DUI Checkpoint advice.........Possibility for general police stops in Indiana?

[VUPDblue]

Call me naive, but somehow I have a hard time envisioning any vehicle with all red or, especially the combination of blue & red lights, on top being selected to endure additional scrutiny.

It happens. It's part of how the selection of vehicles is kept random. The removal of any Officer discretion as far as selection of vehicles is what keep the checkpoints legal in Indiana. We have cop cars, ambulances, fire trucks, DPW trucks, taxis, limos, construction vehicles, you name it come through the checkpoints. They all get the same greeting. Again, it's the removal of discretion that keeps us on the right side of the law.

 

[KG1]

It happens. It's part of how the selection of vehicles is kept random. The removal of any Officer discretion as far as selection of vehicles is what keep the checkpoints legal in Indiana. We have cop cars, ambulances, fire trucks, DPW trucks, taxis, limos, construction vehicles, you name it come through the checkpoints. They all get the same greeting. Again, it's the removal of discretion that keeps us on the right side of the law.

Hey why not. I'm sure most regulars on INGO might be aware of a thread or two of a police officer vehicular incident involving intoxication while on duty.

 

[rhino]

I cannot fathom making up a reason to stop a car and possibly arrest the driver for DUI. The entire incident is predicated on a lawful stop and, absent that, you'd be purjuring yourself from the get-go, even if the driver was impaired. There is no good that can come from an arrest based on lies.

Well, you are honest and you're usually pretty busy doing actual work. That's probably why fabricating a reason to pull someone over is foreign to you. Unfortunately, not everyone who shares your occupation is as honorable.

A few years ago I got pulled over just north of Spencer by a Spencer police officer and another guy riding in his car with him. Yeah, I'm a horrible driver but I wasn't weaving, speeding, or breaking any other traffic regulations, nor were there any obvious deficiencies in my vehicle like a non-functional light. I don't drink at all, nor have I ever used any other intoxicants (my bad behavior is natural!). There was no legitimate reason to pull me over.

The first thing he said to me after asking for my license and registration was that I was "weaving all over the lane." I had not been weaving, much less "weaving all over the lane," but I didn't see any upside to disputing his assertion at that time. He got me out of my truck and then he started with the "do you know your license is about to expire?" when I actually had several years left before expiration. He made a few other similarly annoying statements and questions, which I assumed were "tricks" to encourage intoxicated persons to incriminate themselves.

Then he asked me if I had a gun on me, to which I replied "of course."

Then he asked, "Where is it," and I was expecting the classic "I have to disarm you for your safety" routine.

I said, "Which one?"

That confused him, so he asked me what I meant.

I told him, "You asked me my gun was, and I asked you which one." I don't remember my exact words after that, but he was baffled by what I said, so I explained to him the concept that multiple guns would be carried in different locations.

So he said, "Well, just don't go for it and we won't have any problems."

At that point I went from annoyed to amused. I almost laughed, but I figured that might make things worse. He asked for my "permit," which I produced and he tried the "did you know this is about to expire" routine AGAIN.

Oy. He finally gave up and allowed me to go on my way.

Anyway, this guy invented a reason to pull me over and then wasted my time with his obviously rehearsed routine. My time was wasted, taxpayer paid time was wasted, and I was irritated. It could have been worse, but it was 100% unnecessary.

 

[Force10]

Also: would turning on the dome light prevent the need for use of the million foot-candle torches in the face?

My experience does not support this theory. Every time I get pulled over (not frequently, as I make every attempt to be legal and unobtrusive) if it is dark I pull over, turn on the hazard flashers, turn off the vehicle, and turn on the dome light. I then roll down the window and wait for the officer to approach. So far, every time I have still been blinded by the Maxi-Mag, this in addition to the vehicle mounted spotlight. I wait until the officer is at the window before I remove my regs/ins from the glove box.

I know there is some inherent risk by being a police officer but, come on, ya don't have to blind me when I am obviously making every move easily seen.

 

[Ruffnek]

In regards to the blinding lights, what if I were to accidentally hit the button for my auto-folding mirrors? And that pesky center mirror is always directly in my way when I reach for my info on the visor, what if that were to become slightly skewed?

 

[Kutnupe14]

In regards to the blinding lights, what if I were to accidentally hit the button for my auto-folding mirrors? And that pesky center mirror is always directly in my way when I reach for my info on the visor, what if that were to become slightly skewed?

If your auto folding mirror button is why mine is, I'd suggest during a traffic stop, you not "accidentally" activate it.

 

[ghuns]

Readjusting my side mirror to reflect back at the officer actually facilitated me spending the night in Marion county lock up.

Some peoples gots no sense of humor.

 

[Bill of Rights]

It happens. It's part of how the selection of vehicles is kept random. The removal of any Officer discretion as far as selection of vehicles is what keep the checkpoints legal in Indiana. We have cop cars, ambulances, fire trucks, DPW trucks, taxis, limos, construction vehicles, you name it come through the checkpoints. They all get the same greeting. Again, it's the removal of discretion that keeps us on the right side of the law.

I would hope that an exception would be made (or the driver followed, etc.) for a unit on an emergency run. I gotta tell you... as the medic, I'd be pretty hot if my partner had to stop and do "stupid human tricks" while I was in the back thumping on someone's chest. And as a family member, following the ambulance to the hospital, I'd be stopping to get the names of everyone responsible for the checkpoint that delayed their arrival at the hospital.

I understand the checkpoint, and I understand the removal of "discretion" keeping everyone on the right side of the law.

As to the post where the officer used the "if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't have any problem with consenting to a search", I already know my answer: "I have nothing to hide, and I do not consent to any search." Depending on my mood, I might add, "Mind if I take a look through your car? No, not your commission, I mean your personal car. What about your home? After all, if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't have any problem consenting, right?"

I respect the good work that officers do. I also know that old saying about power corrupting. Too many seem to think they have absolute power and don't seem to care if it corrupts them absolutely. It's those who I'd hope such a comment would wake up to realize that they're no different, no better nor worse than anyone else, because of a badge on their shirt or a cred in their pocket. Ben Parker had it right: With great power comes great responsibility.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[VUPDblue]

Of course emergency units running lights and siren are not going to be waved into the checkpoint. There may not be any discretion but there is common sense.

 

[Rookie]

In regards to the blinding lights, what if I were to accidentally hit the button for my auto-folding mirrors? And that pesky center mirror is always directly in my way when I reach for my info on the visor, what if that were to become slightly skewed?

I don't know about that, but, the few times I've been pulled over, I've had no problem with adjusting my mirrors so I'm not blinded.

 

[VUPDblue]

Well, you are honest and you're usually pretty busy doing actual work. That's probably why fabricating a reason to pull someone over is foreign to you. Unfortunately, not everyone who shares your occupation is as honorable.

A few years ago I got pulled over just north of Spencer by a Spencer police officer and another guy riding in his car with him. Yeah, I'm a horrible driver but I wasn't weaving, speeding, or breaking any other traffic regulations, nor were there any obvious deficiencies in my vehicle like a non-functional light. I don't drink at all, nor have I ever used any other intoxicants (my bad behavior is natural!). There was no legitimate reason to pull me over.

The first thing he said to me after asking for my license and registration was that I was "weaving all over the lane." I had not been weaving, much less "weaving all over the lane," but I didn't see any upside to disputing his assertion at that time. He got me out of my truck and then he started with the "do you know your license is about to expire?" when I actually had several years left before expiration. He made a few other similarly annoying statements and questions, which I assumed were "tricks" to encourage intoxicated persons to incriminate themselves.

Then he asked me if I had a gun on me, to which I replied "of course."

Then he asked, "Where is it," and I was expecting the classic "I have to disarm you for your safety" routine.

I said, "Which one?"

That confused him, so he asked me what I meant.

I told him, "You asked me my gun was, and I asked you which one." I don't remember my exact words after that, but he was baffled by what I said, so I explained to him the concept that multiple guns would be carried in different locations.

So he said, "Well, just don't go for it and we won't have any problems."

At that point I went from annoyed to amused. I almost laughed, but I figured that might make things worse. He asked for my "permit," which I produced and he tried the "did you know this is about to expire" routine AGAIN.

Oy. He finally gave up and allowed me to go on my way.

Anyway, this guy invented a reason to pull me over and then wasted my time with his obviously rehearsed routine. My time was wasted, taxpayer paid time was wasted, and I was irritated. It could have been worse, but it was 100% unnecessary.

There are plenty of impaired drivers out there to go around. I don't understand why any officer would want to try and make a DUI out of every driver they stop. Impairment is so easy to detect, just stop more cars, you'll find one eventually.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Well, you are honest and you're usually pretty busy doing actual work. That's probably why fabricating a reason to pull someone over is foreign to you. Unfortunately, not everyone who shares your occupation is as honorable.

A few years ago I got pulled over just north of Spencer by a Spencer police officer and another guy riding in his car with him. Yeah, I'm a horrible driver but I wasn't weaving, speeding, or breaking any other traffic regulations, nor were there any obvious deficiencies in my vehicle like a non-functional light. I don't drink at all, nor have I ever used any other intoxicants (my bad behavior is natural!). There was no legitimate reason to pull me over.

The first thing he said to me after asking for my license and registration was that I was "weaving all over the lane." I had not been weaving, much less "weaving all over the lane," but I didn't see any upside to disputing his assertion at that time. He got me out of my truck and then he started with the "do you know your license is about to expire?" when I actually had several years left before expiration. He made a few other similarly annoying statements and questions, which I assumed were "tricks" to encourage intoxicated persons to incriminate themselves.

Then he asked me if I had a gun on me, to which I replied "of course."

Then he asked, "Where is it," and I was expecting the classic "I have to disarm you for your safety" routine.

I said, "Which one?"

That confused him, so he asked me what I meant.

I told him, "You asked me my gun was, and I asked you which one." I don't remember my exact words after that, but he was baffled by what I said, so I explained to him the concept that multiple guns would be carried in different locations.

So he said, "Well, just don't go for it and we won't have any problems."

At that point I went from annoyed to amused. I almost laughed, but I figured that might make things worse. He asked for my "permit," which I produced and he tried the "did you know this is about to expire" routine AGAIN.

Oy. He finally gave up and allowed me to go on my way.

Anyway, this guy invented a reason to pull me over and then wasted my time with his obviously rehearsed routine. My time was wasted, taxpayer paid time was wasted, and I was irritated. It could have been worse, but it was 100% unnecessary.

What you should've done, after the conclusion of the stop, and the officer started to walk away, was get his attention, and tell him that you weren't weaving, and your didn't appreciate the stop. He can't write you a ticket, having already addressed his reason for stopping you, and he can't pull you over again. I would have an recording device handy just in case.

 

[actaeon277]

There are plenty of impaired drivers out there to go around. I don't understand why any officer would want to try and make a DUI out of every driver they stop. Impairment is so easy to detect, just stop more cars, you'll find one eventually.

I've had one in Illinois, south of Chicago on 80-94 pull me over for dui, that was over in seconds.
But then spent 15 minutes trying to get permission to search.
Used the "if you have nothing to hide"
and "I can get a dog here"
and "I can get a warrant".

I was calm andcollected.
Let me go.

 

[Rookie]

What you should've done, after the conclusion of the stop, and the officer started to walk away, was get his attention, and tell him that you weren't weaving, and your didn't appreciate the stop. He can't write you a ticket, having already addressed his reason for stopping you, and he can't pull you over again. I would have an recording device handy just in case.

I'm not sure that would turn out well.

 

[pitbulld45]

I don't know about Illinois but in Indiana, without probable cause we can not detain a traffic stop any longer then it takes for normal business to wait on a dog. As for adjusting the mirrors so not to be blinded, I don't mind that on a traffic stop. Why do we use our spot light? To mask our approach. I don't care if you have your hands on the steering wheel, dome light on, Mom with your or what, I don't know who I am pulling over or what you are capable of. I have no answer as to why people are getting blinded by hand held lights the entire time of the stop. In the beginning it may be a way to check for glassy, blood shot eyes or to check pupil response. There are obviously some jacks out there that are Officers but most of us are legit.

 

[JettaKnight]

Did I miss suomething gun related?

Why is this in the carry issues forum?

 

[chipbennett]

There are plenty of impaired drivers out there to go around. I don't understand why any officer would want to try and make a DUI out of every driver they stop. Impairment is so easy to detect, just stop more cars, you'll find one eventually.

So, remind me why there is a need for DUI checkpoints?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I've had one in Illinois, south of Chicago on 80-94 pull me over for dui, that was over in seconds.
But then spent 15 minutes trying to get permission to search.

I've met actaeon, the cop might ask him how to fix electronic gizmo in his police car or something, but I think that is called barking up the wrong tree.

 

[chipbennett]

I don't know about Illinois but in Indiana, without probable cause we can not detain a traffic stop any longer then it takes for normal business to wait on a dog. As for adjusting the mirrors so not to be blinded, I don't mind that on a traffic stop. Why do we use our spot light? To mask our approach. I don't care if you have your hands on the steering wheel, dome light on, Mom with your or what, I don't know who I am pulling over or what you are capable of. I have no answer as to why people are getting blinded by hand held lights the entire time of the stop. In the beginning it may be a way to check for glassy, blood shot eyes or to check pupil response. There are obviously some jacks out there that are Officers but most of us are legit.

The only time I've been pulled over in almost two decades was by a jackwagon in St. Louis County, who made up a "failure to signal" citation*. I came to court prepared to prove that the officer was, in fact, lying about his ability even to see my lane change. Oddly enough, the officer didn't show, and the prosecutor reduced it to a parking fine. So, yeah; they're out there.

I've never run into anyone like that in Indiana, though. I've been pulled over twice, ticketed once, in my entire driving tenure in Indiana. And I was definitely speeding the time I was ticketed. (College kid, last day of work, country road - 59 at Brazil, headed north, back to school. Road is usually empty - except for the police officer coming the other way, who clocked me at 79 in a 55. Yeah, I earned that one. The other time, it was raining and I had bad tires, entering onto 465. I hydroplaned a bit, and there just happened to be an officer coming up behind me. He just said "be more careful".)

* The St. Louis County officer had another car already pulled over, at a curve in a three-lane one-way road. I had to turn right past the curve, and the only reason I was in the center lane to begin with was because I had moved into that lane to yield to the stopped police car. After a safe distance (which was further around the curve, I signaled (as I always do) and changed back to the right-most lane. At that point, around a curve and behind the car he already had stopped, it was, in fact, impossible for the police officer to see my lane change - much less my signal (or alleged lack thereof). He apparently left the other car to follow me down the street and into the grocery store parking lot, where he lit me up in a parking space, and proceeded to read me the riot act. I said nothing in response to his allegations that I was speeding (I wasn't - in fact, I was being passed by a faster car in the leftmost lane) and driving recklessly (refer back to the part about changing lanes to yield to a police car), so he came back with the BS "failure to signal". He seemed to be in a very bad mood - which I knew had nothing to do with me. So I just kept my mouth shut.

 

[KittySlayer]

As to the post where the officer used the "if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't have any problem with consenting to a search", I already know my answer: "I have nothing to hide, and I do not consent to any search." Depending on my mood, I might add, "Mind if I take a look through your car? No, not your commission, I mean your personal car. What about your home? After all, if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't have any problem consenting, right?"

Search away as long as you don't mind me searching through your personal phone officer while you poke around in my car. I would imagine in the time it took the officer to search my car I could find a few of his dirty little secrets on his phone.