View Single Post
Old 12-29-2012, 10:13   #304
DanaT's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,828
Blog Entries: 1
Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
To El Conquistador..
You have my title incorrect.

But my substitute one is Pharaoh or Decius. However, those are not official.

Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
Since I track this stuff we don't use road checks they are worthless.

We use the more effective saturation patrols.
And going back many pages, what have I and others said about DUI enforcement? Seems like the exact same thing as here. No-one has argued that DUI enforcement is bad, we have said checkpoints should not be in place because of lack of probable cause and that they are ineffective. Since you contradict that checkpoints are the way to go I can only reach a few conclusions:
1) You are unintelligent
2) You are not a copp
3) You don't know what you are talking about because of 1&2.

I think I covered all the defenses of DUI checkpoints.

Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
We hardly ever reach goals on arrests and we have never had or been threatened to have grant money pulled.
That is different than the link that I posted. Not all areas work in the same way.

Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me View Post
Our fatalities from DUI drugs and alcohol are below the national average at 18% and our agency has won numerous traffic safety awards,guess what this year we are down 3 dedicated officers in our traffic section and our fatalities have soared upwards and increased by a large percentage.With no other significant changes in population or traffic patterns I can't say it is the only cause effect but I will track and compare.
Again, until you can show statistical significance against the null hypothesis, it is an interesting data point, but not does not mean anything. That is a problem with data like this. It is just like the gun control. People assume causation, because it fits their agenda, and absent proof it is "fact". You will see that gun control advocates talk about lack of assault weapons in Europe being why there are lower homicide rates, yet they leave Switzerland out. Why? Because they cannot make a statistically valid argument against the null hypothesis if they include it (FYI Switzerland has almost all male citizens with a machine gun in their house and yet has a lower murder rate than Germany)
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline