Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
A
common way police try to catch drunk drivers is setting up DWI checkpoints. At these checkpoints,
the police stop every car, not just drivers who have presented signs of intoxication or
who have violated some roadway law. The police then ask drivers if they've been drinking.
If the driver says yes, then the police will direct the driver over and ask him or her
to perform a breathylizer test.
Most people don't know it, but Texas does NOT have DWI checkpoints. They've been outlawed
for nearly 20 years. Unlike 38 of our sister states, the Texas Legislature decided that
they were a bad idea. Virtually every legislative session, our lawmakers are asked to reinstate
them. But every year, they say no.
What could be wrong with stopping drivers and asking them if they've been drinking?
After all, drunk driving is a very serious concern. Well, first, there are constitutional
concerns. Normally, police are only allowed to pull people over if they have exhibited
particular behavior that would lead a reasonable person to believe that they will commit, have
committed, or are committing a crime. With DWI checkpoints, it's a scatter shot approach---simply
stop everyone and look for bad apples. That strikes a lot of people as discriminating
against everyone in an effort to avoid discriminating against "just a few people." Think of it this
way: police are not allowed to stop and frisk based on race; would it be OK then to stop
and frisk people of all races instead? I think not.
Second, checkpoints use up significant resources. Police time is valuable, and having 20 officers
standing in the middle of I-35 and asking countless people if they've been drinking
seems like a waste of time. The statistics on arrests-per-search are often fuzzy, but
many observers don't believe that this is a remotely wise use of resources.
Also, non-police have time taken out of their days for what might well feel like an unwanted
intrusion. Most would think their time would be better served simply getting where they
need to go, especially those who have to drive for a living.
Perhaps the best argument for checkpoints is that they serve as a deterrent. If people
know that there COULD be a checkpoint, they'll be less likely to drive. However, most drivers
know that if you want to avoid checkpoints, all you usually have to do is avoid major
roads.
If you feel strongly one way or another about this, you can always contact your legislator.
But if you've been pulled over and charged with a DWI, a thorough lawyer can protect
you from the state. Don't wait before your license is taken away for good. Get in touch
with a DWI attorney.