Three Drivers Arrested at Lake Elsinore Checkpoint

The DUI/driver’s license checkpoint stopped vehicles at the intersection of Riverside Drive and Collier Road Saturday night.

A DUI/driver’s license checkpoint in Lake Elsinore Saturday night resulted in three drivers arrested for suspicion of DUI, according to police.

The checkpoint at the intersection of Riverside Drive and Collier Road operated from 7 p.m. until 2 a.m. Of the 1,740 vehicles that passed through the checkpoint, 78 were diverted to a secondary-inspection area, where seven drivers were given field sobriety tests.

Lake Elsinore police also cited 25 people for driving without a license or on a suspended license and towed four vehicles for a minimum of 30 days.

The checkpoint was funded by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.


Reverend Smith December 23, 2012 at 08:49 PM
If for no other reason, these drivers needed to be arrested for being out of touch with reality. Who doesn't know by now that intersection has a checkpoint every few weeks? They wouldn't even have to read Patch to know. Although if they read any local news (and there are web site) they'd not only know it's THE intersection for checkpoints. They'd also know exactly when the checkpoint will be. I suppose the police chose that location because almost all the traffic coming from east towards the coast over Hwy 74 passes through there. Although there are plenty of detours, I suppose when you're drunk and driving through unfamiliar territory, you'd probably just get lost and rive into the lake or something if you tried one of them.
tom December 24, 2012 at 03:26 PM
25 people without license. Only 4 lmpounds,the math doesn't work.
Matt December 24, 2012 at 04:04 PM
Tom I agree. How does that compute?
Balance December 24, 2012 at 05:31 PM
Four vehicles are being towed for a minimum of 30 days? Who pays for the gas? Do they tow them around in circles or do they make a trip to the east coast and back?
Bd December 24, 2012 at 07:08 PM
Timber December 24, 2012 at 08:19 PM
Can't stop laughing............
Charles Baker December 25, 2012 at 12:02 AM
That's f'n funny
Reverend Smith December 25, 2012 at 12:06 AM
Towed to an impound yard where they'll be held until the owners can come up with a few hundred dollars to get them out. If not they'll be sold with profit going to the tow yard.
Charles Baker December 25, 2012 at 12:15 AM
Guess they had a licensed driver with them to drive unlicensed driver with their ticket home. Don't drive to court without your license to appear for ticket, either. That's a Dumas idea, too.
Rob December 27, 2012 at 08:51 PM
Another police state failure. 3 drunks out of 1740 cars stopped. Success rate = 0.17%. The only success here is filling up the cops bank accounts, while draining our own. Toss in the 25 citations and you have a 1.6% "success" rate. The results are consistently bad, which is why EVERY article has the following "disclaimer" - The checkpoint was funded by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. They try and make it appear that we do not pay for the checkpoint. Basic math and the principles of taxation escape them and far too many Americans. The only success was imfringing on the freedom of the people in the 1740 vehicles. Retorts - "if someone you knew" "don't drive" "Supreme Court" My reply to all of that is, the MATH/Stats do NOT support your position. Every study shows saturation patrols are more effective, less intrusive and actually protect the civil rights of ALL Americans.
Hoopmom December 28, 2012 at 10:20 PM
Why does a five minute stop when I am not drunk infringe upon my rights? If I haven't been drinking then why should I care? That's three drunks off the road.
Rob December 28, 2012 at 11:01 PM
In that case, do you mind a 5 minute pat down at the Mall? I mean you are not carrying a weapon. Do you mind random searches of multi-family homes for those smoking cigarettes? How about checkpoints to see if your car is in proper running order? I have little patience with those that do not understand the limited role of government as intended by the founding fathers. Even less for people who do not see the infringement on our lives and, worse what shall become of our children's lives. Given this, let us leave aside the political debate. I will assume you understand math, budgeting, stats, etc. Do you feel the cost of the checkpoints merit the spend? If we leave that math aside and look at stats, what is more effectiveat targeting drunk drivers, saturation patrols or checkpoints? Which targets suspected violators while not imposing polict scrutiny on law abiding citizens?
Anthony Scira March 24, 2013 at 02:02 AM
What if one of those drunks would have killed a family further down the road? And a success rate of .17 is relatively good considering what you are looking for. I am sure statistically the ratio of non-intoxicated/intoxicated drivers is far lower than .17%. So technically it is a big success. A 100% success rate is impossible because everyone is not driving drunk.
Timber March 24, 2013 at 03:16 AM
Anthony Scira, What if a a family was killed by a drunk driver further down the road because the officers were waiting around the checkpoint HOPING that that drunk driver would magically gravitate to the checkpoint and turn himself in at the mobile police station known as a DUI checkpoint? Do you realize you have acknowledged that "everyone is not driving drunk." Yet, everyone is not committing murder/theft/rape/torture... and somehow we do not detain groups of people to determine that <>but it could save a life <end sarcasm>


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »