RUMOR - DUI Checkpoint in St. Matts Tonight (07/09)

A couple thoughts...

I wonder if the family whose eleven year old son was run over and killed by a drunk driver a couple weeks ago here in town would approve of the checkpoints?

... police state tactics...If you are in the area of Frankfort and Bauer in St. Matthews tonight PLEASE drink responsibly. If you have friends who frequent this area...or know local bar owners they might appreciate a a courtesy call.

I don't know Steve...how about "Please drink responsibly wherever you are"???? That would seem more appropriate. Or do you only favor drinking responsibly if you're about to get busted? And tell your drunk friends to avoid certain areas (so they can drive drunk with impunity). Odd.

They got thirteen drunk drivers off the street. Maybe some of those folks will learn a lesson and stop drinking and driving for the rest of their lives (I bet a few of them will). Maybe some have serious drinking problems and will get treatment and turn their life around (I've seen it happen after a major event like a DUI). You're potentially doing a lot of good with this "police state" action, without all that much downside.

Are they randomly searching cars too? Sheesh...that's kinda creepy.

Can't believe they had the officers available for this checkpoint with Forecastle going on. It was like a police assembly line down there all weekend long. Undercovers take them out of the gate, put them into a car or paddywagon, trip down to jail to drop off. Rinse and repeat.

also at these checkpoints not only are they checking for alcohol intoxication, drugs and last but not least, that you have current auto insurance.
you would be amazed how many people drive with no insurance here.

I'm surprised, my insurance rates dropped immensely when i moved to IN. I've been told in the past that KY has one of the highest uninsured driver rates in the country,but I havent researched that claim.

I wonder if the family whose eleven year old son was run over and killed by a drunk driver a couple weeks ago here in town would approve of the checkpoints?

Magic 8-Ball says: " We Approve "

[Robin Garr]

I wonder if the family whose eleven year old son was run over and killed by a drunk driver a couple weeks ago here in town would approve of the checkpoints?

Magic 8-Ball says: " We Approve "

This is a great argument to emotion and sympathy, but sorry, it doesn't work. We live under a rule of law simply to prevent vengeance and vigilantism.

No one in this thread has spoken in favor of DUI. Drunks should be off the roads, and drunks who kill people should be in jail. But we're giving police a pass to step gently on our rights in exchange for letting them catch drunks the easy way. Patrolling and police work and reasonable ground for suspicion is where they need to be. I'm terribly sorry for the mother whose 11-year-old son was run over, but sorry, I don't care for a system in which a grieving family sets public policy on the basis of their loss.

Road blocks involve patrolling and Police work.

Personally...I'd rather share the road with a bar full of drunks than a road full of mini-van-driving-cell-phone-yammering-soccer-moms...or rice-burner-driving-cell-phone-texting-make-up-putting-on-female-teenagers.

Probable cause. Two words which the courts have unfortunately and conveniently chosen to ignore when it comes to checkpoints.

Probable cause is the standard by which a police officer has the authority to make an arrest, conduct a personal or property search, or to obtain a warrant for arrest.

I think this is how they get around the probable cause issue. They are not technically arresting or searching anyone. I personally don't have a problem with checkpoints for various reasons, as a cop can/will pull you over without cause whenever they want. I have heard various reasons; crossed center, 1 mph over, rolling stop, bright lights, or any other excuse they want.

We used to cruise the streets around the Marengo Tavern just to see how long it would take us to get pulled over. The police would always sit where you had to drive past them when leaving the tavern. We would be as careful and possible to obey all the traffic laws, but were always pulled over. Checkpoint or not, they will pull you over.

Does everyone here have updated insurance on their vehicles? Do you drive while intoxicated?

I've been in numerous (too many!) conversations recently regarding the sticky political situation for any politician to oppose any DUI legislation. Such opposition too easily gets twisted to "he supports drunk driving."

Much of the rat race to .08 can be traced to the amazing power M.A.D.D. has in regards to lobbying and influence. No one - and I mean no one - wants to get on the wrong side of M.A.D.D. when running for office.

I'm no longer convinced that .08 is an impaired situation in and of itself when compared to other impairments (texting, eating, children going crazy in the back seat, loud music, general freaking inattentiveness, etc.)

Studies regularly show that accidents, injuries, and fatalities - to one's self and others - continue to occur at levels above .10. Many of these accidents occur well above .10, such that I'm not convinced anyone has shown a clear difference between consequences at .08 and .10. In other words, this seems to be mostly an issue of semantics. One is "drunk" at .08 because the law defines it as such.

[Yes, reaction time and coordination is worse at .08 than .00, I'll give everyone that. But it can't be any worse than the times I've jumped awake from a dead sleep and got right in my car. Spent my high school years doing that. Talk about down-right scary, in the pitch-lack of I-65 in Bulliet County!]

The most interesting issue here, I think, is the role of the serving establishment in this whole mess. If they are not legally to serve peoples who are "visually intoxicated" than many, many of the people being served are being done so illegally. I've been disturbed recently by how many CLEARLY intoxicated people I have seen being served at various local establishments. While I'm willing to bet it is very hard to visually "see" .08 intoxication, the levels at which serious accidents are happening have to be easier to see.

As a society we need to agree on a level which actually represents impairment. This shouldn't be a race to the lowest number just because we can. Then, at this level, we need to implement serious penalties. The ability for people to acquire multiple DUIs is incredible and beyond my ability to comprehend.

With .08 we have arrived at a point where any drinking while driving is getting-right-near drunk driving. Which is rough, considering our love of and dependence on the motor vehicle. You know what would solve all this. A good light-rail system.

The ability for people to acquire multiple DUIs is incredible and beyond my ability to comprehend.

I could not agree more with this statement. Apparently, it takes a fatality to have someone's license permanently suspended these days.

The ability for people to acquire multiple DUIs is incredible and beyond my ability to comprehend.

I could not agree more with this statement. Apparently, it takes a fatality to have someone's license permanently suspended these days.

My suspicion is license suspensions have little deterrent value on habitual DUI offenders.

I'm not saying take away their license and they simply won't drive drunk. My statement was trying to show lack of action toward a problem that's been around for a long period of time; even though a person may look down on it.

Incarceration would be the only way to keep people off the streets and from behind a wheel. And, that's not going to happen unless someone dies. Which, was my point.