Representative David Butterfield has introduced HB 140, a bill that would amend the code. The bill would prohibit checkpoints where police officers ask for a motorist's license, registration, or insurance. It would also prohibit checkpoints based on sobriety.
It seems the same old crowd seeks to reinvent itself by opposing the legislation. MADD maintains that the checkpoints are a deterrent, but thus far has provided no evidence to substantiate that claim. The only study with which I am aware is the one in Maryland that shows its Checkpoint Strikeforce program is not a deterrent.*
Representative Lee Perry is a police officer who supports checkpoints, even though he acknowledges that they are less effective (see http://www.ksl.com/?nid=960&sid=19192238&title=legislature-looks-at-banning-dui-checkpoints&s_cid=queue-5 (http://www.ksl.com/?nid=960&sid=19192238&title=legislature-looks-at-banning-dui-checkpoints&s_cid=queue-5)).
An 8-5 committee vote has already advanced the bill. See the bill's text here:
http://le.utah.gov/~2012/bills/hbillint/hb0140.htm (http://le.utah.gov/~2012/bills/hbillint/hb0140.htm)
*The Maryland anti-drunk driving campaign called Checkpoint Strikeforce was evaluated for deterrence. The review found that there was no deterrent effect:
"To date, there is no evidence to indicate that this campaign, which involves a number of sobriety checkpoints and media activities to promote these efforts, has had any impact on public perceptions, driver behaviors, or alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes and injuries. This conclusion is drawn after examining statistics for alcohol-related crashes, police citations for impaired driving, and public perceptions of alcohol-impaired driving risk.
This quote is from Health Promotion Reports, July 1 2009.