Dwi

[rebeccanew]

I have been wrestling with this development in our area and would appreciate any (name removed by moderator)ut you CAF posters could give. There have been two young drivers that have been stopped by the police and charged with dwi. The police followed the drivers without their headlights on until they caught them making a violation (crossing the fog line in both cases), then they turn on their headlights and sirens and pull the people over. I think the police are starting to use stings to the point that it might be violating basic freedoms, and in the end that is bad for everyone, so does the end justify the means?

 

[thistle]

I have been wrestling with this development in our area and would appreciate any (name removed by moderator)ut you CAF posters could give. There have been two young drivers that have been stopped by the police and charged with dwi. The police followed the drivers without their headlights on until they caught them making a violation (crossing the fog line in both cases), then they turn on their headlights and sirens and pull the people over. I think the police are starting to use stings to the point that it might be violating basic freedoms, and in the end that is bad for everyone, so does the end justify the means?

What is dwi?

 

[Dale_M]

What is dwi?

Since Rebecca is in the state of New York, I think she is referring to Driving While Intoxicated.

I have no idea what the situation is like where she is. But I think most African-Americans can attest that the police have, for a long time, routinely pulled people over for minor infractions, or merely the suspicion of an infraction.

 

[DaveBj]

DWI is a very serious offense. I’m for anything that will get impaired drivers off the road.

 

[thistle]

Since Rebecca is in the state of New York, I think she is referring to Driving While Intoxicated.

I have no idea what the situation is like where she is. But I think most African-Americans can attest that the police have, for a long time, routinely pulled people over for minor infractions, or merely the suspicion of an infraction.

Okay. Thanks.

But what does this have to do with what the police do/are allowed/not allowed to do.

The police are not subject to the Church so whatever the Church teaches (in this case the end does not justify the means) the police do not have to obey.

 

[MtnDwellar]

he police followed the drivers without their headlights on until they caught them making a violation (crossing the fog line in both cases), then they turn on their headlights and sirens and pull the people over. I think the police are starting to use stings to the point that it might be violating basic freedoms, and in the end that is bad for everyone, so does the end justify the means?

I don’t what right was violated???

Do we have a right to drive around drunk and not be followed by police with their lights out?

 

[1ke]

I have been wrestling with this development in our area and would appreciate any (name removed by moderator)ut you CAF posters could give. There have been two young drivers that have been stopped by the police and charged with dwi. The police followed the drivers without their headlights on until they caught them making a violation (crossing the fog line in both cases), then they turn on their headlights and sirens and pull the people over. I think the police are starting to use stings to the point that it might be violating basic freedoms, and in the end that is bad for everyone, so does the end justify the means?

What basic freedoms and “rights” are being violated? I don’t believe i am following your logic here.

 

[adv1sor]

I don’t see where the police did anything wrong in this situation.

Selfish people that endanger the lives of others by drunk driving need to be locked up where they can’t hurt anyone else. There is no other solution. Taking their licenses away doesn’t work as they just continue to drive without a license. Giving them multiple chances doesn’t work either as you are just waiting for them to kill or injure someone. Lock them up for several years and maybe they will get the lesson. DON’T DRINK AND DRIVE.

 

[cessnawag]

I understand what you mean. In my town we have road blocks that stop every car then a cop sticks this head in your car and asks “what have you been doing tonight”. I would like to say “none of your business”. I think we need to get drunk drivers off the street too but this is a bit much.

 

[Denimguy]

Down here they call em license checks. My wife was kind of frightened the first time she encountered one. In the midwest there are DWI checks but usually they run them at night. This was at 3 PM on a Wednesday. Remember driving is a privilege not a right. If measures like these keep the roads safe I think they are likely a good thing but if they are a scheme to make money off of minor infractions probably not a good thing.
My biggest worry is that I have a Knights of Columbus license plate on my truck & I can just see it now, some sheriff deputy pulling me & harassing me over it.

 

[coachkfan1]

I don’t what right was violated???

Do we have a right to drive around drunk and not be followed by police with their lights out?

I would think that driving with your headlights off would be pretty dangerous. Look, I am not on the side of lawbreakers, but where do we draw the line with police powers? What if the guys they are following have NOT been drinking and these cops kill some innocent bystander while driving with their lights off. So no, in my opinion, the ends don’t justify the means. As a famous attorney said one time, “Who polices the police?”

