SantaMariaPolice
The Santa Maria Police Department arrested 0 drivers on suspicion of DUI while conducting a DUI Checkpoint, August 10th, 2024. The checkpoint was held at the 500 block of east Main st. from 6:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.
We are committed to taking impaired drivers off the road,driving under the influence is not only dangerous, but also has major consequences.
10 drivers were cited for operating a vehicle unlicensed or with a suspended/revoked license, 527 vehicle came through the checkpoint, 267 drivers were screened, and no drivers were arrested for other criminal charges.
Drivers charged with a first-time DUI face an average of $13,500 in fines and penalties, as well as a suspended license.
The Santa Maria Police Department will hold additional DUI/Driver’s License checkpoints in the upcoming months.
Funding for this checkpoint was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Glad for zero results that time! (Including “driving without a license” which is often found).
I always wonder, why doesn’t the SBPD or the SBSO (when they hit Goleta with these) ever publish their results? Santa Maria always does, regardless of how minimal or nonexistent (as here) the results of these questionable tactics are.
What does SB have to hide?
There’s nothing questionable about the results. Studies show that knowledge of the presence of DUI checkpoints, and not necessarily knowledge of the location, has a deterrent effect.
ANON – the results are not questionable, the efficacy of these checkpoints is what I’m referring to.
I know what the studies “say,” but it’s difficult to prove deterrence. How are you supposed to know that’s why they don’t catch many DUIs, if at all?
My point with these is that I think active patrolling known high risk areas (outside bars, liquor stores, etc), as opposed to sitting and waiting in the same spot each time so that everyone always knows where to avoid (yes, everyone knows where the Goleta and SB checkpoints will be) is more effective at catching drunk drivers.
People don’t forgo alcohol just because they know there will be a checkpoint on Glen Annie or Los Carneros (and social media announces it to the world instantaneously), they just drive a different route. No one, sober or not, wants to get stuck in a cop checkpoint.
These are outdated and as we see here, not very effective at actually catching drunks.
Cops need to get off their duffs and be out patrolling instead of waiting for the one (or 2) dummies who don’t have Waze or any social media to fall into their overtime-paid “trap.”
You “think” that, but the studies by NIH show that checkpoints are more cost effective. Decisions should be based on data, not feelings.
ANON – can you please show the “data” that says it costs less to pay multiple officers overtime in addition to all the traffic obstruction and additionals costs associated with checkpoints as opposed to paying on duty cops their normal rate for their normal job?
That would be interesting to see, indeed!
On your comment below, I am in no way anti police but I am very against a the SB police department.
They are incompetent at what little they do to investigate crimes. They are no help to victims wanting to follow through with charges where due.
They are also huge wastes of money doing things like running checkpoints they don’t publish stats on and patrolling Cabrillo mid day but not at night and having the whole department go to chic fil a in the middle of the day multiple times a month.
They, like other public services around here need to be held more accountable and regulated more closely, especially where the finances they are allocated are concerned
OK, I’ll do your research for you:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15276922/
https://www.nhtsa.gov/book/countermeasures-that-work/alcohol-impaired-driving/countermeasures/enforcement/publicized-sobriety-checkpoints#:~:text=A%20study%20of%20sobriety%20checkpoints,et%20al.%2C%202019).
ANON – cool links, but those just show they’re effective. I asked for the data YOU claim shows they are more cost effective than patrolling known drunk driving areas.
Try again!
PS – I concede they can be effective, I just don’t think they’re AS cost effective as patrolling.
Man, I wish there was an edit function! Here’s what I meant to say:
“but those just show they can be effective.”
Some folks are automatically anti-police, Anon. What can you do? Let ‘em gripe.
BASIC – Im in no way anti-police, I just don’t think this particular tactic is the best way to catch drunks (one of it’s stated purposes).
You really need to stop being so painfully simplistic.