In late March, four US Senators banded together and wrote a letter to Apple asking that they remove apps that alert users as to the whereabouts of DUI checkpoints.
“With more than 10,000 Americans dying in drunk-driving crashes every year,” the letter stated, “providing access to iPhone and iPad applications that alert users to DUI checkpoints is harmful to public safety. We know that your company shares our desire to end the scourge of drunk driving and we therefore would ask you to remove these applications from your store.”
While some of these apps make use of information housed in publicly accessible databases, many of them rely on crowdsourcing. Indeed, one app singled out by the letter is alleged to have had approximately 10 million users actively alerting “each other to DUI checkpoints in real time.”
In a separate letter sent concurrently by US Sentator Charles Schumer, Schumer also called out apps like Trapster and PhantomAlert which work to alert users as to the whereabouts of police speed traps and red light cameras.
Well, Apple took those letters to heart, partially.
In revised app store guidelines discovered by Mac Rumors, Apple has updated Section 22.8 to now read:
Apps which contain DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies, or encourage and enable drunk driving, will be rejected.
So one out of two ain’t bad, and in all honesty, Apple made the right decision here.
DUI checkpoint apps do nothing more than tell potentially intoxicated drivers where not to go. They’re still driving drunk, just on the down low. Apps like Trapster, however, might effectively work to cut down on speeding when a police speed trap is noted. Though to be fair, it might encourage speeders to pick their spots more strategically.
Either way, drunk driving is a lot more serious and contentious than speeders which is probably why Apple chose to only address DUI checkpoint apps.
We should note, however, that DUI checkpoint apps already on the iTunes App Store haven’t been kicked out and we’ll have to wait and see if they’re grandfathered in or if they’ll eventually be removed. Take DUI Dodger, for example, which enables users to view and submit checkpoints in their area.
June 9th, 2011 at 9:30 am
“DUI checkpoint apps do nothing more than tell potentially intoxicated drivers where not to go.”
The point is to avoid getting pulled over for no reason other than driving down the street in a “free” society…
June 9th, 2011 at 9:30 am
How in hell is A DUI checkpoint App illegal.
To me it seems like a medium which people can communicate and let others know, where an event is happening similar to traffic accidents, fires, or any other type of hendrance that would keep folks from gettig to their destinations timely.
If Apple wants to support the Police State that is the United States then – suck on them.
The DUI checkpoint is freedom of speech and Apple is silencing that avenue of expression.
June 9th, 2011 at 9:33 am
If you’re sober enough to care to look – your probably sober enough to drive or make an educated decision, not to drive drunk.
I personally have been pulled over at one of these checkpoints.
When I inquiried as to why I was pulled over when I had done nothing wrong, after I had been given the breathalizer and passed the officer wrote me a ticket for going 5 over.
It’s a racket and citizens should be standing up against it.
June 9th, 2011 at 9:33 am
Right, so all this is going to do is have some sort of HTML5 and gears enabled app instead? well, that worked well….
June 9th, 2011 at 9:45 am
Wow…what a pointless decision. I sincerely doubt someone intoxicated enough to pose a threat to other drivers would be able to effectively use these apps to avoid DUI checkpoints. Putting that aside, law enforcement should really find a better way to crack down on intoxicated drivers rather than casting a large net and forcing hundreds if not thousands of completely innocent motorists to endure being treated like potential felons. Not to mention, DUI and seatbelt checkpoints inevitably become ‘whatever we find’ checkpoints…just another excuse to avoid doing any real police work or having to exercise common sense.
Maybe we should just all start and end our day by queuing up at the local police station so they can give us a quick look-over to make sure we’re not ‘criminals’. Finding legitimate reasons to detain motorists seems to be too difficult for the police to manage.
We don’t need bottlenecks and we don’t need to give up our rights everytime we need to travel somewhere. We need smarter police.
June 9th, 2011 at 9:46 am
You don’t believe in freedom much, do you?
