Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Driver's License Regulations Are Slanted Against Latino Immigrants
The Columbus Dispatch ^ | June 2, 2007 | JOSÉ LUIS MAS

Posted on 06/02/2007 7:44:38 AM PDT by buccaneer81

Driver's license regulations are slanted against Latino immigrants Saturday, June 2, 2007 3:31 AM

Since the recent Dispatch article "Checkpoint for Latinos, not drunks, critics charge," responses to my criticism of the May 5 (Cinco de Mayo) checkpoints in Latino neighborhoods have included at least two letters to the editor (May 16 and 18) and a Dispatch editorial on May 14. The prevailing opinion appears to be that my condemnation of the checkpoint was off-target and that such checkpoints provide law enforcement with a useful tool for the citation of people who should not be on the road. I stand by my criticism of the checkpoint and wish to clarify the reasons behind it.

According to Carl Booth, Franklin County DUI Task Force coordinator, the checkpoint area was targeted because, "The officers were seeing a great rise in people with no license in that area." Excuse me, but that expressly tells me that the event was just what I suggested: a no-license checkpoint. The location of the checkpoint -- a neighborhood with heavy Latino representation, many without Ohio driver's licenses -- made it like shooting ducks in a barrel. Does that make it legally or morally wrong? I guess it depends on your point of view.

Courts consistently have held that police must have probable cause or, more accurately, "articulable suspicion" in order to stop your car and inquire as to your state of inebriation, licensing status or whatever. That's because the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that everyone has a right "to be secure in their persons . . . against unreasonable searches and seizures." Driving-under-the-influence checkpoints have been declared to fall outside of the Fourth Amendment because the checkpoints impose a small inconvenience relative to the great danger that drunken drivers impose on the roads. No-license checkpoints are another matter, however, and while not wholly illegal under all circumstances, their location within a Latino neighborhood does raise constitutional questions and certain moral challenges.

You see, prior to 1996, a driver's license in Ohio was just that: a license confirming a level of skill adequate to drive a car on the state's roads. In that year, much like today, illegal immigration was being heavily debated in Washington, and individual states pondered the question of states' rights to act independently from the federal government to control immigration. The U.S. Constitution prohibited that, so various states experimented with the denial of driver's licenses to those who could not confirm the status of their visas. Ohio's Bureau of Motor Vehicles, acting without legislative support, imposed such a standard, and its constitutionality was not challenged, in part because of the heavily politicized legal atmosphere.

However, demonstrating a high level of cynicism, the bureau exempted Canadians from the visa requirement, saying in effect that if you were from north of the border you were OK, but if you were from south of the border you were not. Apologists might be willing to perform moral and legal contortions justifying the distinctions, but I am not. The driver's-license provision taking away Ohio licenses from undocumented Latinos was a racist and intolerant measure.

Of course, the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, changed everything. Federal and state governments found more than sufficient reason to revamp licensing requirements, but the reality of an undocumented community firmly imbedded in Ohio remains.

I do not believe that it's appropriate to drive without a license, as one of the letters to the editor suggests, but I also do not believe it is OK to target vulnerable populations when their vulnerability has been artificially crated by the state. My position has been and remains that it is imperative to find a way to license Ohio drivers without delving into their immigration status, as many states found a way to do and as many in law enforcement support. The recent announcement of a bipartisan immigration agreement in Washington promises to bring undocumented families out of the shadows and into the light of American freedom. That promises to solve the licensing problem for most such immigrants once and for all.

And as for DUI measures? I firmly support and call for more, not fewer, initiatives to prevent the endangering of our families. We need more education, more prevention and more effective law enforcement to ensure the safety of all residents of Franklin County.

JOSÉ LUIS MAS Chairman

Ohio Hispanic Coalition

Columbus


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: aliens; columbus; dui; illegalimmigration; illegals; invasion; nolicense
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last
The fifth column hard at work this lovely Saturday.

No mas, Senor Mas.

1 posted on 06/02/2007 7:44:42 AM PDT by buccaneer81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
If you're taking flak, you're over the target.

Now if we can just get ICE to check out the background of Mr. Mas....

L

2 posted on 06/02/2007 7:47:15 AM PDT by Lurker (Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing small pox to plague.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
The location of the checkpoint -- a neighborhood with heavy Latino representation, many without Ohio driver's licenses -- made it like shooting ducks in a barrel. Does that make it legally or morally wrong? I guess it depends on your point of view.

No. it doesn't. They're breaking the law. IF they get caught, too bad.

3 posted on 06/02/2007 7:50:06 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

Amazing, is it not, how liberals will twist and turn and back and fill? If you are driving without a license, isn’t that illegal? Is it not a good thing to get illegal drivers off the road before they hurt themselves or somebody else?

Am I missing something here?


4 posted on 06/02/2007 7:51:21 AM PDT by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
I’ll bet this guy doesn’t do very well at the race track! Typical liberal BS. Question the motives, not the result.
5 posted on 06/02/2007 7:52:29 AM PDT by jwpjr (Sigh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

he edited the 4th Amendment...

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


6 posted on 06/02/2007 7:56:30 AM PDT by Vn_survivor_67-68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

I was on jury duty the week of 12/11/06 and one of my fellow jurors told me that her nephew was killed a year earlier by two illegals DRIVING their truck with FAULTY BRAKES to the BRAKE SHOP to be repaired when – surprise, surprise — the BRAKES FAILED AND THEY KILLED HER NEPHEW. I guess these MORONS thought they were back in Mexico where – in addition to driving DRUNK — they and their idiot friends do crap like that all the time. Can you say “Tijuana Taxi?” Can you say “TOW TRUCK?”

