> > Now why doesn't the
> >ACLU take on this one.
> Because this falls within the range of acceptable governmental
> behaivor,approved of by the ACLU. Did you have a Fish on the back of your
> car?
>
> Phil Smith
> Tampa, FL.
> 69 TR6
>
>
As another lister pointed out, these smog checkpoints probably fall into the
same legal category as a sobriety checkpoint. Accepting that, whereas a drunk
driver presents a clear and present danger to public safety, are we to believe
that operating a car which may be marginally over the pollution standards for
its model year also present a clear and present danger to public safety. Also,
out here, the PD are required to advertise the date, time and location of
sobriety checkpoints, I have not seen an announcement for a smog checkpoint.
The fact that the checkpoints are announced with a sign reading "Survey Ahead"
to me, implies taht participation is voluntary. I think the average person
would interpret it this way as well. Also, "Survey Ahead" is not a clear or
complete statment of purpose. "Vehicle Pollution Survey Ahead" is more
accurate. Lastly, is this an effective use of a CHP officers time?
As for a fish on the back of my car, no, but a couple of anchovies up the
tailpipe could make the whole experience more interesting!
Cheers,
Kurt Oblinger ("You get the government you deserve") I didn't make it up.
Redondo Beach, Ca,
c394829@is6.mdc.com
|