I have seen, in the newspaper, that police will be "out in force" over a weekend, but I have never ever ever seen an exact date, time, and place of a checkpoint. They popup around here at various places and times throughout the week. Either the rumor that they must announce is just that, or they are announcing it where no one can find it.
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.
U.S. Senators Ask Apple to Remove DUI Checkpoint Apps From App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I was wondering who sent me these e-mails when incompassitated
Pobbally you kott no nott sheeee shttreigth and the letttaass were all grabbledd
Police do just that: knock and talks. They suspect a house, they go knocking hoping that they will open up and essentially let the policeman into their house. That's why you never open your door to the police. Talk through the door or a closed window. If they have a warrant, they won't bother knockin'. If they claim to have a warrant, tell them your unarmed sitting on the couch, but they'll have to break the door down.
Just more waves of harassment from your friends over at the protect and bother center.
I wonder how many people drunk driving has killed in a year compared to the September 11th incident?
My point being that drunk driving in one incidence may only kill a few people but over time with many incidents if not kept in check it can kill a *lot* of people. Just because it's not as newsworthy doesn't mean it doesn't kill hundreds or thousands of people. It just means it happens so often it's no longer news (the news likes stuff that stands out).
As they say, you have more chances of dieing in a car than flying or in a terrorist attack. Granted, that's including more than driving drunk. But point is, focusing on making people better drivers is definitely a worthwhile cause and probably would prevent more deaths than airport security.
Hell, focusing on just drunk driving would probably prevent more deaths than the *theater* of airport security (You do realize all that hassling they do in the US anyways for airline checks is mostly feel good measures. There are much more effective things they could try that aren't so invasive and aren't so hassling. I think I've heard Israel has a really good method of airport security).
Apps should not be pulled
I believe that asking Apple to pull this is a violation of the 1st amendment. Free speech. Secondly, what law does this violate? NONE!
Why is my congress spending time on this? Go the f%^k home and quit trying to run my life. Thank you. Every congress person that voted for this should be removed from office immediately.
Everyone who thinks this app should be pulled should go back to school and read their constitution!
I believe that asking Apple to pull this is a violation of the 1st amendment. Free speech. Secondly, what law does this violate? NONE!
Why is my congress spending time on this? Go the f%^k home and quit trying to run my life. Thank you. Every congress person that voted for this should be removed from office immediately.
Everyone who thinks this app should be pulled should go back to school and read their constitution!
It isn't. If you're a fugitive but not a complete dumb@ss, chances are you'll be laying low, not committing any more crimes. Or if you are a complete dumb@ss, you'll probably get caught doing something stupid anyways, and you can go off to jail then.
As long as the driver with the revoked license is driving sanely, they don't affect me, and thus don't bother me.
I have no problem with drug dealers.
I do have a problem with the police making me sit in my car, engine running, wasting time and gas, so they can treat me like a criminal.
re: how do we feel about airport security
I know I feel the same way about "airport security" as I do about these random DUI checkpoints. VERY unhappy with both!
As it's been pointed out many times already, the ONLY change the airlines made, post 9-11, that had any discernible impact on improving safety was locking the cockpit doors! (Hard to hijack an airline if you can't even get to the controls, or to the people flying it.) Everything else has really just been security theater and creation of a bunch of unnecessary jobs (TSA screeners, etc.) to help make the unemployment rates look better than they'd otherwise be.
The airport screening and DUI checkpoints both have a lot in common. Both ignore our Constitutional rights and standard procedure of "due process", all because of a supposed threat that's so scary, we're encouraged to throw away our individual rights and freedoms so the government can step in and try to save us from ourselves.
And just like the DUI checkpoints, there always seems to be more to it than its claimed purpose on the surface. With the airlines, they've got "no fly" lists made up that customers aren't allowed to see or even find out exactly what makes someone a candidate to be put on one. I know people who complained about the body searches and x-ray machines once, while getting on a flight, and ever since - EVERY time they go to any U.S. airport to board a flight, they're "randomly picked for extra screening". Obviously, they got put on another list that again, nobody will admit even exists or will show you. (Probably a 2nd. list that says "MAY be a problem" or something.) With the DUI checkpoints, they're harassing people they stop for all sorts of things that they'd never have been stopped for otherwise. It's becoming a "carte blanche" way for the cops to search the vehicles without any reasonable suspicion or probable cause involved first, all because "We were supposed to stop you anyway, since this is a DUI checkpoint. Too bad!"
I know I feel the same way about "airport security" as I do about these random DUI checkpoints. VERY unhappy with both!
