Just take a look at last week’s post. According to statistics obtained by Insurify, an auto insurance comparison website, North Dakota was ranked as the worst state when it came to drunk drivers. 5.73% of people who responded to a questionnaire from Insurify indicated that they had a history of DUI. 24.7% of people reported drinking excessively. What’s more, nearly half of all fatal traffic collisions in the state involved alcohol.
Now, to some, this can be interpreted to suggest that North Dakota might need additional DUI enforcement and preventative measures such as DUI checkpoints. However, to others, like the North Dakota House of Representatives, the numbers are an indication that DUI checkpoints, as currently deployed, are not working in that state and maybe, just maybe, state funds should be allocated elsewhere.
North Dakota House Bill 1442, which would prohibit the use of DUI checkpoints in the state, was passed by a whopping majority of 79-14. It’s now headed to the state Senate for consideration.
While the Highway Patrol is not taking a stance on the issue, Fargo Police Chief David Todd and Cass County Sheriff Jesse Jahner oppose the legislation arguing that DUI checkpoints are tools necessary for law enforcement to stop and prevent drunk driving.
The bill’s primary sponsor, Rep. Rick Becker, however, claims that the argument that DUI checkpoints are an effective tool in combating DUI’s is “cliched” and have been “proven inadequate.” There’s something to be said about Beckner’s argument.
Between January 2017 and December 2018, the Highway Patrol conducted 16 DUI checkpoints in North Dakota, which only resulted in 17 DUI arrests. Only 17. This is a drop in the bucket compared to the 1,135 DUI arrests made in 2017 and the 1,158 DUI arrests made in 2018 by the Highway Patrol.
The ACLU of North Dakota issued the following statement regarding House Bill 1445:
â€œThe ACLU of North Dakota supports House Bill 1442. Our constitutional right under the Fourth Amendment to live free of â€˜unreasonable searches and seizuresâ€™ is one of our most cherished â€“ and most threatened. While traditional Fourth Amendment violations continue, new areas of concern crop us every day. We need to ensure that the Fourth Amendment, written over 200 years ago to protect our â€˜persons, houses, papers, and effectsâ€™ from intrusive searches, evolves to protect todayâ€™s equivalents.â€
The ACLU is alluding to the fact that the courts have in the past allowed law enforcement a freebie in stopping motorists (which under the law is a â€œdetentionâ€) without the normally-required probable cause and/or warrant when it comes to DUI checkpoints. The courts have continued to justify this exception to the constitution by claiming that the admitted invasion of privacy of the driver by law enforcement is outweighed by law enforcementâ€™s interest is preventing drunk driving.
Matt Agorist, columnist for freedomoutpost.com, writing on this very topic said it best: “To those who would say, ‘if you are not doing anything wrong, you should have nothing to hide,” and support these checkpoints, you are the problem. Families do not draw the curtains in their homes at night because they are doing something wrong. One does not lock the bathroom door in public because they are doing something wrong. It is about maintaining, asserting, and protecting your rights – without being forced to lose your privacy.”