If there is one thing I hate, it's the premise of bigger government over the greater good of society. I actually was caught in one of these "motorcycle only" stops in Manhattan, NY. As a matter of fact, my father and a buddy of his were doing a 4 corners run of the US shortly after both retired. At the time (a year ago) I was stationed (Active Duty Army) about an hour north of NYC at West Point. The purpose of our ride was to visit Ground Zero at the World Trade Center and some of the surrounding sights. We were pointed to, motioned over, and then inspected (license, registration, helmets) by NYC's finest.

As Chamokie stated, if you have nothing to fear- no worries! It actually is not a 4th amendment issue as Toypuller stated (unless I missed something). The Police aren't searching pockets, bags and anything else, they're just ensuring documentation and state mandated equipment are used- when we sign the license application at the DMV, we actually agree to this in the fine print (yes- it really is there).

We've all broken the law- for some it's not wearing DOT approved helmets or keeping up with registration. Others (Chamokie included) have exceeded the speed limit (not in the line of duty) by a single MPH. Others have other criminal issues ie: drugs, weapons, who knows what! I don't think it's prudent to hamper the LEO efforts by crying fowl in a blanket manner as often happens-

Then again, I've been blown up, shot at, spit upon and cursed (in several languages)... and gladly come back for more because I believe in the end, right is right... no matter how much gray we try to extract out of a black and white situation. I'm not trying to flame any person or idea here, I just think an open thought (OK- my biased opinion) on the subject may be of some benefit.

 

As a retired Police Chief, I will state that the police function is to promote safety and I made sure that is the direction that my department went.

Revenue should not be the reason for citations. In my era it was not. That is the path to creating disrespect for law enforcement.

I believe the the targeted motorcycle only check sites by officers on overtime crosses the line from the legitimate function of safety to merely revenue generation. It disgusts me.

I suspect that the constitutional line is crossed also.

I retired many years ago and much has changed. When current officers are unable to recognized what they are doing is not legitimate, they should take refresher courses in the constitution. To protect and serve is not meant to empty citizens wallets.

 

On locking the thread. I vote no! It's been a lively debate at times but it hasn't fallen off the deep end yet. It's been a good read!

We are supposed to do 6 (I think) "Sobriety Check Points" a month. (I work for a state agency) We check D.L.s and tags as we observe for alcohol/drug use, short skirts....wait, I digress...... and then you are on your way in about 15 seconds. We don't do them where traffic is heavy so the wait in line is usually less than a minute or two. 99% of the folks thank us for doing them. We keep things light and friendly and try to have a good time with it. The state doesn't get the revenue from the tickets we write, it goes to the county. Our administration is only interested in how many DWIs we can arrest. (We do get a few bucks out of the court costs, but it is the numbers we are after, not the money.) We stop everybody. I would not agree with stopping only one segment of the motoring public, (unless we could figure out how to stop only the impaired drivers) and I don't see that happening anytime soon in our state.

 

this leads me to believe it is more about the revenue than the safety factor. if you do it on a road that is less traveled, then the odds are that there are going to be less drunks. therefor, you are allowing more intoxicated drivers to drive illegally.

i don't drive illegally, but i do not care for motorcycle only checkpoints. if you are going to run a checkpoint, then stop everyone, or no one. not just one class.

 

I was enjoying the debate until this one. I don't know whether you were around in the late 60's early 70's but the folks who were, will surely remember what happened when they turned us (LEOs) loose. There was some sowing and reaping going on then, that's for sure!

BTW Stroh you may as well give up you are never going to convince some people that you do have to enforce all laws. I can't imagine telling a shift sarge that you are not going to run the checkpoint that he wants run..

 

Sir, You get a lot of respect from me to step up and state your views. The voice of reason should be heard from all corners.

Bones.

 

As a former Chief, you have my respect. That said...are you suggesting that, if you were an officer today, you would disobey an order to take part in a checkpoint because you think that they are unconstitutional? And are you suggesting that your interpretation of it (the Constitution) is more "right" than that of the Supreme Court? Help me understand please.

 

While I hate the idea of govt. stepping into our everyday business but I have to say if they do it to me they'll be nothing but bored.

As far as the bike, or cages for that matter, everythings legal and up to date. Go ahead. Stop me. Waste your time.

And if really big brother ever wants to look and listen into my phone and internet use they better have lots and lots of caffeine. They'll need it.

 

Here's an "Action Alert" I got from the AMA last night. Thought I'd pass it on!
http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/al...63506&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]

 

Chief Justice Rehnquist acknowledged that checkpoints infringed on a constitutional right but reducing drunk driving outweighed this minor infringement. Supreme court made a exception to the constitution .... now who's right??