Yo Troy...

[MMIXJ]

...on the way home from Boulder this evening back to Golden on hwy 93, there was a line of at least 30+ Jeffco cruisers all headed north w/ lights flashing but no sirens. seemed almost like a police funeral procession, but didn't see a hearse anywhere.

what's up?

 

[YELLAHEEP]

That new Krispy Kreme in Arvada, scheduled to open first thing Saturday morning........ Guess they all wanted to be there before the crowd.... :dunno:

 

[98POSXJ]

Probably a DUI checkpoint on the move

 

[YELLAHEEP]

Probably a DUI checkpoint on the move

I called earlier today...... that's exactly what it was. I had forgotten they were doing checkpoints this weekend up north.

 

[riverfever]

Never seen one. Do they just park all 30 cruisers in one location and start checking every driver coming through?

 

[YELLAHEEP]

They pretty much set up a cone-zone directing drivers to certain lanes where you stop, say hello to the po-po and if they smell alcohol, see open containers, or other indications of possible DUI, they have you pull off and do road sides. There's a warning sign usually before the next available intersection announcing the checkpoint giving the driver the option to take a different route and skip the greeting.

But there's usually other cops waiting to stop & talk to those people too should they make an illegal u-turn or fail to signal......

They can be pretty effective though. These operations are always funded by MADD or other related organizations.

 

[BillR]

That new Krispy Kreme in Arvada, scheduled to open first thing Saturday morning........ Guess they all wanted to be there before the crowd.... :dunno:

"That's funny right there; I don't care who ya're!":laugh2: :roflmao:

 

[JohnJohn]

That new Krispy Kreme in Arvada, scheduled to open first thing Saturday morning........ Guess they all wanted to be there before the crowd.... :dunno:

I remember when that KK opened up in Highlands Ranch. I stopped in(big surprise). They had Douglas County Sheriffs directing traffic, it was a fricking madhouse. I asked one of them if he was on his dream assignment; Cop guarding a donut shop, he didn't think my comment was too funny... ?

 

[BillR]

I remember when that KK opened up in Highlands Ranch. I stopped in(big surprise). They had Douglas County Sheriffs directing traffic, it was a fricking madhouse. I asked one of them if he was on his dream assignment; Cop guarding a donut shop, he didn't think my comment was too funny... ?

LMAO!:laugh3:
Thanks for the coffeee on my keyboard, John!

 

[philip_g]

I've seen them do checkpoints on parker road in parker. ugh.

 

[footdale]

They pretty much set up a cone-zone directing drivers to certain lanes where you stop, say hello to the po-po and if they smell alcohol, see open containers, or other indications of possible DUI, they have you pull off and do road sides. There's a warning sign usually before the next available intersection announcing the checkpoint giving the driver the option to take a different route and skip the greeting.

But there's usually other cops waiting to stop & talk to those people too should they make an illegal u-turn or fail to signal......

They can be pretty effective though. These operations are always funded by MADD or other related organizations.

Follow on question...

Why is it that it is always publicized that the legal limit for drinking is .08 BAC, when in actuality it is 0.05? It seems like every news story I hear always talks about the BAC in relation to .08, and even the CDOT home page has an image of .08 in big red letters. You have to dig deep to find anything about .05. A couple of years ago a friend got busted for .058. I consider myself a fairly informed person and this was news to me as well. Ever since then I've been noticing that pretty much all of the public education stuff never mentions that anything over .05 will land your ass in jail and be on your record forever, it is always .08. So what is with the big conspiracy? I would tend to think that people would be less willing to risk driving after drinking if they knew how little it took to get them to an arrestable level.

 

[YELLAHEEP]

Well I don't know about your friend being jailed simply for a .058, that's just a DWAI and easily taken care of with a summons..... must have been other issues during that arrest?

There's a lot of confusion about "legal limits".....

The difference between the DUI .08 and the DWAI .05 lies in the burden of proof and penalties.