June 9th, 2011 at 9:51 am
this article seems to overlook the fact that there are police and sheriff’s departments which publicize locations of dui checkpoints because they believe this reinforces the anti-drunk driving message they wish to send to the public. so “So one out of two ain’t bad …” is only half right; it’s really one out of one, and apple has noted this by stating “Apps which contain DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies …”
June 9th, 2011 at 9:56 am
“DUI checkpoint apps do nothing more than tell potentially intoxicated drivers where not to go.” Please keep an open mind. I’m sure these apps can be used by a drunk. They can also be used by a sober person who wants to avoid the gridlock these checkpoints create in my city. The police regularly choke one of three entrances in/out of downtown on weekend evenings. Getting stuck sober in one of those snarl-ups is a guaranteed way to be late for the game or concert.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:01 am
“How in hell is A DUI checkpoint App illegal.”
Who said anything about it being illegal? It’s totally legal, they just won’t be publishing them, as is their right. Just as you have the right to use something else.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:02 am
EVERYONE post I’ve read so far is being made by some drunk who got busted before and will again if these APPs are pulled. When your child is killed by a moron who doesn’t understand “don’t drink and drive” for the 20th time maybe you two will believe.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:07 am
Of note, unless the wikipedia page is entirely wrong, DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies are unconstitutional anyway. In Ingersoll v Palmer, the court established, among other guidelines, that “advance publicity is necessary to reduce the intrusiveness of the checkpoint and increase its deterrent effect”. Stand strong, Apple.
The basis of a checkpoint is to discourage drunk driving. Trying to hide the presence of a checkpoint is not going to do that. It’s merely going to give an excuse for law enforcement to dodge the fourth amendment.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:17 am
Apple’s reaction displays an amazing level of ignorance. It’s a fact that the results of breathalyser tests are a poor indicator of BAC. It’s also a fact that BAC is a poor indicator of impairment. DUI Checkpoints provide doubly-false metrics, but they still exist because a) they make money, and b) it makes people *feel* like they’re doing something to stop impaired-driving fatalities.
June 9th, 2011 at 10:55 am
“EVERYONE post I’ve read so far is being made by some drunk who got busted before and will again if these APPs are pulled.”
This is a lie. You are a liar.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:10 am
The ONLY reason DUI checkpoints are legal is because the police department is REQUIRED BY LAW to publicly publish the locations in advance.
This is just another example of why Apple sucks.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:25 am
Wow. Look at all the drunks coming out of the woodwork.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:30 am
It’s just a way of making money. If they really care, they should test people after sporting events exiting the parking lot. That would be the day…
June 9th, 2011 at 11:38 am
“nobody special” you are an idiot. maybe you didn’t know that but now you do. please stop leaving your stupidity all over the internet.
June 9th, 2011 at 12:31 pm
While I agree drunk driving is wrong (I don’t even drink), an app like this is NOT illegal.
STUPID phone and OS maker should NOT be allowed to tell me what apps I can or can not run!!!!!
June 9th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
“Of note, unless the wikipedia page is entirely wrong, DUI checkpoints that are not published by law enforcement agencies are unconstitutional anyway. In Ingersoll v Palmer, the court established, among other guidelines, that “advance publicity is necessary to reduce the intrusiveness of the checkpoint and increase its deterrent effect”.”
I think you missed an important word before “Supreme Court” on the Wikipedia page: California. The *California* Supreme Court made that decision and holds no weight on any other state.
The Wikipedia page does say this about the US Supreme Court, however: “Chief Justice Rehnquist implicitly acknowledged that there must be guidelines in order to avoid becoming overly intrusive. […]The Chief Justice left it to the states to determine what those minimal safeguards must be”. There are no federal laws regarding publication of DUI checkpoints.
The “advance notice” is not law.
June 9th, 2011 at 12:58 pm
The “advance notice” is not **federal** law.
