DUI checkpoints save lives

So Joe Williams (5/3, Letters) was inconvenienced and irritated that the DUI checkpoint he was stopped at netted “only” 22 DUI citations. According to Mr. Williams, his time and the taxpayers’ money are both being wasted.

I think a reframing of priorities is in order here. If even one of those 22 citations saved someone’s life because a drunken driver was arrested, the time and money were well worth it. And by saving someone’s life, I include the drunken drivers themselves. Sometimes an arrest can be the beginning of a life of recovery from alcoholism.

Mr. Williams, next time you’re inconvenienced by a DUI checkpoint, be grateful if no one in your life is struggling with alcoholism or drug addiction. Be even more grateful if someone you know and love hasn’t been hurt or killed by an impaired driver.

Shelley Staib
Shawnee

It’s too bad that Joe Williams and his wife were “inconvenienced” by having to be part of local law enforcement doing their best to protect them from drunken drivers. The number of citations may seem small, but the message got out to every driver who passed by.

Twenty-two potential killers were taken off the road. The other citations for “miscellaneous offenses” may have brought justice to some other offenders. Remember the Son of Sam killer in New York City? He was caught by the police tracking down traffic tickets. Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was caught by an alert highway patrolman pulling him over for not having proper license plates.

And the 1,670 inconvenienced vehicles? That’s about the number of people affected by one life lost to a drunken driver.

John E. Gacek
Liberty

Comments

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

On the moral stance, local and state law enforcement should receive no funding or revenues from taxation of the liquor industry since they are concerned with public safety.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

If public safety is the issue, then simply sit outside of establishments that serve liquor and sort through those folks.
Speed is more of a problem than alcohol.
The problem is the "legal" limit is bogus, one drink and you pretty much can count on getting arrested drunk or not.

[strlslvr]

What about all the cars that bash into each other and kill people that are driven by completely sober drivers? I think you will probably have a better chance of being crashed into by a sober person than by a drunk person.

So how do we stop all those sober people from causing accidents??!

[Marctnts]

Nabbing 22 out of 1,670 people translates to a success rate of 1.3%. Even by the most lax of governmental standards, that seems like poor utilization of resources.

[Greyhounder]

Well Ksskidude, since drinking isn't the only (or biggest) cause of inattentive driving (you should also add having children in the vehicle to causing inattentiveness), I think the solution is simple.

Ban cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles.

There. problem solved.

Not a workable solution? Well, neither is the erosion of the liberties of the American citizen. Funny you don't seem to mention the hundreds of thousands who have died trying to win and protect those liberties.

[Stifled Freedom]

DUI check points save a lot more lives than raiding massage parlors.

[ksskidude]

If you drive a car, don't have any alcohol in your system. Period!!!!!!! How freaking is it for people to understand this?
When a driver who has a .05 bac crashes into one of your family members and kills them violently, your not going to care they they only had .05 bac. Why because, .05 bac will slow down your reaction time. If you are even 1/1000th of second deleyed because of a drug that you put in your body, then you are negiligent, and deserve to go to jail!!! 42,000 familes a year get a knock on the door from some highway patrol officier telling them that they have lost a loved one in a car crash.
Enough is enough!!! When idiots stop drinking and driving, stop speeding, stop taking their eyes off the road, we will have far fewer deaths.
So until that happens, Checkpoint away as far as I am concerned. Or watch one of your family members break thier neck in a car crash, break their back, suffer a brain or spinal cord injury. Car crashes are the leading cause of traumatic injuries, yet people still want to drive after they have been drinking. Yes people are idiots!!!!!

[mike d]

I'm sorry I thought this was America, where a person could legally drive from point A to point B without police harassment. How foolish of me to think that. Maybe we can just stop traffic all of the time everywhere, just to make sure we are safe. Nothing like a good old checkpoint. I feel better already.

[Greyhounder]

The stats regarding "alcohol related" traffic deaths are compiled by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The stats are completely meaningless, because of the broad definition they use for "alcohol related".

If a car, driven by a completely sober driver person, crashes into a beer delivery truck, also driven by a completely sober individual, the NHTSA classifies that as an "alcohol related" accident. If someone died in it... alcohol related death. Neither driver has to have any alcohol. If even one passagener in a vehicle that is in an accident has any BAC over .01, you guessed it... NHTSA classifies it as "alcohol related". MADD got that put in a long time ago. It inflates the stats they use.

[solomon]

John,

Sorry to admit it but I don't think 1,670 people would be affected by my death.

[Kate]

“Remember the Son of Sam killer in New York City? He was caught by the police tracking down traffic tickets. Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was caught by an alert highway patrolman pulling him over for not having proper license plates.”

You're comparing two different types of police work here. In the McVeigh situation, first the violation was noticed, and then the offender was stopped, as opposed to stopping hundreds of citizens to check if any are in violation of the law.

[Casady]

Let's see some stats on the number of alcohol related traffic deaths on nights when there are checkpoints vs. nights when there are not before spewing a bunch of emotionally charged rhetoric.