DUI: You don't even have to show bad driving (speeding, failure to signal, accident) to be convicted - although it helps. The law simply states "operates a motor vehicle with .08 Blood Alcohol Content (BAC)". A person can simply put the keys in the ignition while sitting in the passenger seat and that constitutes "operating" the car. Lots of case law on this gray area of the vague definition of "operating" but it has been upheld often enough. The State has determined that no one as a matter of scientific principal can safely operate a car with that BAC level. Conviction carries 3 month license suspension first offense, 1 yr second offense. Up to 30 days in Jail, court costs and fines.

DWAI: This being the "lesser included offense" to DUI, it's used many times as a plea deal for a DUI charge. But it is also an offense in itself. Generally, the courts won't uphold a DWAI charge without an included "probable cause" charge of speeding, weaving, etc, that shows bad driving. Basically, this is where your issue lies - A person could possibly operate a car safely with a BAC of .05 to .079, but without probable cause to show bad driving, the roadsides, portable breath test and other tests would be without merit. The case and it's prosecution lies in evidence that shows the impairment caused the bad driving. Conviction carries no jail term, and license suspension is not likely, generally just lots of points off your license and fines.

But simply stated, the law states that the .08 BAC level is the "limit" where any question as to a person's ability to drive safely is no longer subject to arguement. If you're caught driving with a .08 or higher, you're in violation of the law - period. Any BAC between .05 and .079 is argueable and requires a bit more proof to show "impairment" which is in essence the violation - alcohol caused bad driving below the legally defined "limit".

Does that make sense?

 

[footdale]

It makes sense, but I don't think that is how it is enforced. The stories he heard from the lawyer are that you will be taken to jail and charged with DWAI if you are anything over .05, regardless of how well you do on roadside test. At least this is the case for Boulder. If you don't have any priors, then they will plead down to either careless or reckless driving. After studying the report, I think he could have fought it and successfully argued that he was not impaired. But it would have cost $$$$ and included the risk of being guilty to the alcohol charge instead of just the pleaded driving infraction. He was pulled over for 65 in a 55 but made the mistake and admitted to having been drinking earlier and that was that.

I'm not Pro-drunk driving or anything, I just think it is shady to have all the advertising, education, reporting talk about the legal limit being .08, but anything over .05 will cause you to be put in handcuffs and charged with a serious crime that will stay on your record for ever. To me that is the legal limit.

Thanks for answering.
-Joe

 

[YELLAHEEP]

Joe,

Ya gotta be clear on one thing though..... being taken to the jail for a DWAI and being "jailed" are two totally different things. The first constitutes an arrest with a subsequent release after the driver signs a summons. The reason they go to the jail is that's where the Intoxilyzer is - or where they'll do the blood draw most times. Express Consent requires a driver to cooperate with the process or the Dept. of Revenue will suspend the license for 1 year for non-compliance with a test. So, yes, in any DUI/DWAI there is an arrest - but being jailed for DWAI as the only charge would be a very unusual occurrance - and the only time it can me mandatory is if the person is caught DUI/DWAI and they live out of state. Arrest standards by statute provide that bond must be set for non-resident violators.

Was your friend "taken to the jail" or "jailed" as in booked in and had to post bond?

You also need to realize that if the accused takes a non-alcohol related plea deal for a traffic violation.... that is all that would be on his record - a traffic violation conviction. Those disappear after 5 years. DUI/DWAI convictions stay on record for 10 years. The only time these charges get "anchored" to one's record is for repeat violations. There's a statute that allows for this should a driver need to be charged with Habitual Offender.

Your friend shouldn't sweat it - 5 years from now, there won't be any record of it.

Be careful of relying on a lawyer to give you the straight info..... all most really want you to think is that you WILL need their services to defend you and clear up your record.

 

[footdale]

They took him to jail for the testing, wasn't put behind bars or anything. Thanks for the info.