June 9th, 2011 at 2:25 pm
Guess one reason more for not buying Apple products. It’s my phone, and I decide what I run on it. Apple probably can associate easily with a police-state because they themselves operate on similar principles their app store 😉
Actually, the reasoning is faulty. If you are so drunk that you are a danger, you probably won’t be able to use the app. So the only real users would be sober drivers, who might want to avoid loosing time on a point less checkpoint, especially if they have an alternative route to their destination.
June 9th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
“So the only real users would be sober drivers, who might want to avoid loosing time on a point less checkpoint, especially if they have an alternative route to their destination.”
good point yacc. if they check cars randomly then sober people avoiding the checkpoint will help them catch drunks. why is apple trying to help drunk drivers?
June 9th, 2011 at 8:46 pm
@US Citizen
And you are basing this off what exactly?
I have never had a DUI, probably never will since I do not drink and drive, ever. However, I am against such checkpoints just like I am against dragnets in general. There is also the problem that the breathalyzer is known to be junk.. it is a good ‘offical’ tool for officers who need a piece of paper to ‘prove’ the person they pulled over was drunk, but using one on every person who goes through an area is guaranteed to get a bunch of false positive (and probably quite a few false negatives). Checkpoints are, as others have pointed out, good PR to get people to think and potentially not drive.. but as a tool to actually catch drunk drivers they are pretty piss poor.
June 9th, 2011 at 11:57 pm
I don’t drink and drive, so I don’t have to worry about getting a DUI, but sobriety checkpoints seem to be more of a PR tool than an actual enforcement mechanism. According to a friend of mine, who is a police officer, sobriety checkpoints are actually less effective in catching drunk drivers than regular patrols. This is besides the fact that regular patrols cause far less congestion.
June 10th, 2011 at 5:09 am
In order for a checkpoint to be legal under our constitution it is required for law enforcement to notify the public where and when a checkpoint will be using public media. Law enforcement needs to use the DUI applications to their benefit. Businesses are forced to evolve when competitors come into the market resulting in better businesses. If law enforcement was forced to evolve as a result of some competition from Iphone apps it is inevitable that law enforcement will improve.
June 10th, 2011 at 8:52 am
I love the comment “When I inquiried as to why I was pulled over when I had done nothing wrong, after I had been given the breathalizer and passed the officer wrote me a ticket for going 5 over.”
You did something wrong– you were going 5 over. The police officer cited an individual with no regard for following the letter of the law in his traffic stop. Sounds like an effective checkpoint to me.
If you break the law (which couldn’t be more clearly stated– there’s freaking signs every 500 feet), no matter how small the infraction is, you have no right to complain you’re being unfairly persecuted. You’re being punished– grow a pair and follow the rules.
June 10th, 2011 at 8:58 am
It’s pretty flawed logic that “if I’m sober enough to check my phone for checkpoints” then “I’m sober enough to drive”.
If you’re checking the app with concern because you may be cited, you clearly shouldn’t be driving. If you haven’t been drinking, checkpoints take all of 10 minutes to bypass.
June 10th, 2011 at 10:36 am
@Daniel
By the letter of the law perhaps, but not its actual implementation. There are many laws where the way they are written and how they are enforced are out of sync and speeding tickets are one of them. People have a good reason to be annoyed when they have a reasonable expectation of not getting in trouble for something that is not usually enforced.
In other words, selective enforcement pisses people off. When a law is applied uniformly it can be said someone did something wrong, but when 99% of the time it is not enforced then the officer decides they are going to, not a good thing.
June 12th, 2011 at 3:09 am
Don’t you worry abou that you can’t ban it anyway just open up safari and access website that way its the website that provide the service not some banned app. And second its not about being drunk who said this was created for drunk people? its for normal people who know that they had absolutely no alcohol and don’t to waste time stay inline and be tested by police so they just go different way to avoid that that’s what its for.
June 12th, 2011 at 3:09 am
Don’t you worry abou that you can’t ban it anyway just open up safari and access website that way its the website that provide the service not some banned app. And second its not about being drunk who said this was created for drunk people? its for normal people who know that they had absolutely no alcohol and don’t to waste time stay inline and be tested by police so they just go different way to avoid that that’s what its for.