How to Nullify Suspicionless Checkpoints

This past weekend in the Philadelphia suburb of Willow Grove, eight courageous liberty activists nullified a suspicionless sobriety checkpoint. With their investment of $50 and a few hours of their time, they rerouted drivers around the massive multi-agency boondoggle to safety. During the first 3 hours, they prevented the police from making even a single arrest.

I spoke via Skype with Jim Babb, one of the participants in this innovative action for the first episode of my new podcast, which goes by the same name as this blog. Please give it a watch or listen. As CNN, MSNBC and other news outlets know, Jim never fails to give an entertaining interview.

Given that DUI tickets can range up to $5,000 a piece in Pennsylvania and Jim estimates they may have denied the police up to 20 arrests, if we say that each ticket earns $1,000 for the police then the activists may have denied the police as much as $20,000. The ROI on their investment of $50 is approximately 40,000%. John Robb would be proud.

Will you repeat this experiment in your area?

Support and engage with George Donnelly at Patreon

23 responses to “How to Nullify Suspicionless Checkpoints”

  1. What needs to be done is to make sure the families of these Agents are made aware of what their off spring are doing,especially to the future of their own children.Photographs,and the names of these Agents should be posted in their neighborhood(s). Everyone that comes in contact with these Agents should be made aware of them,and their Anti America ethics.
    Taking off the Mask works every time…They will either run away,or,ask forgiveness.

  2. alicelillie says:

    What is sorely needed is an online registry of these checkpoints so one can check this list before they leave the house. I travel across the U.S. by car annually and would like to check my route each morning.

    • As soon as someone managed such a thing, the cops would quickly catch on and go even more random than they are now. I don’t think such a registry would be cost-effective.

    • ilivefreeordie says:

      How about adding a Checkpoint service to Garmin Traffic?

      • Interesting idea but I think the accuracy would be dubious and it would be shut down quickly. GPS map devices are best for things that are permanent and don’t change a lot. I bet tho that a map of all past checkpoint instances would be useful as a predictor for where future ones might be.

  3. steveo says:

    Jim is absolutely right about the fact that local leos wouldn’t put on these roadblocks without federal money. The roadblocks are incredibly expensive to operate and are usually very distasteful to the general public. We have a local attorney who was able to convince the court to nullify all DUI arrests in 12 checkpoints due to 4th Amendment violations. The sheriff hasn’t operated one since. That was more than a year ago. The local sheriff is the first one who will tell you that far more DUI arrests occur by just doing their normal jobs, rather than this Kabuki dance.

  4. Joe Tittiger says:

    HUGS AND KISSES! Great job :-) And yes the local nazi, rights stomping sherriff needs to go…. go to jail at the very least.

    • Do you really think putting people in cages changes anything? Real change only comes from the heart and can’t be forced.

    • Libertariansuckass says:

      No George, REAL change comes from REAL MEN going out there with a badge pinned to their chest in the name of justice and facing off against murderers, rapist, drug dealers, gang bangers and violent criminals – all the while being chased around by you assholes with your little cameras, hoping to twist their acts of valor & heroism into a civil rights violation that you can exploit on your website.

  5. Pablo H. says:

    I hope none of your families or injured or killed by a DUI driver that could have been taken off of the streets by a checkpoint. I fear you might sing a different tune if they are.

    • I hope no one anywhere is injured or killed by anyone under any circumstances. And I can’t imagine under what circumstances I would want to violate that hope of mine in search of some kind of dubious prevention. Thanks for commenting.

  6. Richard says:

    Jim and George, You guys obviously have never had a friend or loved one killed by a drunk driver. The more drunk drivers off of the roadways, the safer people are. Your efforts are a means to help people to continue to drink and drive, which leads to crashes and death. The huge legal fees, time in jail, and negative image that comes with being arrested for drunk driving is a price people need to pay for putting others lives at risk. When someone you care about is killed by a drunk driver, I think that you will have a different attitude.

    • When you take people to jail for having alchohol in their bloodstream but who are not impaired or intoxicated (i.e., the legal limit is ridiculously low), this is not making people any safer. In fact, it endangers the public. They’re in danger from police.

      Even if a drunk driver kills me, my ghost will not support suspicionless DUI checkpoints run by government police. Thanks for commenting.

    • Austincrazed says:

      Richard, You obviously feel as though you are the only person that has ever been touched by tragedy. You are using a tired old trick of associating those who want freedom from oppression for all, with endorsing everything that all people do with those freedoms. It is a tactic that is usually used by people that have no actual input in the debate at hand. This issue does bring alot of emotions to the table with it so your response is not surprising nor do I think that you should be condemned for your opinion, even though I disagree with it.

      The fact is that suspisionless checkpoints are not Constitutional. DUI stops also are not Constitutional. Anyone that drives, swirves within their lanes or crosses over the lines daily. This act is not enough to trigger reasonable suspision that someone is impaired. The actual DUI alcohol level also is not Constitutional. The law is uniform in nominal terms but not all consumers of alcohol are actually impaired at the limit, meaning some people go to jail and have their lives ruined while never having been impaired. The actual DUI charge also is not Constitutional. When you punish someone for driving impaired alone, you are either punishing them for an act that someone else commited in the past while being impaired or you are punishing them for an act that they may commit in the future.

