Now we live in a society where everyone just blinding follows MADD's drumbeat on DUIs without putting in any independent thought to the issue. One would think that the people involved in our lifestyle would be a bit more openminded since we are also victims of the same thought process. Evangelical Christians and Feminazis have done a great job misinforming the average American as to what a bunch of evil people we supporters of responsible prostitution are, and the average American blindly accepts the representations of our biggest opponents without looking into the subject independently.

With regard to current DUI laws, people go to prison for multiple DUIs even if they never even came close to causing an accident - is that right? MADD operates as a business and as such needs to constantly push for tougher laws regardless of weather or not the laws in place are sufficient, and they will continue putting out propaganda that they are insufficent as long as it suits their agenda. DUI fatalities were not changed one bit by the lowering of the BAC limit from .10 to .08. Regardless of this fact, if MADD had it's way the law would in fact be zero tolerance - no one can drive with a measurable amount of BAC. Luckily the push for lower BACs is now getting pushed back by restraunts that serve alcohol. In every DUI vehicular manslaugher case I am aware of the driver was way fucked up...like a BAC of .20 or higher. So really the right approach would be to have much tougher penalties for people driving at .20 or higher, perhaps even making that a felony right out of the gate, and have less harsh penalites for people driving a couple blocks home from the bar after work at a .10. However DUI fines are huge revenue generators for county government and thus they have no incentive to upset the status quo in a way that will promote public safety yet curtail revenue.

As for check points, my knowledge of the political beliefs of the signers of the constitution is such that this is exactly the sort of government intrusion they were trying to curtail when they passed the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. Remember, unlike the vast majority of Americans today, these were all men that actually lived under an oppressive government, and were very concerned about government abuse of power, since they knew first hand the intangible evils such abuse can cause on a society. I find it amazing the supposedly 'strict constructionist' Justices on the US Supreme Court don't see it this way.