1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Random Taffic Stop Gun Checks

Discussion in 'Legal' started by atlctyslkr, Jun 10, 2006.

  1. atlctyslkr

    atlctyslkr Well-Known Member

    Seatbelt checks and intoxication checkpoints have been around for a while. Now it's checking for valid insurance, what next? How long will it be before California or New York decide to do random traffic stops for guns? The search and seizure rights supposedly protected by the constitution have been consistenly erroded.
  2. AJ Dual

    AJ Dual member

    The Milwaukee County Sherriff's dept. was doing this in Milwaukee last year. They did use the pretext of minor traffic or safety violations, not just random checkpoints.

    I'll fully grant they focused on the neighborhoods where the odds were 95% of the guns they found would be illegal somehow, but the principle of the thing still bugs me a bit...
  3. Serendipity

    Serendipity member

    NY has been using vehicle scanners, in search of hidden guns, for several years now.
  4. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Well-Known Member

    There's only one non-organic technology I know of that can find a firearm in a vehicle. As far as I'm aware, not a single system of the type has been deployed yet. If this is anything other than a rumor, I'd like a reference...
  5. Soybomb

    Soybomb Well-Known Member

    I've always wondered if I'm driving and hit one of our famous Illinois traffic check points with a long gun case visible in the cargo area of my hatchback if they'd just glance at my license and insurance and wave me on, or ask me to pull over.
  6. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    Most likely they would ask if you had a FOID or just do a FOID inquiry through LEADS when they ran your license. I have never asked someone to produce a FOID card. I just run them through LEADS when I run their ID.

  7. Soybomb

    Soybomb Well-Known Member

    Thanks Jeff, good to know. The pessimist in me was half expecting an open the case and run the serial thing. Although I dont think you can read the serial with the side saddle on the 870 anyway... :D
  8. evan price

    evan price Well-Known Member

    Since possession of a firearm would not impair the driver's ability a roadside checkpoint would be the ultimate in fascism.

    However, How Many of us can say they have been pulled over at the wee hours by a LEO who states, "You were weaving a bit", or "One of your License Plate lamps is out" or "You didn't come to a full and complete stop before turning right on red."
    My favorite, "I had trouble reading your tag.". This was on a pickup with a hitch ball on the step bumper. The LEO told me, after I objected, that step bumper hitches were intended for temporary use only and the ball should be removed imediately after towing....! Of course his first words to me after pulling me over were, "Good evening sir I stopped you because I couldn't clearly read your license plate have you had anything to drink tonight sir?"

    As long as LEO's are taught to turn minor traffic stops like that into big violations and arrests, we will always have roadside checks for concealed firearms.
  9. Overman

    Overman Member

    That's nothing. I was pulled over for "accelerating fast out of an intersection". No kidding. After that happened, I did some research on the legality of that. Turns out that was what they call "reasonable suspicion" (particularly when done at 2:30 AM which is just after the bars close). "Resonable suspicion". A much lower standard than what most people think they need to pull you over (in other words, "probable cause").
  10. Lupinus

    Lupinus Well-Known Member

    Random checkpoints are, in my opinion, unconstitutional.

    They shouldn't be able to stop your car to ask you questions or make you prove something anymore then they should be able to enter your home whenever they feel like it so you can prove you aren't doing something illegal.
  11. Vex

    Vex Well-Known Member

    Driving on a public roadway is a privilege. Owning a house and being safe from unwarranted random searches while on your personal property is a right. That's the difference.

    Also, it's not a random "search" checkpoint. It's a checkpoint to ensure drivers are complying with traffic laws: insurance, intoxication, license, and registraton are among the most popular.
  12. Chris Rhines

    Chris Rhines Well-Known Member

    Driving on a public roadway is no more a privledge than walking on a public sidewalk.

    This misconception needs to be killed off before it gets any more traction.

