Photo: Traffic checkpoint on Law Street, Batavia

Registration and inspection check is not a way to eliminate crashes and they didnt tell anyone to slow down this was a tag and snag event for tax $$. I wish the media for once would call it for what it is. I understand the need for fines so dont everyone else. Call it what it is.

I didn't know there were alot of accidents on law st..If its a speeding problem set up radar and write tickets.I don't agree with any of those road blocks..Its like going door to door looking for property code violations..Its also like stopping everyone on the street and frisking them...Nothing against the cops they are just doing there job..This is also revenue generator..

I fail to see how random checking of registrations, inspections, seat belts, and tires is such a horrible thing. It's not like people are getting stopped, grilled and groped by TSA agents at a border crossing. The more irresponsible drivers who get their act together from hitting them in the wallet where it hurts most, and the more unsafe vehicles which get repaired or permanently removed from the road, the better it is for everyone.

Scott, so you don't think increased police presence in this form will make people think twice about speeding along that stretch? I am one of the people that voted thumbs down on your simplistic and uninformed post.

Mark, I agree that radar and tickets would better address a speeding problem but at the same time I don't have a problem with this kind of checkpoint.

Mark is completely right. This is just intimidation to make sure everyone is complying. Auto registration is nothing more than a revenue generating tactic by forcing you to pay for something that is basically a necessity if you live in a rural area. Automotive registration serves no other purpose except to force you to buy insurance. You may have an argument about inspections, Bob, but they a far too stringent and roadblocks are pure intimidation. BTW the following states have no safety inspections. Are you safer in NY then the people are in:

States without safety, emissions, or VIN inspections

Alaska[39]
Arkansas
Iowa
Kentucky
Michigan
Minnesota
Montana
North Dakota
South Carolina
South Dakota

Dave, are you saying that anybody that wants to drive should be able to? No restrictions as to age, cognitive ability, or vision?

And what about the driver that has inadequate or failed brakes in a school zone? Or no working lights at night. Or bald tires on a rainy day on a road where children play nearby.

And the people described above should be allowed to drive with no insurance? OK, if they hurt you or me, we have insurance to cover ourselves and our families. Should taxpayers be on the hook for the uninsured motorist?

I agree with you most of the time, Dave, but we are light years apart on this one.

to stop 20 innocent people who have up to date inspection and registration to catch that one or two who don't seems wrong to me..

Road Blocks? Check Points! Tax collecting? Traffic Safety! What some of you seem to forget that, DRIVING IS A PRIVILEGE AND NOT A RIGHT. Second, if someone is not following the law then it is their fault, not the police officers doing his job and correcting it! Third, there is no tax collecting (aka Issuing of Traffic Violation Tickets) if, people are in compliance with the rules of the road. You talk about the media calling it for what it is. How about, stop crying about check points? Does the big bad check point hurt you? Please, what whiners! I highly doubt that, these officers issued a ticket for every vehicle violation they saw as well. Can tell you alot of Police Officers give more verbal warnings than tickets.

Yes Mark if, you check 20 people and only get 2 violators, it is a job well done. Now you will have 20 people in compliance with the law instead of 18. More is better!

Bob, I am talking about vehicle registration, not driver's licenses. Paying every 2years for the privilege of driving your car on a road is a money grab. Like I said, you might have a point about inspections, but then I showed you 10 states with no vehicle inspection laws. Do we hear about people with bad brakes running over school children in those states? Insurance is a good idea and it should be something you have to protect yourself. But unfortunately the insurance laws in this state don't work that way. No, the taxpayers should not support uninsured motorists. It should be a risk you take, but again, the hand-wringers won't allow that. Again, there's not much we can do about state laws, but we can stop doing things like roadblocks and aggressive enforcement. You can't drive from McDonalds to Cedar St without seeing 3 cop cars.
We have 3 agencies in Genesee County and all are working hard to justify their existence.

Your point about the ridiculous charges for vehicle registration is valid. It's nothing but another tax called a "fee".

As far as insurance being mandatory, I fully support it. The uninsured idiot gets hurt in a wreck, who is going to pay? You and me.

Police presence: We have a different perspective. We lived in Rochester until 18 years ago. I like seeing them. I don't believe they are there to hassle the everyday law abiding citizen - they are there to "protect and serve". There is probably a few that are "bad apples" that allow their badge and gun swell their egos. Fortunately, I've never met one. Apparently you don't see it that way? I'd rather have a lot rather than too few.

As far as enforcement, isn't it better that it is "close to home" instead of the ever intrusive Albany machine? All levels of government are dysfunctional (TERM LIMITS!) but local government is slightly more accountable than those entrenched in Albany.

Your turn.

John W., So you think it's a good thing to bother 90% of the drivers because of the 10% that may be in violation of a traffic law?
What's next, random house inspections to make sure there are no code violations? It is my opinion, there is no difference, it is a violation of my personal space. Give em an inch, they take a mile.
What ever happened to reasonable cause?
Bob, more police, more burden on the taxpayers.

My problem isn't with the individual officers that much Bob. True some of them are boors and get carried away with themselves. The problem for me is the bureaucracy that has created multiple law enforcement agencies. All are sucking off the taxpayer teat and all, in my humble opinion, have to periodically justify their existence and their money flow. I can agree that local is better. It's my opinion that the only law enforcement entity we need in Genesee County is the County Sheriff. The state police agency has grown far too big and over reaches. Don't even get me started about all the federal over stepping. The sheriff is elected and should follow the laws agreed on by the elected county legislature. If the taxpayers think we need vehicle inspection check points, then it goes into the county budget we should also be voting on every year or maybe 2 years. We should have the law enforcement we want to pay for. Period. My bet is that once people realize how much all this "faux safety" is costing them, they won't think it so necessary. It all goes back to the money trail and you and me are paying for it, Bob. You wrote about what you don't want to pay for, I'm writing about what I don't want to pay for. If taxing was handled at the most local level, and then counties, states and the fed had to ask for the money, instead of the other way around, I believe things would be a lot different.

Can some one explain why we have a state tax surcharge on every ticket written..If this is not about money..Howard i don't know one city cop in batavia so it would no difference to me who patroled my street..A county of 58,000 doesn't not need all these police agency's.I see no reason for a city resident to pay three times for police protection..We pay a city tax,a county tax,and a state tax ...It would be interesting to see what all the police budgets in genesse county add up too.

Dave, you mentioned states that don't have vehicle registration, and listed states that don't have safety, emissions, or VIN inspections.

Don't be fooled that these states make owning and operating a vehicle much cheaper than it is here. They have other "fees". A few states consider vehicles property and charge property taxes on them, and others simply call them "vehicle fees." Many of the states you listed have these other fees... none of them cheap.

California, for example, has an annual vehicle license fee of .065% of the vehicle's fair market value for 11 years of the vehicle's life. Imagine owning a $50,000 vehicle and paying $3250.00 license fee the first year. No thanks!

Every state gets their money one way or another. A car is taxed when it's purchased, and over and over again when it is sold to new owners. That's double dipping as far as I'm concerned, and it stinks.

This is from 2012: http://cga.ct.gov/2012/rpt/2012-R-0086.htm

Idaho also has no safety/emissions inspections. And as I recall when we moved back it was waaaaaaaaay more expensive to register in NY. To the tune of about 400.00 to re register 2 vehicles. Our auto insurance was cheaper out there too. 75 mph speed limits and no cell phone laws. It was nice to be free for a while.

Brett, your post made me look a few statistics up... Idaho's population is only 1.5 million people, and there are only about 2,500 people receiving welfare. I suppose they don't have the same problems that states like NY have.

This argument about we are paying for too much Law Enforcement here is so bogus, ill informed and just plain out of perspective.

1) We have a large State Police presence here NOT because we are over patrolled, but because Troop A which covers almost all of Western New York to the Pennsylvania border is headquartered here. Not to patrol Genesee County, Nine cars are assigned to The Genesee County patrol area over 3 shifts, there usually are only 2-3 Troopers assigned to Genesee county patrol at any given shift. the exception being when certain special duty details are underway. (Like radar, registration checks etc.) Look at the license plates on the trooper cars 1A41 thru 1A48 are the cars assigned specifically to Genesee County and 1A49 which is an unmarked car Everything else is a troop car either from another zone or Troop wide.

The reason why you see so many trooper cars at Sporto's at lunch time is because troopers come from all over the area to train and/or conduct business with the Troop Commander here, It

The reason you see so many trooper cars here is because certain area wide units, administrative units and special detail units are assigned to this barracks and pass through Batavia on a Daily basis, they are NOT all assigned to patrol Genesee county, Occasionally, there will a special traffic detail like registration checks etc. will boost the presence for a few hours each day.

