National
Motorists
Association

Tracking The Fourth Amendment

The protection afforded against unreasonable search and seizure by the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is so important that we included a version of it in the NMA’s Motorist Bill of Rights:

Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and the guarantee that all traffic stops will be based on probable cause.

Two years ago, Jim Baxter lamented the deterioration of our rights against being stopped or having property seized without law enforcement meeting a meaningful standard for "probable cause." Roadside stops, whether under the pretense of an alleged traffic violation or through organized roadblocks checking for DUI (or unfastened seat belts, or . . .), have increasingly made warrantless searches of drivers, passengers, and vehicles fair game.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit handed down an interesting decision earlier this month that bolsters the Fourth Amendment. In a case where federal agents, without a search warrant, attached a GPS tracking device to the vehicle of an unknowing suspect, the federal appeals court reversed the conviction of that suspect.

Stephen Leckar, a lawyer who worked on the appeal said that the ruling “recognizes the Fourth Amendment’s continued significance in promoting privacy in a high-tech age." He added, "The decision simply tells law enforcement agents that they need a judge’s decision before trespassing on a person’s car and attaching a device that tracks and records him or her relentlessly over time and space."

But not so fast. The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals twice rejected a similar appeal earlier this year, ruling that law enforcement can secretly place a GPS device on a suspect’s vehicle without needing a court-issued warrant. The decision applies to those living in the nine western states under the Ninth Circuit Court’s jurisdiction.

It will probably be up to the U.S. Supreme Court to eventually sort out this issue. In the meantime, there is no reason yet to amend Jim Baxter’s 2008 editorial about the Fourth Amendment.

Free Mobile App for Drivers
Check out Waze’s free daily driving application with turn-by-turn GPS navigation and enter yourself into the running for a brand new iPhone 4. This contest is open to NMA members only. Click here for more information.

Newsletter Archives:
You can now view all past issues of the NMA email newsletter, including this one, online here: http://alerts.motorists.org/tag/emailnewsletter

Want to find the speed traps in your neighborhood?
Check out the NMA's speed trap registry at www.speedtrap.org.

Loading mentions Retweet

Now is the time to contact Governor Schwarzenegger's office to voice your support for Assembly Bill 909, which will be on his desk by early next week.  If signed into law by the governor, AB 909 will effectively cut state right-turn-on-red (RTOR) traffic fines in half from the current $450 to $500 charged per violation..   

Many California cities have built the financial success of their red-light camera programs on the RTOR violation, which statistically has imperceptible safety implications for drivers, cyclists, or pedestrians.  (According to a 2001 report from the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, only about one tenth of one percent of accidents caused by one vehicle cutting into the path of another vehicle were caused by a RTOR violation of a traffic signal.) 

Los Angeles, for example, derives nearly 80 percent of its ticket camera revenue from drivers who don't come to a complete stop at a red light before turning right.  Some communities are reportedly making up to 98 percent of their red-light camera revenue from slow-rolling, or "California," stops.

Odds are strong that you, or someone you know, has received one of these $500 California tickets while making a safe turn.  While AB 909 will not eliminate the RTOR violation, it will at least make the financial impact to motorists a bit more reasonable.

Because Governor Schwarzenegger will have AB 909 on his desk for signature within a few days, send him an email or call his Sacramento office at 916-445-2841 right away to voice support for this important bill for California drivers.

Loading mentions Retweet       Tags:   ALERT   CALIFORNIA   RIGHT-TURN-ON-RED   TICKET CAMERA  

A bill sponsored by Senate Transportation Committee Chairman John Rafferty, R-Berks County, is the latest attempt to authorize radar for municipal police in Pennsylvania, according to an August 20th pennlive.com report.

The state police have used radar to enforce speed limits on Pennsylvania highways since 1962, but municipal and regional police forces have never been granted access to the technology. Pennsylvania is the only state in the nation that does not permit local police officers to use radar.

Rafferty's panel held a hearing on the bill this week, but he said he will likely have to reintroduce his proposal next year because time is running out to pass it in this legislative session.

Loading mentions Retweet       Tags:   ALERT   PENNSYLVANIA   RADAR DETECTOR  

Making A Difference

This headline caught our attention: “Does Ruling Doom Red Light Cameras?” The story postulates that a recent decision by an Orange County, CA appellate court to overturn an earlier red-light running conviction could, in fact, be the death knell of red-light cameras in the state.

The appeal of the case in question, “People of the State of California vs. Tarek Khaled,” centered on the issue of whether the photo evidence against Khaled lacked foundation, i.e., whether it could be accepted as legitimate on its own. The appellate justices ruled that without a witness from the private camera company to provide relevant testimony regarding what the camera captured, the evidence did lack foundation and was inadmissible. They reversed the earlier Khaled conviction.

