"We have never approved a checkpoint program whose primary purpose was to detect evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing. Rather, our checkpoint cases have recognized only limited exceptions to the general rule that a seizure must be accompanied by some measure of individualized suspicion. We suggested in [Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979)] that we would not credit the "general interest in crime control" as justification for a regime of suspicionless stops. Consistent with this suggestion, each of the checkpoint programs that we have approved was designed primarily to serve purposes closely related to . . . roadway safety." Strickland v. Georgia, 265 Ga. App. 533 (2004) quoting City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32, 41-42, 121 S.Ct. 447, 148 L.Ed.2d 333 (2000).
Adairsville Police Department established highway safety checkpoints Saturday around the city after several entering auto reports in the areas of Kuhlman and Lawrence streets. The checkpoints were conducted in an effort to reduce crime and apprehend criminals, according to an APD press release.
In other words, members of "law enforcement" aren't enforcing the laws they don't like, such as the ones that say roadblocks (or "checkpoints") have to be for a specific purpose related to roadway safety. Now, everyone in this line of work knows that almost every roadblock is really for the purpose of general crime, not roadway safety. (That's why these "roadway safety checkpoints" often have a drug dog at the scene.) But the police are always smart enough to lie and say that they are just out there looking for traffic violations.
Except in Adairsville.