FHP announces daytime driver license, vehicle inspection checkpoints

page: 3
17
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Kevinquisitor
 

Haven't posted here in a few years, but this thread made me sign in. Connecticut has already been implementing these "checkpoints". About three weeks ago I was on my way to a client meeting when I came upon one of these. There were a total of five cruisers parked along both sides of the road and troopers standing out in the street motioning cars to slow down as they approached. At first I assumed it was road construction, until I was motioned to a full stop (I drive a bright colored, sporty coupe, so I'm sure that didn't help). The trooper walks up to my window and tells me to pull over to the side of the road. I politely asked why I was pulled over, he told me it was a random safety inspection and that they're implementing these all over the state. He proceeded to walk around my vehicle, then came back and asked for license and registration, went back to his cruiser (of course to run my plates, but I could have told him he wouldn't find anything). He came back and told me I was free to go. The whole time he was at my window he was visually scanning the interior of my car pretty heavily. As I drove away I thought to myself that this was extremely odd behavior for a safety inspection. Considering the Sandy Hook incident happening not to long prior, maybe they amped up security, but I don't think that had anything to do with it. Thought I'd share.




posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 12:40 AM
link   

FHP says the checkpoints will be conducted during daytime hours, and generally cause delays of five minutes or less.


I can tell two things from that...

The line of cars that lead up to the actual checkpoint might be long but will only take 5 or so minutes for you to get up there and get through because, they are making a precursory inpsection of the occupants only. Checking IDs, trunks or kicking tires on each and every car would back it up for miles. I know they don't say this but if you appear white skinned... on your way. If you are brown, pull over to the secondary area. They are checking for Illegal immigrants. Its Florida. Not Idaho.

"Daytime only" so they can better determine skin color. That would take longer at night.

Just observing...



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 12:50 AM
link   
sorry, but the wording of the thompson v. smith case is quite clear. the whole case is many pages long of dialogue between the two parties, and the issue that started the lawsuit has little to do with the consequences of the final ruling.

traveling is constitutionally protected, and does not require registration or licensing. black's law dictionary has all the definitions if you need them.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
sorry, but the wording of the thompson v. smith case is quite clear. the whole case is many pages long of dialogue between the two parties, and the issue that started the lawsuit has little to do with the consequences of the final ruling.

traveling is constitutionally protected, and does not require registration or licensing. black's law dictionary has all the definitions if you need them.


Yes, the Court opinion is quite clear. But apparently it isn't clear enough for you, assuming you actually read the opinion, as you obviously missed these parts of Thompson v. Smith:

1. "The exercise of such a common right the city may, under its police power, regulate in the interest of the public safety and welfare; but it may not arbitrarily or unreasonably prohibit or restrict it, nor may it permit one to exercise it and refuse to permit another of like qualifications, under like conditions and circumstances, to exercise it."

2. "The regulation of the exercise of the right to drive a private automobile on the streets of the city may be accomplished in part by the city by granting, refusing, and revoking, under rules of general application, permits to drive an automobile on its streets; but such permits may not be arbitrarily refused or revoked, or permitted to be held by some and refused to others of like qualifications, under like circumstances and conditions."

The ruling does not say that operating an automobile can't be regulated.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 





this is an exercise in conditioning. they want people used to checkpoints, traffic stops, and unlawful search and seizures.


Yah I got pulled over a few weeks ago and the cop said he thought he saw me throw a cigarette out the window(fire hazard and all around here) but I neither smoke nor had the window open in 13 degrees. I am hearing stories from friends that they got pulled over or had visits from the cops at their homes. This is getting creepy.

It just occurred to me after reading more of the posts that he may have been errr looking for something else.....he mentioned that the car did not smell like smoke.
edit on 7-2-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Well, the way Americans seem to enjoy shooting each other up and kidnapping people I have no problems with police doing some policing.

If they start abusing people, arresting people for no reason, or harashing you, then yes we have a problem.

But I'd feel pretty safe in saying for 99.99% of the population it will be nothing but,

'' morning maam, sir. Can I see your DL please. Your car looks in pretty good order, you two have a nice day now ''

BY GOD make sure you pack your guns to defend your constitution from these NAZI sympathizers!

edit, tell you what. why not just give them an alcoholic breathe tester and call it a random breathe test.
edit on 7-2-2013 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Kevinquisitor
 


This sounds highly illegal. There was, when I was living in Florida, no vehicle inspection. I have not heard of one being implemented since then, either. If a state wants such an inspection, they need to get a law passed for that, and then give drivers time to get their vehicles in shape, passed, and stickered. Random roadside inspections sounds like random searches to me, and thus against the Constitution.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 02:25 AM
link   
Massachusetts:

Excise tax for the use and maintenance of the roads $25/ per $1000 of vehicle value per year

Registration $75 for regular pass vehicle

Inspection $35

Mandatory insurance checked through DMV, no avoiding this as they are direct connected to the insurance agents.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:24 AM
link   
One thing is sure to come of this.

Increase in identity thefts.

Two things. Expert identity thieves who sale fake identities.

You make one law you need to make more to counteract the negative side effects of the first.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by Kevinquisitor
 


This is not a new thing . People have been driving older and older vehicles now days and have put off vital repairs . This means brakes , steering and lights have not been taken care of . As cars age they become less safe if not kept up . As far as the drug dog I have no problem with that . If there is drugs in the car and you are doing them you are a safety hazard to everyone . Then there is the blinding head lights and inappropriate lights that are popping up now days , that are a safety hazard for oncoming traffic or blinding drivers from behind .
If this is a safety check fine but if they start inappropriate searches checking for legal weapons of cars driven by people not prohibited to posess them that is something else . You can look for Homeland Security to try to confinscate what they determine to be illegal and nobody will tell them no !


In other words, You can take these three rights, but you can't have this one.

If you give them any of them, they will try to take them all.

This is why they do what they do. We find ways to justify it for them.

Sad really.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 06:26 AM
link   
I lived in Florida back in 1987-88,Melborne area. Back then they would set up on interstate 95 and have a rolling check as they called it. They were sneaky little troopers, They would set up signs telling you the check was X amount of miles ahead. Just allways seemed like they would also set up at the top of that last exit before the check, this is where the dogs are. Most arrest's came at these points, not the rolling check on 95.

So you can bet , they have worked with their traffic planners and came up the the best alternate routes to avoid the license/safety checks. Here is where they will really be. And alternative routes is where they'll catch the most people who have infractions.
edit on 7-2-2013 by openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by erwalker

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
traveling is constitutionally protected, and does not require registration or licensing. black's law dictionary has all the definitions if you need them.




2. "The regulation of the exercise of the right to drive a private automobile on the streets of the city may be accomplished in part by the city by granting, refusing, and revoking, under rules of general application, permits to drive an automobile on its streets; but such permits may not be arbitrarily refused or revoked, or permitted to be held by some and refused to others of like qualifications, under like circumstances and conditions."

The ruling does not say that operating an automobile can't be regulated.
Ummm......The difference is all in the wording...You will note that the court used "drive" which legally means "to drive a commercial vehicle" the use of this term defines the limits of the granting. Before you question the use of the term "private automobile"....ALL commercial vehicles are private and not public in nature, (to include City, County and State as these are incorporated entities). However, when these terms (drive and private) are linked private becomes private "commercial". In order for an individial to "drive" he/she must be a "driver", ie., "commercial", involved in commerce while in the act of driving.
All others are "traveling", and are merely travellers, which the courts do not address...You will note also that the court does not use the term "operate or operator".

YouSir



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by erwalker
 



The ruling does not say that operating an automobile can't be regulated.

the right to travel is constitutionally guaranteed.


"The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.



"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.

if anyone is wondering how this actually plays out in court:

it is quite clear.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 



Well, the way Americans seem to enjoy shooting each other up and kidnapping people I have no problems with police doing some policing.


This is why you have no rights. You have none when you push your responsibility off on someone else.
edit on 7-2-2013 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   
I don't understand; how can they conduct and execute inspections on vehicles when the state doesn't require it? That's right, there's no vehicle inspection here in Florida. There are literally cars and vans traversing down I-95 that are duct taped and bungee-corded together!

So if it's not mandated on a state level how can this be enforced as an after-thought on a city level? I tell ya, this state is so backwards, corrupt and impossible to manage that it needs to fall off into the Atlantic Ocean but only after I'm outta here first



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



I tell ya, this state is so backwards, corrupt and impossible to manage


That's actually a pretty good assessment of the Union as a whole.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
I lived in Florida back in 1987-88,Melborne area. Back then they would set up on interstate 95 and have a rolling check as they called it. They were sneaky little troopers, They would set up signs telling you the check was X amount of miles ahead. Just allways seemed like they would also set up at the top of that last exit before the check, this is where the dogs are. Most arrest's came at these points, not the rolling check on 95.

So you can bet , they have worked with their traffic planners and came up the the best alternate routes to avoid the license/safety checks. Here is where they will really be. And alternative routes is where they'll catch the most people who have infractions.
edit on 7-2-2013 by openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)



Up north (Daytona area) they conduct these stops mainly for drug running. Seeing they can't stop the influx of coc aine, heroine and pot coming into this state by way of oceanic cargo (which is mainly where the drug trafficking starts and that's thanks to the CIA) they try to eliminate the middle-man schmuck instead.



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by LewsTherinThelamon
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



I tell ya, this state is so backwards, corrupt and impossible to manage


That's actually a pretty good assessment of the Union as a whole.



I agree


That asteroid that's due to whiz by us next week is looking more and more promising!



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Sounds a little fishy to me. Let's just say for a second that this is not random or a grab at extra tax payer dollars. Instead, let's imagine a world where Cuba has nuclear missiles, where Hammas is backing Cuba in it's hate and condemnation of the US. Let's get creepier. Let's imagine that this Hamas (I think that is how you spell it) group has Iranian ties. And Iran has enriched uranium? Maybe? And has said that any movement on them will be considered an act of war? I'm feeling a little doom and gloom. Let's throw in a war with Syria, backed by Russia, who is in deep with China, who is backing North Korea, who claims to have developed their own ICBM and has something in the range of 8-20% enriched uranium, and is just wacky enough to use it!!! Whew, I'm out of breath...Good thing we don't live in THAT world. Because if we did, that would make Florida one of the first invasion points through Cuba's proximity. 90+ miles from Cuban soil to US soil. Having Police doing checkpoint searches in broad daylight along major freeways could be the first security steps, looking for a secret invasion of foreign hostiles. BOO!



posted on Feb, 7 2013 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 



That's right, there's no vehicle inspection here in Florida. There are literally cars and vans traversing down I-95 that are duct taped and bungee-corded together!


However, by doing so, technically they are doing so illegally and would be subject to punishment, if caught.

Chapter 316 of the Florida Statutes (for the purposes of required equipment, roughly 316.217 - 316.302) covers the safety requirements of vehicles in more detail.

..and as far as the Highway Patrol's Authority, technically they (or any municipality) can enforce these laws and dish out the corresponding penalties.

Title XXIII MOTOR VEHICLES Chapter 321 HIGHWAY PATROL

321.05 Duties, functions, and powers of patrol officers


Without the inspections that once were the norm, it is now on the officers patrolling to "catch" these violators, whereas before, a lot were caught (and kept off the road presumptively) when the state inspections were still around.





new topics
top topics
 
17
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join