Senators Want DUI Checkpoint Apps Removed

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Four US Senators have made it clear to Google and Apple that they want both companies to remove the DUI Checkpoint App from their stores. A similar request was made to RIM, which complied. The Apps locate and warn drivers of the location of DUI checkpoints and even offer alternate routes to avoid the police. Both Google and Apple are still reviewing the request.

"Isn't what these apps are doing is encouraging people to break the law?" Udall asked. Udall, along with Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Harry Reid (D-NV), Charles Schumer (D-NY), had called such apps "harmful to public safety."
Click to expand...
 
While checkpoints are inconvenient for sober drivers it's worth it to catch drunk drivers. I have no sympathy for folks who want to endanger others on the road by driving intoxicated. Seems like a reasonable request to me to have the apps removed.
 
Normally I would say the gov. shouldn't interfere with stuff like this. However, I can't seem to find any other use for this kind of app besides evading the police when you are driving tipsy. It's an app that has far more of a negative impact on the people than the government; and with no redeeming qualities it should probably go.
 
how is it any different from people sending out mass texts to everyone at parties telling them not to go down particular street cause of road blocks. Happens all the time at college parties. :D
 
Greg-O said:
how is it any different from people sending out mass texts to everyone at parties telling them not to go down particular street cause of road blocks. Happens all the time at college parties. :D
Click to expand...

It isn't different at all. ^_^
 
drako said:
While checkpoints are inconvenient for sober drivers it's worth it to catch drunk drivers. I have no sympathy for folks who want to endanger others on the road by driving intoxicated. Seems like a reasonable request to me to have the apps removed.
Click to expand...

Marlfox said:
Normally I would say the gov. shouldn't interfere with stuff like this. However, I can't seem to find any other use for this kind of app besides evading the police when you are driving tipsy. It's an app that has far more of a negative impact on the people than the government; and with no redeeming qualities it should probably go.
Click to expand...

^ this. In a world with too much irresponsibility, to much freedom is a bad very bad thing. Until we all can use better judgement, we have to do things like this.
 
Marlfox said:
Normally I would say the gov. shouldn't interfere with stuff like this. However, I can't seem to find any other use for this kind of app besides evading the police when you are driving tipsy. It's an app that has far more of a negative impact on the people than the government; and with no redeeming qualities it should probably go.
Click to expand...

Yeah, next up: apps that help any form of piracy. You can be sure the media companies are already whispering in the politicians ears that those apps only hurt people, have no positive benefits, and that they should demand those apps removal as well. Once politicians have say over what can and can't be in the appstores why stop at just this kind of app?
 
As much as it may help curb DUIs, having the government remove any kind of App is censorship and unconstitutional.
 
ninjaturtle said:
^ this. In a world with too much irresponsibility, to much freedom is a bad very bad thing. Until we all can use better judgement, we have to do things like this.
Click to expand...

Seriously, nanny state all the way. I hope the government starts to interfere with more things, average people simply can't be trusted to conduct themselves appropriately.

Government knows best guys, let them control your whole life!
 
"Isn't what these apps are doing is encouraging people to break the law?" Udall asked. Udall, along with Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Harry Reid (D-NV), Charles Schumer (D-NY), had called such apps "harmful to revenue streams ."
Click to expand...

Fixed up the quote to make it real....

Now I don't drink and drive...ever, but lets not for a minute think these clowns care about anything but the money these stops generate....cause they don't...not one bit...not one fucking iota....not even a little bit........:)
 
GishForever said:
Seriously, nanny state all the way. I hope the government starts to interfere with more things, average people simply can't be trusted to conduct themselves appropriately.

Government knows best guys, let them control your whole life!
Click to expand...
Yep. Let them tell us what to eat, what to wear, whom to marry, when to crap, etc.We can't be trusted, but somehow they can?
 
The Apps aren't unlawful because all they do is offer in a more convenient way info that is already published on newspapers (those checkpoints//roadblocks are published in order to be lawful).
 
how are these senators to get around driving drunk if this is passed?

the only reason some of them even probably know about this shit is because they have used it themselves.
 
As usual the slippery slope contingent completely misses the point. For all of their bluster it's the people on here trying to make that argument who can't seem to draw the line between what is reasonable and what is not. Driving drunk is not a right.
 
I think they should just change the apps to direct people straight into DUI checkpoints. Drunk drivers are right down there with crackheads in my opinion.
 
ninjaturtle said:
^ this. In a world with too much irresponsibility, to much freedom is a bad very bad thing. Until we all can use better judgement, we have to do things like this.
Click to expand...

best reply I can think to this is to simply quote my favorite President

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

some dont agree, but those people are usually wearing diapers as an adult and wanting nanny state to make their decisions for them.
 
I don't want to run into these. Annoying as hell. I just want to get home and not be raped by the police everywhere I go.
 
drako said:
As usual the slippery slope contingent completely misses the point. For all of their bluster it's the people on here trying to make that argument who can't seem to draw the line between what is reasonable and what is not. Driving drunk is not a right.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is.
 
TakeN0Prisoners said:
I don't want to run into these. Annoying as hell. I just want to get home and not be raped by the police everywhere I go.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. I do not drink alcohol nor do I use these apps but I could see why people would want to make use of them even if not for getting away with driving while intoxicated. How on board would we be if the police started to do door to door searches for drugs or illegal weapons? its basicly the same thing that they do when they just pull every car over that passes through an area to check for drunks. will we next seach every house in an area for dangerous contraband that could cause harm to others?
 
Ualdayan said:
Yeah, next up: apps that help any form of piracy. You can be sure the media companies are already whispering in the politicians ears that those apps only hurt people, have no positive benefits, and that they should demand those apps removal as well. Once politicians have say over what can and can't be in the appstores why stop at just this kind of app?
Click to expand...

I think it's already covered by the Induce Act.

Although I as well find this crap legislation pretty dangerous and offensive to sensibilities, their premise that some software deliberately enables harm (or unlawfulness) is a perfectly valid one. Our politics are already too crippled by slippery-slope arguments to effectively deal with any bad situation. Every time we worry about the ramifications a precedent will set, we end up in hostile, dysfunctional situations.

It's a really stupid, irresponsible app, from the sound of it. The store should never have permitted it. But then there's less harmful, harder-to-legislate speed camera/trap POIs for GPS--- that's in a clear grey area, because speeding causes magnitudes less harm than drunk driving does, and the technology is not specifically created for harm.
 
The main issue here is that the police department publish DUI checkpoints thinking it will deter people from DUI. All it really does is let people know where not to drive. The police departments need to stop being stupid and publishing this information.
 
hawtrawkr said:
How on board would we be if the police started to do door to door searches for drugs or illegal weapons? its basicly the same thing that they do when they just pull every car over that passes through an area to check for drunks. will we next seach every house in an area for dangerous contraband that could cause harm to others?
Click to expand...
Except it's not because houses containing drugs or illegal weapons will not harm random innocents unless the inhabitant of the house is dealing the contraband. A car being piloted by a drunk driver is itself a weapon.

Of course, if everyone could just exercise common sense this discussion wouldn't be happening.
 
i just have that app just to get around (i work for an living so cant be bothered been stopped every time i go out) the name of the app seem that its for drunk drivers they could do with renaming it an little

all the app does it makes it little bit easier to avoid them, for most drivers its an time saver very much so if they avoid 6 of them
 
If you can afford to have a social life, you can afford cab fare.

Else, find a designated driver who doesn't mind or you'll return the favor to.

If neither, keep your dumb ass home.

Problem solved.
 
SamuraiInBlack said:
If you can afford to have a social life, you can afford cab fare.

Else, find a designated driver who doesn't mind or you'll return the favor to.

If neither, keep your dumb ass home.

Problem solved.
Click to expand...

This is solid advice that unfortunately many people don't follow.
 
DUI is stupid as hell, but police performing their public duties on a public street is public knowledge and should not be restricted.
 
This is why "app stores" suck. A central point for censorship.

They took away the DUI apps, but i dont DUI so i did not care.
 
The federal government has no need to even try dictating what apps can and cannot be sold.
 
We have every right in the world to know where the police are engaging in illegal searches. We have every right to communicate this info to others. There is no clear and present danger, to prevent our exercise of our first amendment rights.

Drunk drivers should all be rounded up and pushed off a cliff as far as I am concerned, but that still does not give the police the right to search your person whenever they want unless there is probable cause imo. Due to a most oddball interpretation of the 4th amendment, the courts do not agree with me.
Are the courts going to engage in yet another oddball interpretation of the first amendment as well? I hope not.
 
For those of you against these apps, I hope they put a DUI checkpoint down the street from where you live. It's a lot of fun waiting in line for half an hour when you are trying to get somewhere and then being asked 20 questions by the cops without reason. That happened to me several times when I lived in Florida.

I'm glad we don't have DUI checkpoints here in Wisconsin, I don't think the tavern league would allow it! :D This is the only state int the US where the first drunken driving conviction isn't a crime, it's a civil infraction.

Personally I think these Senators should be spending their time creating tougher legislation for drunk driving. Whats up with the guys that have 20+ drunk driving convictions dating back to the 80's and they still have their licensences?
 
mmmmmdonuts said:
We will all have steering wheel alcohol sensors soon enough anyways. Make DUI's a thing of the past hopefully.
Click to expand...

That has to be the worst idea I've heard for stopping drunk driving. All it will do is add cost to the vehicle and have a negligible effect on accidents. That's just what I need to do is try to blow into some stupid device mounted to the steering wheel while I am driving so that my car doesn't get shut down, that won't cause any accidents. As far as other people blowing into it, people already have sex, and not just of the oral variety, while driving so taking a break from blowing the driver to blow the steering wheel shouldn't be a problem.

That being said, I don't drink very often, I have never driven drunk and I don't think they should remove the apps from the app stores.
 
I can't imagine a great number of drunk people having the presence of mind and the reasoning abilities required to check an app and comprehend it before getting in a car.
 
I can't understand how this sort of app can be published so widely. There is no way in good conscience anyone should be able to support drunk driving. :mad:

I can only imagine how more incensed I'd be if I or a loved one was ever affected by a drunk driver (god forbid) in my response to these apps.
 
ninjaturtle said:
^ this. In a world with too much irresponsibility, to much freedom is a bad very bad thing. Until we all can use better judgement, we have to do things like this.
Click to expand...

No we don't. You're just condoning the nanny state because it fits your needs. Next step, is the shit that you might do, and it will infringe on you.

You can't have it both ways. This is reality, not government.
 
nerdydesi said:
I can't understand how this sort of app can be published so widely. There is no way in good conscience anyone should be able to support drunk driving. :mad:

I can only imagine how more incensed I'd be if I or a loved one was ever affected by a drunk driver (god forbid) in my response to these apps.
Click to expand...

No one is supporting drunk driving. We do support the First Amendment right to tell others where DUI checkpoints are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top