I bet the attorneys general of those states would be shocked and deeply disturbed by your legal opinion!

 

-----signature-----

I think you have to stop.. The whole driving is a priviledge and not a right. You will lose ypur license for not stopping, you wont go to jail though.

The best is probably refuse and say take my license away instead of dealing with a DUI.

Edit: just checked online, it looks like by accepting a license to drive then you have also accepted to deal with these procedures.

That's true of traffic stops, but a DUI is a misdemeanor offense and they're performing searches with no probable cause. It's a legal grey area at best. Your best option is to not be drunk and to respond to the officers. Failing that, total silence might work. At a different checkpoint in a different state, the results of that stop could have been very different, though. You may have a victory in court a year later, but it would be kinda hollow after spending a year without a license and being tazed.

 

-----signature-----

There is no legal grey area.

"By a 6-3 decision in Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz (1990), the United States Supreme Court found properly conducted sobriety checkpoints to be constitutional."

 

-----signature-----

nothing twists a cop's tit more than exercising your rights

 

-----signature-----

Also, with Tali and others I agree.

 

-----signature-----

Don't be stupid.


The SCOTUS has already heard cases relating to DUI checkpoints, and they are "reasonable" searches as the law defines reasonable.


As a reminder, the Constitution does not say you can't be searched without a warrant. It says you can't be subject to an unreasonable search without a warrant.


http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11348246873623439918&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

 

-----signature-----

Yes, but do you have to answer the officer's questions? Of course not. Now IF you choose this route, a professional officer may realize that your silence should not be self-incriminating. A less professional one may find you to be acting irrationally or resisting a lawful order and force you out of the car. Like I said, you may get a victory in court a year later, but it's not really going to be worth it.

 

-----signature-----

In Ontario (a Province in the Peace-Loving peoples Social-Democratic nation of Canukistan),one HAS to stop for Police Random Stops BUT one does not have to talk to them other than to provide proof of license, insurance and ownership.


If requested, a roadside breathalyzer test MUST be taken.


The stock question "Have you had any alcohol to drink today?" does NOT have to be answered - if the officer asks, you can say "I don't wish to discuss that with you.".


As a personal note, I think all Random Stops smack of Fascism - they are failing to curb drunken driving (more people nailed this winter here than ever before). I would opt for scaled (3 month, 6 month, 1 year and LIFE) mandatory hard labour incarceration if drunkeness was involved in a motor vehicle incident.

 

-----signature-----

The DUI Exception

Your 5th Amendment rights are safe, unless of course they aren't

 

-----signature-----