From Overland Park PD:
The Overland Park, Kansas Police Department is conducting a DUI Saturation Patrol on March 14, 2008. It is the police department’s goal to reduce alcohol related auto accidents and discourage impaired driving within its community.
The DUI Saturation Patrol will begin at 11:00 PM, and the enforcement will not end until 3:00 AM. The Traffic Safety Unit will hold a briefing at the Myron Scafe Building, 8500 Antioch, Overland Park, KS, prior to initiating the enforcement.


It is the police department’s goal to reduce alcohol related auto accidents and discourage impaired driving within its community. -------------------------------
LOL, Not to mention lining their pockets while showing us who's in charge by harassing the other 99.9% of the population is just an extra bonus.
Posted by: Uncle Sam | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 08:31 AM
The City of Overland Park must need money
Posted by: | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 08:57 AM
Big 12 Drunks Beware!
Posted by: | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 09:00 AM
Well, the good news for me is that I won't be in OP that night. :)
Posted by: You're a Mean Drunk R2D2™ | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 09:35 AM
Read: Saturation Patrol
Not: Sobriety Checkpoint
In order to be "harassed" by the police conducting this patrol, they have to have reasonable suspicion to pull you over. This type of patrol is not that much different than a speed trap, except that they are looking for drunks rather than speeders. They don't stop every driver, only the ones that draw enough suspician to warrant being pulled over.
Posted by: Sasquach | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 09:44 AM
The comments so far seems like only drunks and boobs care about this. Just remember one drink per hour or have a DD. If you are dumb enough to drive drunk I hope they bust you and take your license away.
Posted by: awthrfrd | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 09:46 AM
Sasquatch- I understand the difference between czechpoints and saturation patrols... however, with the ever-growing list of probable cause for stopping a motorist this is nothing but lip-service.
I mean, one can get pulled over for any reason if the cop feels like it.
Posted by: Uncle Sam | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 09:59 AM
OP needs the $$$$ to subsidize the developers in the newly annexed areas...
Posted by: concerned | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 10:02 AM
Uncle Sam:
If a cop pulls you over and you have done nothing wrong what reason does he give for pulling you over? It doesn't happen unless it's a checkpoint.
Quit drinking and driving and register your car.
Posted by: Bill | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 10:10 AM
and get insurance. This especially applies to all you who are in this country in a less than legal status.
Posted by: KAB | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Bill- Why is it when an individual voices their displeasure of police conduct, people like you assume they are criminals, drunks, etc?
I guess following blindly single-file and not questioning policies is for the good of the children. In your world i'm sure cops and others in "authority" do no wrong and never abuse their power. Quite sad really.
Posted by: Uncle Sam | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 10:22 AM
Bill- Why is it when an individual voices their displeasure of police conduct, people like you assume they are criminals, drunks, etc? - Uncle Sam
They don't assume that. They simply want to discredit any possible opposition to their scheme.
Saturation Request! Shawnee Mission Parkway & Foster. You'll fill a drunk tank per hour, quick trip nearby! Easiest overtime you ever made.
Posted by: Nick | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 10:35 AM
The lawers are the ones that must be very happy for all the DUI related phone calls on Monday morning.
Posted by: Manuel | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 10:44 AM
Nick, I said before. Why don't they patrol 119th & Nall?
No matter to me, my lil a$$ will be home when they start all this crap anyway.
Posted by: JewwellsP | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 10:54 AM
If it helps to minimize the number of drunk drivers on the road, the good. If you're not driving drunk or breaking any other laws, you have nothing to worry about. I had a neice killed by a drunk driver. I have a friend that drove drunk and killed two people. I have 3 daughters that drive on these streets. I don't want them killed by a drunk driver. I drink. I drive. I don't drink AND drive. And I"m as protective as they get of our rights and liberties. But I will give them some latitude on this one. GET the DRUNKS OFF the STREETS!
Posted by: kcskip | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 11:15 AM
If it helps to minimize the number of drunk drivers on the road, the good. If you're not driving drunk or breaking any other laws, you have nothing to worry about. I had a neice killed by a drunk driver. I have a friend that drove drunk and killed two people. I have 3 daughters that drive on these streets. I don't want them killed by a drunk driver. I drink. I drive. I don't drink AND drive. And I"m as protective as they get of our rights and liberties. But I will give them some latitude on this one. GET the DRUNKS OFF the STREETS!
--------------------------------------------
Again, let's just line everyone up and strip search them every time one leaves their home. Oh, and let's just install cameras inside everyone's houses too, and microchips and serial numbers...I mean if you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about right?
Posted by: Big Brother | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Big Brother, fact of the matter is you are driving on a publicly funded road and it's not a right it's a priveledge. You have to do it by the rules.
Posted by: blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Please read Martin v. Kansas Department of Revenue, No. 94,033. This decision of the Kansas Supreme Court states that the fourth amendment does not apply to administrative suspensions for alcohol test failures or refusals. You are subject to a stop of your vehicle without reasonable, articuable suspicion. The police do not need a reason to stop you and your vehilce! If you subsequently fail or refuse a test of breath, blood or urine, your license will be suspended. Scared yet? Call your state representative and your state senator. This decision came down February 1, 2008.
Posted by: fpgilman | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Nope. Not scared.
Posted by: j | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 12:00 PM
If the local and state governments truly wanted drunks off the road, they would lower the BAC limit to .02 like many other countries. .02 means if you have even one drink, you can not drive legally.
However, .08 means you can take your chances and governments will get rich from your fines if you happen to be over the limit, and police don't have to fight dangerous crime. Just the politically correct kind that draws major revenue.
I am completely against drunk driving. But even more against the facade that is our governments acting like they are keeping us safer while lining their pockets.
Zero tolerance is the only safe answer. But it doesn't pay the bills.
Posted by: What A Country! | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 12:01 PM
I'm not stupid enough to drink and drive. And I'm sure as hell not stupid enough to drive in Johnson County, that's the scary part!
Posted by: linda | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 12:16 PM
I have a rant here not for Overland Park in general but the state of KS. I got a dwi over 1 1/2 ago in MO. I recently bought a house in KS, I went to get a KS d.l. today and I was informed by the bureau that I am suspended in KS. I have never had a license in KS, but when I got the ticket in MO they sent the information over. I haven't had a license for over a year now and KS is telling me per their law I can't get one until October of 2008 because they received a notice in October of 2007 about my ticket. There is no way around the law, so I am going to use a KC, MO address and reregister my vehicle in MO and I will be valid. Kansas Laws in general are terrible, I understand I made a mistake but come on this is nuts.
Posted by: dave | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Dave, next time. Refuse the test. Call a better lawyer.
Posted by: JewwellsP | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 12:50 PM
"And I'm sure as hell not stupid enough to drive in Johnson County, that's the scary part"
Ya sure? Have you been tested recently?
Sorry, couldn't resist....
Posted by: | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Big Brother, fact of the matter is you are driving on a publicly funded road and it's not a right it's a priveledge. You have to do it by the rules.---Blarney
Who said anything about not driving by the rules? What does that have anything to do with being subjected to being pulled over and harassed on a whim in the name of safety? Keep living in your fantasy land and believing this is for our own good when in reality it is nothing but a money-grab.
Posted by: Big Brother | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Oh brother Big Brother. What you do in your own house is your business. But once you get out on the roads that you share with the rest of us, you have certain obligations. Even if you have to pull over at a sobriety checkpoint, no one has taken anything away from you. You get to drive on and resume your life as normal. YOu can still vote, you can surf the internet for porn, you can protest funerals of dead soldiers if you're so inclined. You still cannot have sex with a dead deer you find on the side of the road. I'm sorry, like I said I'm big on constitutional liberties, and I would guess you and I probably agree on many things. But having been through the personal experiences that I have been through regarding drunk drivers, this is the way I feel on this particular issue.
Posted by: kcskip | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Big Brother that is one of the rules of driving on the road. It's not a fantasy it's the law that they can do sobriety check points and the law has stood up. Keep living in your fantasy world where you think this isn't a rule. Nobody said it was for their own good I said it was the rule, how come in all your bluster you missed what was said but then added what you wanted?
Posted by: blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Oh brother Big Brother. What you do in your own house is your business. But once you get out on the roads that you share with the rest of us, you have certain obligations. Even if you have to pull over at a sobriety checkpoint, no one has taken anything away from you. You get to drive on and resume your life as normal. YOu can still vote, you can surf the internet for porn, you can protest funerals of dead soldiers if you're so inclined. You still cannot have sex with a dead deer you find on the side of the road. I'm sorry, like I said I'm big on constitutional liberties, and I would guess you and I probably agree on many things. But having been through the personal experiences that I have been through regarding drunk drivers, this is the way I feel on this particular issue.
Posted by: kcskip | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:01 PM
Blarney- saturation not checkpoint.
Learn how to read yourself before spewing your insults.
Posted by: Education...not for blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:01 PM
Sure blarney, I'm the one who misinterpreted my own posts...lol.
Posted by: Big Brother | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:02 PM
skip-
I'm sorry for your losses, but statistically the results of these patrols aren't nearly as effective to warrant the hype and manpower as the cops and politicians lead people to believe.
These patrols and checkpoints net far more money and tickets from seat-belt violations and broken tailights than removing dangerous drunks off the road.
Posted by: Big Brother | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:11 PM
Not sure why my last one posted twice.
Anyway, maybe the act of advertising that they're doing a saturation patrol discourages people from drinking and driving. Maybe that causes fewer drunks to actually be on the road. Maybe not, I don't know. Certainly more can be done though. More education, more parenting, etc. I know I've had many conversations with my kids about it. We all need to do our part. I don't take up a lot of causes. But drinking and driving is taking away good people from this world, and it needs to stop. Sorry for coming off so pius.
Posted by: kcskip | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:23 PM
Blarney why do you hate the freedoms gaurenteed by the constituition? Why do you and idiots like Bill assume that because someone values the freedom of going through the day without police infringement is a way out liberal concept? I don't want to be stopped for no reason, by some moron that is just looking for the chance to taser someone. I don't want someone listening to my conversations no matter what I am talking about.
