Get Low-staffing Sobriety Checkpoints - Nhtsa - Nhtsa

Both the current interpretation of the federal Constitution by the Supreme Court and New Hampshire state law allow sobriety checkpoints, provided that the police departments involved have the appropriate paperwork in place and that the officers performing the checkpoint follow the right procedures.

However, sobriety checkpoints can be controversial for improper profiling and harassment of innocent drivers, the delay, distraction, and roadway hazards they can cause, and police abuse of individual rights.

The CDC's systematic review of 15 high-quality studies found that checkpoints reduce alcohol-related fatal crashes by 9% (Bergen et al., 2014). Similarly, a meta-analysis found checkpoints reduce alcohol-related crashes by 17%, and all crashes by 10 to 15% (Erke et al., 2009).

Sobriety checkpoints are a highly effective strategy to reduce alcohol-impaired driving, but they are used infrequently in the USA.

It is not illegal to turn around at a DUI checkpoint as long as you comply with all traffic laws in the area. However, if you attract the attention of law enforcement, your decision to turn to avoid the DUI checkpoint could be seen as a factor that provides police with probable cause to pull you over.

Despite these rules, many argue that DUI checkpoints violate their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. Others believe that the benefits of preventing drunk driving outweigh any potential infringement on individual liberties.

The California Supreme Court in People v. Banks, 6 Cal. 4th 926 (1993) similarly upheld the legality of sobriety checkpoints, and specifically found that law enforcement agencies need not publicize in advance the placement of such a checkpoint.

The California Supreme Court in People v. Banks, 6 Cal. 4th 926 (1993) similarly upheld the legality of sobriety checkpoints, and specifically found that law enforcement agencies need not publicize in advance the placement of such a checkpoint.