If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Redding Record Searchlight)   Five hour long police checkpoint nets one DWI arrest - a bicyclist   (redding.com) divider line 79
    More: Strange, security checkpoint, DWI, sobriety checkpoint  
•       •       •

6032 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Sep 2012 at 9:15 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



79 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-09-23 09:16:32 AM
Ha Ha!
 
2012-09-23 09:19:48 AM
All the drunks looked out for one another and took sidestreets and alternative routes in order to avoide the cops? Submitter, drunk drivers are assholes. It's not stupid to get drunk drivers off the streets. Now, it sucks for the other four people out of 240 who were issued citations for shiat which isn't a menace on the streets (expired licenses and suspended licenses) by themselves............... but fk drunk drivers.
 
2012-09-23 09:24:31 AM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: All the drunks looked out for one another and took sidestreets and alternative routes in order to avoide the cops? Submitter, drunk drivers are assholes. It's not stupid to get drunk drivers off the streets. Now, it sucks for the other four people out of 240 who were issued citations for shiat which isn't a menace on the streets (expired licenses and suspended licenses) by themselves............... but fk drunk drivers.



I didn't see that subby made a comment one way or another about the acceptabillty of DUI. Bicycling under the influence? STFU cops.

You sound republican though so given that GFY.
 
2012-09-23 09:24:39 AM
The sad thing is he doesn't have to worry about losing his bicycle drivers license or have his bicycle insurance rates going up. I wonder what it's going to cost to get his bike out of impound.
 
2012-09-23 09:28:12 AM
this is one case where I think the rules of the road, and especially the steep penalties, should not apply to bicyclists. I was hit by a drunk bicyclist. I had to pop my side-view mirror back into place after the crash. The guy should be applauded for not getting behind the wheel of a dangerous vehicle and instead putting basically only himself at risk.
 
2012-09-23 09:28:52 AM
Our long national bikemare is over.
 
2012-09-23 09:29:00 AM
Good policing there, Lou.

Protection and Service R Us
 
2012-09-23 09:30:12 AM
[Stupid] tag in the drunk tank?
 
2012-09-23 09:32:30 AM
Walking home while drunk is 8 times more dangerous than driving home.

/not pc ..... but a fact notheless....
Want another???? Pipe smokers (tobacco) live longer than non smokers..........

Suck it you pc tools
 
2012-09-23 09:35:24 AM
Sucks that no matter the vehicle it still counts as an OWI. You could be in your kids powerwheels and get pulled over in front of your house and get one.
 
2012-09-23 09:36:07 AM

Jenna Tellya: this is one case where I think the rules of the road, and especially the steep penalties, should not apply to bicyclists. I was hit by a drunk bicyclist. I had to pop my side-view mirror back into place after the crash. The guy should be applauded for not getting behind the wheel of a dangerous vehicle and instead putting basically only himself at risk.


fark you because $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

/i feel safer
 
2012-09-23 09:36:30 AM
And he could not have been THAT intoxicated. Seriously, do you know how hard it is to stay upright on a bicycle while drunk?
 
2012-09-23 09:36:44 AM

SweetDickens: Walking home while drunk is 8 times more dangerous than driving home.


It may be safer for you (or not, I haven't seen your source) but unfortunately driving home drunk is infinitely more dangerous to others, and therein lies the rub.
 
2012-09-23 09:37:49 AM

Jenna Tellya: this is one case where I think the rules of the road, and especially the steep penalties, should not apply to bicyclists. I was hit by a drunk bicyclist. I had to pop my side-view mirror back into place after the crash. The guy should be applauded for not getting behind the wheel of a dangerous vehicle and instead putting basically only himself at risk.


Ok, here's a what if. How would you feel if you were driving and drunk bicyclist rides right out into a county road intersection and gets blasted at 50 miles per hour. Would you be so casual if your hood was dented, your wind shield shattered, and blood all over your car? You get out of the car slowly only to see the horribly mangled corpse who's organs are now spread over a 20 foot area.

Now you and others will say "Serves him right, I don't care." But one person dead and another who is DEFINITELY going to have emotional trauma for the rest of their life.

Yea, I'm ok with the penalties. But then again when I go drinking the most mechanical device I operate is a bottle opener.
 
2012-09-23 09:38:20 AM
This shouldn't happen in a supposedly free country. Yet, the sheep line up.
 
2012-09-23 09:40:41 AM
In my area they have a free service, run by college kids, that will not only pick you up if you get blotto, their partner will drive your car home as well. Their phone number is posted at every bar in town and the bartender will even call them for you. My sis has used them before and always gives them a nice tip for their gas money, but they don't expect it.

I don't drive at all. I've never driven drunk even when I did drive, but I still ended up smacking into trees, stop signs, lamp posts, etc. Either they were all suicidal and jumped in front of me or I'm really bad at driving. So I don't drive. Problem solved.
 
2012-09-23 09:44:51 AM
Sorry to challenge your MADD brainwashing ...check out the follow up to the book superfreakanomics.......the break down is there......You can also find out why blow jobs are cheaper today than they were 10-15 years ago.......
 
2012-09-23 09:49:57 AM
And how much did this cost the taxpayers?
 
