Posted on 04/29/2011 2:05:09 PM PDT by moonshinner_09
Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck has adopted a common-sense approach to dealing with unlicensed drivers and the cars they drive. Under Beck's new rule, when officers at sobriety checkpoints stop unlicensed drivers, they can issue them tickets or, if they have no identification, arrest them. But police are no longer allowed to impound a car if a licensed driver or the registered and licensed owner is on hand or can pick up the car in a reasonable amount of time. This helps officers do their jobs while complying with a federal court ruling that set limits on when cars can be seized.
The LAPD's new rule doesn't give a free pass to drivers whose licenses have been revoked or who failed to get one in the first place. Rather, it applies the same rules to them that are applied to drunk drivers. In those cases, police aren't required to impound a vehicle as long as there is a licensed and sober individual available to drive it.
The change was made in part to ensure that sobriety checkpoints focused on nabbing drunk drivers. Beck said the old policy cast too wide a net and suggested that it disproportionately penalized undocumented immigrants, who are barred by law from getting driver's licenses. The new approach should also help prevent abuses like those uncovered in Bell, where police are accused of using impounds to help boost the city's revenues.
A 2005 federal court ruling said that police can't impound a car just because the driver is unlicensed. The California Highway Patrol and other police departments, including San Francisco's, have the same policy.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
This person really makes a great point.Bank robberies are a problem because they interrupt daily business activities of the bank, jeopardize customers and cause long lines waiting for the hostage drama to play out. Surely, none of us wants to see this happen. So let’s all adopt a “common sense” solution like the L.A. Times recommends for unlicensed drivers. No, the solution is not to enforce the law and arrest and imprison bank robbers. You might think it would be, but that’s just because you don’t have common sense like the Times editorialists. The “common sense” solution is, first, to call bank robbers something else that sounds a lot better like, say, “Unauthorized withdrawers of funds who use a firearm and scrawled note to expedite their transaction.” Then, following the Times model, simply open the doors to the vault and authorize anyone and everyone who so desires to stroll in, scoop up all the money they want and briskly walk out the door unhindered by any law enforcement whatsoever. Voila! The unpleasantness formerly known as “bank robbery” is now solved, L.A. Times-style, just like the problem of unlicensed drivers. Now, on to arson, rape, embezzlement, drug-smuggling ....
http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2011/04/april-29-buzz-the-cost-of-illegal-aliens-firefighters-and-schools-.html
And if the bank robbber is drunk, make sure the getaway driver is sober and can make sure the theif gets home safely.
Excellent. LOL
Impounding takes too much space. Crush the car - just like in “Goldfinger”.
I’d love to know how many of the unlicensed illegal immigrant drivers actually show up in court and pay their ticket. It is cheaper just to buy a new identity.
So, just impound the ones without insurance. That’ll cover most of the illegals, licensed or not.
If done like in Goldfiger, the unlicensed driver should be in the trunk.
Ping!
I wonder if the Latimese newspaper was paid for publishing it -- and is the Los Angeles Police Chief getting any money?
It's supposed to. They aren't supposed to be here or even driving.
Beck is in never never land now, giving illegal aliens more rights then citizens by executive fiat, power he doesn't have.
But this is just part of the larger push to legalize the illegals: the latest initiative of La Raza and LULAC to defeat law enforcement.
It’s not the impounding it’s the 30 day hold they put on that makes unlicensed drivers pay for 30 days of storage, which is often more then the car is worth. This lets the tow yard and the city auction the car off and split the money.
I don’t have much sympathy for illegals, but the fact is they don’t really catch very many drunken drives at these constitutionally dubious “checkpoints.” They are used primarily to raise revenue from other violations.
Speaking as someone who has fallen victim to having his car impounded because he was driving with a suspended license (scofflaw) not once but twice as a much younger man, I don’t have a problem with them impounding the vehicles of drivers with suspended licenses. (They suspend your license now days for practically any violation that goes to collections.)
They just shouldn’t be allowed to hold the car for 30 days so they can run the bill up.
As for the impounding themselves. Heck. LA will impound your vehicle for parking on a surface street in Hollywood overnight.
If they are illegals then no problem.
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.