Thursday, April 16, 2009
Media Lauds Intrusive Police Action
You know, the media tends to really get down on surveillance in pursuit of terrorism. However, have you noticed how any intrusive police actions that infringe upon private citizens are okay if it falls under behavior that the media dislikes, such as driving after a couple beers?

Here's the story:
    Police in St. Charles County are drawing a new weapon in their fight to stop drunk drivers — blood testing.

    On Thursday night, about two dozen officers from several area police departments are holding what they're calling a "no refusal" checkpoint to catch impaired drivers.

    From 11 p.m. to 3 a.m., police will stop all drivers at a busy intersection near Interstate 70, the city's Main Street corridor and the Ameristar Casino. If those arrested on suspicion of driving drunk refuse an officer's request for a breath test, police plan to get on-the-spot court orders for blood tests from a nearby on-call prosecutor and circuit judge.

    Though the approach has already been tested in at least three other states, police say this style of checkpoint combining the "no refusal" element may be the first of its kind in Missouri. Police and advocates for tougher enforcement hope the effort adds muscle to a criminal justice system that often fails to keep drunk drivers off the roads.
Checkpoints, prosecutors and judges waiting on speed dial to issue warrants based only on refusal to submit to search, what isn't to like if you're pro-statist in pursuit of trivial goals or a pro-statist eager to just erode civil liberties because you can?

To say Noggle, one first must be able to say the "Nah."