2012-09-23 09:53:30 AM

SweetDickens: Walking home while drunk is 8 times more dangerous than driving home.

/not pc ..... but a fact notheless....
Want another???? Pipe smokers (tobacco) live longer than non smokers..........

Suck it you pc tools


Fact:
Washing your hair with gasoline protects against welding mishaps.

Fact:
Teenage prostitutes make better parents.

Fact:
Crapping on your stove kills the germs that cause leprosy
 
SH
2012-09-23 09:56:11 AM
Seems like the laws should specify "motor vehicle".

To me, hopping on a bike, whether drunk or sober, is doing everyone a favor except the revenue grabbing cops and court system. Why do we need laws to protect us from ourselves? Whether it's drunk bicycling or driving a car without a seatbelt, it's none of the government's goddamned business since the only one we could possibly hurt is ourself. 

Fark you nanny-state capitalists.
 
2012-09-23 09:59:02 AM

s1ugg0: Jenna Tellya: this is one case where I think the rules of the road, and especially the steep penalties, should not apply to bicyclists. I was hit by a drunk bicyclist. I had to pop my side-view mirror back into place after the crash. The guy should be applauded for not getting behind the wheel of a dangerous vehicle and instead putting basically only himself at risk.

Ok, here's a what if. How would you feel if you were driving and drunk bicyclist rides right out into a county road intersection and gets blasted at 50 miles per hour. Would you be so casual if your hood was dented, your wind shield shattered, and blood all over your car? You get out of the car slowly only to see the horribly mangled corpse who's organs are now spread over a 20 foot area.

Now you and others will say "Serves him right, I don't care." But one person dead and another who is DEFINITELY going to have emotional trauma for the rest of their life.

Yea, I'm ok with the penalties. But then again when I go drinking the most mechanical device I operate is a bottle opener.


Emotional distress and minor property damage, vs death to a carload full of innocents. Those are quite different scales if you ask me. In your hypothetical, I would definitely not think "serves him right", I'd think "bad luck to him and the innocent, but thank god he wasn't driving a car". If he were on a motorcycle I might think "serves him right" ;)
 
2012-09-23 10:08:56 AM

Jenna Tellya: s1ugg0: Jenna Tellya: this is one case where I think the rules of the road, and especially the steep penalties, should not apply to bicyclists. I was hit by a drunk bicyclist. I had to pop my side-view mirror back into place after the crash. The guy should be applauded for not getting behind the wheel of a dangerous vehicle and instead putting basically only himself at risk.

Ok, here's a what if. How would you feel if you were driving and drunk bicyclist rides right out into a county road intersection and gets blasted at 50 miles per hour. Would you be so casual if your hood was dented, your wind shield shattered, and blood all over your car? You get out of the car slowly only to see the horribly mangled corpse who's organs are now spread over a 20 foot area.

Now you and others will say "Serves him right, I don't care." But one person dead and another who is DEFINITELY going to have emotional trauma for the rest of their life.

Yea, I'm ok with the penalties. But then again when I go drinking the most mechanical device I operate is a bottle opener.

Emotional distress and minor property damage, vs death to a carload full of innocents. Those are quite different scales if you ask me. In your hypothetical, I would definitely not think "serves him right", I'd think "bad luck to him and the innocent, but thank god he wasn't driving a car". If he were on a motorcycle I might think "serves him right" ;)


And if said intoxicated cyclist hit a pedestrian because they couldn't stop at full speed?
 
2012-09-23 10:09:34 AM

wild9: And he could not have been THAT intoxicated. Seriously, do you know how hard it is to stay upright on a bicycle while drunk?


Yeah, I do know. You can ride a bike pretty drunk, if you ride regularly. Although to be fair, I've never ridden when I was full out, throwing up drunk. I got off the bike to throw up.
 
2012-09-23 10:13:22 AM
About 240 drivers were also screened between 8 p.m. and 1 a.m.

Checkpoint was too early. Had they gone until 3:00 am they would have found half a dozen drunks.

One man was issued a citation for an outstanding warrant from Butte County. Two others were issued citations for driving with a suspended license, and two other drivers were driving with expired licenses.

In that case it wasn't a sobriety checkpoint, it was a general traffic enforcement checkpoint and, in my opinion, was unconstitutional.
 
2012-09-23 10:13:29 AM
Okay, for this whole argument about riding a bike drunk being better than driving or not, I feel like I ought to point out that you can ride a bike slowly and you're no danger to anyone, including yourself unless you happen to fall over into a pit full of angry weasels.
 
2012-09-23 10:16:29 AM

I May Be Crazy But...: wild9: And he could not have been THAT intoxicated. Seriously, do you know how hard it is to stay upright on a bicycle while drunk?

Yeah, I do know. You can ride a bike pretty drunk, if you ride regularly. Although to be fair, I've never ridden when I was full out, throwing up drunk. I got off the bike to throw up.


Curiously I must agree. Maintaining your balance on bike, motorized or not, is surprisingly manageable even if your balance is starting to wobble. The biggest problem with driving drunk is the arrogance that comes with an alcohol buzz, and the stunningly stupid decisions it encourages you to make. Like riding a bike or motorcycle drunk.

/motorcycles are 36.25% faster while drunk.
 
