Posted on 06/04/2013 5:00:23 AM PDT by relictele
Per vehicle code and opinion of courts it is an arrest. Do you need the sections and citations?
Officers couldn’t pull you over specifically for a seatbelt violation initially either.
As much “this will never happen” that has ended up happening (across the regulatory and legal spectrum), by the time we get to old Soviet style or Chinese style control with crap like this they will have a nice FAT database of DNA, and when Senator X’s grandchild needs a liver, someone who matches will “have an accident”...
We have this kind of arguement for every kind and level of government crap, and the folks who are all “This is gonna lead to misery and woe” are always right and the folks who are all “Well this might save one little waif from getting buggered by the devils right hand man” are wrong and they keep lapping this sht up...
My answer is what happens in San Francisco Bay Area, of which I have knowledge. The police department makes no money when someone is arrested. In fact, each arrest costs more to make than is ever recovered by any fine for traffic or criminal arrest. Any money that might be recovered goes to several entities including the courts; victims recovery funds and to the State and county.
I have no knowledge of other parts of CA, but it was our policy that DUI checkpoints were well publicized many days prior and were usually around national holidays. In fact, they were the subject of public service announcements and were broadcast on radio and local television. On the roadway, one mile before the checkpoint, there were flashing road signs warning of the upcoming checkpoint. There were many side streets to turn off of and no one was stopped for taking that option and by taking that side street, drivers could go parallel to the same street the checkpoint was working and therefore, would not be delayed.
And, the “Governor’s Fund” is for state highway enforcement and the money for the checkpoints comes from grants funded by fines. I do realize that money is fungible, but when we used to report back to the state and we received funds from the OTS program to cover some of our costs.
Now your experience may be more than mine, but what I have stated above is what happens in police agencies in the SF area.
As far as your other comments on the TSA etc, you get no argument from me. However, your comments about DUI being big business etc, is really hard to fathom. No one goes to “traffic school” for DUI and the ‘kick backs’ etc, are something of which, I have no knowledge and if you do, I would advise you to make a criminal complaint to the local DA. (that is if you trust the DA is not part of the cabal)
“The fact that none were found is merely proof that they need to expand the operation.”
I hope you are being sarcastic. Surely.
But, with all the anti-4th amendment Nazis around here you never know.
I can’t wait for Google’s self driving car technology in cars. Driving fines will drop to near zero. Unfortunately all law enforcement will become automated as well. We will get $2,000 J-walking tickets deducted from our bank accounts for stepping one inch outside the crosswalk lines. The trough eaters must be fed.
I would refer you to Terry v. Ohio.
Also, please tell me what law or decision would allow a police officer to take a DNA swab at the scene of a traffic stop....citation please!
Yes, I was indeed being sarcastic.
Tell me pappy, are you suggesting the government is trustworthy, would never spy on, harm, threaten or intentionally intimidate law abiding citizens?
Irrelevant question. A DUI checkpoint is not spying.
Rational thinking would seem to conclude that check-points, which you seem to be fond of, do absolutely nothing to restrict your pet fear.
Or maybe you should move to LA, where they apparently have no drunk illegals.
Not spying, just a hopelessly inefficient public safety strategy, full of big govt theater and lots of OT.
They only deter those who are responsible anyway, the drivers who may have 1-3 drinks at dinner or over a couple hours at a party.
Of course, these drivers are statistically insignificant in serious injury/fatality traffic accidents, but they DO usually have jobs, families, and other things to lose, so they often plead out quickly and quietly, pay huge fines and do the county-contracted "defensive driving" school and "drug/alcohol awareness" and are usually willing to submit to lengthy and expensive terms of probation in lieu of lengthy license suspensions or ANY jail time.
And in case you missed it the first time, THESE DRIVERS are no more prone to involvement in serious injury/fatality traffic accidents than SOBER drivers.
Division 17 of CA Vehicle code, Section 40500
People V. McGaughran
People V. Hubbard
U.S. V. $404,905
All point out the nature of a traffic stop being an arrest (to name a few).
I haven’t said that you could or would be swabbed at this time for a stop, but that given the proclivities of the day and the history of laws such as seat belt laws, it’s inevitable that it will occur. If the Supremes have ruled you can be swabbed during some type of arrest, and a traffic stop IS [fact] and arrest, and “it’s just a quick painless swab”, douchebags are gonna run with this and expand it.
In an age where the bureaucrat and media meme is that “your children belong to the community”, “guns are evil” and you’re going to be required to purchase health care or be fined or taxed (definition depending on what suits or flys with politico’s at the moment) among other things, to believe otherwise is to either be in denial or blind to history and reason...
A DL isn’t a right, travel is, and those “kooks” pretty consistently win in court as long as they are tight on their contract law and haven’t entered into licensing contracts that void their rights. I know people closely who have won on that subject, and on refusing to become licensed as a business in a city.
Irrelevant question.
Is it not the government and their agents creating these checkpoint operations?
If the government lies, threatens and intimidates law abiding citizens, should we not assume government lies and breaks the laws as a matter of routine even during their checkpoint operations?
LOL, ridiculous.
Are you suggesting government, city, county, state, feds, etc., make no money and or do not recover the money it took to arrest someone, through imposed fined, pays fees, asset seizures?
Could I see the link to this?
Read the first case McGarughran and it had to do with two guys possibly involved in a drug case at a school. Yes the officer stopped them for suspicious activity as they were crossing school grounds (a known drug sales location), in a vehicle (the detention) and did a warrant check and arrested them for the warrants (the arrest). The stop itself is not an arrest...it is a detention.
40500 is administrative...it tells the officer what do do after an arrest is made for violations of the vehicle code..i.e.; release on a citation. The stop itself is not an arrest, as many people are stopped and many sent on their way with a warning...again read Terry v. Ohio it is very settled law...
Which Hubbard case....the ones I could find were not in CA and would have no standing.
Re: “your children belong to the community” and “guns are evil” I don’t believe in any of these things, but try as I might, I don’t know what this has to do with DUI checkpoints?
Are you suggesting government, city, county, state, feds, etc., make no money and or do not recover the money it took to arrest someone, through imposed fines, fees, asset seizures etc?
Could I see the link to this?
What I am saying is when you calculate all of the time involved in a drunk driving arrest ( district attorney time, officers time, court time, logging of evidence, judge’s time, court reporter, jury expenses, expert witnesses (usually a toxicologist and sometimes a physician etc), the fine from a DUI does not pay for all of these expenses and by the time any fine money makes it to a local agency (again speaking from my experience) there is not much left.
Now if a defendant does not go to trial, some of the expenses are mitigated but all of the work, short of the trial is done, and the expenses are incurred. The fine for first time DUI in CA can be as high as $3500 but can be as low as $1400, plus 48 hours in jail and then DUI school and possibly probation and as you can see that vast majority of the fine is consumed by the expenses. Also, judges are known to give the defendant a “payment” plan which might be as long as two years.
For other than traffic, say an rape or assault, the cost of investigation alone might run into the thousands of dollars. This does not include all of the court costs or forensics. And, since most defendants are indigent, from whom do your recover expenses?
We did receive some assest seizure money, on occasion but not anything you could bank on and by the time it got to us, it was not very much. Now, I cannot answer for the Feds or State just my experience.
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.