Keep and Bear Arms
Home Members Login/Join About Us News/Editorials Archives Take Action Your Voice Web Services Free Email
You are 1 of 374 active visitors Friday, June 21, 2024
Main Email List:

State Email Lists:
Click Here
Join/Renew Online
Join/Renew by Mail
Make a Donation
Magazine Subscriptions
KABA Memorial Fund
Advertise Here
Use KABA Free Email




Keep and Bear Arms - Vote In Our Polls
Do you oppose Biden's anti-gun executive orders?

Current results
Earlier poll results
4743 people voted



» U.S. Gun Laws
» AmeriPAC
» NoInternetTax
» Gun Show On The Net
» 2nd Amendment Show
» SEMPER FIrearms
» Colt Collectors Assoc.
» Personal Defense Solutions



Keep and Bear Arms


Archived Information

Top | Last 30 Days | Search | Add to Archives | Newsletter | Featured Item

Police roadblocks out of control

Police roadblocks out of control
by Vin Suprynowicz

On the local front, citing bad publicity as well as lack of any justification for the policy, Las Vegas Metro police this week suspended their "administrative traffic checkpoints" in the riverfront casino town of Laughlin.

Beneath the gentle-sounding name, Metro spokesman Capt. Mike Ault describes what confronted a motorist who ran into one of these "Papers, please!" checkpoints south of Las Vegas, admitting the military style of the roadblocks -- complete with officers in green fatigues and snarling dogs -- "looked bad." Though future checkpoints have not been ruled out.

That would be up to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the further good news this week came on that front, as the high court announced it will take up an Indianapolis case turning on whether police can randomly stop motorists to search for illegal drugs.

The Midwestern city began its "narcotics checkpoints" in the summer of 1998. A predetermined number of cars were pulled over at one time and drivers were asked to show police their licenses and registration while dogs walked around the parked cars for about three minutes, sniffing for drugs.

In the program's first four months, police conducted six roadblocks in high-crime areas and stopped 1,161 vehicles. The stops led to 104 arrests, 55 of them on drug-related charges.

Kenneth Falk, the Indiana Civil Liberties Union lawyer representing two men who challenged the police practice, points out that once such searches are allowed in a random hunt for drugs, it won't be long before cops are pulling drivers out of their cars for failing to make child-support payments.

The Fourth Amendment supposedly restricts searches to cases where authorities have "probable cause" to suspect a specific crime; the courts have long required police to obtain court warrants to detain drivers for longer than it takes to write up a citation for a minor traffic offense.

The problem is that in recent years, the nation's highest court has allowed the camel's nose under the tent, authorizing "sobriety checkpoints" aimed at randomly detecting inebriated motorists, as well as "border roadblocks" (some now operating hundreds of miles from the border) to track down illegal immigrants.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the checkpoints used by Indianapolis are different. If Indianapolis authorities had reason to believe a terrorist were driving toward the city in a car packed with dynamite, they could block all roads and stop thousands of drivers "without suspecting any one of them of criminal activity," the appeals court said. "But no such urgency has been shown here."

Well ... OK. But in the end, such hair-splitting only leaves police and drivers both uncertain of what's proper.

Even in the Indianapolis case, the appeals court said the trial judge might find another reason to uphold the checkpoint program, musing, "The high hit rate of Indianapolis' roadblock scheme suggests ... areas of the city in which drug use approaches epidemic proportions. If so, the roadblocks may be justified."

Really? Even if every charge led to a conviction, would anyone be shocked to learn that 5 percent of drivers in an urban area are using illegal drugs of one kind or another? And does that really justify suspending the rights of the other 95 percent?

In a participatory democracy, where defendants are guaranteed a trial by a randomly-selected jury of their peers -- a system purposely designed to render convictions impossible under any law opposed by as little as 10 percent of the people -- the court could just as well have suggested that this "hit rate" demonstrates that winning drug-charge convictions before random juries in such jurisdictions may be prima facie impossible, and that this whole attempt at a new Prohibition would thus be better off abandoned.

At any rate, the continuing parade of such cases, in which citizens' rights depend on an interpretation by local police of whether the offense in question could represent an "immediate" or "urgent" danger to the driving public, demonstrates what a Pandora's box the court opened with its 1989 "drunk-driving roadblock" decision.

As is so often the case, this "little exception" to the Fourth Amendment has already been stretched wide enough to drive a Peterbilt through. Instead of splitting hairs, the Supreme Court should now revisit that 1989 decision, close the loophole, and return Americans to the way things are supposed to work in a free country: unless police have probable cause to suspect us of some specific crime, we remain "secure in our person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" -- even in our cars.

The case is Indianapolis vs. Edmond, 99-1030.

Vin Suprynowicz is one of the most articulate spokesmen serving on the front lines of the Freedom Movement we have. Vin's timely and well written articles are syndicated in newspapers all around the country, and they circulate around the world freely on the Internet and in Libertarian publications. He is the author of Send in the Waco Killers, the book that tells the details the media failed to tell in plain English. The best way to get Vin is to subscribe directly to the e-mail distribution list for his column. Send a request to with "subscribe" in the subject line.

It is an honor to host this man's work, and we encourage you to visit his site and read his book. To read other articles by Vin on this site, click here. You can also see his full archives at these two sites:

Printer Version

Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins. Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, whose testimony convicted John Gotti.

COPYRIGHT POLICY: The posting of copyrighted articles and other content, in whole or in part, is not allowed here. We have made an effort to educate our users about this policy and we are extremely serious about this. Users who are caught violating this rule will be warned and/or banned.
If you are the owner of content that you believe has been posted on this site without your permission, please contact our webmaster by following this link. Please include with your message: (1) the particulars of the infringement, including a description of the content, (2) a link to that content here and (3) information concerning where the content in question was originally posted/published. We will address your complaint as quickly as possible. Thank you.

NOTICE:  The information contained in this site is not to be considered as legal advice. In no way are Keep And Bear Arms .com or any of its agents responsible for the actions of our members or site visitors. Also, because this web site is a Free Speech Zone, opinions, ideas, beliefs, suggestions, practices and concepts throughout this site may or may not represent those of Keep And Bear Arms .com. All rights reserved. Articles that are original to this site may be redistributed provided they are left intact and a link to is given. Click here for Contact Information for representatives of is the leading provider of Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) and digital certificate solutions used by enterprises, Web sites, and consumers to conduct secure communications and transactions over the Internet and private networks., Inc. © 1999-2024, All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy