Week of 1.8.2012
To Tow or Not to Tow
More columns
written by Laramie:
Your comments about this column are welcome ~ e-mail Laramie at
Laramie Boyd
The Spectator
A place for intelligent writers
A place for intelligent readers
founded 2004 by ron cruger
Starting in 1995, California Police departments were granted the
authority to impound cars for up to 30 days if the driver did
not have a
DMV license to operate a vehicle. Violation of this law was discovered
at sobriety checkpoints when the operator of the
car was asked for a
driver's license, and also by patrolmen stopping motorists for ordinary
traffic violations. Checkpoints were scattered
at various locations
around the state, mostly in the larger cities. For the owner to get his
car out of storage, the cost ran upwards
of $1000, which covered towing
and storage fees. Thousands of Californian citizens were affected by
this ruling and were, naturally,
upset and inconvenienced without
transportation to and from their workplace, shopping for groceries, and
attending social activities.
But they knew the law and they paid the
price.
A serious problem arose out of the 1993 California law that
prevented illegal
immigrants from getting a driver's license. This
meant, of course, that every illegal immigrant who was caught in a
sobriety checkpoint,
or who was stopped for a normal traffic violation,
had their car impounded, as none of them would have a driver's license,
as the
officer at the scene would ask to see one. The ACLU and other
Latino and illegal immigrant sympathizers felt the restrictive driver's
license law was an "aggressive anti-immigrant policy that inflamed
racial tensions." Those affected by the law felt that it ignored
the
fact that a car was a necessity, not a luxury, and having their car
towed away was an too great a punishment in the first place,
not to
mention the high cost to retrieve it. Police officials, of course,
claimed they were targeting law breakers, not illegal immigrants,
and
wondered what was wrong with aggressive policies that enforced existing
laws.
In the last year and a half, as cars were
being taken from them,
670 illegal immigrants were turned over to the Immigration and Customs
Enforcement Department for possible
deportation, as should be the case.
Many of these illegals, were also involved in drugs, had prior DUI's,
and theft or assault records.
Towing companies, in one California city,
were paying $75,000 for the right to tow cited cars, keep any storage
fees, and if the cars
were not claimed, for one reason or another, to
auction off the cars and keep the money. Some activists said "This was
like the towing
companies had a legal right to steal the cars." I
suppose these same people would feel that when authorities confiscated
illegal drugs
from either illegal immigrants or anyone else, and the
vehicles that illegally transported them, and then auctioned the
vehicles off
and destroyed the drugs, that the authorities were stealing
their cars and drugs. If you can believe it, there is a group of
activists
in one city that drives around town locating sobriety
checkpoints, and then texting messages on the web as to where the
blockades
are set up so unlicensed drivers, or even those driving under
the influence or those with outstanding warrants, could avoid being
stopped and getting tickets or having their cars impounded.
Well, starting January 1, 2012, a new law takes effect. It
states
that the police, either at sobriety checkpoints or elsewhere, can
no longer impound a car just because the driver does not have a
valid
DMV license to operate a vehicle. So, many drivers won't be asked to
show their driver's licenses, and the illegals then will
be free to
drive away without being discovered as such. I can't help but wonder if
this state government policy is nothing more than
intentionally not
wanting to identify the immigrants who are in the country illegally. I
guess this is what gets votes from those
who don't want existing
immigration laws enforced, just change the law.