Translate this page

CHP urges public not to drink and drive; DUI checkpoint will be held Sat., Dec. 21 in Temecula area

Wednesday, December 18th, 2013
Issue 51, Volume 17.

TEMECULA - With holiday celebrations in full swing, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) is preparing for increased enforcement throughout the heavy travel period to help ensure safety on the road. The CHP is reminding travelers to never drive while impaired.

The Temecula Area CHP office will be conducting a sobriety/license checkpoint on December 21, in Southwest Riverside County. The exact location is never announced in advance. Motorists approaching the checkpoint will see informational signs advising them that a checkpoint is ahead. Once diverted into the lane, motorists will be detained only a few moments while an officer explains the purpose of the checkpoint and checks their driver license.

Checkpoints are conducted in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the California Supreme Court decision, Ingersoll v. Palmer.

The holiday season can be particularly dangerous for drivers. Advertisement
Advertisement for Casa Tiene Vista
[ Casa Tiene Vista ]
Young adults, males and those driving at night, are among those who have the greatest risk of being involved in a collision with an alcohol-impaired driver or worse yet, losing their lives. Local law enforcement will be out in force, cracking down on impaired driving.

This is the time of year when celebrations increase, as well as the chance of encountering a drunk or impaired driver. One way to keep everyone safe, and reduce your chance of spending the holidays in jail or the hospital, is to have a designated driver.

Along with the increased enforcement effort, the CHP is asking motorists to help keep the state’s roadways safe by calling 911 to report a suspected drunk driver. Callers should be prepared to provide dispatchers a description of the vehicle, its location, and direction of travel.



Comment Profile Imageshea
Comment #1 | Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:58 pm
Hey, at least they tell us in advance that our rights are going to be violated....
Comment Profile Imagebob
Comment #2 | Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:03 am
Since it is CHP and not Temecula pd the checkpoint willnot be on city streets. Possible spots would be Rancho California rd coming from the Wine country. SR 79 westbound coming from Aguanga or Winchester rd coming from French Valley.

Comment Profile ImageMe
Comment #3 | Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:07 am
In the past car has almost been hit four times on I-15 while going to work.

In EACH case, I looked over to see the driver's in all FOUR cases either TEXTING or DIALING their phones. One guy actually weaved over 3 lanes.

The chances of getting struck by a texter are about 500 times greater than getting hit by a DUI driver.

Yet, police spend all their time going after DUI's.......
Comment Profile ImageJr
Comment #4 | Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:58 am
You want to see some drunk drivers go to Vista. i have never seen anything like it!
Comment Profile Imagejust wait
Comment #5 | Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:59 am
Since #1 doesn't like their rights violated, then they wont mind when they creamed by the one drunk driver (that manages to hit them) that got through the cracks because of no checkpoints at all. If you have nothing to hide, then a few seconds out of your drive will not hurt you. It could save you, you know. And if you still feel violated, then oh well, you still have to comply, otherwise merge to the side and let me through. Have fun with your "Am I free to go?" repeated a million times.
Comment Profile ImageFORD
Comment #6 | Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:33 pm
There are no such things as "rights". You have a "Privileges" Those with the POWER can take
your "rights" anytime they want.

Civil rights, Gay rights, Immigration rights are all terms designed to steal
the property, wealth and freedom of the people that founded and built the

It's about who has the power... not who has the rights. And right now the average European
American has no rights or say in anything.

You gave it away 50 years ago
Comment Profile ImageBonsallGayGuy
Comment #7 | Friday, Dec 20, 2013 at 3:51 pm

Regarding comment #6. The US Supreme Court might disagree. Through various decisions it has affirmed rights to reproductive freedom, to privacy, and to civil marriage among others. Perhaps you may wish to address your concerns to those individuals and entities that view these fundamental rights as mere privileges to be withdrawn or extended by the state per the whimsy of those who hold power. My rights to property and equal treatment by our government should not be held hostage by the animus of my fellow citizens.

