DUI checkpoints are touted as a necessary and effective method of curbing driving under the influence offenses and keeping our roadways safe for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians. But are DUI checkpoints really a necessary use of law enforcement power and taxpayer dollars?
Studies show that they are not good uses of resources and do not curb driving under the influence offenses as much as lawmakers and politicians would like us to believe. In order for a DUI checkpoint to be valid, motorists must be warned in advance and given an opportunity to avoid the checkpoint.
Drivers who have been drinking and still have their common sense intact can simply turn down a side street to avoid the checkpoint. This completely distorts the statistics related to the success of DUI checkpoints and means that law enforcement officers are wasting time and resources stopping sober drivers.
Another reason why DUI checkpoints are looked upon unfavorably by many people is that they are often nothing more than an opportunity to fine drivers for infractions like expired registrations, expired driver licenses, and things like broken lights and other vehicle infractions.
Instead of focusing on curbing dangerous offenses by drivers with extremely high blood alcohol levels, law enforcement officers are spending their time writing citations and talking with drivers who have not even been drinking alcohol. These checkpoints are a waste of time and money and do not accomplish the purpose that they have been designed to fulfill. If you’ve been stopped at a DUI checkpoint and need legal assistance, contact a California DUI lawyer immediately to review your case and get help.