This is or was the USA. Scaredy cat people like you who need the government to protect them from the big bad world are a waste of American space. You need to go to Venezuala and enjoy the type of political environment that you seem to need and enjoy.
Posted by: Thom Jefferson | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:37 PM
If Op is having a DUI Saturation Patrol I will certainly show up saturated.
Posted by: Billy Martin | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:38 PM
Umm . . . the idiots that are here in a "less than legal" status probably don't understand enough English to read your post anyway.
It's the hoodrats that dont pay child support to their "baby mama" that i'm more worried about. They never have insurance.
Posted by: Jimmy Dean | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:44 PM
It is all about the money. That is all that OP cares about. The motto used to be "to protect and serve", now it is "pass your wallet"
Posted by: | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:50 PM
Here's a simple idea: Build pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods, where people can easily walk home from the bars. Or, they can at least walk to the bar, then take a cab home. In European countries, even the suburbs are pedestrian-friendly. This would be preferable to the low rent stripmalls and McMansions that you see around here.
Posted by: Steven | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:51 PM
Doesn't O.P. have something like a dozen police cars? How are they going to saturate anything? Stay home March 14th. Don't patronize bars or restaurants in O.P. that day. Let them lose sales tax revenue as well as traffic ticket revenue.
Posted by: Mel Gibson | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 01:53 PM
Thom Jefferson said"
"Blarney why do you hate the freedoms gaurenteed by the constituition? Why do you and idiots like Bill assume that because someone values the freedom of going through the day without police infringement is a way out liberal concept? I don't want to be stopped for no reason, by some moron that is just looking for the chance to taser someone. I don't want someone listening to my conversations no matter what I am talking about."
What an asinine question. I said there are rules because it's a publicly funded road. I can see basically you are just anti police and see them as thugs, most likely you're one of these little anarchist types who thinks no laws are good.
"This is or was the USA. Scaredy cat people like you who need the government to protect them from the big bad world are a waste of American space. You need to go to Venezuala and enjoy the type of political environment that you seem to need and enjoy."
Scaredy cat people like me? WoW you are just going for the gold with asinine statements. I suggest you read a few of my posts before making statements like this it really does just make you look dumb as hell.
Posted by: blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 02:12 PM
Care to address the real comments blarney? Or is just exchanging insults more your speed?
Posted by: blarneytool | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 02:20 PM
big brother said:
"Sure blarney, I'm the one who misinterpreted my own posts...lol."
I didn't say misinterpreted. I said you missed what I said and just added your own. You seem to be continuing the process now...it must be a habit.
I also notice someone trying to play the name game because the lack the testy's to post up a name and have to stand up behind what they post. Pretty pathetic for an anonymous board, must be more liberals who can't handle themselves and need help from others.
Posted by: blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 02:23 PM
blarneytool, sorry I should have known by your inability to have the courage to come up with a name instead of spoofing mine you would also be too stupid to see I did address them. thanks for being the poster child of why guv'ment edjumakashun is not a good thing.
Posted by: blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 02:24 PM
*crickets chirping*
Posted by: blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 02:45 PM
Conversing w/ blarney is like crickets chirping- what a douche.
Posted by: what's a testy? | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 02:57 PM
blarney, some of us actually enjoy an adult conversation and a healthy debate. The majority of your posts contain insults and have little to do with adding to the discussion. So, forgive me if I don't respond to your level-I was taught if have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all.
Posted by: Big Brother | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 03:01 PM
Suspicious reasons? What if you're a black man driving a nice car in OP. It's got me pulled over before.
Posted by: Bwilliams | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 03:04 PM
testy, what's a matter you have to keep changing names cuz you keep making a fool of yourself.
Big Brother, no the majority of my posts contain retorts to stupidity. You brought it onto yourself and then obviously can't handle it. after you get made an ass of(mostly doing it to yourelf) you take the high road. You won't respond because you are now shooting blanks and couldn't be adult enough to have a conversation like an adult.
Next time pull your head out of your arse don't make statements about living in fantasy lands etc. and try to do this like you have an iq above room temperature and most likely you won't be made a fool of.
I love the way the ones who always start the trouble are the ones who whine first then try the high road after the shoot blanks. You obviosly weren't taught very well considering your posts, I'm sure it's mommy and daddys fault though and not yours. LOL!
Posted by: blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 03:07 PM
big brother, I suggest next time listening to your parents when they talk about honesty since you seem to have an issue with changing what people say or just plain making it up. Oh wait they only taught you about saying nice things they weren't interested in teaching you not to lie right? LOL!
Posted by: blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 03:09 PM
Somebody definitely has some anger issues. It's nice to know that your intelligent responses include insulting my parents too. I didn't know that was the topic.
Posted by: Big Brother | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 03:15 PM
big brother, you brought up how you were supposedly raised. I'm just pointing out the flaws in that statement. Cry all you want but next time use manners when posting to others and maybe you won't end up crying.
Posted by: blarney | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 at 03:30 PM