Submitted by HRJafael t3_104f9ec in WorcesterMA
Comments
DJScrubatires t1_j3510ob wrote
Shouldn't the State Police be more concerned with the stolen OT?
largomargo t1_j3520d1 wrote
When you get to drive, you consent to be stopped for things like this. Nothing illegal at all.
HighVulgarian t1_j3526wk wrote
You got a source for that?
elemenopppppp t1_j352wmj wrote
I remember going through one on route 20 in front of Sheldon’s. I pull up, trooper comes to the window and asks “have you been drinking tonight?” I replied “yes sir I had two X and an X about 3-4 hours ago!” He chuckles and says “ok have a great rest of your night” and I was on my way.
largomargo t1_j35ff8j wrote
Yeah, drivers ed, the rmv, and a bunch of state laws you chucklehead
HighVulgarian t1_j35gax6 wrote
So no source. OK bootlicker
Dwm182 t1_j35gc6f wrote
State Police Michigan vs. sitz. Supreme court case on constitutionality of sobriety check point.
HighVulgarian t1_j35jf96 wrote
Thank you. That is very disheartening
Dwm182 t1_j35lf50 wrote
So basically, keeping the roads safe does infringe on our 4th amendment rights. However, the benefit of road safety does, per court, outweigh the cost to freedom. In addition, to offset the infringement of our rights, police must post notice of date and time, and very, very vague location of where the checkpoint will be (i.e. Worcester county; and not in front of dunks on park Ave)
I'm a civil libertarian and this shit burns me up.
HighVulgarian t1_j35mavr wrote
I’m now curious as to what percentage of people detained at these checkpoints result in arrest for DWI. My guess is less than 5%
mattgm1995 t1_j35u51a wrote
Pro-DUI is a wild stance
HighVulgarian t1_j35wh93 wrote
By that logic the government would be right to confiscate guns in the interest of keeping everyone safe. It’s a violation of personal liberty, I don’t want to be harassed when I’m driving sober and safely
mattgm1995 t1_j35xbp0 wrote
By driving on public roads you choose to abide by certain conditions. If you don’t want to, don’t use the roads. Be a homesteader. No one has made you participate in our society
sloppyredditor t1_j36bxq4 wrote
Lot of people cutting you down but I understand where you’re coming from. It all goes back to driving being a privilege, not a right.
That very specific differentiation seems to have been forgotten.
sloppyredditor t1_j36c2q8 wrote
Just put them at construction lanes, give the statie something to do.
CoolAbdul t1_j36gwi5 wrote
It will be on Chandler Street next to Foley Stadium. It always is.
largomargo t1_j36ker4 wrote
spitfish t1_j36nhyl wrote
> It all goes back to driving being a privilege, not a right.
Very true, but the only issue with this is that American cities are built around vehicles, not pedestrians. You're screwed if you lose access to a vehicle.
wsdog t1_j36rmxm wrote
Fully agree. Transportation is a human right. This should be codified.
wsdog t1_j36ry5r wrote
Yeap, this is very sad. For some reason everyone has a right to have a metal thing that shoots bullets, but driving another metal thing that just gets you from A to B is a privilege.
sloppyredditor t1_j36tkuc wrote
I'd love to see a more bicycle-friendly infrastructure like the Netherlands.
The response to the "I'm screwed if they take away my license/vehicle" is "Drive safely and they won't," and honestly I'm OK with that.
framedmushroom t1_j375l15 wrote
I always see it on goldstar boulevard in front of the Price Rite/Austin liquors plaza.
NaNoBook t1_j377mji wrote
If DUIs are a problem, they should implement No-Refusal Weekends, like Texas and other states do: https://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/planners/NoRefusalWeekend/index.htm
All holidays where drinking is big (Fourth of July, Halloween, NYE, etc) should be no-refusal weekends.
But then again, in other states, cops don't unnecessarily harass citizens trying to catch them with the force of institutional power like MA, because they have nothing better to do except steal pension money
awuweiday t1_j37co6j wrote
The State Police are actually very concerned that people keep calling out their stolen OT. They'd like if you all stopped asking questions and and let them abuse their power in peace
GoblinBags t1_j37hc4b wrote
Are people who have a problem with the police saying they don't want any police at all? Are people who think police are too often violent trying to say that cops should never, ever use force?
Disliking the methodology of catching more OUI drivers isn't the same as being pro driving under the influence.
GoblinBags t1_j37i7w9 wrote
A simple Google search gave me this as the top answer to whether or not a DUI checkpoint is legal in MA: https://www.massdefense.com/what-are-your-rights-at-a-dui-checkpoint/#:~:text=Like%20it%20or%20not%2C%20sobriety,as%20well%20as%20interview%20you.
It's legal. People might not like it and I'd argue it's a chance for cops to be unnecessary dickheads, but it's 100% legal and it's asinine to pretend it isn't. I can't believe you demanded a source for something so inherently easy to look up and then call folks a bootlicker for being incredulous that you think such a common practice is illegal.
HighVulgarian t1_j37k9mh wrote
“Our society”
Holy shit, I’ve only heard racists/bigots use that phrase in that context. It’s messed up that you would so readily go there. I’m blocking you for that reason, you don’t deserve to be heard.
Horknut1 t1_j37opjx wrote
I don’t understand this comment. Drunk drivers should be allowed because it would be detrimental if they lost access to a vehicle?
spitfish t1_j37plfc wrote
It's more commentary that we need to improve our public transportation. Everything is centered around using a vehicle to travel long distances for work, food, & entertainment.
PLS-Surveyor-US t1_j37qybb wrote
There is a process to amend the document that you allude to.
Horknut1 t1_j37xuq8 wrote
I think that’s a fair statement… I just don’t think it has anything to do with the enforcement of DUI laws.
Loon013 t1_j38a6q1 wrote
How about taking away one's right to drink instead of one's right to drive? The right to drink is almost never questioned. How many lives could be changed by prohibiting alcohol consumption for just 30 days.
cljamm913 t1_j38n7jn wrote
I find it insane that they even announce these things. Where I grew up, you never knew, and we had at least 3 a month in our small town alone. I remember going through one in Watertown a few years ago and you could see what was happening a 2 miles away and could easily avoid it if you wanted. In NY, there was no indication, sometimes just one squad car on a side street…busted. Sure it’s annoying if you like to go out but, it’s easier now than ever to get home safely.
elemenopppppp t1_j39vxqc wrote
It’s by law they have to
2tuna2furious t1_j3eseny wrote
The proper term is BEVERAGED driving
Please be respectful
Old-Spend-8218 t1_j3zgl02 wrote
What’s the status on that shit bag Dana from Holden the Mass state police Union President who was embezzling money and strong arming his own brothers. The Mass state police leadership is an absolute disaster.
HighVulgarian t1_j350g5g wrote
Illegal search and seizure all for “safety”. On the plus side, they’ve solved all the other crimes in the area