      If there is no victim then there is no crime. The key to curbing impaired driving is punish those people that create victims through their acts while driving impaired, very severely. Instead of getting 20 days for neglegent homocide, killers should be getting many year sentences. That is what deters others from committing the same act.

  7. Libertarianssuckass says:

    I hope that one of the drunk drivers you successfully alerted to the checkpoint and subsequently avoided it – kills you or someone you love on the highway, while driving drunk. Not only are you aiding and abedding dangerous intoxicated drivers to stay on the roads that are shared by our families and loved ones, you go as far as to enter into the checkpoint staging area and outwardly harass the police by making snide comments about “how many donuts it must take” to feed the officers. Undoubtedly, you were provoking the officers into a confrontation that you could then record & post on this site and others. You call it a “public service detail”, but MOST others would call this a true “disservice”. Perhaps you like to hit the bottle yourself, as it would appear that you do by that big ole gut sticking out of your trailer park Tshirt. And to think any one of those officers you were antagonizing and harassing would STILL today, give his life for you because it’s just part of his job. YOU and EVERY other moron who thinks, feels & acts in the mindset that you displayed here in this video are EXACTLY what’s wrong with society today. Yeah Jim, you’re a real badass like the chubby little bitch George Donnelly referred to you as… hiding behind your camera as you poke the bear and wait for him to react. Karma buddy… karma. It WILL undoubtedly catch up with you someday and you’re going to get caught without that little camera in your hand, and I for one would LOVE to watch you piss your pants like the little bitch that you are while you got it stomped in by the police.

  8. Libertarianssuckass says:

    I find it extremely interesting that one of the ‘activists’ in the still frame from the video shown above is holding a sign that says “turn now, risk arrest”… may even be Jim Babb himself. Hmmmm…. if you’re not driving drunk, what might you be in-fear of being arrested for exactly?? George, fact is that there is not ONE piece of evidence that indicates that your protest was an attempt to have everyday law-abiding citizens avoid the delay of passing thru the checkpoint and having their ‘civil rights violated’ and instead, gives EVERY indication that the sole intent was to assist intoxicated drivers and/or others engaged in illegal activity while in a vehicle (drugs, guns, wanted persons, etc.) to avoid the police. And you think you were helping who by doing this…. society??? You’re all a big JOKE!!

    • There are dozens of victimless and political crimes people can be harassed for. You never know what the cops are going to get you on, just because they’re in a bad mood or don’t like you. Maybe you’re squeaky clean but they could still plant something on you just to make their quota. They get to go home afterwards but you could spend days in jail, have to hire an expensive lawyer, lose your job, lose your house, lose your kids, lose your spouse due to stress and stigma and have your life ruined.

      Mr. Suckass, there is not one piece of evidence that that checkpoint helped make anyone safer or that these fine folks have anything but the best of intentions.

      Are you a cop, Mr. Suckass? Was this your checkpoint?

      btw, talk of violence is not acceptable here. I deleted one of your comments because of this. This is your first and only warning.

  9. Reality Hurts says:

    So the Supreme Court and all of the lower courts who have ruled on these are wrong, and you guys with your ideas of tyranny are right. Sure, all police officers are out there planting alcohol on people’s breath and in their bloodstream risking their jobs and food for their families’ tables just to get that 3 hours of court time arresting you for being a drunken driver is going to get them. And departments all want a quota because they would never spend far more money on court overtime than they ever get from the fines you pay when you get arrested for DUI.
    The reality of all this is you guys really don’t know how the system works. You don’t seem interested in learning how it works, just claiming to be activists for activities sake. The shame of it is there are some REAL problems out there in this country that people with such energy could make constructive changes to, and yet you waste your time acting like this is supporting the liberty of American citizens. If you want to be drunk at home where the only person you are hurting is yourself, that’s fine.. but to defend it’s presence on the street where thousands of people die, largely as innocent victims, is an injustice itself. YOU have become the problem in America, not an activist, a cancer.

    • Our ideas are of freedom, actually. The supreme court is absolutely right because they’re working in a context of state power. If you want more state power, that’s the way to go.

      We’re absolutely right if you’re working in a context of liberty.

      Huh? Who said anything about planting alcohol on people’s breath? That’s a new one! You cops are always coming up with the craziest stuff!

      This is a strawman to say that we defend drunk-driving. We don’t. We defend liberty and we oppose a police state. Some of us think the 4th amendment needs to be respected. Don’t you guys swear an oath to that or something?

  10. how about, Y’all don’t be dumbfuqs and just drive sober? after a night of light drinking with friends, I wait out my buzz, THEN drive. if you aren’t out there endangering lives, the “tyrannical government” juuuust might stop doing these little checks. I have NO sympathy, even for my friends who got caught/wrecked driving drunk and are now paying for it. I support these checks, and I’ve never had a tragedy befall me from a dipshit drunkard. hell, make the fines higher, and loss of license more of a reality while you’re at it. there’s no excuse for it, just about everyone has cell phones now, and a pissed off friend is cheaper than a ticket.