Mobile has scheduled another round of checkpoints for today, tomorrow and Sunday. This has become very routine and almost a questionable method of generating revenue. Is it part of the CityStat program for the officers to meet quotas? How much cash are these checkpoints raking in every weekend?
I have serious questions about the constitutionality of regular police checkpoints being set up without specific purpose. I believe the Supreme Court suspended individual 4th Amendment rights for sobriety checkpoints, because that action was deemed of societal interests greater than individual rights. The use of generalized roadblocks to collect evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing was never a part of that Supreme Court opinion. The guidelines left much of the details up to the states, but these things must be random, not target people based upon physical characteristics and they must be advertised in advance. Just how random are checkpoints that are setup every Friday and Saturday night?
The City of Mobile is now using these intrusions into our lives as a means to generate cash and that goes against the whole intent set forth by the higher courts. Someone needs to take a closer look at this activity. Maybe News 5 could get some feedback from some local defense lawyers and a law professor familiar with constitutional law,
I know this is a touchy subject with many people, because quiet a few think the end justifies the means. However, I am not exactly ready for Mobile to turn into a police state where our basic constitutional rights are tossed in the waste basket in favor of hard, cold cash.
These check points are designed to check for proof of: "Current" Drivers License, Vehicle Registration and Automobile Insurance. If any of the 3 are not available the officer will run a check of the drivers record sometimes revealing out standing warrants. Not to mention they are checking for DUI's. I believe it's more for our benefit than any other. I Thank M.P.D. for trying to keep us safe.
The issue of checkpoints has been taken to the Supreme Court many times and their use has been narrowed greatly. I would like to hear an expert opinion.
No offense intended bobcat. Are you an expert? Lawyer? Police?
I think people are pretty understanding when sobriety checkpoints are set up around holidays known for heavy drinking, but when checkpoints are setup every weekend to write citations for a veritable laundry list of possible offenses it begins to look like a cash cow driven by quotas.
How does something remain random when it becomes routine? How does something remain random, if certain areas are targeted? I seriously think there are some constitutional issues that need to be addressed, concerning these weekly checkpoints.
Bamabob................"No Offense" is key here. I don't think that it takes an Expert, Lawyer or Police Officer to understand that if one doesn't violate the laws there is no cause for a violation which in-fact will not create revenue. I am now questioning the real purpose of this thread. BTW, I'm not a Rocket Scientist either. Next time maybe you will state earlier in your thread that you require specific and "professional" responses (only) instead of grandstanding a fellow message board member. Live in Peace.
I suppose you would have no problem if the police come into your home and search tonight, just because your neighborhood happens to be on a list, or the population in your subdivision meet a certain profile developed by the police. Would you?
I believe I found this exact subject nearly word for word by doing what anyone on the internet has the ability to do and that is, GOOGLE...(traffic check points). I wish you all the best in achieving your G.E.D. diploma as you referenced in your other post about smoked meat (tongue) on toast. (YAWN).....ROTFLMAO.
Is there a constitutional question involved with routine, regular checkpoints, or not? That was my original question. Based upon the little reading I have done on the subject, I believe there is a potential problem with these checkpoints. Whether or not it is a noble thing to do in the opinion of some is irrelevant. It is a matter of constitutional law. A law that protects us all from unlawful search and seizure.
