Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

BozoDidtheW t1_j1dungv wrote

Reply to comment by Mnemon-TORreport in Mass. State Police to set up sobriety checkpoint starting Thursday in Bristol County by LackingUtility

Sound like a violation of constitutional rights ngl

26

SheeEttin t1_j1e23iq wrote

You don't have a constitutional right to drive. You can walk through and just wave.

−25

JaesopPop t1_j1e5vy9 wrote

They didn’t say they had a constitutional right to drive.

8

SheeEttin t1_j1e6fec wrote

Is there a scenario other than driving where you'd hit one of these checkpoints and get pulled over?

−10

JaesopPop t1_j1e6mxa wrote

Than driving? No, but that doesn’t mean that person was saying anyone had a constitutional right to drive lmao

3

SheeEttin t1_j1e9zib wrote

What constitutional right would it violate, then?

−10

JaesopPop t1_j1ecias wrote

You can re-read their comment and engage with them if you’re confused I’m just informing you that they didn’t say anyone had a constitutional right to drive

4

alongfield t1_j1ecp8l wrote

The 4th.

Sobriety checkpoints only get away with being constitutional if they stop every single vehicle. If cops use any discretion about which car to stop, then it's illegal.

4

LackingUtility OP t1_j1epviw wrote

Yep. Technically, random stops work too - every 4th car, or "we flip a coin", or something similar, as long as the cops aren't using their discretion.

3

Local_Stuff_Acct t1_j1gbmuw wrote

As a matter of fact, you have a constitutional right to do anything not prohibited by law.

You also continue to have a variety of other constitutional rights while driving and protection from unreasonable searches and seizures is one of them.

0

SheeEttin t1_j1gi8bb wrote

SCOTUS ruled that a DUI checkpoint and brief questioning was not an unreasonable search and seizure. If questioning produces probable cause, then out comes the breathalyzer.

0