    - Chris
  13. evan price

    evan price Well-Known Member

    Lupinus, that's why they are required to stop you for a minor traffic violation, like a burnt out side marker, or a cracked windshield, or a parking pass hanging from the rear view mirror (Obstructed view). These are all minor things that go on every day. When they feel like stopping you they can usually find SOMETHING in the vehicle code.

    Good advice I received fro ma LEO friend at a party after we had beers:

    Ensure your car is 100% up to code. Check every bulb often. Use your blinker at every time you change direction. Make sure you come to a complete stop at every signal or stop sign. Obey speed limits to the letter. Wear your seat belt. DOn't put anything on the glass of your car or hanging from the mirror.

    Also: Especially with smaller cars, the big Police cruisers, when tucked close behind you, can change the way the wind moves over both cars (like NASCAR drafting). By easing the cruiser over to the side they can get your vehicle to drift with them, even without you moving the steering wheel. If that takes you onto the side line of the road, that's failure to travel in marked lanes. Even if you keep it in the lane, the car may "wobble" a little as you correct course, Presto, You are "weaving" & it looks good on the videotape.
  14. Overman

    Overman Member

    They are not technically unconstitutional because you are under no obligation to enter a checkpoint. You are absolutely within your rights to do a legal u-turn and not enter the checkpoint.

    Of course, depending on how many other citizens are u-turning, you might get scrutinized after the turn, and you had better make sure you do a 100% legal u-turn.
  15. Manedwolf

    Manedwolf member

    Mumbles Menino was talking about random checks of cars coming into MA from NH, for "illegal guns". I think people might have reminded him about that fourth amendment thing, because that notion went away.

    And I don't see how anything could detect a steet and polymer item in a steel and polymer vehicle. And if the rounds are kept in an airtight box, no powder scent, either.
  16. rbernie

    rbernie Well-Known Member

    Sadly, the Supreme Court of the United States disagrees with you, so long as the stop meets some unquantifiable standard of 'minimal intrusion'.
  17. DoubleTapDrew

    DoubleTapDrew Well-Known Member

    +1 on the unconstitutional feeling. Sounds like the whole point of them is that you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent.
    "You are just driving home from the range huh? Prove it. Are those guns legal? We'll just see about that. Step out of the vehicle. Have you been drinking?" :barf:
    Some sheeple say "If it saves just one life it's worth it". How many saved lives would it take for you to give up ALL your rights? Think about how many men DIED to give you those rights.
  18. neoncowboy

    neoncowboy Well-Known Member

    So, how do they get around the suspect/driver saying, 'no officer, I do not consent to any searches of my person or my car'?

    Is a burned out tail light/speeding/minor traffic violation enough for the 'arresting' officer to have PC to search the car (as it would be if he were making an arrest?) I didn't think it was.
  19. Lupinus

    Lupinus Well-Known Member

    My car is my personal property. As such a government agent has no right searching it without probably cause or a warrant.

    To search it you need probably cause or a warrant, you can't simply pull over a motorist randomly order them out of the car and go through it. You shouldn't be able to set up a road block either and order someone who has given you no probably cause to prove they aren't doing something illegal- IE driving under the influence, without insurance, etc. You don't have to prove innocence the government needs to prove cause and prove you guilty that is the basis of our country.

    It is thinking like yours VEX that is what is slowly turning the constitution into a worthless pile of confetti.
  20. Lupinus

    Lupinus Well-Known Member

    I need to start typing faster lol

    Not if you can't saftly do so. Say I drive a full sized van and it is a narrow two lane street with ditches on each side. If I can't do the U-Turn saftly it isn't legal. It is a publicly owned right of way and I am in my own private property. Police have no right stopping me with no cause and demanding me to prove I am doing nothing illegal. I will gladly tell the police officer "no, you can't see my insurence card." I have a right to not be harrased by police on a fishing trip, just because I am driving down the road does not change this right.

    They seem to agree with a lot of bull droppings lately.

Share This Page