Posted on 05/31/2006 12:54:05 PM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
Police arrest 67 at checkpoints Wednesday, May 31, 2006 By NADIA M. TAYLOR Staff Reporter Officers issued more than 1,800 tickets and arrested 67 people over the Memorial Day weekend at several driver's license checkpoints throughout the city, police said.
Most of the 1,834 tickets issued were for not having a driver's license or proof of insurance, according to interim Mobile police Chief Lester Hargrove.
Fifty-four people were arrested on outstanding misdemeanor warrants, and 13 people were arrested on felony warrants, Hargrove said. Most charges stemmed from traffic violations or drug offenses, police said.
One man, Carl Mitchell Washington, 22, was driving with his 2-year-old son when police stopped him at a checkpoint and found about 30 pills, which were believed to be Ecstasy, and $2,775 in cash, Hargrove said.
Washington was charged Sunday with possession of a controlled substance and endangering the welfare of a child and was released on a $3,500 bond, according to the Mobile County Metro Jail log.
Under Alabama law, possession of a controlled substance is a Class C felony, punishable by up to 10 years in jail. Endangering the welfare of a child is a Class A misdemeanor, which can carry a sentence of up to one year in jail, according to state law.
In addition to the weekend arrests, police seized two handguns and towed 53 vehicles as a result of the checkpoints, Hargrove said.
The topic of roadblocks garnered substantial media attention last month after two men were shot to death at a McDonald's drive-through in northeast Mobile. After the April 5 killings, city officials called for more frequent random checkpoints to look for and seize illegal weapons.
The latest round of checkpoints -- which ran Friday through Monday -- was the third weekend since April 28 that police have set up roadblocks in Mobile. Police issued a total of 1,362 citations during the first two weekends, which took place April 28 and 29 and May 5 and 6.
Unreasonable search and seizure and all that.
Creepy. I can't understand why people put up with this stuff. When they have them here, they stop 100 people, MAYBE there are 3 or 4 "criminals." Seems kind of unreasonable to me.
Yeah, great idea! Let's extend this to houses too. Door-to-door checkpoints! No warrants! We'll catch lots of "bad guys" that way. After all, if you're doing nothing wrong, then why should you not want police going through your house too?
Papers please.
Glad I'm not alone. This country is falling apart, and it's not due to the commoners. They can not ticket people here for not wearing seatbelts. Maybe they should check women smokers, to see if they're expecting.
Just a question:
Does law enforcement need a search warrant to search a car at a random stop?
More proof that drinking and driving check points have nothing to do with catching drunk drivers.
Your papers, comrade.
Couldn't agree more...checkpoints worked wonders in Germany.
IIRC, SCOTUS ruled "No" I could very well be wrong.
I have insurance, I have a conceal carry permit for my pistol, my automobiles comply fully with state law, and I don't drive around my car with drugs and other contraband. I got stopped at one roadblock, and I informed the officer I had a pistol in my car, and I showed him my permit, along with the other pertinent information, and then I was sent on my way.
The changing demographics of this city necessitate that measures like this occur or else we run the real danger of becoming the next Birmingham, a crime-ridden s***hole, in which a lawyer was kidnapped yesterday in a fairly brazen fashion. It is not like they are stopping pedestrians, and they are not going into people's homes. If you are not on a private road you are on a public road, you have no ownership of a public road. Incidentally, a week after the first roadblock, the PR did a poll and found that 81% of area residents support the roadblocks, the highest level of support for anything recently polled.
In order to get to my home in this nice well-kept area on the Bay, I have to drive through a once nice area that has since turned into a ghetto, I have no way around it. Whenever I buy groceries, I take a pistol with me. Roadblocks have made me feel safer, and they don't violate anyone's rights because you don't have a right to drive. The ability to drive is a privelege granted to you by the state, it's not your constitutional right, and I will say this, every drug dealer, every gang banger, every thug they take off the streets so that the law abiding citizens don't have to sleep with shotguns by their beds, I'm all for it.
Easy solution. Post the sites of the checkpoints on the town website. The only people caught will be idiots.
I guess it would depend upon your definition of essential and a little temporary.
susie
If by "random stop" you mean a stop justified by any one of the hundreds of sections in the motor vehicle code, the answer is yes, you generally need a warrant. But there are lots and lots of exceptions to the warrant requirement for a moving premises.
Two of the most common ones are:
1) Consent. The driver says, "Yea, go ahead and search." Lots of arrests for contraband follow those words.
2) Search incident to arrest. Arrest the driver for minor charge (no ops, no insurance, unpaid ticket, whatever), and a complete inventory search is standard procedure.
I think they only need probable cause. For instance, if they believe they smell marijuana or if a drug dog hits on the car. However, this may just be TX.
susie
Oh, well that makes it alright then.
and they don't violate anyone's rights because you don't have a right to drive. The ability to drive is a privelege granted to you by the state, it's not your constitutional right
Pure BS and already debunked thoroughly on this thread.
In this county, almost anyone can get a pistol permit, if you are not a felon, and you can pay the very modest fee, then it's some paperwork, a few other things, and you are then sent on your way with your permit. It's not unreasonable to ask people to do this so they can carry their pistols with them. And it's not as if everyone is going to be targeted, as I think law enforcement has a pretty good idea of who requires further searching and who doesn't
Last time I checked, they don't do that with citizens. They make citizens post bond before getting out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.