2012-09-23 10:16:58 AM

I May Be Crazy But...: Okay, for this whole argument about riding a bike drunk being better than driving or not, I feel like I ought to point out that you can ride a bike slowly and you're no danger to anyone, including yourself unless you happen to fall over into a pit full of angry weasels.


i212.photobucket.com

Weasels?
 
2012-09-23 10:19:16 AM
A number of bicyclists are alcoholics who lost their drivers license. Around here though, they get mopeds. Either way, it's easier to detect when they are drunk.

However, this sounds like a win for responsible drinking and reduced alcohol abuse, so there's that.
 
2012-09-23 10:25:12 AM
You'd really have to be drunk to be unable to avoid a checkpoint on a bike.
 
2012-09-23 10:27:16 AM

CruiserTwelve: About 240 drivers were also screened between 8 p.m. and 1 a.m.

Checkpoint was too early. Had they gone until 3:00 am they would have found half a dozen drunks.

One man was issued a citation for an outstanding warrant from Butte County. Two others were issued citations for driving with a suspended license, and two other drivers were driving with expired licenses.

In that case it wasn't a sobriety checkpoint, it was a general traffic enforcement checkpoint and, in my opinion, was unconstitutional.


I think a lot of departments are using DWI checkpoints as a cover for "papers please" type operations that would not be allowable, but since we've carved out an exception for DWI they'll abuse it as much as possible

Saturation patrols are much better at actually finding drunks, but those require some work, like actually driving around and looking for people who are driving poorly.
 
2012-09-23 10:30:13 AM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: And if said intoxicated cyclist hit a pedestrian because they couldn't stop at full speed?


In my fantasy world, penalties are based on the amount of increased risk to others. I'm not saying BUI should be legal, just that DUI penalties are based on motor vehicle risks, and the scenarios where drunk cycling causes death or serious injury to others are far less likely than drunk driving, thus the penalty should be much much less. Minor stuff I think should carry the same penalties for cyclists and drivers, as things like failure to signal rarely cause serious incidents in either case, thus the total increased risk of harm is similar.
 
2012-09-23 10:32:02 AM

SweetDickens: Sorry to challenge your MADD brainwashing ...check out the follow up to the book superfreakanomics.......the break down is there......You can also find out why blow jobs are cheaper today than they were 10-15 years ago.......


This is from the book you cited:
Doing the math, you find that on a per-mile basis, a drunk walker is eight times more likely to get killed than a drunk driver.

There's one important caveat: a drunk walker isn't likely to hurt or kill anyone other than her- or himself. That can't be said of a drunk driver. In fatal accidents involving alcohol, 36 percent of the victims are either passengers, pedestrians, or other drivers. Still, even after factoring in the deaths of those innocents, walking drunk leads to five times as many deaths per mile as driving drunk.


The part in bold is what makes drunk drivers assholes. I couldn't care less if your drunk ass falls off a bridge on the way home, just as long as you don't hurt me or mine while you stumble home.

The other "flaw" is that they're evaluating this on a per-mile basis instead of a per-trip basis.
 
2012-09-23 10:33:37 AM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: All the drunks looked out for one another and took sidestreets and alternative routes in order to avoide the cops? Submitter, drunk drivers are assholes. It's not stupid to get drunk drivers off the streets. Now, it sucks for the other four people out of 240 who were issued citations for shiat which isn't a menace on the streets (expired licenses and suspended licenses) by themselves............... but fk drunk drivers.


Wait a minute, you think it is a good idea for the police to engage in five hours of of searches and license lookups for no reason at all? Do you think drunks have a checkpoint phone tree? And if so, how would the first drunk know? None of them got pulled over.

You are entitled to your opinion. If that is really the way you see the world, I would just hope that you vote less, or, better yet, not at all.
 
2012-09-23 11:13:01 AM

CruiserTwelve:

In that case it wasn't a sobriety checkpoint, it was a general traffic enforcement checkpoint and, in my opinion, was unconstitutional.


yeah, but a lot of times the finer points of DUI law are lost on the rank and file. it's not like citizens pay attention to their rights either - people consent to things they shouldn't all the damn time.

ah well. the point was to show the flag and convince the voters that the cops were doing their jobs, not to catch drunk drivers. in that respect, they succeeded.
 
2012-09-23 11:13:29 AM
checkpoints are simply another way for the cops to congregate, do nothing, and still get paid.

"I HAVENT SEEN THIS MANY PIGS SINCE I WAS AT THE OSCAR MAYER PLANT! WACKITTY SHMACKITTY DOO!"

cdn.pastemagazine.com
 
2012-09-23 11:17:49 AM

I May Be Crazy But...: wild9: And he could not have been THAT intoxicated. Seriously, do you know how hard it is to stay upright on a bicycle while drunk?

Yeah, I do know. You can ride a bike pretty drunk, if you ride regularly. Although to be fair, I've never ridden when I was full out, throwing up drunk. I got off the bike to throw up.


When I was younger and dumber, I did this a number of times. Once, I blacked out mid journey. I still made it where I was going, but I apparently collapsed on the sidewalk, and lost my lunch.

A girl I used to work with did it a number of times, then one time too many. She hit a parked car, and woke up in the hospital with a skull fracture. She swore off riding drunk after that, and always wears her helmet now.
 
2012-09-23 11:19:26 AM

SweetDickens: Sorry to challenge your MADD brainwashing ...check out the follow up to the book superfreakanomics.......the break down is there......You can also find out why blow jobs are cheaper today than they were 10-15 years ago.......


U. of Chicago economists would certainly know about the prices for giving BJs.
 
2012-09-23 11:20:17 AM
DWI is a revenue machine, plain and simple.

I live in Norway, where an average speeding ticket costs about $600--- rather than the $100-ish it costs in the US. The high fine is a serious deterrent to speeding, so few people speed, and there is little revenue to be generated. In the US, the fines are tolerable--- a surcharge for arriving faster-- and in the US, it is simply regarded as bad luck to get a ticket, since 'everyone' speeds.

Public safety is NOT the issue with traffic laws in the US--- same with DWI. Around here, there is zero-tolerance (not the absurdly high BAC levels that are legal in the US), and fines begin at $10K (here in Norway). You are considered a serious fark-up if you get a DUI. In the US, it is a rite of passage--- no big deal- to get a DUI (first offense, at least). It is a joke. If they want to get serious, set serious fines and serious consequences. Otherwise, it is all a money-grab.

Jenna Tellya: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: And if said intoxicated cyclist hit a pedestrian because they couldn't stop at full speed?

In my fantasy world, penalties are based on the amount of increased risk to others. I'm not saying BUI should be legal, just that DUI penalties are based on motor vehicle risks, and the scenarios where drunk cycling causes death or serious injury to others are far less likely than drunk driving, thus the penalty should be much much less. Minor stuff I think should carry the same penalties for cyclists and drivers, as things like failure to signal rarely cause serious incidents in either case, thus the total increased risk of harm is similar.

 
2012-09-23 11:28:08 AM

wild9: Sucks that no matter the vehicle it still counts as an OWI. You could be in your kids powerwheels and get pulled over in front of your house and get one.


Then there was the guy popped for OWI while riding a horse, even though the horse was sober.
 
2012-09-23 11:30:33 AM

Jenna Tellya: this is one case where I think the rules of the road, and especially the steep penalties, should not apply to bicyclists. I was hit by a drunk bicyclist. I had to pop my side-view mirror back into place after the crash. The guy should be applauded for not getting behind the wheel of a dangerous vehicle and instead putting basically only himself at risk.


Tell that to the old man who was killed by Chris Bucchere in San Francisco.
 
2012-09-23 11:44:00 AM

Lord Farkwad: The sad thing is he doesn't have to worry about losing his bicycle drivers license or have his bicycle insurance rates going up. I wonder what it's going to cost to get his bike out of impound.


Actually in California riding a bike DUI is the same as if you were driving a car. Your licence can still get yanked and your insurance rates will go up when you get it back.
 
2012-09-23 11:47:52 AM

jmr61: ExperianScaresCthulhu: All the drunks looked out for one another and took sidestreets and alternative routes in order to avoide the cops? Submitter, drunk drivers are assholes. It's not stupid to get drunk drivers off the streets. Now, it sucks for the other four people out of 240 who were issued citations for shiat which isn't a menace on the streets (expired licenses and suspended licenses) by themselves............... but fk drunk drivers.


I didn't see that subby made a comment one way or another about the acceptabillty of DUI. Bicycling under the influence? STFU cops.

You sound republican though so given that GFY.


Submitter's comment was the 'strange' tag followed by 'nets one DWI arrest'. I read that like roll eyes, like 'what's the point of a DWI checkpoint if that's all it's going to net?' If that wasn't submitter's intention, I apologize for misunderstanding submitter's intent.

----------------------------------------------------------

angryjd: ExperianScaresCthulhu: All the drunks looked out for one another and took sidestreets and alternative routes in order to avoide the cops? Submitter, drunk drivers are assholes. It's not stupid to get drunk drivers off the streets. Now, it sucks for the other four people out of 240 who were issued citations for shiat which isn't a menace on the streets (expired licenses and suspended licenses) by themselves............... but fk drunk drivers.

Wait a minute, you think it is a good idea for the police to engage in five hours of of searches and license lookups for no reason at all? Do you think drunks have a checkpoint phone tree? And if so, how would the first drunk know? None of them got pulled over.

You are entitled to your opinion. If that is really the way you see the world, I would just hope that you vote less, or, better yet, not at all.


I think those who drink and drive should Fk Off And Die -- but don't take innocents out with you. I am not a cop lover, and I think most 'pay the fine' citations based on 'we wouldn't have known if we hadn't pulled you over' are bullshiat, especially when those are the only citations which come out of a particular traffic stop.

But DWI isn't one of those. If you're drunk, fk you. That is not an issue of bogus traffic stop leading to bogus citation leading to (in some cases) bogus warrants, when the driver receives no citation for disobeying phantom traffic rule that was the alleged cause of the stop.

As for drunks contacting one another to avoid DWI checkpoints: it's a common enough thing that Apple had to reject apps designed to do exactly that, last year. It would have made Apple, and the app designers who did it, nice chunks of change.

As of the writing of the article above, one of the apps available which caused the problem was DUI Dodger, with the designer asking folks to download and use it in order to fight back against checkpoints.

But drunks had been using cell phones, pagers and whatnot to warn one another about checkpoints for a long time.
 
2012-09-23 12:00:00 PM

filter: DWI is a revenue machine, plain and simple.

I live in Norway, where an average speeding ticket costs about $600--- rather than the $100-ish it costs in the US. The high fine is a serious deterrent to speeding, so few people speed, and there is little revenue to be generated. In the US, the fines are tolerable--- a surcharge for arriving faster-- and in the US, it is simply regarded as bad luck to get a ticket, since 'everyone' speeds.

Public safety is NOT the issue with traffic laws in the US--- same with DWI. Around here, there is zero-tolerance (not the absurdly high BAC levels that are legal in the US), and fines begin at $10K (here in Norway). You are considered a serious fark-up if you get a DUI. In the US, it is a rite of passage--- no big deal- to get a DUI (first offense, at least). It is a joke. If they want to get serious, set serious fines and serious consequences. Otherwise, it is all a money-grab.

Jenna Tellya: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: And if said intoxicated cyclist hit a pedestrian because they couldn't stop at full speed?

In my fantasy world, penalties are based on the amount of increased risk to others. I'm not saying BUI should be legal, just that DUI penalties are based on motor vehicle risks, and the scenarios where drunk cycling causes death or serious injury to others are far less likely than drunk driving, thus the penalty should be much much less. Minor stuff I think should carry the same penalties for cyclists and drivers, as things like failure to signal rarely cause serious incidents in either case, thus the total increased risk of harm is similar.



What you are saying may have been true in the late 80's and early 90's, however most US states at this point .04 is common and is the limit in my state which is lower than the .05 in Finland (Finland my be wrong that was just a quick search engine check.) Typically the first offense is loss of license for a year and around $1500 in direct fines, while your auto insurance (required in most states) goes up $75 per month for the next 5 years for another $4500 in indirect fines, at least $300 for your vechile towing and impoundment (typically significantly more) as well as having lost wages for time incarcerated. (which varies wildly but is almost assured to be at least 48 hours). There are rare instances where people get less than that but it has become big business in the US to pull over the slightly impaired (while letting impairment for other reasons go). Give them a breath test on a breathalizer (which have been shown to be wildly inaccurate in field settings) and rake in allot of money.

I'm not defending drunk driving in fact I despise it and don't do it but in many ways with the constant lowering of the legal limit here in the US along with questionable enforcement practices it has become apparent that it is no longer about safety but about money.
 
2012-09-23 12:06:33 PM
Why is it that drunk drivers have the sense to avoid DUI checkpoints, but they don't have the sense to not "drink drive" to start with?
 
2012-09-23 12:18:42 PM

s1ugg0: Jenna Tellya: this is one case where I think the rules of the road, and especially the steep penalties, should not apply to bicyclists. I was hit by a drunk bicyclist. I had to pop my side-view mirror back into place after the crash. The guy should be applauded for not getting behind the wheel of a dangerous vehicle and instead putting basically only himself at risk.

Ok, here's a what if. How would you feel if you were driving and drunk bicyclist rides right out into a county road intersection and gets blasted at 50 miles per hour. Would you be so casual if your hood was dented, your wind shield shattered, and blood all over your car? You get out of the car slowly only to see the horribly mangled corpse who's organs are now spread over a 20 foot area.

Now you and others will say "Serves him right, I don't care." But one person dead and another who is DEFINITELY going to have emotional trauma for the rest of their life.

Yea, I'm ok with the penalties. But then again when I go drinking the most mechanical device I operate is a bottle opener.


So, your answer to the problem of getting run over is to penalize people who neither ran anyone over nor got run over themselves? You're a douche bag.

No harm, no crime... it doesn't matter what your BAC is.
 
2012-09-23 12:20:36 PM

s1ugg0: Jenna Tellya: this is one case where I think the rules of the road, and especially the steep penalties, should not apply to bicyclists. I was hit by a drunk bicyclist. I had to pop my side-view mirror back into place after the crash. The guy should be applauded for not getting behind the wheel of a dangerous vehicle and instead putting basically only himself at risk.

Ok, here's a what if. How would you feel if you were driving and drunk bicyclist rides right out into a county road intersection and gets blasted at 50 miles per hour. Would you be so casual if your hood was dented, your wind shield shattered, and blood all over your car? You get out of the car slowly only to see the horribly mangled corpse who's organs are now spread over a 20 foot area.

Now you and others will say "Serves him right, I don't care." But one person dead and another who is DEFINITELY going to have emotional trauma for the rest of their life.

Yea, I'm ok with the penalties. But then again when I go drinking the most mechanical device I operate is a bottle opener.


Exactly.

A few years ago, I was headed home on a four lane city street and saw four or five of these spandex warriors leaving a bar on their cycles, weaving all over the outside eastbound lane. I was also eastbound and got into the inside lane to give them as wide a berth as possible, pass them and get away from them.

Three blocks later, I was stopped at a red light, in the left turn lane and signaling for a left turn and I see them come up behind me. The light changes, I pull forward and, just as I am about to start my left turn, these assholes pass me on my left, riding right on the double yellow line and also turn.

