SACRAMENTO – California police agencies are using millions of dollars in federal funds to set up DUI checkpoints, but they are apparently more effective in finding unlicensed drivers than drunks, according to the Investigative Reporting Program at the University of California, Berkeley. Its examination also says that thousands of cars are being impounded for 30 days, apparently in defiance of a 2005 court ruling making declaring such impounds illegal.
State Senator Gil Cedillo says the impounds are taking focus away from finding DUI drivers in favor of targeting poor immigrant communities. Cedillo for years has pushed for allowing illegal immigrants get driver’s licenses so they can be tested and made to purchase auto insurance. He says taking cars from immigrants who need them is not what DUI checkpoints were intended to do. It can cost as much as $4,000 to pay for storage, fines and towing for a car impounded for 30 days. The report says municipalities share revenue with tow yards.
‘”They engage in it because it’s a revenue stream for them that they find is now lucrative,” said Cedillo.
DUI checkpoints uncover seven times more unlicensed drivers than drunk drivers, according to the report. Cedillo says in immigrant communities, that ratio is as much as 60 to one.
“It’s not effective, it’s not efficient, and now we’re finding it’s not constitutional,” said Cedillo.
The report cites a 2005 federal appellate court ruling that says cars can’t be taken from driver’s who don’t have a driver’s license.
But the State Office of Traffic Safety, which administers 14 million dollars in DUI Checkpoint funds from the federal government, says the case doesn’t apply because it was narrowly applied to a car owner whose car was taken from his driveway, not from a public roadway.
Office spokesman Chris Cochran says 20 percent of car crashes involve people without valid licenses. He says officers looking for drunk drivers at the checkpoints can’t ignore other violations.
“Whether they’re wearing a seatbelt, whether there’s a gun in the car…they should be cited for those also,” said Cochran.
Until the courts rule on a more recent case, the Office is telling local police agencies to continue with the impounds.
“As of now, we tell them to follow the law as it’s currently written,” said Cochran.
But many motorists feel a 30 day impound is too high a penalty for driving without a license.
“I think that’s very unfair,” said Pearl Medina, a waitress who has been stopped at DUI checkpoints several times.
She is in favor of getting drunk drivers off the road because they’re dangerous, but says using the checkpoints to confiscate cars from drivers who are driving safely in unwarranted.
“Nobody has the money to get their car out of 30 day impound,” she said
Don Berkstresser agrees.
“30 days is way too much. That puts a hardship on families,” said Berkstresser.
http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines/ktxl-tv-duicheckpointinpounddispute,0,2909565.story
civil_av8r
February 28, 2010 at 5:22 pm
Catering to illegals will result in a net loss.
atom
February 28, 2010 at 5:32 pm
I am inclined to believe that a comprehensive immigration reform is the proper solution for this recurring problem, but i am a firm believer that anybody who doesn’t have a driver’s license should not be allowed to drive, and if caught driving, there should be an automatic impounding of the car driven, in which cost of towing will be at the expense of the owner.
I also believe that the police, while clearly setting up checkpoints for DUIs, does not deter them from apprehending drivers who will be found in violation of traffic laws, other than DUI.
The police should be given credit for their actions. They deserve it. If Americans really appreciate the US military personnel for risking their lives in preserving the freedom of the US, same appreciation should be given to the police too, as they are at the forefront in preserving the peace and order situation of America.
Kudos to the police. To the politician, just pray that your car would not be in an accident that would involve a driver without a license, and definitely no insurance.
Jan
February 28, 2010 at 6:08 pm
If you don’t have the money to pay for impound fees,then stay off the road if you don’t have a license. Why is it so hard for them to understand that if you don’t have a license,you aren’t supposed to be behind the wheel of a car.
Ken
February 28, 2010 at 6:16 pm
The issue here is primarily NOT an issue of illegal. It is an issue was what these impound laws are intended.
The police cannot take your property, as per the 4th amendment. The way they skirt this is by saying they are practicing their role as ‘community caretakers’ – that is to say, they can remove a car if is poses a threat or inconvenience to the public. However, most cops don’t know the law it seems as they take this as a blanket rule to just impound every persons’ car where the person doesn’t have a valid DL. (the law doesn’t designate between an expired DL or someone without one – just says ‘person without valid DL).
The 9th SCotUS has ruled that the officer must prove that they were working within their capacity of ‘community caretaker’. I would wager that 90% of impounds are illegal.
The solution? A person should be allowed reasonable time to legally remove the vehicle. The penalty for driving without a valid license is the ticket and fine – impounding proporty is a violation of our constitutional rights.
Here’s the kicker – in order to defend OUR rights as citizens we have to defend the rights of everyone, because the government will simply use our apathy towards others against us.
If you are interested, please see the links I have included.