on and it's not right but as long as those people in control are like that there's nothing citizens can do except raise hell which doesn't seem to work.
jdb 6 months, 1 week ago
If these sobriety check points were REALLY concerned with saving lives, they would also check each vehicle to see if the driver's cell phone had been used for texting in the last five minutes. Many studies and tests have proven that texting while driving is more dangerous than driving while intoxicated. The University of Utah confirmed that texting while operating a vehicle is twice as dangerous as driving drunk.
But I guess most people would feel that having their car searched for a cell phone and having it examined by a police officer would be an invasion of their privacy..........
Not_Sure 6 months, 1 week ago
Could you prove to the officer that you pulled off the road for that text you made four minutes ago? Or that you weren't even on the road yet when you were texting? Please don't text and drive, but also please don't assume that just because the phone is in the car, the driver was texting.
jdb 6 months, 1 week ago
Not_Sure, The sobriety checkpoints I have been through have been set up where there is limited access for vehicles to enter or exit the area leading up to checkpoint. The cops also monitor the approaching area to make sure drivers do not try to evade the checkpoint. That is why I proposed the five minute window.
Ever been through a sobriety checkpoint? Each person is assumed to have been drinking. The cops ask you if you have been drinking and sometimes those drivers are asked to prove that they are not under the influence. Why should it be any different with cell phone users? Cell phone users, especially texters are more dangerous than drunk drivers.
Festus_Hagen 6 months, 1 week ago
I was caught up in this cluster they call a checkpoint . I was hassled .. yes, hassled, for 20 minutes because I was STUCK in traffic . I was sober . I didn't do anything wrong , yet I was stopped, detained, hassled, unconstitutionally IMO , in the name of saving lives. You got 1 . Count 'em on both hands ... ONE impaired driver . All those cops watching for people that are actually doing something wrong, you know , RAS , would have been a better way to go about it . Don't punish the ones who don't do something . Punish the ones that do .
PatsyDecline 6 months, 1 week ago
But this is so much easier than actually staying out late until the bars close and all the drunks drive home.
Besides.... who doesn't love an unconstitutional stop and questioning for the holidays??!!
It's for your own good don't you know....
JCLifer 6 months, 1 week ago
Anyone who suggests there might be a better way gets slapped with a sad story about babies with dead parents and accused that they hate babies.
The issue here is harrassing and ineffectual law enforcement. Save the dead baby talk for the judges who let the drunk go 10 times before he successfully killed someone.
Festus_Hagen 6 months, 1 week ago
We have laws against killing mothers and babies. Maybe just enforce those and stop harassing 598 innocent people .
raytag 6 months, 1 week ago
if they would set up on the street that I live on,[as they have been ask of many times]law .enforcement would take many more drinkers,speeders,no insurance drivers,etc off our city streets,[where our children play] than they did with this dui checkpoint.
wow 6 months, 1 week ago
You drove up to the flashing lights and realized it was a Check Point. You merged right off of the 179 as directed and then you were greeted with "good evening Sir/Mam, welcome to Cole County Sobriety Check Point, have you had anything to drink tonight and can I see you Driver's License please"? If you replied that you had not been drinking and there were no indicators that you were, your license was scanned and if it was valid, you heard.."thank you Sir/Mam have a nice night" and that was it. Did it take a few minutes to get you through the line...sure but NOBODY WAS FREAKIN HASSLED OR HAD THEIR RIGHT'S VIOLATED OR ANY OTHER OF THAT HAPPY HS BEING SPOUTED OUT! This is America and this is Missouri, but none of us have the right to drive...driving is a privilegdge that the state extends to those who are willing to obey the laws and comply with the rules. THE FREAKIN RULES SAY QUITE CLEARLY...'DUI/DWI CK POINT'S ARE NOT ONLY LEGAL, BUT NEEDED TO HELP COMBAT THE CRIME OF DUI/DWI. If you don't like it...MOVE TO ANOTHER STATE WHERE IT'S ILLEGAL...Thing is chances are you won't find to many states that do not support DUI/DWI Cks. Oh and by the way..there was also a DWI Saturation that happened that very night...so all you sit in your seat quarterbacks...get a grip on life and leave the law enforcement to the men and women you saw out there in that cold wet weather...many of them not recieving adequate pay and many not receiving a dime for their effort's and ya know why? It's because so many of you cheap "stop violating my right's these people are only doing this so they can earn over time to pay for their girl friend's Christmas toy's" do nothing type's are to cheap to get off the tax dollars to pay these brave men a and women a decent salary. Newstribune you might not print this, but I sure hope you do...because the brave men and women who work the roads be they MODOT, MSHP, EMS, City or County Cops, these people work hard for little or nothing..all they ask is just for a little RESPECT. And yes I and a few other's take great offense when that isn't afforded these deserving public icons.
eileen10 6 months, 1 week ago
I don't see why the NT would zap what you said. I agree with everything and Paroquet also added about the saturation patrol which gets even more drunk drivers off the road. You said a lot of good things that are so very true. I just want to add one thing. Where would we be without the police, highway crews, sanitation employees etc. Buried under mounds of trash, driving on unsafe roads with the bad guys ruling. Plus there's the mail carrier, hair dresser, nurse, dr. bartender, waitress etc, etc, etc. What can I say. I'm thinking about the people who help and serve and get hollered at or bad mouthed. On a roll is what I am. I'm thankful for all the people who bust their butt daily for all of us. That's why I say please and thank you.
