Claremont police arrest 29 during DUI...

Claremont police arrest 29 during DUI checkpoint

There are 39 comments on the San Bernardino County Sun story from Aug 31, 2009, titled Claremont police arrest 29 during DUI checkpoint. In it, San Bernardino County Sun reports that:

A police checkpoint resulted in 16 citations, 24 vehicle impounds and 29 arrests Friday night.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at San Bernardino County Sun.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Hitler

Chino, CA

#23 Sep 1, 2009
I fully support these roadblocks. Hand over your papers and you will not be harmed.
BRUNSWAGGER

Santa Monica, CA

#24 Sep 1, 2009
THAT A BOY CLAREMONT PD!!! It's like shooting fish in barrel!!
Bob

Claremont, CA

#25 Sep 1, 2009
Having caught no drunk drivers should be an indicator that the checkpoints are old fashion and will be not necessary in the future. Everybody needs to STOP DRIVING DRUNK and the checkpoints will simply go away right? Can't wait till that day! Only when the Claremont PD no longer provides this “service” will everyone be able to claim SUCCESS! And the world will be a better place without any more checkpoints.
nothing suprises me

Compton, CA

#26 Sep 1, 2009
If you have ever been to a "neighborhood" lounge or watering hole in the vicinity, you would know that they all receive a phone call from all the local lounges and alert their clients to avoid the area & check point.

This is only the third or fourth time that CPD has held the checkpoint there. I wonder if they will ever hold one on Foothill blvd. Seriously doubt it. They might catch some drunks that live a little to the north of the ten freeway.
Foothill Flyer

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#27 Sep 1, 2009
nothing suprises me- that's why they line up @ Claremont's Hi-Brow Lounge @ 1:50 AM like a foxhunt!

The first time the Claremont PD "wetted their beak" by setting up a checkpoint @ this point on the Pomona border(!) there was outrage from Pomona PD since all the arrestees were Pomona citizens...I thought their next roadblock @ this site was arranged "in conjunction with" Pomona PD?

Since: Aug 09

Whittier, CA

#28 Sep 1, 2009
I think it's a great idea to go after unlicensed drivers. Yesterday my boyfriend was driving through Anaheim and got rear-ended (hard) by some woman who had no insurance or license and didn't speak any English. The only reason my boyfriend didn't call the cops is because the woman didn't damage his truck at all because she hit his hitch. The woman has a hole in her front bumper now just like many people who don't have insurance. If I had been hit in my small car as hard as my boyfriend was hit, I would have had at least $2000 in damage and would have no way of getting my deductible back because the other driver didn't have insurance. If you want to drive in the United States, you need to get a license and insurance. They even have the exam in about 20 different languages. People need to be responsible - that's all that I'm saying. At least the Claremont PD picked up some of these unlicensed drivers - I think it's worth it.
hmmmm

Upland, CA

#29 Sep 1, 2009
Bob wrote:
Having caught no drunk drivers should be an indicator that the checkpoints are old fashion and will be not necessary in the future. Everybody needs to STOP DRIVING DRUNK and the checkpoints will simply go away right? Can't wait till that day! Only when the Claremont PD no longer provides this “service” will everyone be able to claim SUCCESS! And the world will be a better place without any more checkpoints.
The checkpoints are funded by the Office of Traffic Safety and are not just for catching drunk drivers, although that is one of the goals. So, the world will be a better place when there are no more checkpoints? You actually want unlicensed drivers on the road?
jak

La Puente, CA

#30 Sep 1, 2009
Why do the Racists gravitate to this message board.
Dare

United States

#34 Sep 1, 2009
While I support the checkpoints wherever they are, I think Claremont may have hyped the numbers in their press release. maybe to make themselve look better than the other valley cities that hold checkpoints. 29 arrests? 6 for warrants the others for those driving without a valid license. I would bet these were not "arrests" in the traditional tense, that is the driver was cuffed, stuffed and booked at the station. They were most likely cited and released at the checkpoint, without even a click on a handcuff. Other cities report this as cited and released. But it is technically an arrest. Either way, keep up the good work CPD and all others.
radarmanDDG31

Golden, CO

#35 Sep 2, 2009
I'll bet a weeks pay that 90% were Mexicanos.
CaptAmerica

Boston, MA

#36 Sep 2, 2009
Your Papers Please wrote:
Re-read the article. NO DRUNK DRIVERS WERE ARRESTED. "Police arrested 16 people driving without a license, seven people for driving with a suspended or revoked license and six people for warrants."
16 + 7 + 6 = 29. So commenter "RON" is correct, no drunk drivers were arrested.
Claremont establishes their roadblocks south of the 10FWY so they only get Mexicans and working class Whites. It is fascinating that their "DUI" checkpoints don't seem to arrest any drunks.
Here is the short article in it's entirety. Please tell me where it says that no drunk drivers were arrested:

"A police checkpoint resulted in 16 citations, 24 vehicle impounds and 29 arrests Friday night.