How about a Texas judge (knowing full well that Texas won't issue marriage licenses to same sex couples) ordering a lesbian couple to either live apart, move out of state or give up custody of their child because they aren't legally married? Or how about an elderly gay couple who will be taxed out of their home when one of them predeceases the other because the state in which they reside only excludes property from property tax reassessment if they are legally married in that state (a state that won't issue them a civil marriage license)? Or how about Ms. Windsor whose marriage wasn't recognized by the federal government and consequently was faced with an additional federal tax bill of some $365,000 that might have left her destitute? Are these not violations of people's families and property?

How again is my equal treatment under the law simply some nefarious scheme "designed to steal the property, wealth and freedom of the people that founded and built the USA!"
Comment Profile ImageZZZ
Comment #8 | Friday, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:40 pm
Last weekend after leaving our company holiday party downtown, I turned up First Ave to go to I-5. "DUI Check point ahead", I had had two beers in a matter of 5 hours, but I was taking no chances - I merged left three lanes to get out of the line, a motorcycle cop watched me. I still can't believe he didn't come after me, knowing I was avoiding the check.

Was I below .08, yes, was I driving under the influence, yes. It is zero tolerance behind the wheel, and the defense is in court, I would have gotten a DUI. If I had gotten into an accident, the cop that 'didn't' arrest me, would have been liable. That's the law.

I am taking heed to this warning - don't drink and drive - next time, I won't be so lucky.

So, maybe that's the problem with checkpoints - the drinkers avoid them, the sober ones don't have anything to hide, so sit in line!! Solution: Turn - so what if they come after you - YOU haven't been drinking!!
Comment Profile ImageReality Checker
Comment #9 | Tuesday, Dec 24, 2013 at 12:18 pm
Comment #8, There's no "zero tolerance", unless it's just a personal rule for you. It's not even illegal to drive with alcohol in your system, unless your under age 21. It's only against the law if you operate a motor vehicle with a BAC of .08 or more. Commercial driving level is .04. While you may be operating under the influence under .08, you are not guilty of violating the law until you are tested with an intoxilizer at or more than .08, unless you are under the age of 21. Generally, a PAS (portable hand-held unit in the field) isn't admissible in court as evidence of DUI. Those are used to build probable cause to determine a crime (DUI) has been committed, and to warrant further testing (field sobriety tests (FST's)) and, if you fail those, you are arrested and then you get your breath tested with the intoxilizer at the station. If you blow .08 or more after an accident, however, it will be determined by law that you were at .08 at the time of the accident (preventing the legal argument of you having an increasing BAC from the time of the accident or traffic stop and only just hit .08 when you blew on the intoxilizer). Also, by signing your drivers license application form, you give consent to a search of your blood or breath for the presence of alcohol or drugs, if suspected of DUI. Of course, any amount of alcohol or drugs found in your system during an investigation may be considered a factor in the event of an accident, especially if it results in injury to someone other than yourself, or their death. Just wanted to clear things up. I used to do DUI enforcement in a law enforcement capacity, but don't try to use what I said here as your own defense. Know the law and obey the law. CVC 23152, 23153 a, & b.

Article Comments are contributed by our readers, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Valley News staff. The name listed as the author for comments cannot be verified; Comment authors are not guaranteed to be who they claim they are.


Add your Comment


Images, Formatting, or HTML is not allowed : plain text only. You may post up to 5 website addresses within your comment.


The Valley News has tightened its' policy regarding comments.
While we invite you to contribute your opinions and thoughts, we request that you refrain from using vulgar or obscene words and post only comments that directly pertain to the specific topic of the story or article.
Comments that are derogatory in nature have a high likelihood for editing or non-approval if they carry the possibility of being libelous.
The comment system is not intended as a forum for individuals or groups to air personal grievances against other individuals or groups.
Please, no advertising or trolling.
In posting a comment for consideration, users understand that their posts may be edited as necessary to meet system parameters, or the post may not be approved at all. By submitting a comment, you agree to all the rules and guidelines described here.
Most comments are approved or disregarded within one business day.

RSS FeedFacebookTwitter

Advertisement for Broken Yolk


Most Commented

Reach Local Customers

The Valley News The Valley News
760-723-7319 - 1588 S. Mission Rd. Suite 200, Fallbrook CA 92028
All contents copyright ©2014
About Us
Earthquake Information
Business Listings
Contact Us
Letter to the Editor
Report a website error
Online Digital Edition
RSS Feeds