The Antelope Valley Times

Your community. Your issues. Your news.

  • Home
  • Latest News
  • Local
    • Palmdale
    • Lancaster
    • Los Angeles County
    • Littlerock
    • Lake Los Angeles
    • Rosamond
    • Edwards AFB
    • Acton
  • Crime
  • Politics
  • Education
  • Health
  • Business
  • Opinion
    • Advertise
    • About
    • Contact Us
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Show Search

3 arrested, none for DUI at Palmdale checkpoint

by The AV Times Staff • August 24, 2015

PALMDALE – No one was arrested for driving under the influence, but three unlicensed drivers were arrested at a DUI/ driver’s license checkpoint in Palmdale this past weekend, authorities said.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s Palmdale Station conducted the checkpoint from 6 p.m. Friday, Aug. 21, to 2 a.m. Saturday, Aug. 22, on 10th Street West, south of Technology Drive, according to Deputy Brent Bunch.

The results of the checkpoint are as follows:

  • 1343 vehicles traveled through the checkpoint.
  • 1343 drivers were checked at the checkpoint.
  • Three unlicensed drivers were arrested and sent to court.
  • Two vehicles were released per checkpoint release procedures.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department will be conducting additional DUI/driver’s license checkpoints and DUI saturation patrols throughout the year as part of an ongoing commitment to lowering deaths and injuries upon streets and highways.

Funding for these operations is provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

–

Filed Under: Crime/ Safety

10 comments for "3 arrested, none for DUI at Palmdale checkpoint"

  1. ExAVForLife says

    August 25, 2015 at 9:59 pm

    Don’t forget these punk-azz pigs drink and drive more than Cleetus the town drunk. They have made a career as revenue collecting government stormtrooper hypocrites whom are far too comfortable hiding behind that little tin shield.

  2. jason h says

    August 25, 2015 at 2:17 pm

    Do they ever catch DUI suspects at these “DUI” checkpoints? Otherwise this is an unconstitutional sham – there isnt supposed to be random searches in the US.

    • Tim Scott says

      August 25, 2015 at 3:27 pm

      Bingo! We have a winner.

      Any ideas on what we can do about it? Between the cops and the cop apologists patting themselves on the back over the great “results” and the fact that the fines collected from these things fund local governments across the country including ours I suspect that if you stand up against these things too much you will just be shouted down.

      Unless of course you are totally irrepressible, in which case you won’t be shouted down, just called names for as long as you want to put up with it.

    • Claire says

      August 25, 2015 at 4:39 pm

      The Constitution requires that a police officer have probable cause for a traffic stop. But the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the dangers from drunk driving outweighs the “degree of intrusion” of sobriety checkpoints and they are an exception to the search and seizure provisions of the U.S. Constitution. If I go through a checkpoint, I might not like it but it’s the law.

      • Tim Scott says

        August 25, 2015 at 4:53 pm

        And law enforcement and local municipalities have used that wedge to create these “papers please” fine generators.

        Face it, the main purpose of these checkpoints is to convert federal money earmarked for traffic safety into easy access general fund money. The cops are paid with the traffic safety money for a function that adds nothing in particular to traffic safety but generates a PILE of general fund income.

      • Yes_Yes says

        August 25, 2015 at 5:04 pm

        Don’t confuse those who are easily confused with facts such as:

        US Supreme court ruled in a 6-3 decision in Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz (1990), the United States Supreme Court found properly conducted sobriety checkpoints to be constitutional.

      • Lady Liberty says

        August 25, 2015 at 5:50 pm

        They did get three unlicensed drivers off the road. If you are driving legally and obeying the laws you have nothing to fear. Why would any rational person object to them.

    • Yes_Yes says

      August 25, 2015 at 7:45 pm

      Actually Jason these sorts of DUI checkpoints have been ruled to be legal by the Supreme Court back in 1990. I site the case law down below. If you don’t like them start a movement to have the Constitution amended to specifically prohibit them.

      By the way, random searches are not Constitutional actually. The standard is Probable Cause under the the 4th Amendment aka “Reasonable” Stops and Searches.

      When stopped by any Law enforcement however, remember the 5th Amendment, you are not compelled ever to tell the police your business, where you are coming from, where you are going or any other details. The right to remain silent and doing so really annoys cops.

      • Tim Scott says

        August 25, 2015 at 8:08 pm

        Of course as all the cop apologists will tell you, if you annoy the cops and they shoot you you had it coming.

  3. Lady Liberty says

    August 25, 2015 at 12:04 pm

    Good job LCSD. Thanks for keeping our streets safe!!

Recent Comments

  • Cherish on Woman killed in two-vehicle collision in Lancaster: “It’s I And 7th St east” Jan 20, 23:55
  • Mike on SAG-AFTRA union moves to discipline Trump over Capitol riot: “It wasn’t SAG hanging nooses and parading the confederate flag in the nation’s Capitol. You folks get things so twisted.…” Jan 20, 22:39
  • Mike on SAG-AFTRA union moves to discipline Trump over Capitol riot: “What’s the “gravy train” Alby? Explain yourself. Are you talking about welfare or what? Anyone affiliated with BLM is on…” Jan 20, 22:35
  • Linda Lee Gorman on Woman killed in two-vehicle collision in Lancaster: “You put down on Ave i and 7th. St. East It’s “17th”.and Ave i” Jan 20, 22:30
  • Linda Lee Gorman on Woman killed in two-vehicle collision in Lancaster: “It was Ave i and 17th. St. East in Lancaster. Not 7th st. East” Jan 20, 22:26

© 2021 · The Antelope Valley Times. All rights reserved. Terms of Use