As it's been pointed out many times already, the ONLY change the airlines made, post 9-11, that had any discernible impact on improving safety was locking the cockpit doors! (Hard to hijack an airline if you can't even get to the controls, or to the people flying it.) Everything else has really just been security theater and creation of a bunch of unnecessary jobs (TSA screeners, etc.) to help make the unemployment rates look better than they'd otherwise be.
The airport screening and DUI checkpoints both have a lot in common. Both ignore our Constitutional rights and standard procedure of "due process", all because of a supposed threat that's so scary, we're encouraged to throw away our individual rights and freedoms so the government can step in and try to save us from ourselves.
And just like the DUI checkpoints, there always seems to be more to it than its claimed purpose on the surface. With the airlines, they've got "no fly" lists made up that customers aren't allowed to see or even find out exactly what makes someone a candidate to be put on one. I know people who complained about the body searches and x-ray machines once, while getting on a flight, and ever since - EVERY time they go to any U.S. airport to board a flight, they're "randomly picked for extra screening". Obviously, they got put on another list that again, nobody will admit even exists or will show you. (Probably a 2nd. list that says "MAY be a problem" or something.) With the DUI checkpoints, they're harassing people they stop for all sorts of things that they'd never have been stopped for otherwise. It's becoming a "carte blanche" way for the cops to search the vehicles without any reasonable suspicion or probable cause involved first, all because "We were supposed to stop you anyway, since this is a DUI checkpoint. Too bad!"
My stance.
If Trapster has this information, it must be public knowledge. Most states require to announce such roadblocks before they are allowed to do so (therefore making it public knowledge).
All this app is doing is providing information that is public knowledge. To remove it amounts to censorship.
For one, I don't drink and drive. I also would hate to have to wait in line behind everyone else they stop, and be questioned as if I were guilty.
I do believe such roadblocks are illegal as it amounts to unlawful search and seizure without probably cause. They are stopping me and my vehicle without any probably cause to do so.
If Trapster has this information, it must be public knowledge. Most states require to announce such roadblocks before they are allowed to do so (therefore making it public knowledge).
All this app is doing is providing information that is public knowledge. To remove it amounts to censorship.
For one, I don't drink and drive. I also would hate to have to wait in line behind everyone else they stop, and be questioned as if I were guilty.
I do believe such roadblocks are illegal as it amounts to unlawful search and seizure without probably cause. They are stopping me and my vehicle without any probably cause to do so.
censorship!
for the sake of safety!
on the one hand, if apple removes these apps, they're government lap dogs.
on the other hand, if apple doesn't remove these apps, people may die.
on the third hand, if apple removes these apps, drunk people won't be able to avoid sobriety checkpoints as easily.
on the fourth hand, if apple doesn't remove these apps, sober people like you and me will be able to find and avoid sobriety checkpoints to speed up our evening commutes.
on the fifth hand! if apple doesn't remove these apps, we may see a rise in drunk-driving related accidental deaths because now drunk people have an Actual Urgent Reason (as opposed to Fake Urgent Reasons like "call ex-girlfriend") to be using technology while driving.
on the sixth hand, if apple doesn't remove these apps, sober people like you and me will have yet another reason to be stopped and fined $300 for operating a digital device ("texting") while driving.
CONCLUSION: everyone -- even the "geniuses" at the apple store -- is stupid.
CONSENSUS: pull the apps!
REASON: who cares!
for the sake of safety!
on the one hand, if apple removes these apps, they're government lap dogs.
on the other hand, if apple doesn't remove these apps, people may die.
on the third hand, if apple removes these apps, drunk people won't be able to avoid sobriety checkpoints as easily.
on the fourth hand, if apple doesn't remove these apps, sober people like you and me will be able to find and avoid sobriety checkpoints to speed up our evening commutes.
on the fifth hand! if apple doesn't remove these apps, we may see a rise in drunk-driving related accidental deaths because now drunk people have an Actual Urgent Reason (as opposed to Fake Urgent Reasons like "call ex-girlfriend") to be using technology while driving.
on the sixth hand, if apple doesn't remove these apps, sober people like you and me will have yet another reason to be stopped and fined $300 for operating a digital device ("texting") while driving.
CONCLUSION: everyone -- even the "geniuses" at the apple store -- is stupid.
CONSENSUS: pull the apps!
REASON: who cares!
I wish this was an issue of fatality statistical data and comparisons, but it's not. This is a complicated issue that involves violations of the 1rst, 4th and 14th amendments. Expressed or otherwise by these 3 Senators; they are attempting to circumvent due process by requesting Apple remove Apps that contain publicly available information, that is required by our laws to make the existence of the "consenting loophole" even possible to begin with. What these Senators have done, is considered unconstitutional, a very slippery slope for politicians to be on.