WTF?

Fortunately, I still have fast reflexes and stopped in time to avoid mowing them down. I waited for them to clear thew intersection and then made my turn. the went on to a bar just down the street from my apartment and went in. I was plenty angry and called the cops. It was then that I learned it was not a crime to cycle drunk in Des Moines. Even though I could identify each, they would not come out and bust them for public intoxication or being a safety hazard. However, had I hit one of the dipshiats when they turned in front of me, I just know I would have been the one arrested.

fark 'em. Next time I'll throw a scare into them, just because.
 
2012-09-23 12:32:02 PM
Actually in California riding a bike DUI is the same as if you were driving a car. Your licence can still get yanked and your insurance rates will go up when you get it back.

THIS IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

"Although California courts have repeatedly ruled that a bicycle is not a vehicle covered by the state's drunk driving laws, the California Vehicle Code makes it a misdemeanor for any person to ride a bicycle while intoxicated. Unlike DUI, which carries much heavier punishments, people charged with riding a bicycle under the influence face a possible fine of $250."

It's an infraction, and there is no DMV action IF YOU ARE OVER 21.
 
2012-09-23 12:52:00 PM

Aulus: Next time I'll throw a scare into them, just because.


Unfortunately, it won't work. Oh, you'll probably feel better about yourself, but it won't change the way they act. They're half-drunk and used to having cars almost hit them (sometimes it's even their fault) so if everything goes well, they'll just end up at the next bar with another story about some jerk who almost hit them. If everything doesn't go well, they'll end up yelling at you for it, and nothing you say will be able to convince them that they might be at fault - now they're drunk AND righteous.

So please don't try to teach them a lesson. It won't help the situation. Just drive (or bike) carefully, since you can't count on anyone else on the road doing it.
 
2012-09-23 01:08:55 PM
Not a big haul for the cops that day. Should start picking up drivers and hold them upside down for loose change.
 
2012-09-23 01:13:22 PM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: Why is it that drunk drivers have the sense to avoid DUI checkpoints, but they don't have the sense to not "drink drive" to start with?


How do you know they don't? Maybe with the enforcement efforts people in the area have gotten the message.
 
2012-09-23 01:31:51 PM
There have been drunk drivers since cars tansportation was invented. The hysteria is new. Being free is dangerous business.
 
2012-09-23 01:38:28 PM

wambu: A number of bicyclists are alcoholics who lost their drivers license. Around here though, they get mopeds. Either way, it's easier to detect when they are drunk.

However, this sounds like a win for responsible drinking and reduced alcohol abuse, so there's that.


Around here, everyone calls them "liquorcycles"... many states don't require a license or insurance to drive them...
 
2012-09-23 01:40:55 PM

Weaver95: CruiserTwelve:

In that case it wasn't a sobriety checkpoint, it was a general traffic enforcement checkpoint and, in my opinion, was unconstitutional.

yeah, but a lot of times the finer points of DUI law are lost on the rank and file. it's not like citizens pay attention to their rights either - people consent to things they shouldn't all the damn time.

ah well. the point was to show the flag and convince the voters that the cops were doing their jobs, not to catch drunk drivers. in that respect, they succeeded.


I have another question about DUI checkpoints: unless I'm mistaken, the cops can only pull over like the fifth or 10th vehicle to assure they're not profiling. If that's the case, shouldn't we be worried about drunks rolling through the checkpoint while someone coming home from 2nd shift is blowing into a Breathalyzer?
 
2012-09-23 01:42:30 PM

DrewCurtisJr: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: Why is it that drunk drivers have the sense to avoid DUI checkpoints, but they don't have the sense to not "drink drive" to start with?

How do you know they don't? Maybe with the enforcement efforts people in the area have gotten the message.


Exactly... people see the 1 arrest and think "waste of time" or "they all took back roads". It's entirely possible their enforcement is curbing the problem. Kinda like when ya see a fit in shape person drinking a Diet Coke. "Why is he drinking a diet drink? he doesn't need it" Well, that's how he keeps in shape... Or a rich person being a little tight with their money. Not being flippant with their money helps them become rich. And the same reason bipolar people stop taking meds, "I feel just fine..."
 
2012-09-23 01:54:54 PM
prairiefirenews.com
 
2012-09-23 01:58:50 PM

DrewCurtisJr: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: Why is it that drunk drivers have the sense to avoid DUI checkpoints, but they don't have the sense to not "drink drive" to start with?


Erm cuz "drink driving" amounts to having a pint and driving home?

/USA
//DNRTFA so don't know what country
 
2012-09-23 02:29:48 PM

cmb53208: I have another question about DUI checkpoints: unless I'm mistaken, the cops can only pull over like the fifth or 10th vehicle to assure they're not profiling. If that's the case, shouldn't we be worried about drunks rolling through the checkpoint while someone coming home from 2nd shift is blowing into a Breathalyzer?


The cops must use some objective means of stopping people that doesn't discriminate. Most checkpoints just stop every car, and if they're asked why they stopped a particular car the reason is "because it was the next car through the checkpoint." If it's a busy street they might stop every third or fifth car. If they deviate from that set procedure they must have reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle. For example, if they decide to stop every fifth car and the third car along is driven by a guy drinking a beer, they can stop him for the beer violation. They would need a reason outside of the checkpoint to stop that car though.

