Sobriety checkpoints — like the ones held in Utah — often fail to make even a single drunk driving arrest, despite stopping hundreds of vehicles ("Utah House votes to ban DUI checkpoints," Feb. 24). A 2009 University of Maryland study found that checkpoints don't have "any impact on public perceptions, driver behaviors or alcohol-related crashes, police citations for impaired driving and public perceptions of alcohol-impaired driving risk."
County police should employ roving — or saturation — patrols in which police patrol the roadways for dangerous drivers. State Supreme Court cases from both Pennsylvania and New Hampshire revealed that roving patrols caught 10 times more drunk drivers than checkpoints. According to the FBI "it is proven that saturation efforts will bring more DUI arrests than sobriety checkpoints." Patrols also stop distracted, speeding, aggressive and drowsy drivers because officers can catch them in the act.
Managing director of the American Beverage Institute
- In our opinion: U.S. needs immigration...
- How America feels about Mitt Romney right now
- Letter: Acting on immigration
- Michael Gerson: Obama’s executive order...
- Greg Bell: It's time to raise the gas tax
- In our opinion: 70 mph — driving at the...
- Dan Liljenquist: Obamacare was a rude...
- My view: Global warming needs free market
- Letter: Where jobs come from 65
- Dan Liljenquist: Obamacare was a rude... 61
- In our opinion: U.S. needs immigration... 61
- Letter: Growing party divide 52
- Michael Gerson: Obama’s executive... 44
- How America feels about Mitt Romney... 40
- In our opinion: When it comes to... 40
- Letter: Acting on immigration 30