As law enforcement agencies in Missouri and throughout the country have stepped up their enforcement of drunk drivers, DWI checkpoints have become one of the most popular methods used by police to arrest alleged drunk drivers. However, many people believe that DWI checkpoints are not the most effective way to apprehend offenders.

In a recent opinion article, the author states that not only are checkpoints ineffective, but that they actually hinder the fight against drunk driving by taking valuable resources away from DWI prevention programs that are more effective at apprehending and punishing people who drive under the influence of alcohol.

The opinion was written by Sarah Longwell, the managing director of the American Beverage Institute, an industry group representing bars and restaurants throughout the country. As such, Longwell likely has a vested interest in the methods by which alleged drunk drivers are prosecuted. However, Longwell raises some valid points about the flawed methodology currently used to investigate and arrest suspected drunk drivers.

Most importantly, she says, DWI checkpoints do little to actually apprehend drunk drivers. They are easy to avoid, with highly visible roadblocks and widely publicized alerts. As a result, very few people are actually arrested at checkpoints. In California in 2008, for example, less than one percent of the more than one million people that passed through DWI checkpoints were arrested for driving while intoxicated.

In addition, checkpoints can easily cost more than $10,000, which is a huge increase from the $300 it generally costs to run a roving patrol. As such, the cost of a checkpoint far outweighs any of its minimal benefits, Longwell says,

What do you think? Should DWI checkpoints be eliminated in St. Louis?

Source: News Star, "Checkpoints not effective," Sarah Longwell, Feb. 18, 2012