Thread: LAPD Turns a Blind Eye to Illegal Aliens without Driver’s Licenses

LAPD Turns a Blind Eye to Illegal Aliens without Driver’s Licenses


pjmedia.com
by
Jack Dunphy
Bio
December 23, 2011 - 12:06 am


Things in Los Angeles have reached the point that illegal aliens — people who by all rights ought not to be living here in the first place — are nonetheless able to exert sufficient influence on politicians that public policy is altered to suit their desires. Witness the debate taking place (if one can truly call it a debate; the conclusion is foregone) over the impounding of cars driven by unlicensed drivers.


California law authorizes police officers to impound cars found to be driven by unlicensed drivers. It further authorizes the storage of those cars for 30 days so as to discourage the unlicensed drivers from returning to the roads. Under direction from Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck is weighing a policy change for his department that would require officers, who having stopped an unlicensed driver, to allow him time to summon a licensed driver to the scene and release the car to him. This proposed change in policy was discussed at a Dec. 13 meeting of the Los Angeles police commission, the five-member civilian panel that oversees the LAPD. That meeting, which can be viewed here, was remarkable for its near-total obfuscation of the impetus behind the proposed change, which is to make Los Angeles more hospitable to illegal aliens.


There was a time in California and indeed the entire country when the law affected the number of illegal aliens coming over the border. How quaint that notion seems now, for today it is the number that affects the law. There are approximately 600,000 illegal aliens living in the city of Los Angeles, or about 15 percent of the total population. For the time being, California law does not allow non-citizens to obtain driver’s licenses, but many illegal aliens choose to risk the consequences and drive anyway. When they are stopped for a driving infraction and found to be unlicensed, they are cited and their cars are impounded in accordance with the Vehicle Code, which draws no distinctions between U.S. citizens who for whatever reason fail to obtain driver’s licenses and illegal aliens who are prohibited from doing so. Advocates for illegal aliens claim that enforcement of the laws requiring driver’s licenses and the consequent impoundment of cars place an undue burden on otherwise law-abiding people.


The illegal alien lobby has no better friend than Mayor Villaraigosa, who earlier this year put the camel’s nose into the tent on the issue of impounding cars driven by unlicensed drivers. At the mayor’s urging, the LAPD instituted a policy that allowed sober but unlicensed driver discovered at a sobriety checkpoint to call for a licensed driver to take charge of his car and thereby avoid having it impounded. The proposed new policy would extend this procedure to all traffic stops.


“It’s a fairness issue,” Chief Beck told the Los Angeles Times. “There is a vast difference between someone driving without a license because they cannot legally be issued one and someone driving after having their license revoked.”
Indeed there is, and those differences are already recognized in California law, specifically in the punishments prescribed for each offense. But in seeking “fairness,” or his idea of it, the chief ignores the specific language of state law as it pertains to the seizure of cars from unlicensed drivers. Section 14607.4(f) of the California Vehicle Code reads as follows:

It is necessary and appropriate to take additional steps to prevent unlicensed drivers from driving, including the civil forfeiture of vehicles used by unlicensed drivers. The state has a critical interest in enforcing its traffic laws and in keeping unlicensed drivers from illegally driving. Seizing the vehicles used by unlicensed drivers serves a significant governmental and public interest, namely the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of Californians from the harm of unlicensed drivers, who are involved in a disproportionate number of traffic incidents, and the avoidance of the associated destruction and damage to lives and property.

It’s worth noting that in 2008 the city of Los Angeles was one of several cities and counties named as defendants in a federal civil lawsuit that challenged the current impound policy. The U.S. District Court granted summary judgment to the defendants, a decision affirmed by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, a court not widely known for being a friend to law enforcement. In so ruling, the Court stated, “This limited application [of the impound authority in the California Vehicle Code] accords with the California legislature’s determination that such a temporary forfeiture is warranted to protect Californians from the harm caused by unlicensed drivers — a determination we have no basis to reject.”


And yet now the LAPD’s chief, based on his own — and the mayor’s of course — sense of “fairness,” rejects this same determination.


So how “fair” will this new policy be to those who come to suffer for it? Just as I sat down to write this column I came across this story of a traffic accident in L.A.’s San Fernando Valley. A 60-year-old woman, Patricia Ellen Riedy of Wildwood, Mo., was struck and killed by car driven by an unlicensed driver, 36-year-old Martha Cruz. The story makes no mention of Ms. Cruz’s immigration status, though one might draw an inference based on her surname. But whether a citizen or not, she had no right to be behind the wheel of the car that killed the unfortunate Ms. Riedy, whose survivors might offer instruction to Chief Beck on what is “fair.”


The people of the state of California, through their elected representatives, have decided that people who drive while unlicensed, whatever the reason, should have their cars impounded. It is not for the mayor of Los Angeles or his chief of police to decide otherwise.

http://pjmedia.com/blog/lapd-turns-a...inglepage=true

“It’s a fairness issue,” Chief Beck told the Los Angeles Times. “There is a vast difference between someone driving without a license because they cannot legally be issued one and someone driving after having their license revoked.”

This guy must have a medical issue because he sounds like he has been smoking something.

And we need drivers licenses why? Sounds stupid to me doesn't it to you...Drivers license Holiday for everyone...


This is what our Country is turning into and no ones stops it....unbelievable the gall of these people we Americans are stupid for letting these government officials continue this...wake up....

Beck has been a pro illegal sheriff for some time. He stopped the impoundment of cars driven by illegals since the local latino community and LaRaza raised a stink at the city council meetings claiming that taking the cars and truck away from illegals puts a hardship on them. What really should be done is impound the vehicle and auction it off with proceeds going to immigration enforcements the same way drug impounded vehicles are. The illegal driver should be charged with felony trespassing in the state, driving without a license, public endangerment, and any other charge that can be administered so that they are not only removed from the streets but also the country as well. Make sure their family goes with them. BE LEGAL OR BE GONE!!!!

Unlicensed and Illegal Immigrant Drivers are Killing People

Sacramento, CA -- According to the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety report "Unlicensed to Kill", an average of a little more than 8,000 people were killed each year in driving-without-a-license crashes from 1993 to 1999. That's 20 percent of all fatal crashes. (By comparison, DUI drivers are involved in 32 percent). 40 people tragically and unnecessarily killed recently by unlicensed drives are listed below.

"we enforce the law, not only to punish the lawbreaker,
but to validate the good behavior of those who choose to obey it."

Law Enforcement increased DUI checkpoints & vehicle impounds for unlicensed drivers

So why are people STILL driving without licenses?

Bad news! -- Michael Allen (D-Santa Rosa) & Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles)
want the impounds stopped. (AB 1389 & 131)

Allen argues sobriety checkpoints specifically target illegal aliens and are unfair.
Wake up Mr. Allen and Mr. Cedillo, people are dying in accidents caused by DUI drivers and unlicensed drivers - statistically 50% of all fatal crashes. Impounds and checkpoints save lives!
Now, LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa puts politics ahead of your safety. Villaraigosa wants to abolish the 30-day impounds. Don't agree? Tell the mayor how you feel. We made it simple to email the mayor and other elected representatives. Tell them your safety is more important than their political agenda.


A driver license indicates:

• testing for a basic understanding of the rules of the road
• a vision test
• agreeing to comply with DUI & drug testing
• a verified identity for traffic tickets and traffic accidents
• you are eligible to purchase vehicle insurance -- no license, no insurance

* Read the AAA study "Unlicensed to Kill"

It's not OK to drive without a license, whether in the US legally or not.

• 8,000 people die each year in driving-without-license crashes (20% of fatal crashes)
• Unlicensed drivers are 5 times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash
• Unlicensed drivers are 4 times more likely to be involved in hit and run crashes
• There are over 1 million traffic warrants in the Los Angeles City and Los Angeles Count warrant system. (How do you identify and ticket a driver without a license?)
• In California, over 1 million drivers are driving without ever being licensed, 720,000 have suspended licenses (14607.4 VC below)
• Checkpoints Save Lives Driving without a license kills people

Los Angeles Police are instructed not to comply with the law, which requires officers to impound unlicensed drivers cars at DUI checkpoints. They feel it "unfairly targets" illegal immigrants. Other agencies are following the LAPD lead. Sobriety Checkpoints Under Attack .
The US Supreme Court disagrees. In Delaware v. Prouse, the court commented that agencies could "develop methods for spot checks" if a neutral formula were used to determine which cars were stopped.
The Los Angeles Police Protective League, the official representative of Los Angeles Police Officers, provides a very clear opposing perspective to that policy in two articles on the dangers of unlicensed drivers;
"Disregarding state law proves deadly – again" read the article
"A dangerous and potentially costly departure from state law" read the article

While the law seems pretty pretty simple;

• A license is required to drive a vehicle (12500(a) VC)
• The owner of a vehicle must determine that the operator possesses a license (14604(a) VC)
• The owner must authorize the person to operate the vehicle (14604(a) VC)
• Impounding vehicles of suspended or unlicensed drivers is mandatory (14602.6(a)(1) VC)

it does involve that the rules are actually followed. So, it appears that illegal immigrants will be exempt from traffic enforcement and immigration enforcement. Owners will be allowed to retrieve their vehicles without penalty, and allow their use again.


California Legislative Findings:
14607.4 VC The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

• (a) Driving a motor vehicle on the public streets and highways is a privilege, not a right.
• (b) Of all drivers involved in fatal accidents, more than 20 percent are not licensed to drive. A driver with a suspended license is four times as likely to be involved in a fatal accident as a properly licensed driver.
• (c) At any given time, it is estimated by the Department of Motor Vehicles that of some 20 million driver's licenses issued to Californians, 720,000 are suspended or revoked. Furthermore, 1,000,000 persons are estimated to be driving without ever having been licensed at all.
• (d) Over 4,000 persons are killed in traffic accidents in California annually, and another 330,000 persons suffer injuries.
• (e) Californians who comply with the law are frequently victims of traffic accidents caused by unlicensed drivers. These innocent victims suffer considerable pain and property loss at the hands of people who flaunt the law. The Department of Motor Vehicles estimates that 75 percent of all drivers whose driving privilege has been withdrawn continue to drive regardless of the law.
• (f) It is necessary and appropriate to take additional steps to prevent unlicensed drivers from driving, including the civil forfeiture of vehicles used by unlicensed drivers. The state has a critical interest in enforcing its traffic laws and in keeping unlicensed drivers from illegally driving. Seizing the vehicles used by unlicensed drivers serves a significant governmental and public interest, namely the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of Californians from the harm of unlicensed drivers, who are involved in a disproportionate number of traffic incidents, and the avoidance of the associated destruction and damage to lives and property.
• (g) The Safe Streets Act of 1994 is consistent with the due process requirements of the United States Constitution and the holding of the Supreme Court of the United States in Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co., 40 L. Ed. 2d 452.

"LAPD Turns a Blind Eye to Illegal Aliens without Driver’s Licenses"

My third eyes blind!