I live in a relatively small town and know how many police officers are on duty at one time. If I know where all those police offices are I also know where they are not.
That's easy enough to know, if the town is small enough. By your reasoning, any small town with a maximum of 1 or 2 police officers should be a veritable hotbed of criminal activity.
Sorry but your "scenario" misses a huge piece. People do not go to jail for having beer spilled on their shirt. If the police can not prove alcohol over the limit in the person's body they do not go to jail.
Sorry, hate to pop your bubble, but I've witnessed this issue first hand. Friend got to a party, some nimrod spilled beer on him, he was driving home to change when he got pulled over for one of those "general checks". Spent the night in jail and had to go through court to get it thrown out. Oh, and police don't have to prove alcohol over the limit, that's just there to help them, not you. You thought breathalyzers were there for you? How cute. If it's the policeman's opinion that you're impaired, off to jail you go. At least he was lucky enough to get it thrown out of court.
You also completely missed the point that even if someone gets tracked an pulled over the general public was not privy to the exact location of that person.
Finally, do you realize the manpower needed to put that chain of events together? Sorry but a DWI charge is not enough to justify that amount of manpower to any police force.
You're missing the point that we live in a big data world. All that's needed is for the policeman to scan your license along with the reason for you being pulled over. 5s later the various systems have correlated the data and stated that you're an AA member and thus likely to be drunk - no warning should be given. After all, what good is data if you're not going to use it?