This decision means that the cost of prosecuting red-light photo tickets just jumped in Orange County if --- and this is a BIG “if” --- enough defendants decide to challenge their red-light camera tickets, forcing the appearance of a camera company employee at each trial. Currently, less than five percent of traffic ticket recipients fight the charges against them in court. That isn’t enough for most district attorneys to worry about. But if a higher percentage of ticket recipients begin pleading not guilty and demanding a witness to legitimize the photo evidence, the Orange County appellate decision suddenly casts a shadow on the financial viability of red-light camera programs in that jurisdiction.

A Riverside County, CA red-light ticket case argued identically to “Khaled,” which also resulted in a conviction at the municipal level, was brought to our attention. The NMA Foundation is funding the appeal, which will also be presented exactly like “Khaled” so that the precedent set by the Orange County appellate ruling is pertinent. A Riverside County appeals court decision that matches that in Orange County could well be the beginning of rulings in other California counties that cause those localities to take a long hard look at the true cost of gaining convictions via their red-light camera programs. And we know from several case histories that if photo enforcement programs aren’t profitable, the ticket cameras quickly disappear, along with the safety claims made by ticket camera proponents to originally justify those programs.

The National Motorists Association Foundation was established ten years ago to protect and improve the interests of the driving public. The NMA Foundation awards financial grants in the areas of education, research and legal aid where key projects can have the broadest beneficial impact for motorists. These grants are made possible because of the financial support of NMA members. You and the NMA Foundation can and do make a difference.

Free Mobile App for Drivers
Check out Waze’s free daily driving application with turn-by-turn GPS navigation and enter yourself into the running for a brand new iPhone 4. This contest is open to NMA members only. Click here for more information.

Newsletter Archives:
You can now view all past issues of the NMA email newsletter, including this one, online here: http://alerts.motorists.org/tag/emailnewsletter

Want to find the speed traps in your neighborhood?
Check out the NMA's speed trap registry at www.speedtrap.org.

Loading mentions Retweet       Tags:   Email Newsletter  

In these financially troubled times, national, state and local governments struggle to balance their out-of-control budgets, which often means using accounting tricks and "robbing Peter to pay Paul." Clearly, many government units have turned to the disproportionate use of oppressive, profit-based traffic enforcement and tolling to try to save their bacon.

Ironically, though, while revenue from motorists is being funneled into whatever area is most convenient for the government, our roads and bridges are falling into increasing disrepair. 

Without laws in place to require any such funds to be used for improving transportation infrastructure, motorists' needs are going to continue to play second fiddle. 

The Finding Forward Coalition is a collection of Wisconsin private businesses, local government, organized labor, and transportation associations, among others, who are dedicated to amending the Wisconsin state constitution to require collected transportation revenue to only be used for transportation projects, and not for general use funds.

The Coalition wants every county in Wisconsin put an advisory referendum on the local ballot this November regarding the directed use of transportation user fees.

For more information about this important effort that the National Motorists Association fully supports, visit the Finding Forward Coalition website.

Loading mentions Retweet       Tags:   ALERT   TOLLING   WISCONSIN  

Orange County Circuit Judge Frederick Lauten explained that despite the city using red light cameras for more than two years and issuing nearly 50,000 tickets, the state of Florida only deemed the use of red-light cameras legal as of July.

Loading mentions Retweet       Tags:   ALERT   FLORIDA   TICKET CAMERA  

A new bill, introduced in the U.S. Senate in February by New York Senator Charles "Chuck" Schumer, would put $12 million in annual funding for five years into the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety program.

According to the Indiana Beverage Journal, Shumer's proposed addition to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010 would eventually lead to every motorist in America being subjected to automatic alcohol testing before turning his or her engine on. The journal reports that according to Schumer's bill, alcohol detection devices would become standard in all automobiles within five to ten years.

Senator Schumer's web page, on the other hand, claims, "...this legislation does not require this technology to be installed in any car..." 

In any event, restaurant groups agree that if the devices were installed, they would probably be set, for liability reasons, below the legal blood-alcohol limit of .08. Furthermore, the American Beverage Institute (ABI) points out in a recent web article that "even if these new devices were 99.99966% effective (and that's a big 'if'), there would still be almost 4,000 cases of misreadings per day."

The money, according to Senator Schumer in a Buffalo News report of July 8th,  "...would be used to develop better technologies--such as a steering wheel that determined blood alcohol content from the sweat of a driver's hands..." and contrasted this with Breathalyzers now used which "...can be circumvented, such as by having the passenger blow into the machine." People concerned about how taxpayers' money is being used might fairly ask whether such a steering wheel technology, even if it were perfectly accurate, could not also be circumvented, perhaps simply by the use of gloves.

The web site Washingtonwatch.com recently conducted an e-poll that showed 76% opposition to the Act. They also estimated the cost of the Act would be $38.31 per family.

And of course, we have to wonder whether this kind of study will, in fact, take us down the road toward the point where all drivers are subjected to these costly and invasive "protections." The National Motorists Association discusses ignition interlock devices here.

Concerned citizens may express their views to Senator Schumer through his web site, or to their own U.S. Senators, listed here.

Loading mentions Retweet       Tags:   ALERT   IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE   IID   NATIONAL  

Ethanol Legislation Back In Congress

The NMA has long criticized the federal ethanol mandate as a huge public policy farce. We weren't alone, but thoroughly ignored.

We argued that ethanol does not make the air cleaner. Ethanol will not reduce our dependency of oil, foreign or domestic. Ethanol is a net negative for the environment. The subsidies for ethanol steal funds that could improve our highways. The price for food grains are increased. And, ethanol is harmful to many forms of non-automotive internal combustion engines. The kicker is that any rational expert, right-wing, left-wing, green, or capitalist, on the subject, does not seriously disagree with our arguments!

So why continue with this farce? Yes, the ethanol mandate has boosted farm income (unless you're in the livestock or dairy business where feed prices have been increased). For want of a better explanation it seems that we should continue to mandate and subsidize ethanol use because we, uh, once upon a time passed a law to mandate and subsidize ethanol use and we should continue this policy because otherwise the investors that capitalized on this legislative fiasco will now lose money.

Ironically, the current high profile controversy nagging at ethanol proponents is not the waste, expense, futility and harmful effects of the ethanol mandate and subsidies, it's that we tax cheaper foreign ethanol so it can't compete in the US market. This is a great distraction that buries the fundamental issue; the ethanol mandate and subsidies should be repealed, in total.

If you would like to contact your US Senators and Representative here's a few points you might want to raise:

• How can ethanol reduce our dependence on foreign oil when it takes as much, or more, energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than the energy a gallon of ethanol can deliver?
• How can ethanol help clean our air when its production puts more pollution in the atmosphere then the oil it is supposed to replace? (not too mention that it makes no difference in the emissions of fuel injected vehicles)
• How many billions of dollars could be invested in our highways and bridges if the subsidies for Ethanol were eliminated?
• When water is becoming a stressed commodity in many parts of the country why are you mandating a fuel that uses three gallons of water to produce one gallon of that fuel?

There are other good questions to ask as well. They need to be asked and an election year is a good year to ask them.

Free Mobile App for Drivers
Check out Waze’s free daily driving application with turn-by-turn GPS navigation and enter yourself into the running for a brand new iPhone 4. This contest is open to NMA members only. Click here for more information.

Newsletter Archives:
You can now view all past issues of the NMA email newsletter, including this one, online here: http://alerts.motorists.org/tag/emailnewsletter

Want to find the speed traps in your neighborhood?
Check out the NMA's speed trap registry at www.speedtrap.org.

Loading mentions Retweet       Tags:   Email Newsletter  

A common question we get from New Jersey motorists is how to best fight the advent of red light cameras in their state.

In January, 2008, New Jersey adopted Assembly Bill 4314, authorizing red-light ticket cameras in that state. But the law requires municipalities that want to use RLC's to pass an ordinance authorizing their use first; then they have to apply to NJDOT and get the specific sites approved; then there are rules that must be followed while the cameras are up and running. So, the place to fight the issue is with towns considering cameras.

We have seen some evidence that New Jersey communities, like many of the other communities using RLC's, are making most of their money from tickets for rolling right turns on red.

Here is one tactic that may help you fight a ticket for running a red light. Inform the prosecutor/court that New Jersey adopted minimum yellow light times for RLC installations. These standards require a minimum of three seconds for intersections with approach speeds (85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic) of 25 MPH or less. The minimum time increases one half second for each five MPH increase in approach speed. A ticket should be dismissed if no study was done to determine the approach speed, or if a study was done but the yellow light duration is too short for the approach speed.

We also encourage New Jersey motorists to be aware whether their locality is considering implementing red-light cameras, and to take action at the local level to fight against any authorizing ordinances. If you know of others who want to actively oppose red-light camera programs, encourage them to join and support the NMA, a watchdog group that keeps the red-light camera process transparent and encourages local, grassroots challenges to photo enforcement programs.

Loading mentions Retweet       Tags:   ALERT   NEW JERSEY   TICKET CAMERA