Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Bans DUI Checkpoint Apps
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's sad to see apple cave on this issue. Makes me wonder what will be next. I would rather see these fine upstanding senators working on things like the national debt, taxes, ever increasing loss of jobs to places like Mexico and China, Illegal Immigration, Gang violence, etc. It is even more bothersome to see so many of the members here supporting the nanny state. This really is what we need more of, total government control from cradle to grave.
Except that a breathalyzer is utilized when police have suspicion of some level of intoxication. A person who hasn't been drinking would essentially have no reason to resist outside of having some type of views such as your apparently that the government is violating your rights.
Otherwise, if the person has been drinking and refuses the breathalyzer out of their own fears of being caught having driven under the influence, police will then simply wait until obtaining a warrant to take a blood sample for testing.
Either way, do innocent people sometimes get inconvenienced? Yes. To the extent you're making it sound? No.
Also, as you yourself stated, the law has the stipulation of: After 10 PM, unless with an adult over 21, and under 6 months of driving experience. Essentially, you're stating that a new driver, with limited experience, should have the same level of expected trust as that of an adult or someone with considerable experience. That's simply laughable.
Oh, and just to point out, as the courts have typically stated time and time again, driving is a privilege, not a right.
Not false either....
The US Supreme Court ruled it legal on a federal level (imho, correct)
The states have a right to write their own laws as long as they don't go against what the USSC says (ie if they said it was illegal, states couldn't have laws that make it legal as it would be violating federal law).
Guess you missed that there's also an exception for traveling to/from employment.
http://www.michigan.gov/sos/0,1607,7-127-1627_40645-252829--,00.html
DUI checkpoints are nothing. If you want to get angry about, imagine them merely selecting a class of private vehicle for checkpoint stops - then imagine the federal government funding the program.
http://www.americanmotorcyclist.com..._to_Virginia_motorcycle-only_checkpoints.aspx
I know it must be terrible to lose a loved one to drunk driving, but is reducing drunk driving really worth limiting free speech?
Before anyone gets on my case about the definition of free speech, yes, I consider the App Store banning apps that provide information on certain topics a limitation of free speech. I know Apple has every right to do enforce their own policy on their App Store, but I feel uneasy about certain topics being banned.
edit: i should also say I like DUI checkpoints since people shouldn't be drinking and driving. I also don't ever drink and drive. I just want to be able to have access to information that isn't illegal to possess.
Before anyone gets on my case about the definition of free speech, yes, I consider the App Store banning apps that provide information on certain topics a limitation of free speech. I know Apple has every right to do enforce their own policy on their App Store, but I feel uneasy about certain topics being banned.
edit: i should also say I like DUI checkpoints since people shouldn't be drinking and driving. I also don't ever drink and drive. I just want to be able to have access to information that isn't illegal to possess.
I suppose history apps should be banned to. After all, knowledge of history can encourage revolutions.
Just another step in the trend towards government rights/priority over the citizens (I know its voluntary by Apple, but this puts the cops 1st and the citizens last). The filming of cops being an illegal activity is another thing that makes me mad.
The priority should always go to the citizens, that is why it is illegal to search private property without a warrant. . .oh wait, thats eroding as well. . .
We need some sweeping changes back to citizens rights and the constitution. I don't care if it makes policing harder. 100 guilty men should walk before the the rights of just 1 person are trampled.
/soapbox
Just another step in the trend towards government rights/priority over the citizens (I know its voluntary by Apple, but this puts the cops 1st and the citizens last). The filming of cops being an illegal activity is another thing that makes me mad.
The priority should always go to the citizens, that is why it is illegal to search private property without a warrant. . .oh wait, thats eroding as well. . .
We need some sweeping changes back to citizens rights and the constitution. I don't care if it makes policing harder. 100 guilty men should walk before the the rights of just 1 person are trampled.
/soapbox
People shouldn't be allow to drink and drive
The only people whining about this are those who drink and drive, cause otherwise, why would you care? Do yourself a favor and stop drinking, your life will be that much better. You'll save money, and won't risk killing people.
The only people whining about this are those who drink and drive, cause otherwise, why would you care? Do yourself a favor and stop drinking, your life will be that much better. You'll save money, and won't risk killing people.
How about we stop targeting his age and address his comments/arguments? Checkpoints are a PITA for anyone who isn't doing anything illegal. I for one can't bare being delayed by them and can't tolerate the "traps" that have been mentioned. And I'm certainly no juvenile. So let's get to the point and leave the fluff aside shall we?
Anyone stop to think that this App may be useful for people who are working late and want to avoid waiting in DUI check point lines. I know for me when I was working late hours they had a check point on the busiest street and it took close to 20 minute to get through. The Cops would always harass me about my red eyes and I'd have to explain the fact that is 11:30PM and I have been up since 7AM at class and then worked an 8 hour shift. I think its wrong for you guys to assume that people will use this App to get around checkpoints with the sole intention to drive drunk. Shame on you. This is preventing a few things, #1 Entrapment, #2 avoiding traffic jams on streets where check points are, #3 avoiding harassment if you are a Designated Driver with a car full of drunks. I have a stomach disease so I cannot drink Alcohol yet whenever I am DD and have drunks in the car Cops treat me like a drunk as well.
Just to point out, your own link states that the state laws that do allow for DUI checkpoints have apparently been upheld under the US Constitution.
yeh it's all a money grab one way or the other. Most municipalities make tons of money from egregiously slow speed limits. Most studies have shown red light cameras to simply be a money grabthere's no safety benefit.
For all the DUI enforcement for checkpoints, the government should put that into a fund to reimburse cab companies for drunk patrons because the bars sure as hell aren't going to do so.
Yeah... the yearly cost of the carnage inflicted by drunk drivers (and picked up through our insurance rates and taxes) is chicken feed.
He admits he's both juvenile and a scofflaw, so no insult there. He calls police pigs and you're concerned about my insult? OK.
And by the way, numerous references to brain development, including Sowell, Nature Neurosciences 2003. Not irrelevant at all because the incomplete neural connections in teenage brains govern judgment.
Last edited:
Also, with regard to free speech, I may be wrong about this given how long it's been since I last studied it, but isn't the guarantee of free speech essentially more at the government/public level, i.e. the federal/state/local government cannot impinge upon your right to free speech, but that does not extend to the purvey of private businesses?
A good example, to me at least, is how the Boy Scouts of America are allowed to refuse openly homosexual individuals from being members, a policy that is perfectly "acceptable" given its private nature, but which would run afoul of anti-discrimination laws if they were a government organization.
Thus, if someone chooses to use the App Store and an Apple device, they're at the purvey of whatever decisions Apple chooses to make.
A good example, to me at least, is how the Boy Scouts of America are allowed to refuse openly homosexual individuals from being members, a policy that is perfectly "acceptable" given its private nature, but which would run afoul of anti-discrimination laws if they were a government organization.
Thus, if someone chooses to use the App Store and an Apple device, they're at the purvey of whatever decisions Apple chooses to make.
Thats what IOS jailbreaking is for bro...I am all for apples closed off system. It works for us developers. We make money on the IOS side...hardly anything on the android side.
Illegal? Whatever. More of the Constitutionally uninformed public spouting off their knowledge from friends on facebook.
Read more about the actual law as it was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, decades ago. And ironically, Michigan is at the center.
http://caselaw.duicenter.com/sitz03.html
(hint: This would mean it is not illegal or unlawful)
Agreed. I dislike drinking and driving as much as anyone but I don't know if it is worth banning free speech over.
Not to mention the fact that I don't think Trapster is particularly important when it comes to DUI checkpoints. Everyone can see them a mile away. At least in the city where I live, you start getting suspicious as to why the traffic isn't moving at 10pm. A few blocks up, you can see cop lights flashing and this line of cars stopped. What does a drunk driver have to do? Take a left before you come across that line. You don't need trapster.
Your not talking about the "Mapping cortical change across the human life span" article are you? I sure hope not!