2) The Sheriff's department covers entire county and if you ever listen to a scanner or radioreference.com you will soon find that they are spread out with those 2-3 trooper cars covering a lot of area and are often stretched to their coverage limits.

3) The City Police, patrols the city,3- 4 officers per shift which is what we have and a small investigative force is actually on the low side for a city of 16000+

The reason why you see so many cars passing through the city is just that, they are passing through from their HQ to their respective patrol areas.

Howard was right on, our community is safer then most precisely because we are fortunate to have the police presence that we do.

Well, gee I must be wrong. Thanks for straightening me out Mark. I'll just start lovin' me some big expensive intrusive gov'ment now. And be grateful for all the security thereof.

NOT

Just a random statistic. In 30 years of driving I have passed through more roadblocks/checkpoints than I can count. Because I keep my insurance, registration, and inspection up to date and choose not to drive 1.) while under the influence, 2.)without a seatbelt, 3.)while talking on the phone or texting, the total amount of revenue collected from me in 30 years is $0 and a couple extra seconds of my day each time. I'm good with that.
John was right to point out that driving is not a right, it is a privelige and as such has certain responsibilities attached to that privilege. The privilege is admittedly very expensive in New York but that is a legislative issue, not a law enforcement issue.

What I think Frank, is that unfortunately a few bad apples spoil the bushel! What I think is too many people whine about what they feel is an inconvenience rather than a public service provided to ensure all drivers and their vehicles are in compliance with Vehicle Safety Laws! What you seem to overlook is something as simple as an inspection stickers ensures a vehicle is safe to drive on a road and not a danger. Failure to comply with such simple laws can also lead to someone's death on the road.

Please get off that "They are violating my personal space BS." What a totally lame statement. I suppose your feelings get hurt very easily as well?

Checkpoints are reasonable. Once again driving is a privilege and not a constitutional right (Really!). We drive on public roads so; if your paperwork for the vehicle is not valid then you are in violation of the laws established. If someone is stupid enough to leave an illegal substance or object in plain view in their vehicle, that is on them. So, what I think Frank, people need to stop being so sensitive and stop whining about such a trivial matter.

I would agree that adding more police means more tax dollars spent. Just like all the individuals who are abusing our social services and draining our tax dollars.

Good points Howard
Having a current inspection sticker on a vehicle does not mean that it is safe to operate either. It just means that at a fixed point in time, it satisfied criteria. The most crucial part of a vehicle which determines it's safety is the person behind the wheel. If, John you are truly concerned with safety, then you'd have to have an actual safety inspection right there on the road, lift the car, check the frame. pull a wheel, blow the horn, check the lights etc. I doubt that's going to happen. This stuff is bogus.

Either you believe most people are possessed of enough sense to not try to kill or injure themselves or somebody else or you believe government has to force them and is therefor responsible for everyone's safety.

Rhetorical question.

Of course it's a privilege! So it's o.k. that every Tom, Dick, and Harry who can afford a car should be able to drive it just because it's their property? That's just crazy, IMO. So some Hollywood rich kids whose parents buy them a car when they're 12 should be on the road? Should someone who has 25 speeding tickets should just be able to drive because they own a car? Can a blind person drive just because they own a car?

This may all sound ridiculous, but so does the comment that ownership means instant rights.

Howard you may disagree but, like you stated it is a court ruling. It is not a constitutional right. Laws have been placed on vehicles for safety purposes as I pointed out. To say that, a checkpoint is a violation of one’s privacy and personal space is just asinine.

You are comparing a constitutional right (Assembly) with a non-constitutional right (Driving). Our constitutional rights can't be taken from us but, our driver's license can be taken when one is not in compliance with traffic/vehicle laws. Our liberty is not based on driving our vehicles.

Vehicles are just another modern convenience which makes life easier for all of us. Heck if, driving is such a right then why bother with setting age limits for drivers? Heck, I know some 10 years old children that are better drivers than some adults. Driving is a right with limitations so, how much is driving really a right? So, does age play in one's rights?

My argument is not about driving. It is over those who feel checkpoints are unconstitutional, invasion of their privacy or personal space. If, the court is wrong like you believe, why has it not been changed?

So, a reasonable restriction is okay to violate a right of individual? Which is it? Yelling "fire' in a crowd threater also would cause a major panic and endanger one's safety.

Dave, it is an inspection that, looks over the safety of the vehicle. If, it doesn't pass then it cannot be operated on the road. If the frame is going to break it will only take one of the millions of Batavia potholes to break it in half.

Thanks, John you made my point for me. A car that was inspected 6 or 8 months ago will have a valid inspection sticker, but the springs could be broken, the brakes could be shot, so on and so on. I lived in MD for 9 years. The only safety inspection you need is when you register it for the first time in MD. Otherwise, it's an emission test every 2 years, or least that was the case until 2007 when we moved back to NY. I had 3 cars or vans at a time for most of those years, 4 for a few. Mine, my wife's, and my daughters when they were old enough to drive. We switched cars sometimes, so I kept all 3 safe, I didn't want my wife and children in an unsafe vehicle. I checked the brakes every so often and replaced them when needed, I kept the tires inflated, I made sure the lights were all working, I did the maintenance & repairs on them, mostly myself in the driveway as I couldn't afford a shop. Taught my 2 girls quite a bit about motor vehicles so they now as adults can recognize a problem before it happens. Point being, I didn't need the government breathing over my shoulder to do it, I don't think there were any more accidents in MD than NY per capita.

Here's another point I've seen plenty of beat up old trash cans on wheels in Buffalo, Roch, 'Cuse, Albany, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg loaded with people going down the road with no plates, passing me. Might stick out around here, but in the higher traffic areas, not so much. It's just another thing that penalizes decent responsible people and the ones who don't care about the law, still don't care.

Once you extract the emotion out of the argument, the logic of checkpoints being money grabs and driving being a right is fundamentally flawed. Checkpoint first, as I pointed out in my first post, the only money that can be grabbed at a checkpoint is from a person who willfully chooses to ignore the current laws and regulations of New York State. In most cases, if you are found in violation of a DMV regulation (sometimes people are unaware of their violation), you are given a warning citation and an certain period of time to come into compliance therefore the only thing it costs you is that which it should to make it right in the first place. If you are found with an illegal item, substance, or under the influence then shame on you, not the person who caught you. It is logically and legally impossible for checkpoints to generate income from those who choose to obey current statutes. That makes sense to me since law enforcement is funded by tax dollars then every dollar that is generated by a willful scofflaw offsets a tax dollar paid by someone who does the right thing. If the only revenue gained by law enforcement came by virtue of non-compliance being discovered through an accident or other offense, our taxes would necessarily be higher than they already are.
Driving as a right vs. privilege. In this country and state you can own any type of wheeled, motorized vehicle you want. You can operate it freely without insurance, registration, inspection, helmets, etc. You are completely unencumbered by government regulation. It is your personal property to do with what you want on your property...period. As soon as you operate it on public land, sidewalks, roads, etc., you are subject to the laws, rules, and regulations of the public entity that owns, built, and maintains that property. These are authorities given the federal government by the Constitution. Do I like them all? NO. Are we overtaxed, over regulated, and over burdened by our government both state and federal? YES. But current laws, rules and regulations are what they are. I for one choose to obey them, not like them, obey them. I have limited choices and they include redressing my government to get them changed or moving to a state where I am less burdened. Both those choices come at a cost and require me to balance my desire to put forth the effort to change it, or balance my desire to remain in New York for the reasons each individual has (family, career, like the geography, love the weather). Ultimately it comes down to choice. The choice to obey or not and the choice to effect change or not. Griping about checkpoints and cleaving to rights that aren't really rights fixes nothing.

Probably because, you beat on your car. Not to mention you cannot avoid potholes.

John, I have a bad habit of trying to avoid law enforcement.
I do that by obeying the law. I will call them when I need them.
If you misinterpreted my opinion as whining, get over yourself.

So Frank how did I misinterpret your comment? If, you obey the traffic laws then why whine about checkpoints? Whining is whining simple and true! Those policemen were doing their job plain and simple. There was no misinterpretation of your comment, you were just whining simple and true. lmao

Yes very true Dave but, there are those who know mechanics who will do a favor for a friend (especially if they believe it is not a major issue or feel they can get around the issue). I can tell you that, we have stopped numerous people coming on the installation with photo copy inspection stickers and expired inspection stickers (not just a week or two but, 1/2 year plus). NYS Inspection Sticker=$10; Repairs of inspection failures=$100s and $100s. Photo copy of inspection stick=$0.25. Just because, you see rust buckets on the road still does not mean it is legal and usually those are the vehicles that do a complete stop, drive te speed limit, use their turn signals, etc..... They avoid (like Frank put it) law enforcement so, they do not get discovered.

