Motorcycle Only Check Points in NY

And home of the brave!

There is no valid rationale for checkpoints. You can't justify violating a person's individual rights by saying "It's OK, we're violating *everyone's* rights equally". The 4th Amendment STILL says "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects", and requires warrants or good reason for any searches of any individual or his home, papers, or effects.

They may well; indeed I'm sure some of them do. Which is why the rest of that paragraph was there, noting that

PhilB

Apparently the word "search" means something different to you than it does to me.

Asking for my licensee and registration to verify they are up to date is hardly a "search" to me. They are not asking me to open my saddle bags. I do not see the seizure part at all, unless you mean seizing an illegally modified motorcycle, which neither is anything near the intent of the parts of the Bill of Rights you are referring to.

But hey, if it makes you feel better jump on the right to protest it. Change the law, and stop whining about it on the internet where you have about as much chance of changing my opinion as I do yours!

Jim

PS I am hardly illiterate, and resent your implication that my differing opinion somehow makes me so.

So anyway, I'm more concerned over the massive communication interception and data mining being conducted by the federal government. And that their response is, it's okay, we've been doing it for a long time, it's only bothering you because you found out about it.

All he had do was say he was an American would have ended that in about 2 seconds. What did he gain by that? What did he lose?

People sometimes just love to push back against "the man"! There is zero harm in answering that simple question, yet people want to make a case of it. Oh well, if it means that much to him, he won, sort of.

Jim

The checkpoint thing comes up every year around this time because of Americade. They set up in the rest areas on the Northway and flag all the bikes in to give the once over and hand out revenue tickets.

I personally think any of these stops are an infringement of civil liberties and have actually pointed this out while being stopped. Most of the cops have said they don't agree with it either but just doing their job. A couple have threatened to "haul me in for obstruction".

Along these lines there was an article in the local newspaper today about a drug shake down a the local school. The sheriffs department was at the school when the buses pulled in in the morning. They kids were taken off the buses and told to stand along the walkway with there belongings layed out on the sidewalk. Pockets emptied and turned out. One by one they were sniffed by the drug dog. "No contraband was found" This is BS as far as I'm concerned and I don't even have kids.

Walking the dog past them is probably legal, but emptying pockets and turning them out is clearly unconstitutional.

I am surprised at how few people on this thread are concerned with the aftermarket exhaust check. In California, well over half of the bikes have aftermarket cans of some sort. Is that not the case in New York?

He works for the DHS.

Ha, I got stopped at one of those ridiculous check points in 2002 coming back from Mexico. They asked if we were American and we said no so they let us go (2 Canadians, 1 Frenchman, and 1 Spaniard). It was a real shock to us as we've been through the Canadian border a million times and never seen such a thing before. Tons of Canadians probably live in the US illegally but it will never be "dealt with".
I mean, we were stopped at a bunch of road blocks in Mexico but at least they were not just searching people based on physical appearance. They were searching everybody.
Steve

The last 20 seconds were pretty funny.

The NY checkpoints are retribution.
I am not sure if they actually ran any in 2012.

NY State Trooper Craig Todeschini was killed when he lost control of his [large] SUV & crashed while pursuing a speeding motorcyclist going 100+ mph in rural central NY, April 23, 2006 . Bad choices were made that day by everyone. It’s been an ongoing problem that motorcyclists choose to flee from the NYSP, rather than pull over for the very expensive speeding ticket so they are very angry about the fatality and the fleeing motorcycles. The retribution is disguised as a federally funded checkpoint program started in 2008 called Operation 50-60, the badge number of Trooper Todeschini. Oh that’s just a coincidence…

Motorcycle checkpoints do not make a real world difference; rather the checkpoints prey on the uneducated, ignorant rider who has made poor choices like a non DOT certified helmet, loud exhaust, or lack of a motorcycle license endorsement. Troopers get overtime pay, expensive equipment gets used, citations get written. Subsequently, NYSP management proclaims success with press releases, seminars etc. to justify the use of the money & resources; telling of the desperados apprehended and the lives saved, however the statistics prove them wrong. For those motorcyclists who neglect to stop for the illegal checkpoint; the NYSP utilizes a helicopter to chase them down. NY State has repeatedly raided the money in the dedicated motorcycle safety fund, and placed it in the general fund; ignoring a state finance law prohibition against such action. The money is collected from a surcharge fee on every motorcycle registration and is to be used only for motorcycle safety programs.

And then there is this:

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <wunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> Stephen Faughnan
Chenango Forks, NY 13746
April 18, 2011

Hon. Richard Hanna
319 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Sir,
On March 16th of this year I sent a letter to your office asking you to support HR 904. The response that I got was, in my opinion, unsatisfactory. Your letter correctly states that HR 904 would &#8220;prohibit the Secretary of Transportation from providing funds... to be used for any program to check helmet usage or create checkpoints for a motorcycle driver or passenger&#8221;. It is this second point that I am most upset about, not the helmet usage provision.
I have been lobbying the NYS Legislature for 12 years, fighting for motorcyclists rights. I too, believe that the helmet issue is a &#8220;state&#8217;s rights&#8221; issue and so have concentrated my efforts in that venue. The imposition of motorcycle only checkpoints is, however, a Federal issue because of the Fourth Amendment Constitutional protections and several Federal Court cases.
The NYS Police have already admitted in court depositions that the checkpoints were not for informational purposes but rather were targeted at finding violations on the part of the motorcyclist being stopped. Courts in NYS have established (citing City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 US 32 (2000)) that enforcement checkpoints constitute a seizure under the Fourth Amendment.
The Edmond case was primarily focused on checkpoints for drunk driving. The Court emphasized that the &#8220;gravity of the drunk driving problem and the magnitude of the State&#8217;s interest in getting drunk drivers off the road weighed heavily in our determination that the program was constitutional.&#8221; The Court went on to further state that unless the primary programmatic purpose of the checkpoints is the immediate imperative of highway safety as opposed to an attempt to obtain evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing, the checkpoint is presumptively unconstitutional. Edmond at 39 and 43-47.
The Secretary of Transportation, in providing funds for state programs to establish motorcycle only checkpoints, certainly violates the constitutional interpretation provided by the Court in the above cited case.
If the NYS Police were truly interested in correcting dangers on the roadways that posed an immediate danger to other vehicles, they would be stopping all traffic and not just motorcycles. When looked at in this light, the motorcycle only stops closely resemble police profiling, which has obviously been ruled illegal.
In closing, I am asking you again to support HR 904, not only to protect the rights of motorcyclists, but because it is the right thing to do.
Respectfully submitted,
Stephen Faughnan
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->

Do you now or have you ever lived in New York State?

If the answer is other than the affirmative, you have no idea what you are saying.


Trust me, these checkpoints are not about constitutional rights nor rider safety, it is "revenue enhancement".

See post #2.

Well apparently the supreme court feels differently. I don't necessarily agree with them, but I do realize that it is part of having the privilege to drive/ride. If I have to go through one, which I have here in GA a few times I just hand them my things and get on my way. No big deal.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious Joel. Though my job has zero to do with checkpoints or this discussion.

You work as a mechanic!

Jim

They pulled the same crap in Virginia, so I do know what I am talking about.

By the way, if you actually read my posts, I never once said I like this!

Jim

People forget that driving is a PRIVILEGE, not a RIGHT. You do not have a "right" to drive, but you do have a "right" against improper search and seizure.

Your license and registration are valid in any state if they are valid in the issuing state. It would make things interesting if state X lets you ride without blinkers but state Y tickets you.

When I lived in NC, they would have Drivers License checks. They would usually be in a residential neighborhood. Police would ask for your DL, then let you go if it was valid, proper endorsements etc. The difference as I see it is that they would stop everyone.


D

Most states have a "reasonable amount of time" clause for delaying you. The stopping officer and judge determine what "reasonable" is.

Unless someone in the car has a medical emergency, 5 minutes would almost certainly be considered "reasonable."

D

The DHS' core is the desire to search. This discussion is about illegal search and the freedom from as guaranteed by the Constitution. If your employment is justified by the need to search, then you have a vested interest in extending searches to every venue available.

Illegal search pays your salary to make it as simple as possible.

Who the hell decided it was a privilege and not a right anyway. Do you have the right to choose for or against paying taxes for roadways? No. That's just big brother bullshit.

There is an interesting and infinite discussion of the right to freedom of movement as written in the constitution. It's fairly loosely written and therefore subject to different interpretations. You know, when it was originally written there were no motor vehicles, vehicles were slower, had lower capacity, smaller size. A lot like the discussion of the Second Amendment.

Anyhow, there is a school of thought that says driver licensing is unconstitutional.