Festus_Hagen 6 months, 1 week ago
Yes, they WERE violated . I did nothing wrong . There were 598 other innocent people out there that were hassled and ONE that was caught doing what the checkpoint was set up for . 1 out of 601 is not a good percentage . It did not work , that numbers prove that .
John 6 months, 1 week ago
It is absolutely perfect that our military served in order that the constitutional rights can be trampled upon. After all, the police have the right to stop and investigate you whether they have reasonable cause. . . .
JCLifer 6 months, 1 week ago
Checkpoints are good? How about setting up checkpoints all over town then? I'd like to have a checkpoint to keep the thugs out of my neighborhood. Maybe a checkpoint to make sure that we don't allow felons to go to restaurants.
Guilty until proven innocent. That is the goal fo checkpoints. Hardly the American way.
wow 6 months, 1 week ago
Festus_Hagen what you experienced was not a violation of your Constitutional rights. Now if you were driving in saaaaay Arizonia and are an American who just happens to look hispanic..yes you could suddeny be detained by the Police for no other reason than you look hispanic. Also the Police will feel you need to produce paper's to prove you are legally able to be in this country....YES..then your YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WOULD BE VIOLATED. But nothing like that happended in Cole County!
JC LIfer...only people who are currently wanted by the cops or are currently doing something criminally wrong need to worry about Check Points and Saturations. As for getting theThugs out of your neighborhood...what are you doing to help besides complain? If you really wanna help...put your man/woman pants on and get POST Certified..then you can get hired with one of the local Cop Shops and actaully go out and properly deal with your Thug problem...thing is you won't be abe to do a lot of your personal crime fighting because you'll quickly learn that your law services will be needed somewhere else. You will also come to realize that the leagal system doesn't let you arrest anyone for simply being a thug in the wrong. neighborhood....that's called profiling which is illegal. Alkso until you hired full time, youmwon't be getting paid a dime for your time and effort. You will however be expected to lbe professioanl and do the job correctly, without bias or delay. You will be a Cop expoected to give make the ultimate scarfice if needed. If you do get hired fulltime, the same will be expected and you would be recieving minimum pay for you services. Of course you could alway's be a good citizen and keep reporting these folks...but ya gotta remember...they have to be doing soemthing illegal to gert arrested. Just because you don't living next to someone isn't an issue the Cops can solve.
Folks if ya have not noticed..I am very much pro-public servant when it comes to the men and women who are protecting and serving the riight way. All of those people deserve our RESPECT!
Festus_Hagen 6 months, 1 week ago
The cop was giving his all alright . Sitting down waving a flashlight ... lmao . Good Job CCSD !
Delbert 6 months, 1 week ago
I don't agree with checkpoint stops. I don't agree with drinking & driving.I don't agree with the big brother either. BUT HERE WE ARE. Now what is next,read about it and BIT--.We have already gone over the cliff,with no way to return!!
wow 6 months, 1 week ago
Ok so ya don't agrree with Check Point's at least you're not cryng you're Constitutional Right's were violated. If you feel like you were delayed a bit at the Ck Point...ok I can live with that...but you are not spouting that the only reason these Cops are out there is to get overtime so they can buy present's for their loved ones. So you don't like Ck Points fine..I get it. But here's what you gotta deal with. There legal, they work and as long and people continue doing things that call for Ck Points, these operations are gonna continue!
Festus_Hagen 6 months, 1 week ago
Yea, they work . Caught ONE out of SIX HUNDRED and ONE . Nice percentage . Meanwhile, the drunks apparently weren't going that way, so they were all safe Friday night .
John 6 months, 1 week ago
Then you shouldn't mind that the Patriot Act also gives the government the right to listen in on your telephone calls and open your mail . . . all withOUT any kind of warrant. But don't worry, if you're not doing anything wrong then it is okay and no worry to you.
JCnative 6 months, 1 week ago
Wow. You must be a cop. If not WOW! I also do not agree with the check points as I would imagine most people do not. Yes drunks are dangerous but so are everyday drivers not under the influence of anything. The world is a dangerous place. Every day I wake up and walk out the door I realize something terrible could happen and I'm fine with that you odveouslly think that there should be a world of zero accidents or instances were people will be at falt that will never happen. I for one am fine with living with a degree of danger in my life as long as I have the rite to choose wether or not I should wear my seat belt (witch I don't), drink one or two beers ( witch I do ) or what ever else it may be because I am responsible and I take responsibility for my actions. I don't need someone telling me what to do or how to do it because a few unreasonable people go and have a reck and kill some one. But what do I know we live in a world were its always some one else's falt and we need perfect people who do no wrong policing us.
JCnative 6 months, 1 week ago
Oh and Btw driving is not a privilege. I paid and am still paying to drive I paid for my test to get my license I paid for my drivers license I pay for my car license I pay road tax I pay fuel tax plus what ever else I forgot to mention most everyone has paid for the rite to drive. Not sure were you can up with " driving is a privilege" riding a non motor bike on the road ways is a privilege. Sorry for getting off topic everyone.
eileen10 6 months, 1 week ago
It's ok. I do it all the time.
JCnative 6 months, 1 week ago
Thank you for that graceful. I stand corrected the courts do say that and the Court's are never wrong. But as far as I'm concerned I have paid for my rite to drive as have most people it is no longer a privilege when I am the one with everyone else paying for roads. Now as I said before if I were to ride my bike on the road that is a privilege because I am not paying road tax,licensing or any other tax or fee that goes along with diving a licensed motorized vehicle in Missouri . Again that is my opinion.
Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting
Or login with:
OpenID