Sobriety checkpoints have been ruled legal in the US by the Supreme Court in Michigan v. Sitz and subsequent rulings, and in New Hampshire by the State Supreme Court. New Hampshire is the only state which first requires Superior Court order. Interestingly, in State v. Koppel, the State Supreme Court found that to justify suspicionless stops, the state must show that its objective cannot be met with less intrusive means. But the court also found no evidence that checkpoints are a greater deterrent than publicized roving patrols.

So, not only were Portsmouth police interested in surprising drivers with a checkpoint, they could have served the same purpose with marginally less intrusion via roving patrols if they had bothered to tell anyone. Why might they have been interested in making sure it was a police checkpoint?

One answer is the money. Sobriety checkpoints justify budgets and provide lucritive overtime pay to the police officers who opt to work them. This author has witnessed such a checkpoint, and it features police, some with dogs, stopping cars while more than a dozen other officers, many state police, drink coffee and stand around looking bored but getting paid.

Sobriety checkpoints bring together a number of state and local agencies. Assistance with the Portsmouth checkpoint last July came from state police, the county Sheriff’s Department, the state Liquor Commission and the Dover police. Part of the funding came from the state’s Highway Safety Agency.

One effective tactic against such arbitrary and public displays of police force, for those wishing to subvert the checkpoint, is to go up the road a mile or so and warn drivers about the checkpoint so they may find an alternate route. This author and her cohorts have used this tactic with some success. When we tried it, local police did not prevent us from continuing our "detour." And when the bars got out downtown, people that might have otherwise been driving home, joined in the fun. Since the checkpoint was late at night, local kids with nothing better to do, but a healthy hostility for authority, also joined in.

For the record, I think drunk driving is positively reckless, but heavy-handed police tactics are most definately not the solution. When we asked local police why cops might spend their time on such a checkpoint instead of stopping, say, rampant domestic violence, our local cops only said they opted out of participating in the checkpoint. When we questioned a police officer at the checkpoint why he needed a K-9 unit, he responded that a suspect might try to run away. Such is the state of preserving sobriety in New Hampshire.