Huntsville Police issue more than 100 citations at safety check point

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

Huntsville Police conduct a safety check point

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (WHNT) — Huntsville Police conducted their last weekly safety check point of the Summer Wednesday night.

Officers set up on South Memorial Parkway, at Martin Road. Police asked drivers for their license, insurance, and registration.

Police handed out a total of 119 citations to drivers. Most were for not having proof of insurance.

Two people were taken to jail for driving under the influence.

Three cars were impounded.

Huntsville Police still plan to have other check points in the future. Officers will also perform rolling patrols to look for those who may have imbibed a few too many.


  • Michael

    Oh, so now they call it a “safety” checkpoint. 2 DUIs out of hundreds of drivers that were just pulled over without probable cause. All 119 jackboot citations should be fought in court.

    • Say What

      CN, if they were after revenue, Alabama could get a lot more revenue by passing a law requiring annual vehicle checks like they do in other states!

  • Michael

    11 states have banned checkpoints. Alabama should be #12.

    It’s funny when you read the history of checkpoints. Even the SCOTUS admitted that checkpoints violate a person’s Fourth Amendment rights….but they ruled in favor of them anyways!!!

    • LAC

      Checkpoints are legal. It has nothing to do with the federal government, but they do find the checkpoints. However t the State of Alabama sets the laws of their roads and you consent to them when you get your Alabama drivers license.

  • Gomez

    Good Job HPD! those who complain are probably the ones that “escaped” the checkpoint as they “Bar Hop” around Huntsville. HPD should have doubled their citations in my Law Abiding Opinion!

  • Wes

    I support checkpoints 100%. If your not doing anything wrong, obey the laws and are sober, you don’t have a thing to worry about. It’s no different than being screened for drugs before getting free money from the taxpayers.

      • Michael

        Did I cite Youtube as legal reference? Since most people, if they even bother to do research, will only do it in the most laziest way possible then yes Youtube is a decent source. With all due respect to Channel 19, on Youtube I can watch the ENTIRE video and not just selected parts for the story. Ideally I’d rather tell him to read a book or two on the subject like I have or spend a little time on Google, but you and I both know people don’t do that.

    • Police State

      I hope you have the same opinion when they show up at your house wanting to see your papers. Sieg heil mein Führer!

  • campbell

    Gomez, Lotus, Wes. which world do you live in? You have no idea how this department works. They are trying to meet an arrest quota. Do you know what that means? They have to issue tickets to help the city pay for that jail. Thanks for being the high sounding moral gas bags.Do you know anything about the constitutionality of check points?

    • Lotus

      Campbell – I happen to know exactly how the HPD “works.” There aren’t any citation quotas, you’re wrong. If they cite 100 drivers for not having insurance and get a few DDs off the road, well that makes me very happy indeed. I don’t feel my rights are violated at check points. I’m grateful for them.

  • Wes

    Campbell, I know several HPD officers, there are no quotas. If you can PROVE otherwise, bring it on, however, I don’t think you will be able to. You just make up what you want to believe to fit your agenda.

  • Michael

    Funny how so many conservastans around here pledge their love and affection for the US Constitution yet are ok with a blatant Fourth Amendment violation. Why not start allowing police to do routine house checks to make sure no one is doing drugs?

    For those of you still defending checkpoints in the name of public “safety,” maybe you should do your research. Spoiler alert: They don’t catch DUI offenders near as effectively as increased patrols do. Increased patrols catch up to 10x more offenders than checkpoints do. The reasoning is simple. Increased patrols only target drunk drivers rather than targeting all drivers. Of course, patrols don’t make that cheap money like checkpoints do…

    From the American Beverage Institute:
    https://abionline “DOT” org/press_release/restaurant-group-urges-nhtsa-and-police-to-focus-labor-day-crackdown-on-dangerous-drunk-drivers/

    • B

      I agree with you 100% on this subject Michael. I do not drink and drive, I do not use drugs, and I believe those who do so illegally should be punished. But this is not how you catch them! out of 119 citations only 2 people were arrested for DUI, how is that effective? Its nothing more than an excuse to stop you and interrogate you, asking you “where have you been?” “Where are you headed to?” “What have you been doing tonight?” as if it were any of their business.
      Check points only allow law enforcement to conduct warrantless stops and inspect people and private vehicles without demonstrated probable cause, and often leads to police using pushy scare tactics to convince you to allow them to search your vehicle without probable cause, as if its not optional. I unfortunately have fallen victim to this 2 times, but never again! The last time I was asked I replied “No” the officer became irritated, and asked “sir would you step out of the vehicle” again I replied “No sir, unless I am a suspect to a crime or under arrest I would prefer to remain seated in my car.” He finally wrote me a ticket for following to closely (though I was no where near the car in front of me, but ended up paying the ticket because I figured that was cheaper than fighting it.) but oh well.
      The first time I was asked to allow a search I agreed, well all of my personal belongings ended up scattered all over my truck, some laying on the ground next to my truck, I still received a ticket for expired an insurance card, and the officer was a total jerk after wasting my time and his to find NOTHING. Again another time where my items were strewn everywhere, while left on the side of the road after the officer didn’t find anything I found my new Costa sunglasses under my seat with a broken lens, prior to being stopped my glasses were in the case in the center console, once again the police man was more irritated after not finding anything illegal than he was when he first stopped me.
      Point is that road blocks are nothing more than an excuse for them to use these pushy tactics to dig through your personal belongings, and show their authority. Now I will say if I’m doing something illegal behind the wheel, and I’m caught the officer gets all the respect he can ask for from me, they have to deal with enough crap to begin with in my opinion, but to have my respect I need theirs as well!

    • LAC

      That’s all great there buddy. You agreed to follow rules when you got your license, not your house. And hpd does a good mixture of both increased patrol and checkpoints, so likes like they are covering everything.

      • Michael

        And they took an oath that included not to stop people without probable cause. Screw the checkpoints. Stop doing it the lazy way and start combatting DUI the most efficient way possible.

  • Wes

    The idea isn’t always to catch offenders, it’s to let them know the PD is out there and to not drink and drive in the first place. If your doing drugs in your home, your no threat to me or my family, quite different if your driving a vehicle. Unfortunately, you cannot measure the good you do because you never hear about it. Most people will not drink and drive if they know there are checkpoints out there.

    • Michael

      The house check analogy I used was done to kill the “nothing to hide” and “not doing anything wrong” arguments, and as a defense of the Fourth Amendment. Again, as the evidence shows, checkpoints do next to nothing to curb people from getting behind the wheel drunk.

      Most people aren’t going to drink and drive regardless if a checkpoint is out there or not. Alcohol abusers won’t care either way. They’re going to drive drunk and the police need to go after them instead of waiting and hoping they come to the checkpoint. You say the idea isn’t always to catch offenders, yet you also say in the next line driving a vehicle (under the influence) presents a threat for you and your family. You don’t want them caught?

  • Wes

    What I’m saying is it’s a tool for preventing people drinking from driving! Of course I want the ones that ignor the warnings to be caught. Why do you think this article was written? Why was it covered on the local news? The police are saying “don’t drink and drive or else” That makes perfect sense. The police advertise to get some (not all) to think before they get behind the wheel. The ones that don’t wish they would have listened and all their friends agree. I do agree it won’t eliminate the probleb, but it’s better than doing nthing..

    • Michael

      I get that. What I’m saying is that it’s a tool that doesn’t work and evidence shows that. As to why it’s covered on the news, there are strict guidelines police have to follow so checkpoints can meet legal requirements, among them is advertising where they’re going to be.

      But we’re getting way off base now. This was never about DUI awareness. 119 citations, most of them under the “show me your papers” side. If they really cared about DUI why do they even bother with license and insurance on people they don’t suspect of a crime? Those don’t list whether the driver is drunk or not. I have a paper I’ll show them. It states:

      “I DO NOT CONSENT to any search of my body, home, car, personal items and all other property. I am exercising my rights under the United States Constitution to REMAIN SILENT and to have my attorney present during any questioning. I want to contact my attorney immediately. If I am free to leave, then I demand to be allowed to leave. I do not agree to stay and speak with you.”

      • LAC

        And they have a paper to show you called implied consent and title 32 codes on providing dl and insurance upon an officers request. You should remember, you agreed to it at the dmv when you got your license.

      • Michael

        Where did I say I wouldn’t show them when asked? I’ll do that, but I’m also putting my card on top of them so it’s the first one they see.

        Implied consent refers to after the arrest is made, not before.

  • Tyler

    Good job H.P.D. Don’t worry about the crap people are posting. If they were not breaking the law it would not be an issue. Glad your department has the guts to do it.

  • LAC

    The money the get to do the checkpoints come from federal grants
    ……so yeah, feds please investigate the program you provide money for. Why does everyone complain about these things? If you have the proper documents, as required by Alabama state law, you get no ticket … Seems pretty simple to me.

  • LAC


    I know implied consent applies after the arrest, which is why I put title 32 codes, which required insurance and dl upon request.

    On the paper… I know when handing that to a cop you think your proving some big point but your really not… must of them will just laugh at you because they are not searching you or your property, they are not questioning or demanding statement and certainly dont care about your lawyer.

    What did you see on the full video that was more unconstitutional than the segment on the news?

    Also, based on your extensive law enforcement experience what exactly is the most effective manner to combat dui’s? And since your method is obviously so effective, why are you not a millionaire consulting agencies on your bright idea?

  • campbell

    LAC, you are probably a demoted police officer with a very low rank, or none, doing a desk job. Why were you ‘demoted’ or why were you punched in the face? why aren’t you driving around in your cruiser that you used to get the girls? Why are you insulting everybody’s intelligence here? You think we don’t know your department’s policy and protocol on arrests? We know for a fact that you have arrest quotas. Dispute that and i’ll out you out on this forum. We also know that, that jail needs to be paid and you need to create job security for the jailers and the best way to do it, have more people in jail. Now, whats the constitutionality of all these reckless check points other than just plain harassing and inconviniencing alot of hardworking people who need to catch some sleep before they get back to work?

Comments are closed.