The driver got 4 years in prison and will be deported when he gets out.

Gotta wonder how long it will take him to sneak back in and kill someone else?
Estimates indicate they are killing around 25 American citizens each day, either with vehicles or via other criminal activity.

I can’t wait until the interstates start filling up with Mexican truckers on tight deadlines – and I do mean DEADlines – hurtling at carloads of unsuspecting native-born American citizens – all 387 of us.

Do you suppose this crap might stop if one of Bush’s daughters became a victim?

Of course, unlike the rest of us, they are driven to their endless round of parties by an armed SS detail, which eliminates the risk that they will be tempted to drive drunk themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_zCpQZ-H94


7 posted on 06/02/2007 7:57:46 AM PDT by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
I guess the trick here is that if you live in an area where *everyone’s* breaking a particular law then the cops mustn’t take any steps to detect those violations and issue the appropriate summonses.

One can only wonder how this clown feels about identity theft...particularly usin g the social security number of another to....well,you know.

8 posted on 06/02/2007 7:58:09 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative ("The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."-Karl Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
The reason his population is vulnerable is because they have broken the law! Why do the journalists and guest commenters never address the root of the problem? The ILLEGAL immigrants are ILLEGAL! So he wants some laws upheld but not others? My husband is an immigrant and a 20 year US citizen. Whenever the MSM refers to immigration problems, by their omission of the word ‘illegal’ they are including all the legal immigrants who went through the proper channels to be lawfully in this country. At least the masses do see through the MSM on this one.
9 posted on 06/02/2007 7:59:55 AM PDT by originalbuckeye (I want a hero....I'm holding out for a hero (politically))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

Yeah, this guy is truly nutty.


10 posted on 06/02/2007 8:00:05 AM PDT by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Now if we can just get ICE to check out the background of Mr. Mas....

He's a local attorney, but hey, they'll let anybody into this country these days.

11 posted on 06/02/2007 8:04:30 AM PDT by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
He's a local attorney,

Maybe they ought to take a hard look at his High School yearbook.

L

12 posted on 06/02/2007 8:07:31 AM PDT by Lurker (Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing small pox to plague.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

“the bureau exempted Canadians from the visa requirement”

*******************************

He is right you know.

Canadians, especially those Canadians that have abused the extremely lax immigration laws of Canada, should not be allowed a US state drivers license ANYWHERE without a background check.

If visitors with TB are not allowed into the country, why should we give legal papers to any virulent diseased person?


13 posted on 06/02/2007 8:08:59 AM PDT by texas booster (Join FreeRepublic's Folding@Home team (Team # 36120) Cure Alzheimer's!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
Driver's License Regulations Are Slanted Against Latino Immigrants

Wanna' see "slanted"?
Just be a gringo taking a vacation in Mexico and have a run-in
with the local Mexican police.
14 posted on 06/02/2007 8:11:14 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
Wow, setting up a checkpoint were ILLEGALS/CRIMINALS might be, what a concept.
15 posted on 06/02/2007 8:12:59 AM PDT by unixfox (The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
They are a vulnerable population because they are here illegally. This is by their own choice.
You guys think just because these people managed to break into the family estate that they can now use the car, have a right to be added to the health plan and are guaranteed a place at the dining table every night.
When someone breaks into your house or your country you call the cops and have them removed!!!!!
16 posted on 06/02/2007 8:17:58 AM PDT by oldenuff2no
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vn_survivor_67-68
His statement from the article: ... the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that everyone has a right "to be secure in their persons . . . against unreasonable searches and seizures."

His "editing" does not alter what the Amendment says.

Even though the issue at the heart of this is one that we have strong opinions on, it is his opinion. For us to deny his right to express his opinion would be starting down the slippery slope to having our own rights denied.

17 posted on 06/02/2007 8:22:14 AM PDT by LantzALot (Yes, it’s my opinion. No, it’s not humble.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
Driver's License Regulations Are Slanted Against Latino Immigrants

What are they saying? That Scandinavian illegal aliens are somehow immune to those checkpoints?

18 posted on 06/02/2007 8:26:14 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (When toilet paper is a luxury, you have achieved communism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

Any Hispanics who might read this: I respect you a lot more when you have an English first name. Or English nickname. The JOSÉ LUIS MAS who wrote this compliant isn’t really an American. He is a squatter

There are exceptions but when you have no English name, but two, three or four Spanish ones I can tell you are a too much Hispanic and not enough American. Same goes for Chinese and others. I love it when I see a restaurant with the name “Danny Chung’s”. That’s how it should be. His real name might be Tsing-Ching but he has an English nickname to show respect for America and our Anglo/English traditions and culture


19 posted on 06/02/2007 8:35:43 AM PDT by dennisw (The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
My position has been and remains that it is imperative to find a way to license Ohio drivers without delving into their immigration status, as many states found a way to do and as many in law enforcement support.

You are absolutely correct, a persons immigration status should have nothing to do with it.

Unfortunately, what we have in the u.S right now is about 30 million illegal aliens that are not participating in any form of immigration at all. They are criminal illegal aliens that did NOT attempt immigration, because swimming a river or jumping a fence in the middle of the night is NOT immigration.

It is called “Breaking the Law.”

Breaking the law can result in revocation of drivers license in many offences. Here in Texas you can loose your drivers license for buying a teenager a pack of cigarettes! It would seem to me that long term and repeated violation of Federal Alien Residency Status laws should at least carry the penalty as sneaking a teen a pack of smokes!

20 posted on 06/02/2007 8:44:14 AM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson