Support NeoGAF

[Eric-GCA]

http://www.oaklandtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,82~1726~2428344,00.html

Oakland police halt DUI checkpoints

Immigrant activists say roadblocks discriminate against those without licenses

By Heather MacDonald, STAFF WRITER

OAKLAND -- Oakland police officers have stopped setting up roadblocks to check whether drivers are under the influence because of a rash of complaints from the Latino community and City Council President Ignacio De La Fuente.

The checkpoints, which allow officers to demand licenses and proof of insurance, are an effective way to get drunken drivers off Oakland's streets, city leaders agree. But the checks also have ensnared dozens of illegal immigrants who are not licensed to drive yet otherwise obey the law.

"These checkpoints make people's lives miserable, not make them safer," said Jesus Rodriguez of Oakland Community Organizations, which filed most of the complaints about the checkpoints. "I've watched while the police have towed away cars (full) of groceries, leaving children crying on the sidewalk."

The complaints and pressure from De La Fuente, who represents the largely Latino Glenview-Fruitvale district and plans to run for mayor in 2006, prompted police Chief Richard L. Word to order his officers to hold off on any more DUI checkpoints while new guidelines are drafted.

"The checkpoints are a great tool for law enforcement," Word said. "We'll develop a better focus on drug hot spots and stopping sideshows."

However, the month-long moratorium on checkpoints has outraged Councilmember Larry Reid (Elmhurst-East Oakland), who calls the change a threat to public safety.

"It is absolutely insane to stop these checkpoints," Reid said. "I would not want to explain to a mother why we stopped doing these checkpoints when we know they work and her son or daughter was killed."

Reid also criticized elected officials for "micromanaging" the police department, although he did not single out De La Fuente for blame. Reid and De La Fuente are usually on the same side of issues before the council and recently worked together to propose a measure to raise taxes to hire more police officers.

The new checkpoint guidelines, which are not final, may call for police to notify Latino community organizations of the time and location of coming checkpoints. The checkpoints will be held after the evening rush-hour commute and rotated throughout the city, officials said.

"It's simple common sense," De La Fuente said. "You don't want to stop

people going to or from work. If there are kids in the car, give someone an opportunity to call someone to pick up their kids rather than create chaos."

Legislation that would have allowed illegal immigrants who submit to background checks to apply for a California driver's license was vetoed this week by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both Word and De La Fuente supported the legislation.

While officers have some discretion, the cars of unlicensed drivers are usually towed. To get their cars back, owners must pay $125, plus any storage fees. That is a significant burden to many illegal immigrants, Rodriguez said.

Reid said he has little sympathy with Rodriguez's position.

"I don't care if they are illegal immigrants," Reid said.

"They should not be driving on our streets without a license, without insurance. I expect the Oakland Police Department to do its job and get them off the street."

The council is expected to take up the issue at its Oct. 19 meeting

 

[DarienA]

General statement only casually related to the above article: I've never understood why illegal immigrants get so many rights... I mean why the hell are they called illegal then?

 

[bishoptl]

Immigrant activists say roadblocks discriminate against those without licenses

It was at that point where I had to push back from my PC and go for a brisk walk to calm down before typing a response.

1. You're not in the country legally.
2. It is a legal requirement to possess a valid driver's license before going behind the wheel.

This is discriminatory how? How? It discriminates against law breakers! OH TEH NOS

"I don't care if they are illegal immigrants," Reid said.

"They should not be driving on our streets without a license, without insurance. I expect the Oakland Police Department to do its job and get them off the street."

That may sound harsh, but I agree 100%. What's next, applying for city funds to establish separate racial business and residential enclaves?

 

[Culex]

No one should feel sorry for these people. There are laws for reasons. Freaking liberals and their touchy-feely, "please don't offend our illegal immigrant" ideals.

I guess I shouldn't renew my license and cancel my insurance while I'm at it, too.

 

[Error Macro]

If there's one thing that an overwhelming majority of the country agrees on, it's the subject of illegal aliens. Something must be done, however, neither Bush nor Kerry will or would lift a finger. Apparently no politician will ever do anything. It's incredibly disheartening.

 

[fennec fox]

Two reasons why no one does anything:
- Democrats are afraid of losing one of their traditional support bases
- Everyone else is afraid of taking their minimum-wage jobs at Chipotle

Still, there is nothing inherently librul about this decision because it would have happened in any town with as many illegal aliens as Oakland. I mean, as a cop, if you were trying to snare DUIs and other major threats to road safety, would you be happy spending all day hauling off aliens instead?

 

[SyNapSe]

These stories are freaking amazing. They simply defy logic...

It seems like we are making a 2nd class citizen here in the US out of illegal aliens. They are willing to do a lot of jobs Americans aren't interested in for the most part, and do the job at a much cheaper rate.

 

[Loki]

It seems like we are making a 2nd class citizen here in the US out of illegal aliens. They are willing to do a lot of jobs Americans aren't interested in for the most part, and do the job at a much cheaper rate.

Yet that begs the question that is never asked: "why are these jobs so low-paying that only illegals would do them?"


Answer that and maybe we'll talk. Maybe. Still, that's no rationalization for the sort of thing cited in the article, nor for turning a blind eye to the ILLEGAL nature of illegal immigrants.


Oh, and I second what Bishop said-- I too was getting pretty steamed just reading that article, particularly the part where it says that, "depite being in the country illegally and driving without licenses, they are otherwise law-abiding."


Holy...holy...fuck. Seriously. The mind boggles; this country is a joke.

 

[explodet]

In other news, college scholarships discriminate against stupid people.
They will now be handed out alphabetically.

(Old SNL joke)

 

[DarienA]

In other news, college scholarships discriminate against stupid people.
They will now be handed out alphabetically.

(Old SNL joke)

LOL I never heard that one bofore.

 

[seismologist]

No one should feel sorry for these people. There are laws for reasons. Freaking liberals and their touchy-feely, "please don't offend our illegal immigrant" ideals.

I guess I shouldn't renew my license and cancel my insurance while I'm at it, too.

Yah tell me about it. I should start driving around with no license and no insurance and just say I'm an illegal immigrant. Sounds like a good deal.

 

[Loki]

If there's one thing that an overwhelming majority of the country agrees on, it's the subject of illegal aliens. Something must be done, however, neither Bush nor Kerry will or would lift a finger. Apparently no politician will ever do anything. It's incredibly disheartening.

Very true, and very sad. As to why no politician will ever touch the illegal immigration issue with a ten-foot pole, well here you go (copied and posted from an old post of mine at OA, which largely mirrors fennec fox's post above):


Democrats: cries of racism and spurious invocation of the "poor, huddled masses" imagery which marked early-mid 20th century immigration (legal, mind you, but still)-- disregarding the fact that assimilation is the furthest thing from the new generation of immigrants' mind, and that we waste tremendous resources-- both personal and financial-- subsidizing them, providing them services, and otherwise coddling them in any of 60+ languages. Only in America. It also, over time, has the effect of bolstering the Democratic party's footing amongst the populace, as more and more of these illegals (or their children) become citizens, since the Dem party is seen as the "immigrant-friendly" party (read: perpetuation and expansion of the welfare state).


Republicans: provides an ample supply of cheap labor which undercuts our largely unionized labor market and allows corporations to reap massive profits. They supposedly do "the jobs that no American would do", which never addresses the question of precisely why most Americans wouldn't do these jobs (read: sub-minimum wage and no benefits-- should welfare recipients not be able to find a job through their own means, these are the sorts of jobs which they should be compelled, and proud, to do, being on the dole and all). Meanwhile, corporations in every sector have seen record profits over the past decade. There's a profound disconnect there somewhere, but I'll leave it to others wiser than myself to put their finger on it, because I'm not about to get flamed.


It'll never be done, though it would go a long way towards restoring this country's sanity imo. Do things legally through the proper channels, I say. This is to say nothing of the threat of terrorism by these means.

 

[Hitokage]

Um, about illegal immigrants... If we are not going to mass-deport them, then what the hell are we going to do? Let them continue to exist in poverty in our borders? Set up ghettos? Having a segregate population is not a problem to which you can shove your head in the sand and hope it goes away. Like a serious wound, you either heal it or amputate the limb, or it'll fester and harm the whole body.

 

[Drensch]

Checkpoints should be illegal because they presuppose guilt and detain innocent people.

 

[Gek54]

^Completely agree

 

[Hitokage]

Was going to say something about that. The whole immigrant issue is really besides the point.

 

[Dan]

I mean, as a cop, if you were trying to snare DUIs and other major threats to road safety, would you be happy spending all day hauling off aliens instead?

Umm, why should we be concerned with whether cops are overly happy with what specific laws they're protecting? They're still finding lawbreakers. It doesn't matter what the cops are trying to do. If they pull over a car with a broken headlight and end up finding drugs or weapons in the car, is that somehow bad? Cops are supposed to protect the law. Telling them that they can only look for certain violations at certain times, or completely avoid looking at all, is just wrong.

Checkpoints should be illegal because they presuppose guilt and detain innocent people.

I agree with this though.

 

[ShadowRed]

Checkpoints should be illegal because they presuppose guilt and detain innocent people.

IDAWTP!!!!!!

 

[Loki]

Um, about illegal immigrants... If we are not going to mass-deport them, then what the hell are we going to do? Let them continue to exist in poverty in our borders? Set up ghettos? Having a segregate population is not a problem to which you can shove your head in the sand and hope it goes away. Like a serious wound, you either heal it or amputate the limb, or it'll fester and harm the whole body.

If you're making the case for amnesty (hard to tell, though I agree with your general statement that we must do something one way or the other), then I will say that I strongly disagree with the notion. However, I would not be entirely opposed to it if it came with strict assurances that we were going to get serious about our border situation and were going to take measures to stop illegals from coming over via plane or sea as well (forged documents etc.).


Since that's never going to happen, though, I can't support it. However, proponents of illegals (not you, Hito) can sleep easy, because as I mentioned before, nothing is going to be done to change the status quo on this issue (like so many others).

 

[bishoptl]

Funny, we have checkpoints up here (without the driver's license checks) for potential DUIs. It's called Drinking and Driving Counterattack, they run during the summer and winter holiday season, and have been pretty damn effective in knocking down DUI-related accidents in BC. You round a corner somewhere, come across a shitload of cops in the street queueing up cars. You roll down your window, s/he asks if you've been drinking (while close enough to smell your breath and/or anything in vehicle, you say "no" because you're not dumb enough to drive drunk, and they send you on your merry way.

It's easy enough to check anyone's insurance at ANY time, thanks to the date tags on our license plates, so I fail to see how that's some kind of presupposition of guilt.

What you as Americans choose to do with illegal aliens is your business - my ire is at those aliens who think that they should enjoy privileges that those who chose to enter the country legally cannot enjoy. Like seismologist said, if YOU decided to drive around without a license or insurance, do you really think that you'd receive the same consideration?

Driving is not a right. It's a privilege granted to you by the state. Common sense dictates that you should follow the same rules as everyone else when enjoying this privilege.

 

[levious]

What you as Americans choose to do with illegal aliens is your business - my ire is at those aliens who think that they should enjoy privileges that those who chose to enter the country legally cannot enjoy. Like seismologist said, if YOU decided to drive around without a license or insurance, do you really think that you'd receive the same consideration?

It's tough though, they do deserve a certain level of rights because first of all, our constitution doesn't set aside our rights exclusively for citizens, and secondly, they do contribute to our gross national product.

- although I generally agree to the overall reaction to this article.

 

[bishoptl]

Levious, you're not reading me correctly.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't have rights (sticky as that particular tar baby can be), I'm saying that they shouldn't have more rights than those who are legal citizens.

 

[Hitokage]

If you're making the case for amnesty (hard to tell, though I agree with your general statement that we must do something one way or the other), then I will say that I strongly disagree with the notion. However, I would not be entirely opposed to it if it came with strict assurances that we were going to get serious about our border situation and were going to take measures to stop illegals from coming over via plane or sea as well (forged documents etc.).


Since that's never going to happen, though, I can't support it. However, proponents of illegals (not you, Hito) can sleep easy, because as I mentioned before, nothing is going to be done to change the status quo on this issue (like so many others).

My argument rests on the simple observation that we are not mass-deporting. I really don't have an opinion one way or the other, but neither is not an acceptable choice.

 

[Error Macro]

Checkpoints should be illegal because they presuppose guilt and detain innocent people.

This is something I absolutely agree with. The power of the police force these days is something to worry about.

 

[Brannon]

Immigrant activists say roadblocks discriminate against those without licenses

...those guys need brain?

Every time I look at the quote, I lose even more respect for the extreme politically correct crowd, and that was already in the negatives. CONGRATULATION.

 

[SKluck]

Holy shit. Fuck people getting into the country legally, aliens get a better deal than proper citizens.

No license, YOU ARE OFF THE FUCKING ROAD.

It is disgusting seeing these politicans (Gop and Dem both) pander to these people just to get their vote or support when they shouldn't even be here to begin with AND are breaking the law. Yet they look the other way. Like the fact that illegal aliens can get licenses or don't need licenses to drive, I can't remember which (Who signed that? Bush or Schwarzeneggar?)

Is insurance required by law in Cali? I assume not.

It's just so fucking wrong.

 

[Kettch]

Yah tell me about it. I should start driving around with no license and no insurance and just say I'm an illegal immigrant. Sounds like a good deal.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't have rights (sticky as that particular tar baby can be), I'm saying that they shouldn't have more rights than those who are legal citizens.

Some quotes from the article:

"I've watched while the police have towed away cars (full) of groceries, leaving children crying on the sidewalk."

While officers have some discretion, the cars of unlicensed drivers are usually towed. To get their cars back, owners must pay $125, plus any storage fees. That is a significant burden to many illegal immigrants, Rodriguez said.

I don't see any extra rights or advantages here, for being an illegal immigrant (other than not being deported). They appear to be towed and fined just like everyone else who doesn't have a license.


I can see where the organizations are coming from, since it's made impossible for the immigrants to follow the law and are then punished for it. Hopefully the new rules will work out fine, allowing immigrants to drive to work but still catching anyone without a license driving at other times. It's unfortunate that the drivers license legislation didn't get through, as it would've solved all of these problems and many more. As Hito said earlier, leaving their status in limbo is pretty much the worst course of action you can take. Either deport them or stop charging them for crimes they have no way to avoid. Pretending they don't exist doesn't work. As long as we have illegal immigrants in the country, they're going to need to make a living, and that means driving. Given the choice of being out on the road with illegal immigrants who've gotten their drivers license, and being out on the road with immigrants who don't, I'd easily take the first option.

No license, YOU ARE OFF THE FUCKING ROAD.

...

Like the fact that illegal aliens can get licenses or don't need licenses to drive

As was mentioned in the article, that legislation was vetoed by Arnold. Illegal immigrants are not able to get a license as far as I know.

 

[Dan]

I don't see any extra rights or advantages here, for being an illegal immigrant (other than not being deported). They appear to be towed and fined just like everyone else who doesn't have a license.

I think you're looking too deep for that advantage. The point is that these roadblocks would be in place if it weren't for illegal immigrants complaining about being caught breaking the law. The advantage these illegal immigrants have is dictating the ways in which police can protect the law. I think that's the advantage over legal immigrants and citizens that people are talking about.

 

[Kettch]

I don't see how that's in any way an advantage given to illegal immigrants over everyone else. Regular people without licenses would be helped by this as well (though they have no reason to be helped, since they can get a license). If anything, this brings illegal immigrants a bit closer in terms of rights to citizens, but still inferior. The immigrants can now drive to work like everyone else, but won't be allowed to drive at other times like citizens can.


EDIT:

The advantage these illegal immigrants have is dictating the ways in which police can protect the law.

Anyone is free to try to make changes like this with a valid reason. If citizens were prevented from getting to work I'd expect these changes to be far more immediate.

 

[Dan]

The act of eliminating the checkpoints does not give them an advantage. The act itself is the advantage. This is something that is being done for the express purpose of helping illegal immigrants, with blatant disregard for the harm it will do to all residents, legal or otherwise.

Yes. Succinctly put.

 

[Kettch]

The act of eliminating the checkpoints does not give them an advantage. The act itself is the advantage. This is something that is being done for the express purpose of helping illegal immigrants, with blatant disregard for the harm it will do to all residents, legal or otherwise.

Which is not a right or advantage given to illegal immigrants over citizens. Changes like this can be made for them as well, that is what special interest groups try to do.

For example, if marijuana were to be legalized it wouldn't be giving more rights or advantages to marijuana smokers over everyone else. It would be helpful to them, but it would not be an exclusive right or advantage.