Law enforcement launches widespread DUI checkpoints, roving sobriety patrols, and house party monitoring over July 4 weekend

SAN DIEGO COUNTY – An intensive multi-law enforcement agency campaign against intoxicated driving and underage drinking in San Diego County over the long Fourth of July weekend is scheduled to begin today, Wed., July 3.

“We encourage everyone to plan ahead,” California Highway Patrol Assistant Chief John Antillon said. “If you’re going to drink, plan to have a designated driver.’

The multi-agency effort, dubbed “Operation Safeguard,” will consist of widespread DUI checkpoints, roving sobriety patrols and stepped-up enforcement of house-party laws throughout the county from today through Sunday.

“We say this … if you’re going to drink and drive, you’re going to be in trouble, and you’re going to spend your weekend not at the beach but with us, all of the people that you see here,” San Diego police Chief William Lansdowne said. “Drink responsibly.’

Those caught driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs will face longer-than-usual stints behind bars before they can bail out, county Sheriff Bill Gore noted.

“If you do get arrested, plan on spending the weekend in the San Diego County jail,” he said. “You probably won’t get out until Monday morning. So think about it.’

In addition to drunken driving, authorities advised that “social host” laws, which prohibit underage drinking at house parties and other private gatherings, will be aggressively enforced.

On the dates of July 3, 4, and 5 from 2008-12, there were 54 alcohol-related deaths in the San Diego region, according to the county Medical Examiner’s Office. Of those, 15 involved drunken driving, while 21 were due to falls, drowning, poisoning or overdoses.

Overall, 40 percent of Independence Day traffic deaths involve a drunken driver, the Automobile Club reported.

32 Responses to "Law enforcement launches widespread DUI checkpoints, roving sobriety patrols, and house party monitoring over July 4 weekend"

  1. Me   July 3, 2013 at 10:44 am

    I don’t drink…never have…..and I’m getting sick and tired of roadblocks every **** time I get in my car. I resent police asking me where I’m going and where I’ve been. It’s none of their **** business. Instead of stopping 99.99% completely sober drivers in all these roadblocks…..let them get off their overtime-swilling, donut -munching butts and get out on the roads where the REAL drunks are. They’re easy to find. They’re the ones I see swerving all over the Interstates, running red lights, and driving on the wrong side of the highway.

  2. Lee   July 3, 2013 at 12:04 pm

    Law Enforcement, excellent and thank you!!! Keep up the great work! You should have sobriety checkpoints EVERY day, and CA’s driving alcohol level should be 0.0%, NOT 0.08%.

    Me, you are wrong. It most certainly IS my business to know if an intoxicated driver is on the road endangering MY and, I might add, YOUR life. So I don’t mind these roadblocks one bit. In fact, I believe that the penalties for DUIs should be FAR stricter.

    Again, thank you Law Enforcement! Fallbrookers, PLEASE do not drink and drive over this weekend or anytime, for that matter! Let’s all stay safe to enjoy the 4th!

    Happy 4th of July!

  3. Ummm   July 3, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    Monitoring house parties? im throwing a rager, nobody will be driving and were all underage. Good luck monitoring, ill never answer my door to a cop. It’s called a search warrant morons. Know your rights and you have nothin to worry about. Party on!

  4. Me   July 3, 2013 at 3:54 pm

    Lee….ah forget it……not worth responding.

  5. To Me:   July 3, 2013 at 4:01 pm

    As someone who used to work DUI checkpoints, you’ll never convince me it’s a waste of time to have checkpoints.

  6. Me   July 3, 2013 at 4:32 pm

    Well if you really worked them….then you would know they are the least effective method to control DUI.s Any one who claims to have been law enforcement…but makes a claim that roadblocks aren’t a waste of time…..was never a cop.

    And before you start, I, too, have a little experience as well. I made well over 1000 arrests for DUI personally and later I spent 6 years as Lieutenant in charge of traffic enforcement for a large east coast police department.

    Any time you are spending time, money, and manpower stopping 99.99% completely sober drivers instead of intoxicated ones….it is not a good use of resources.

    The only reason roadblocks are so popular around these parts is because its easy money for the officers…..grants from both Sacramento & the Feds have made it a gravy train in overtime.

    Saturation patrols will ALWAYS be the most effective method to control DUIs. No time wasted on sober drivers…..larger patrol and enforcement areas by taking all those officers standing in ONE place and spreading them out throughout the city…….you are actually catching DANGEROUS intoxicated drivers, the ones who are actually driving poorly instead of the poor schlep who drank one beer too many but is driving perfectly fine.

  7. Pink   July 3, 2013 at 5:40 pm

    Clearly Hades has frozen over because I actually agree with Lee on something. I cannot understand why anyone, unless they are drinking, would resent a DUI checkpoint. What is a few minutes of your time if it actually gets a drunk off the road and possibly prevents an accident? I have nothing to hide. Do you? As far as "rights" go I believe the right to be safe on the road trumps what some might see as a personal rights violation. Happy 4th everyone. Be safe out there. Choose a designated driver.

  8. Me   July 3, 2013 at 9:21 pm

    Pink….please show us where there is "a right to be safe on the road." I must have missed that in civics class.

  9. Cat   July 4, 2013 at 7:55 am

    Me you are Dumb. If someone knows that they could get stopped at a checkpoint then they would most likely not want to drive. And if it such a problem for you stay home.

  10. To Pink   July 4, 2013 at 8:28 am

    It is usually more than a few minutes and I get annoyed because the cops act like everyone is a suspect at those checkpoints. They shine the light in your eyes, I was even asked by one in Vista to exhale my breath so he could smell it. I was not drinking I was just out shopping at Walmart, but they automatically assume since its in the middle of the night that I must be up to no good.

    I always see full parking lots at a lot of bars in town. Why don’t the sheriffs go park near the bars, etc and get those drunks coming out of there!

  11. Pink   July 4, 2013 at 9:08 am

    Sorry Me I know how anal you are about things. Obviously the "right" to be safe on the road is somewhat like the "right" to be safe in your home or "safe" at school, or in the work place. I guess we all know that we aren’t "safe" anywhere but when we can use some common sense, like DUI checkpoints for instance, or metal detectors at schools and airports, then it is better than nothing at all. I guess you didn’t learn about common sense in COP school huh? Have a safe 4th.

  12. Queen   July 4, 2013 at 12:01 pm

    Lee, you are wrong. There is NO reason for the legal alcohol limit to be 0.00%. Yes, drunk driving is horrendous; however, there is no reason a responsible adult can not or should not be able to enjoy a beverage. We KNOW one beverage does NOT impair the average person. The only reason to have it at 0.00% is for those who want to keep their hand over everyone (enough of that in California, the nanny state) and to raise money in traffic fines. Be responsible people, but, we don’t need government and hand holding in all aspects of our lives.

  13. grunt   July 4, 2013 at 2:08 pm

    @me Same place right to abortion – I think being safe on the road is a right under liberty and pursuit of happiness. Driving is a privilege, not a right.

  14. Pink   July 4, 2013 at 5:19 pm

    I feel I should point out that while I do believe that DUI checkpoints serve as a good deterrent to drunk driving, I also believe that a responsible adult can still have a drink with dinner and be able to drive an automobile.

  15. Lee   July 4, 2013 at 10:20 pm

    @#12 Queen

    Keep on thinking your argument through.

  16. Lee   July 4, 2013 at 10:22 pm

    PS. @ #8 Me

    Please show us where there is "a right to be safe on the road?"

    No comment.

  17. Peasant   July 5, 2013 at 8:17 am

    Nazi germany had roadblocks. I wonder what reason they gave the public… At what point did it become constitutional for law enforcement to stop citizens as a group so they can search persons and their personal property without cause?

  18. Pink   July 5, 2013 at 8:55 am

    @Peasant: When citizens start complaining that they are being illegally searched and manhandled (without probable cause) at DUI checkpoints, and that any of their civil rights are being violated without due process, I will be the first one to step up and protest!! As long as the police are merely checking to see if you are impaired or not, that, in my book, is not a violation of anyone’s civil liberties. I don’t like it either, I also hate going through the long security lines at the airport, but I’m willing to do it if it will save lives. Unfortunately these are the times in which we live.

  19. @Lee   July 5, 2013 at 11:35 am

    No need to, “….Keep on thinking your argument through.” I clearly stated my opinion.

  20. Lee   July 5, 2013 at 11:38 am

    @#17 Peasant

    Where is YOUR right to endanger MY life while you are operating a vehicle intoxicated? Where?

    NOTE TO LEE: Dial down on your anger setting please. —Village News

  21. Peasant   July 5, 2013 at 1:33 pm

    Pink would you feel comfortable having homes randomly searched on certain days to "keep safety"? Personal property is personal property.

  22. what 4rth amendmant   July 5, 2013 at 2:49 pm

    Lee my understanding is the police will enter your house without a warrant. I know of two occasions this has happened in Fallbrook.

  23. Pink   July 5, 2013 at 3:34 pm

    @Peasant (comment 21) I believe that you are talking apples and oranges. A DUI Checkpoint is conducted on a public roadway. My home is on private property. I’m a Republican. I believe in less government, not more. My belief about a DUI checkpoint is that if people know there is going to be a checkpoint, hopefully they will choose not to drive while impaired. How can that be a bad thing?

  24. @ 22   July 5, 2013 at 3:59 pm

    I think what you meant to say was the police may enter "your" house without a warrant not mine. Again, know your rights. It’s that simple.

  25. Lee   July 5, 2013 at 4:51 pm


    Get real, will you? Just because I use an exclamation mark does not mean I’m angry, silly. How absurd! It is YOU, the reader, who thinks I am angry, etc., but in no way, shape or form does that mean that I, the writer, am angry.

    If you don’t understand this concept, what does that have to do with me? Like I said, get real!

  26. For a Free America   July 6, 2013 at 7:49 am

    To comment #22. No doubt your 4th amendment rights are being violated by a search, but these "social host" laws are also a violation of our 14th amendment right to privacy. But then now that they kill American citizens with drones without any due process, and nobody says WTF, why would anybody expect ANY constitutional rights at all? It is frightening how more and more people are accepting of their freedoms being taken away in the name of safety. If "these people" need a "safety" cause, they should work on something that doesn’t take freedoms away like the doctor handwriting problem. There are over 7000 deaths a years due to bad handwriting.,8599,1578074,00.html Once they solve that one, come back and I’ll give you another assignment.

  27. Peasant   July 6, 2013 at 7:59 am

    Lee I didn’t condone DUI my question was pertaining to search of personal property without cause.

  28. Criminology 101   July 6, 2013 at 9:47 am

    The police can enter your home without a search warrant only if they believe they have probable cause, such as a crime in progress or if they believe that someone is in danger.

  29. Lee   July 6, 2013 at 7:59 pm

    Peasant, PLEASE explain to me how an intoxicated driver of a motor vehicle has the right to endanger another person’s life? Can you PLEASE explain that to me/us?

    Two, can you do all of us a HUGE favor, please? I would like you to find folks who have lost a loved one due to a drunken driver. OK? ANY folks who have lost a loved one due to a drunken driver will do. Cool? And I want you to ask them how THEY feel about having lost their loved one. Cool? And I would like you to ask them how they feel about drunk drivers. And I would like you to ask them how they feel about DUI checkpoints. And I would like you to ask them how EACH and EVERY day feels like WITHOUT their loved.

    And FINALLY, my dear Peasant, I would like to ask them, while looking them straight in the eye, your infamous point #8 verbatim, " . . . please show us where there is "a right to be safe on the road"?" Can you do that for us, Peasant?

    And then, I would like you to come back to us and share with us YOUR findings in, shall we say, NAUSEATING details. Can you do that for us, Peasant?


  30. Lee   July 6, 2013 at 8:26 pm

    Oops, the second point, etc., is directed at Me, not Peasant.

  31. JM   July 6, 2013 at 11:02 pm

    @Me, Can we get some verification on your 6 years as a Lieutenant?

  32. Peasant   July 9, 2013 at 10:59 am

    Lee I never said DUI was acceptable. My point was law enforcement stops cars and searches people’s vehicles without cause, eg. No moving violation.


Leave a Reply