This is not just a feel good issue, it's a publicity stunt that comes at the cost of actually catching drunk drivers:
Also, if you read: Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 US 444 - Supreme Court 1990 - articles 445 to 477 (don't skip anything) it'll make more sense.
If it saves one life, everyone should be put into straight jackets, locked in padded rooms, and fed through tubes. Are you serious, if it saves one life that is justification for the government to ignore the constitution?
These senators should be drummed from office for violating their oaths to uphold the constitution. I don't condone driving while drunk, but that isn't what this is about, in my opinion. I do condone free access to information and the right to be informed about and to inform others about actions being taken by the government.
Is it reasonable to have a public debate about this issue, what these apps imply, and how to deal with it? Absolutely. And in that debate I come down on the side of opposing censorship.
Is it reasonable for a Senator or other agent or minister of the government to ask a private company to censor information that does not affect national security? Heck no. The government does have some legitimate interest in defending itself and in engaging in secrecy for the protection of the state, but these must always be measured against the harm they do to individual liberty and the essential quality of life of all citizens.
Obligatory Ben Frankling Quote: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Better get my tin foil hat before I read any more of this bollocks.
Indeed. But if you're not doing anything illegal, then what are you worried about? Is it the alien probes that scare you?
Welcome back to the party dude! For a second you went all kerrrrazy eyed on us!
Oh dear God. I'm pretty sure the gay community would find it exquisitely insulting that you choose to refer to their sexual orientation as a "chosen lifestyle". But I guess your intention was to offend, wasn't it?
By the way, is your chosen lifestyle heterosexuality? Or perhaps your chosen lifestyle is to sit alone all day and get all weird on people you meet on the internetz.
First post too! Welcome! Just a recap on the rules (don't worry, they're not constitution busting): only one account per person, so if you feel the need to get all creepy but don't want people to know who you are, you're not allowed to make up a new account to spout insensitive crap from that might otherwise get your proper username banned. Again, welcome to the forum!
While I think it is kind of silly to focus on apps like this, I'm confused as to why all of you think a "request" (read: not a law or order) is a violation of Free Speech. Last time I checked Apple has the right to ignore the request. Now if they bring them under inquiry or something that would be a different story.
Also your argument doesn't really make sense... you complain about Senators trying to run your life and then you ask why they are wasting time on this. Which do you want?
I have a feeling most folks on here are just feeding into the partisan political discourse with couched terms about constitutionality and government intervention (or lack there of).
While I think it is kind of silly to focus on apps like this, I'm confused as to why all of you think a "request" (read: not a law or order) is a violation of Free Speech. Last time I checked Apple has the right to ignore the request. Now if they bring them under inquiry or something that would be a different story.
Also your argument doesn't really make sense... you complain about Senators trying to run your life and then you ask why they are wasting time on this. Which do you want?
I do think some of the arguments here go too far, but there's no need to pull out the bulls horns here, save them for the politicians (of no specific party.) lol
I have to admit, I've observed that "most folks" though "not all" responses here are of a non-partisan nature.
Just out of curiosity, how many lives do you throw at a problem before you start thinking "maybe I don't have to bleat continuously about a totally contemporary amendment which was written 100 years before anyone could get drunk and go kill people in cars but still totally applies to DUI checkpoints cos the founding fathers were really brainy and predicted these things"? Since you scoffed at one life am I right in guessing you're a "two plus" sorta guy?
A sad but true thing; in Michigan, at train crossings without signs, I believe it takes 2-3 lives before they'll put a simple warning sign up.
I usually set up my own checkpoint a mile before the DUI checkpoints.
I like to warn anyone not 100% compliant to turn around and take an alternate route.
I like to warn anyone not 100% compliant to turn around and take an alternate route.
Yes drunk driving is reckless but what does this have to do with Apple or the Trapster app made primarily for speeding? Is removing it suppose to stop drunk drivers who I'm sure have been doing this before this app was made? Really, think about it
I don't have to think about it. Attempting to justify anything that can be construed as a way to circumvent responsible behaviour (such as an App that helps avoid speed traps) is complicit to idiocy.
Cars are dangerous, people are idiots - drunk or not. If you can't drive responsibly, then you shouldn't be behind a wheel. Giving people the tools to do even more damage than they would and - yes here it comes - glamorizing it as an App is just plain dumb.
So you can take your smiley face and show it to some of the poor families out there who've lost loved ones to idiots who can't drive. Seriously, utter plank.
Yes, only in small minds does the constitutional right to live comes second to the constitutional right to avoid penalties for putting other peoples' lives at risk (through dangerous driving).
Basic freedoms and common sense humanity are hard for some people to understand or distinguish between. Humanity, human compassion and common sense first, I say. If you don't have any of those, I guess you can hide behind the constitution.