Heck, they can even stop every red car or every Ford if they want, as long as they don't deviate from that set plan and don't discriminate against any protected class.
 
2012-09-23 02:39:19 PM
If they had that checkpoint in Wisconsin, they would net about 25% of the drivers at any given time of the day.
 
2012-09-23 02:39:42 PM

buzzcut73: I think a lot of departments are using DWI checkpoints as a cover for "papers please" type operations that would not be allowable, but since we've carved out an exception for DWI they'll abuse it as much as possible.


I've said many times that restrictive case law comes from abuse of the law by cops. I agree with you - too many agencies abuse the checkpoint rules by setting up general checkpoints where they stop every car and check for warrants, insurance, valid licenses and such. The SCOTUS ruled that checkpoints for detection of sobriety are constitutional. General checkpoints are not. I think if someone were to challenge a summons they received at a checkpoint that wasn't related to sobriety could get a ruling in their favor. I'd like to see that happen.

Saturation patrols are much better at actually finding drunks, but those require some work, like actually driving around and looking for people who are driving poorly.

True, but the purpose of checkpoints goes beyond just making arrests. They're supposed to be big, obvious productions with lots of cops and flashing lights and signs that get plenty of attention. The purpose is to deter drunk driving. If people think they might get stopped by a checkpoint, they're less likely to drive drunk. Most drunks think they can drive just fine and they won't get arrested because the cops won't stop them because they're driving will be as normal as it is when they're sober. Checkpoints are supposed to throw a wrench in the works of that thinking. If a drunk thinks they can drive normal but still might get stopped, they will be less inclined to drive after drinking.
 
2012-09-23 03:00:25 PM

badhatharry: There have been drunk drivers since cars tansportation was invented. The hysteria is new. Being free is dangerous business.


There have been murderers as long as there have been humans. Appeal to tradition just doesn't cut it in this case. You can choose to ignore the inconvenient facts about how alcohol impairs the ability to operate a motor vehicle (or human powered vehicle) safely, but don't expect the rest of us to.
 
2012-09-23 03:00:56 PM
Why would a bicyclist need a headlight mounted on their bicycle during daylight hours? Are you aware a law exists stating you must have a headlight on your bicycle?

Why have usa state and federal governments created so many laws and statutes that the paper they are printed on when stacked up will be much taller than you? And may heaven help you if you cannot afford a really good attorney if you are charged with breaking some law you did not know existed.
 
2012-09-23 04:32:24 PM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: As for drunks contacting one another to avoid DWI checkpoints: it's a common enough thing that Apple had to reject apps designed to do exactly that, last year. It would have made Apple, and the app designers who did it, nice chunks of change.


The irony here is that -- depending who you listen to -- cell phone use while driving is just as dangerous as DUI.
 
2012-09-23 05:13:40 PM

Repo Man: badhatharry: There have been drunk drivers since cars tansportation was invented. The hysteria is new. Being free is dangerous business.

There have been murderers as long as there have been humans. Appeal to tradition just doesn't cut it in this case. You can choose to ignore the inconvenient facts about how alcohol impairs the ability to operate a motor vehicle (or human powered vehicle) safely, but don't expect the rest of us to.


Maybe we should have checkpoints for murderers, bankrobbers, and rapists.
 
2012-09-23 05:38:21 PM

badhatharry: Repo Man: badhatharry: There have been drunk drivers since cars tansportation was invented. The hysteria is new. Being free is dangerous business.

There have been murderers as long as there have been humans. Appeal to tradition just doesn't cut it in this case. You can choose to ignore the inconvenient facts about how alcohol impairs the ability to operate a motor vehicle (or human powered vehicle) safely, but don't expect the rest of us to.

Maybe we should have checkpoints for murderers, bankrobbers, and rapists.


And checkpoints for crooked cops; there seem to be more of them.
 
2012-09-23 06:11:08 PM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: And if said intoxicated cyclist hit a pedestrian because they couldn't stop at full speed?


The pedestrian would be rather pissed off and probably kick that cyclist's ass.
 
2012-09-23 06:42:31 PM

CruiserTwelve: About 240 drivers were also screened between 8 p.m. and 1 a.m.

Checkpoint was too early. Had they gone until 3:00 am they would have found half a dozen drunks.

One man was issued a citation for an outstanding warrant from Butte County. Two others were issued citations for driving with a suspended license, and two other drivers were driving with expired licenses.

In that case it wasn't a sobriety checkpoint, it was a general traffic enforcement checkpoint and, in my opinion, was unconstitutional.


Cops do that shiat here all the time...they will have traffic backed up for 2-3 MILES (no, that's not an exaggeration) at a strategic bottleneck spot...as they slow everyone down so they can write tickets for things like inspection stickers and go fishing for other violations.

In the meantime, they're causing a gigantic traffic jam.
 
2012-09-23 09:50:28 PM
It's all about public safety.
 
2012-09-23 10:14:22 PM

BuckTurgidson: It's all about public safety.


Something about freedoms, something about safety, something about nothing...

filter: Around here, there is zero-tolerance (not the absurdly high BAC levels that are legal in the US), and fines begin at $10K (here in Norway). You are considered a serious fark-up if you get a DUI. In the US, it is a rite of passage--- no big deal- to get a DUI (first offense, at least). It is a joke.


Absurdly high? Thanks to the insanity of MADD, legal BAC levels have dropped a lot in the past decade. In the US, a DUI is not at all a right of passage. Losing your license for six months is a life altering thing.

DUI's are setup completely wrong. Take someone that doesn't drink at all. They have 2 beers in an hour, they are (depending on weight) legally able to drive. Take someone who drinks a lot. They have four beers in an hour. They are legally impaired. Talk to the two of them, give them motor skills tests, the seasoned alcoholic is going to be much safer than someone who doesn't drink at all that has two beers.

A checkpoint (IMHO) is morally wrong. I am not defending people who drive drunk, I am defending people who have to drive home at this time of night. They are stopped for no reason other than the time of day, much like people were asked for papers at another time in our history.
 
2012-09-23 10:15:54 PM

SweetDickens: Walking home while drunk is 8 times more dangerous than driving home.

/not pc ..... but a fact notheless....
Want another???? Pipe smokers (tobacco) live longer than non smokers..........

Suck it you pc tools


Yeah, but it's not safer for others now is it? You know, others... As in other people : not self.
 
2012-09-23 10:17:12 PM

wild9: And he could not have been THAT intoxicated. Seriously, do you know how hard it is to stay upright on a bicycle while drunk?


Not really at all?
You've obviously never lived in the Netherlands ;)
 
2012-09-23 11:56:54 PM

SH: Seems like the laws should specify "motor vehicle".

To me, hopping on a bike, whether drunk or sober, is doing everyone a favor except the revenue grabbing cops and court system. Why do we need laws to protect us from ourselves? Whether it's drunk bicycling or driving a car without a seatbelt, it's none of the government's goddamned business since the only one we could possibly hurt is ourself. 

Fark you nanny-state capitalists.


A friend of mine almost got a bike DUI, but the cops noticed the huge gash on her forearm (she had already fallen) and figured that was punishment enough.

The fact that that was up for debate - when she wasn't biking in the street, but barely doing what could be considered biking on the sidewalk (legal - or it was - here if you're going pedestrian speed, which she certainly was) and having a DUI even be on the table is f--king stupid. I can see the "drunk biker causes car to swerve and crash" or "motorist has to live with killing a drunk through no fault" arguments... but fine, get those people swerving in the road for endangering traffic *first*, DUI *second*.

I can bike just f--king fine at 0.08, thanks. I could probably drive fine but my license (despite it basically being a necessity in areas of the country without decent public transport) is still a "privilege".

I didn't have to sign away my rights to ride my f--king bike. Maybe in some cities with mandatory registration, but I got a new bike and found out my town did away with it... even though they got $10 from me last time. Kinda strange they'd take a revenue stream away, but whatever. Only reason I registered it was so if it got stolen and I found it locked up somewhere, I could legally break out the bolt cutters after consulting the police.
 
2012-09-24 12:11:09 AM

KrispyKritter: Why would a bicyclist need a headlight mounted on their bicycle during daylight hours? Are you aware a law exists stating you must have a headlight on your bicycle?

Why have usa state and federal governments created so many laws and statutes that the paper they are printed on when stacked up will be much taller than you? And may heaven help you if you cannot afford a really good attorney if you are charged with breaking some law you did not know existed.


That's what happens when you vote for Democrats or Republicans.
 
2012-09-24 07:35:41 AM

Aulus: fark 'em. Next time I'll throw a scare into them, just because.


or, you know, you could just look after yourself, continue to drive safely and not try and police everybody else.
 
2012-09-24 08:14:32 AM

Lord Farkwad: The sad thing is he doesn't have to worry about losing his bicycle drivers license or have his bicycle insurance rates going up. I wonder what it's going to cost to get his bike out of impound.


I wouldn't count on that. Some places (most? all?) road infractions committed on a bicycle count against your license. I once lost my drivers license for not paying a ticket I got for running a red light on a bicycle.
 
2012-09-24 08:31:56 AM

KrispyKritter: Why would a bicyclist need a headlight mounted on their bicycle during daylight hours? Are you aware a law exists stating you must have a headlight on your bicycle?

Why have usa state and federal governments created so many laws and statutes that the paper they are printed on when stacked up will be much taller than you? And may heaven help you if you cannot afford a really good attorney if you are charged with breaking some law you did not know existed.


I use a flashing headlight on my bike during the day for increased visibility.
 
2012-09-24 08:37:07 AM

mjbok: They are stopped for no reason other than the time of day, much like people were asked for papers at another time in our history.


seriously?
 
2012-09-24 09:12:53 AM
These guys are good! They should be unloading flight attendant's licensed revolvers.
 
2012-09-24 09:15:58 AM

wild9: And he could not have been THAT intoxicated. Seriously, do you know how hard it is to stay upright on a bicycle while drunk?


YES! My first six pack, at age 14, back in '75. Made it home, many miles, quite well, thank you.
 
2012-09-24 11:50:10 AM
GDISM, be safe or I'll kill you.
 
Displayed 79 of 79 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report