Law Enforcement Should Be About Public Safety, Not Throwing People In Jail

Ken McCracken • October 31, 2007

David Harsanyi relates at Reason Magazine the story of a woman who was pulled over by Washington DC police for not having her headlights on and then arrested for having a blood alcohol content of .03%, or the equivalent of exactly one glass of wine in a 120lbs woman. A BAC of .08% is required to be considered “legally intoxicated” in Washington DC, but now the city has apparently also issued a “zero tolerance” policy making it illegal to drive with any BAC level at all.
According to Officer Dennis Fair, who arrested this woman, “If you get behind the wheel of a car with any measurable amount of alcohol, you will be dealt with in D.C. We have zero tolerance….Anything above 0.01, we can arrest.” And they do, too. According to Harsanyi, some 321 people were arrested for “drunk” driving with a BAC below .08%. The year before that it was over 400.
The problem with this is that laws against things like drunk driving exist to keep us all safe, not to put as many people in prison as possible. Yet far too often that’s how police officers and prosecutors treat those jobs. What good does it do to put a soccer mom who had a glass of wine and drove in jail? Does it make the roads safer? No. All it does is intrude on said soccer mom’s life while costing us all thousands of tax dollars in police time, court time, jail time, etc.
I think that people who drive drunk should absolutely be held accountable for endangering the lives of other motorists, but laws against drunk driving should be aimed at punishing people who are actually dangerous. Not people who had a glass of wine and drove. That, after all, isn’t in keeping with the principles of a free society.

Tags: Cultural Marxism, Domestic Issues, Nanny State, Politics

http://Array Bat One

Ted Kennedy better watch his ass, in DC.

You didn’t know about the chauffeur-driven limo? You should. You helped pay for it.
Hoss

What a great story, because we know that D.C. has so few real crime problems to worry about.

And, you don’t have to worry about the Kennedys getting busted for drinking and driving, they just claim Congressional immunity for their get-out-of-jail-free card. Remember old Patrick Kennedy, man, the apple doesn’t fall too far from the tree, does it.
Popeye

There might be more to the story than what is posted. If her only mistake was forgetting to turn on her lights (possible to miss on brightly lit streets), I would not think that was probable cause for a blood alcohol test. The officer certainly could not notice any behavioral change to warrant the test. If the city has a policy of a blood alcohol test for any traffic stop on the whim of the officer (maybe he does, maybe he doesn’t), that would meet at least my definition of an unreasonable search and seizure. And on the other hand, I doubt they would demand a blood alcohol on every last driver pulled over – in which case, the rule is applied capriciously – again an unreasonable search and seizure. If a trooper pulls over a motorist and suspects alcohol impairment, I believe he generally is required to perform a screening test for sobriety or document something that aroused his suspicion to warrant requiring a blood alcohol test. At least, that seems to be the case on the cop reality shows, when the officer requests someone obviously impaired to heel-toe walk or some such test, before requesting the blood alcohol test. If officers did not need to do that for legal reasons – “He just looked drunk to me.” – I suspect they would not bother.
Pilgrim

Rob,

Once again I’m forced to agree. This isn’t enforcing the law. The law defines what a DWI is. This is enforcing someone’s view that ANY amount of alcohol should be a jailable offense.

Ridiculous. And dangerous.
http://ewebsmith.com/ ews48

Is this a policy or is it a law? There’s a big difference.

Or is it that if Bush can get away with it, so can D.C?
skh.pcola

Ted Kennedy better watch his ass, in DC. Not that I really think the “law” (such as it is…or isn’t, in this case) applies to libtard sooper-heroes.

This diktat from City Hall is unconstitutional. I’m surprised that it’s been around for longer than a year.
redwolf

sounds like d.c. cops are to cowardly to go after real criminals!

SayAnythingBlog.com

Law Enforcement Should Be About Public Safety, Not Throwing People In Jail

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments