© EricPetersAuto
Well, why not?
If the
occasional random roadside stop n' frisk is a good idea - and not a violation of anyone's rights - why not make such gantlets ubiquitous - and
permanent? That's the nut of San Antonio Deputy Police Chief Anthony Trevino's argument in favor of establishing
permanent DWI checkpoints. He'd like them in the vicinity of what he calls "hot spots" - that is, establishments where alcohol is served, such as restaurants and bars. (See
here for the news story.) But why not everywhere? After all, "drunk driving" is a possibility
anywhere.
If Trevino's wish is granted, the price of going out to dinner will include not merely the
possibility of having to submit to an unwarranted (and unwanted) interrogation and inspection by the likes of Trevino and his pals. It will be a
certain thing. The new normal - part of the routine. Just like being forced to assume the
I surrender pose at the airport, spread your legs and let a blue-shirted goon have his (or her) way with you as the price of getting on an airplane.
It has already been established in law - sanctified by the black-clad priests of legalese - that it is
not "unreasonable" (and so, not a violation of the Fourth Amendment) to stop vehicles at
random - that is, without any specific probable cause - and require drivers to roll down their window, provide ID, answer questions and - at the arbitrary discretion of the costumed enforcer - remove themselves from their vehicle and submit to a sobriety test of one kind or another. To prove to his satisfaction, in other words, that you
aren't "drunk." As opposed to the old-fashioned idea that it's up to the law to prove you
are.
