Deseret News | Troopers pull over 8,933 in a holiday blitz

Reader comments
Troopers pull over 8,933 in a holiday blitz

Checkpoint Charlie | 8:14 a.m. May 27, 2009

I remember going through Checkpoint Charlie a couple times in Berlin. Now there was an understandable reason for a checkpoint. Explain to me where in the Constitution--federal or state--I can find anything authorizing our law enforcement to establish checkpoints to make sure people aren't breaking the law. Did I miss something, because I've searched pretty carefully? Oh, I see, so probable cause is that it is a holiday and lots of people are likely to break the law. Right on. Utah makes no exception to being a state of the police state. Hmm.

Cosmo | 11:20 a.m. May 27, 2009

"We don't do this for the revenue"! Oh please don't make me hurl. It's all about money and power!

Tax man cometh | 12:01 p.m. May 27, 2009

Yeah, we made over $160000 in ticket revenue, but it wasn't about the money, it was about making people safe. Oh, and I have this great ocean front property for sale in South Dakota. If there's one thing you can count on from the police force it's honesty. And yes, that was sarcasm. I

Comments continue below

Anonymous | 12:11 p.m. May 27, 2009

Checkpoint Charlie: Conservatives love to whine about liberals and big government. All the while, conservatives are turning toward fascism.

Once, police needed probable cause to search you. Then, conservative activist judges gave government greater power to search citizens.

The real reason is conservative courts have made it possible for conservative states, like Utah, to steal citizens property. In stead of patrolling to make freeways safer, the UHP is on a endless fishing expedition to smell out pot or to discover large amounts of money to justify legal thief.

The UHP confiscated 10k a man was carrying because he failed to explain, to the biased UHP's satisfaction were he got the money. If you carry money through Utah there is a unwritten and unspecific requirement to document were you got your money. This is America?

Re: Cosmo | 12:17 p.m. May 27, 2009

Cosmo: Are you really that naive? If they were doing it for money then why did they advertise the heck out of it? Nation-wide there must've been millions of dollars spent in advertising to make everyone aware. I must've heard on the radio or seen on tv an advertisement for the blitz probably 50 times. Why do that when you could save that money and in the process find even more people not wearing seatbelts? Think about it...don't hurt yourself.

Unfortunate | 12:22 p.m. May 27, 2009

It's too bad that still so many people choose not to wear their seatbelt. It's very likely that two of those four deaths over the holiday weekend would've been avoided. You are 25 times more likely to be killed during an auto accident if you are thrown from the vehicle.

And why do we have a mandatory seatbelt law but yet you can ride a motorcycle witout a helmet?

Aaron | 12:57 p.m. May 27, 2009

With state budget cuts across america, this was a perfect weekend to make some money for the police departments.

Highway Robbery | 1:06 p.m. May 27, 2009

Breaker breaker 109 we have a suspect in a black and white ford taurus robbing tax payers on the freeway, request back up now!

In fact... | 1:19 p.m. May 27, 2009

I wouldn't doubt that the advertising campaign associated with the blitz cost more than the revenue brought in through the issuing of tickets. The driving force (no pun intended) is not revenue but to improve the statistics for fatalities ocurring over the holiday weekend, both statewide and nationwide. Your argument that government wants to control your life just isn't holding up in this case (okay, maybe save your life, but control it? Nah.)

Its obvious | 1:48 p.m. May 27, 2009

that some posters on this article have either been cited, or are afraid of being cited, and having to pay fines for infractions of the law: driving w/o seatbelt, DWI, drug possession, etc. The silent majority think to themselves how grateful they are that there are still public servants willing to put up w/ ridicule, scorn, and abuse to enforce the laws. You can bet posters that whine about law enforcment would be the first to tell others who are adversely affected by the poster's own lawless actions to stop whining.

Anonymous | 2:15 p.m. May 27, 2009

If it was all about the money, then why didn't they issua a ticket to the 6,275 people who were pulled over and just warned? Get real. Break the law - pay the price. Deal with it!

Anonymous | 2:53 p.m. May 27, 2009

I have a perfect driving record. I've driven thought most western states. No where but in my Native state of Utah do I get treated more poorly than in Utah. They have stopped me looking for venison.

I use my seat belts. This may be liberal thinking but, Americans should have the right not to wear seat belts or wear helmets. I chose not to own a Harley.

Utah is the alpha nanny state.

Checkpoint Charlie | 4:16 p.m. May 27, 2009

I am very grateful to the UHP and police officers/sheriffs in general. They do good work, and I especially appreciate their LAWFUL law enforcement efforts. Busting DUIs is great. Boneheads that are a danger to me and you ought to be busted. Checkpoints annoy me to no end, though, because they are a violation of the Constitution, as there is no legitimate probable cause for pulling people over. The ticky-tack seatbelt law is ridiculous, too. Might as well throw in a law to all lowriders that they wear a belt to hold their pants up. How about we have checkpoints at schools so we can bust all beltless lowriders?

re: Checkpoint | 10:00 p.m. May 27, 2009

You can find the authority for a checkpoint in the Constitutional amendment that says you have a right to drive a car. Oh that's right, there isn't any such right.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.