Driver falsely arrested at DUI checkpoint claims statistics — not drunk drivers — motivate arrests

That's more than disturbing to me. 

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2023/12/14/driver-falsely-arrested-dui-checkpoint-claims-statistics-not-drunk-drivers-motivate-arrests/

Sounds like the Wells Fargo fiasco for policing.

GameboyRMH said:

Sounds like the Wells Fargo fiasco for policing.

I wish.  There was at least some result from that.  HPD will investigate themselves and find no wrongdoing. 

GameboyRMH said:

Sounds like policing.

FTFY

Hawaii is a bit weird with police.  Most of which drive their own cars!

But this will all become entirely academic when we all have breathalyzers in our new cars.  I am sure that won't cause issues, blowing into your car every time you want to start it... rental cars.... car shops... fun...

This is a requirement, by law.  No specifics on how it will be implemented, but breathalyzer is the obvious one.  I really don't see breathalyzers being remotely practical, but I also see the other options as potentially problematic (and expensive).

https://www.motortrend.com/news/anti-drunk-driving-technology-mandated-infrastructure-bill/

This is looking a bit like yet another "great idea" by the gov, without any concept of how it will be implemented, or the unintended consequences.

A guy I worked with was a cop before he switched professions.  He told us that if he smelled alcohol on the breath of a driver he arrested that person for DWI.   I asked what about the breath test to see if the person blows over 0.08.   He tells me its not my problem once I arrest him. I let the DA deal with it.   That was the last day I spoke to this guy unless necessary for work.  

He also told us that he gave out a lot of tickets for red light running but the charges kept being thrown out because the police car  video proved it wasn't a violation. He was actually angry about this.   I'm glad he isn't a cop anymore, nuff said.

I know a guy who works for a construction company. They call him Scrub (made up name). 
 

I watched him work for months, and really couldn't figure out why he had a job at all. One of the laziest men I've ever met. And his boss "Bob" never seemed to care. He ignored absolutely everything Knife did wrong, and never corrected him. 
 

Finally I asked a coworker, "What's up with Bob and Scrub?  Why does that guy have a job at all?"  
 

"Oh, you don't know what goes on with them?  Bob's an alcoholic, and they installed a court ordered breathalyzer on his truck. He makes Scrub blow into the tube so he can drive his car when he's drunk.  Scrub's been doing that for 10 years. Ol' Bob can't ever fire Scrub- he knows too much."

Congress is a bunch of idiots.

He had no alcohol in his system.

Fepuleai said the narrative then changed, and the officers said they suspected drug use.

^^

Not possible to use the quote feature on my phone. 
I had that happen to me almost 20 years ago. A girl rear ended me hard in stop and go traffic on the highway. We pulled over and started exchanging info when a cop pulled over, announced that he was now in charge of the situation, and started barking orders. His first order was telling her to NOT show me her information - which is the first thing you do, and we had already done. When I told him he wasn't required and asked him to leave, that's when he started that bullE36 M3. We'd already exchanged info so I pretty much ignored him, got back in my truck and drove away. He followed me for a long time. I considered reporting him but figured it would probably cause me more trouble than him and chose not to

In reply to SV reX :

Scrub, Knife, whatever :)

In reply to SV reX :

Scrub, I need you to blow my tube after work.  

Change my mind:

Muting or turning a body camera off should be a felony. 

Datsun240ZGuy said:

In reply to SV reX :

Scrub, I need you to blow my tube after work.  

OHSCrifle said:

Change my mind:

Muting or turning a body camera off should be a felony. 

That is why most attorneys are advising to have your own recording of the event even if just audio. It has or can be summonized that if the police balk, it's going to be a bad stop. There is no law saying you can't record them, as much as there isn't one saying they can record you. It's all cya.

Why would anyone take the advice of a person trained in deception and manipulation?

In reply to Racebrick :

(1st grade voice)

Because the policeman is your friend.

(1st grade voice)

It doesn't just happen on islands, here's one same style in Iowa. Here in Richmond they absolutely have a quota per checkpoint. 

OHSCrifle said:

Change my mind:

Muting or turning a body camera off should be a felony. 

Absolutely. And typically if you have a felony on your record you can't get in to any police academy.

So if you commit a felony on the job as an LEO, you should be fired and charged like the average citizen.

Ranger50 said:

OHSCrifle said:

Change my mind:

Muting or turning a body camera off should be a felony. 

That is why most attorneys are advising to have your own recording of the event even if just audio. It has or can be summonized that if the police balk, it's going to be a bad stop. There is no law saying you can't record them, as much as there isn't one saying they can record you. It's all cya.

That depends, different states have different rules regarding recording conversations.  Some are "single party consent" (meaning you can record your own conversation with someone else without needing their consent/knowledge), some are "dual party" (meaning you can't).  If you're in a dual party state you might be breaking the law if you recorded a conversation with a police officer without informing them that you were recording it.

I have no idea what happens if the police officer instructs you to turn the recorder off after you inform him.  That's probably a question for an attorney.

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

I've had enough poor interactions with the police that I'd rather find out the consequences of recording them without their consent after the fact than have no record if something goes sideways.  

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

No state law overrides your 1st amendment right to record in pubic.

IANAL and all that, but I believe if you inform them that you are recording them, it is their prerogative to leave if they're uncomfortable with the situation. They can ask and you can comply, but if they demand that you turn it off you do not have to. 
 

How this plays out in the courts is a different matter. 

Stampie said:

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

No state law overrides your 1st amendment right to record in pubic.

Wait, what?

In reply to Robbie (Forum Supporter) :

PA centric but still ...

https://www.aclupa.org/en/know-your-rights/know-your-rights-when-taking-photos-and-making-video-and-audio-recordings

National ACLU

https://www.aclu.org/news/free-speech/right-record-police-doesnt-disappear-when-you-put-your-phone-your-pocket