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I have been wrestling with this development in our area and would appreciate any (name removed by moderator)ut you CAF posters could give. There have been two young drivers that have been stopped by the police and charged with dwi. The police followed the drivers without their headlights on until they caught them making a violation (crossing the fog line in both cases), then they turn on their headlights and sirens and pull the people over. I think the police are starting to use stings to the point that it might be violating basic freedoms, and in the end that is bad for everyone, so does the end justify the means?

Sure does. The police did not pull them over until they had made a traffic violation. I would rather the cops did this than have to scrape innocent victims of a drunk driver off the pavement and notify their families of what happened.

P.S. I do not believe for ONE MINUTE that the police are driving without their headlights on.

 

[Cristiano]

The police is not allowed to break the law in order to enforce the law. However, that would simply imply that policemen that broke the law should be punished for the infraction that they committed. From the O.P. it is obvious that the case is not about entrapment and so the people that drank and got in trouble were the only ones responsible for their problems. If it can be demonstrated that the cops drove with the headlight off when the law required to have them on then the policemen should get a ticket for a traffic violation. I cannot see how the rights of the intoxicated drivers were violated.

 

[Godfollower]

I would think that driving with your headlights off would be pretty dangerous.

The police is not allowed to break the law in order to enforce the law.

I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps Rebecca meant the police had not turned on their emergency police lights and was not referring to their regular headlights?

 

[coachkfan1]

I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps Rebecca meant the police had not turned on their emergency police lights and was not referring to their regular headlights?

The OP specifically said headlights twice.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Sure does. The police did not pull them over until they had made a traffic violation. I would rather the cops did this than have to scrape innocent victims of a drunk driver off the pavement and notify their families of what happened.

P.S. I do not believe for ONE MINUTE that the police are driving without their headlights on.

Although I do know that sometimes police will drive without headlights on, but they are trained to do so and only do it in specific circumstances.

I have been pulled over for being suspected of drunk driving. Once the cop realized I wasn’t drunk, just very lost and upset he wrote down directions for me to get back home and gave me a cold bottle of water. Even if you’re pulled over you have nothing to worry about unless you are in fact drunk.

 

[OrangeOwl]

The police need a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity before they can stop a vehicle. In at least some states (if not all), crossing the fogline once isn’t going to do the trick. So it should bother you if that’s the basis of these police stops.

Following a car until it does something wrong, though? That’s not a sting.

 

[hannajomar]

I think any healthy society will have this kind of tension. We need to balance people’s freedom with the safety and security of society as a whole. I don’t believe we will ever find that answer while here on earth.

That being said, I don’t have a problem with cops following people they suspect of a crime. The road is a public place and I’ve never had any expectation of privacy when I’m driving. If the people they stopped were actually charged with dwi, there is at least minimal evidence they were committing that crime. If they stop a car for a minor infraction, find no evidence of a crime, but harass him or rough him up, that of course is a problem.

 

[maltmom]

The police need a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity before they can stop a vehicle. In at least some states (if not all), crossing the fogline once isn’t going to do the trick. So it should bother you if that’s the basis of these police stops.

Following a car until it does something wrong, though? That’s not a sting.

Actually you can be pulled over for crossing the fog line, no light over your license plate, tail light out, etc…all legit…if you have been drinking you’ll get arrested for DWI if you fail the FST or you blow over the legal limit. The only way you are going to cross the fog line is if you’re not paying attention or you’ve been drinking. Either way they are justified in pulling you over.

 

[LilyM]

The police is not allowed to break the law in order to enforce the law. However, that would simply imply that policemen that broke the law should be punished for the infraction that they committed. From the O.P. it is obvious that the case is not about entrapment and so the people that drank and got in trouble were the only ones responsible for their problems. If it can be demonstrated that the cops drove with the headlight off when the law required to have them on then the policemen should get a ticket for a traffic violation. I cannot see how the rights of the intoxicated drivers were violated.

Have you never heard of a high-speed car chase? Police are allowed to break the speed limit (which would be breaking the law for an ordinary motorist) in order to apprehend someone who is doing the same.