Officers with the Claremont Police Department conducted the drunken driving and driver's license checkpoint between 6 p.m. and midnight on Indian Hill Boulevard and American Avenue, police said.

Police arrested 16 people driving without a license, seven people for driving with a suspended or revoked license and six people for warrants, according to a police news release."
Splendid

Pasadena, CA

#37 Sep 2, 2009
RON wrote:
But what about the drunk drivers? They certainly generated a substantial amount of revenue
fir themselves but did nothing to take drunk drivers off the street. I can only imagine the total cost of this oiperation versus what amount of revenue they generated. Surely a saturation patrol of tkaing all those costly uniformed law enforcement officers away from the checkpoint and putting them in patrol cars seeking and looking for those drunk drivers would yield btter results. There are plenty of drunk drivers out there and I see many of them on a daily basis.
How many of them willingly will pull into a checkpoint?
RON - Shut up.haha
Splendid

Pasadena, CA

#38 Sep 2, 2009
Your Papers Please wrote:
Next time you're driving up and down Indian Hill Boulevard, south of the 10 FWY, check out the cars and the people. Poor, broke-**** Mexicans, Whites and a handful of Blacks. Indian Hill ends at Holt, it doesn't go to Chino or Chino Hills.
If you're on Indian Hill, you either live there (you're poor) or you really like pho (Google it, it's delicious).
I shouldn't have a police officer - especially a cop from Aryan Acres - stopping me without cause for a roadblock. This ain't the Soviet Union and it ain't a "mammogram," which you spelled wrong, by the way.
It's all about harassing poor and working-class people (Claremont is infamous for this). If they were sincere about catching Drunks, they would hold their "checkpoints" north of the freeway, where they can stop all the people leaving the bars and restaurants in the Village.
That would be a fascinating experiment. I dare you to do it, Aryan Acres.


YOu're absolutely right, I agree on all oyur points, and for valid reasons.
CaptAmerica

Boston, MA

#39 Sep 2, 2009
"Police arrested 16 people driving without a license, seven people for driving with a suspended or revoked license"

Licenses? We don't need no stinkin' licenses!
Splendid

Pasadena, CA

#40 Sep 2, 2009
Hitler wrote:
I fully support these roadblocks. Hand over your papers and you will not be harmed.
These are not road blocks, and they dont ask for papers.
Splendid

Pasadena, CA

#41 Sep 2, 2009
Bob wrote:
Having caught no drunk drivers should be an indicator that the checkpoints are old fashion and will be not necessary in the future. Everybody needs to STOP DRIVING DRUNK and the checkpoints will simply go away right? Can't wait till that day! Only when the Claremont PD no longer provides this “service” will everyone be able to claim SUCCESS! And the world will be a better place without any more checkpoints.
Claremont=World? I dont think so.
Mike H

San Bernardino, CA

#42 Sep 2, 2009
I think you're all morons. Please go sit in your running vehicles with the exhaust pipe plugged. It'd yield better results than this police checkpoint, which did not yield 29 drunk drivers, as clearly pointed out in the article. 29 arrests, yes, but not 29 DUIs.

More than half of the arrests were for driving without a license. Only 7 were for actual DUI.

Please go back to school and learn to read, OLD VET and others. Or just die off. Whichever.
Splendid

Pasadena, CA

#43 Sep 2, 2009
CaptAmerica wrote:
"Police arrested 16 people driving without a license, seven people for driving with a suspended or revoked license"
Licenses? We don't need no stinkin' licenses!
Haha..nice!
Know the Facts

San Bernardino, CA

#44 Sep 2, 2009
nothing suprises me wrote:
If you have ever been to a "neighborhood" lounge or watering hole in the vicinity, you would know that they all receive a phone call from all the local lounges and alert their clients to avoid the area & check point.
This is only the third or fourth time that CPD has held the checkpoint there. I wonder if they will ever hold one on Foothill blvd. Seriously doubt it. They might catch some drunks that live a little to the north of the ten freeway.
They did hold a Foothill checkpoint about a month ago between Indian Hill and Dartmouth (and surprise surprise it was in Claremont). Maybe since you don't live in Claremont you should get your facts straight and they also hold them at Baseline and the 210 quite frequently.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Claremont Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why all the empty store 2 hr slow down coming 5
Should never have been elected! 2 hr Tessitors daisys 34
star news about Mormons 4 hr Hidden agenda 2
News Murder charges filed in Pomona shooting (Mar '09) 12 hr Mikeyhelikesit 6
Janet Jackson converts ISLAM 16 hr egg plant 4
Another problem with muslims 16 hr short sheeted 3
No one is safe Glendora Thu press buttons 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Claremont Mortgages