No Howard, I am merely stating that, driving is not a constitutional right. Vehicles are a modern convenience. Driving is a privilege, otherwise people would not be denied that ability. Just because, you own a vehicle does not mean you have the right to drive it on public roadways.

An great example of one's rights being taken away is Govenor Cuomo's Second Amendment Right VIOLATION. Now that is wrong! There is a right that not everyone participates in but, does have.

John, love how you pick and chose who should and shouldn't lose
their rights.
I can't stand guns, but you can bet your ass I don't support gun control
legislation. My rights today, your rights tomorrow.
I never said you misinterpreted my comment, read slowly.

The problem with this particular checkpoint is it isn't solving the problems that are leading to the majority of traffic accidents or fatalities: impaired and inattentive driving. Paying for 2 officers (with 2 cars that were most likely idling) to stand in a single spot on a single street for I'm guessing at least an hour is inefficient police work and not how I'd like my tax money spent. I'd rather see the 2 officers walking a beat covering 3-4 miles per hour in residential neighborhoods making their presence known. While they are walking (especially on main thoroughfares like Richmond, Oak, Washington, Ellicott, Main, etc...) then can easily observe drivers who are talking on cell phones or texting EVERY DAY! They would also observe any unsafe driving practices. They could patrol local parking lots at night and keep the car thieves at bay while nailing impaired drivers before they hit the roadways. In any of these scenarios, they could easily check stickers once they have the driver pulled over. Paying someone to sit at a spot and wait for trouble to pass them is inefficient and isn't helping keep the community safe from thieves, murderers, etc... let alone the "threat" from vehicle law non-compliance.

Now let's not pretend that our law enforcement practices and vehicle rules and regulations aren't about money. Comments above have already established the insane focus on taking money from car owners, whether the vehicles are driven or not, or where or how far they are driven for that matter. And that's just to allow them to be on the road. Regarding vehicle safety, we can drive all across the country with our vehicles that are deemed legal in our state of residence, mostly with completely independent rules and regulations. I've never seen a correlation to out of state accidents associated with vehicles stemming from a particular state thereby warranting a safety concern. The reality is we do not have a majority of unsafe vehicles out there mostly due to common sense and partially due to inspection laws. As Dave mentioned, the driver is the biggest safety concern and we all know the two biggest unsafe practices. If we really wanted to ensure safety, we'd enforce those laws first and foremost. Since we are not, we're really just looking for ways to augment government revenue.

Bob great points ...

To be honest, its always been my opinion that even the most penny pinching SOB vehicle owners are gonna keep their cars functioning in a safe and reliable manner. Anyone who has had a breakdown on cars in good shape can tell you how infuriating and inconvenient and costly these situation are. I just dont know anyone that says let's go shopping, but get the tow truck number just in case we dont make it back. Some of these rules and fines are just silly. Bob's points are common sense.

Frank show me how I am picking and choosing, please.... Show me where driving is a right.... Simple enough, right? No, because you cannot since, it is not a right but, a privilege.... Like it or hate it, it is true.

You bet your arse you do not support the Cuomo Gun Control Laws because, they will not and do not prevent criminals in using them in violent crimes.

Oh BTW, I can prove that owning guns is a constititutional right and not a privilege. It is called the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

"I'd rather see the 2 officers walking a beat covering 3-4 miles per hour in residential neighborhoods making their presence known. While they are walking (especially on main thoroughfares like Richmond, Oak, Washington, Ellicott, Main, etc...) then can easily observe drivers who are talking on cell phones or texting EVERY DAY! "

That is fine MR. Brown so, how do you suggest they stop them? The last I knew a human cannot run 30 MPH (If, the violator is doing the speed limit and while the PO is wearing 15-20 pounds of gear). Not to mention what if, they need to respond in a timely manner. Even if, they start up their car and moved it here and there, that is still abusing the car mechanically. It takes more gas to start an engine then it is to maintain an engine run.

Everything in today's world is about money. Hench, our financial crisis. Freeloaders are a bigger waste of money then police conducting a vehicle traffic checkpoint (which is not a daily occurrence). Yet Genesee is one of the easiest counties to obtain social services and you are not acquired to be a resident for an allotted time frame. I know there are those who actually need help but, in today's economy more are taking Obama's handouts instead of finding employment.

Robert why don't you conduct this study, "How many of the violator's that, police discover at a checkpoint actually get a fix it ticket or just a verbal warning?" I bet the answer would probably be more verbal than tickets. So, until that is discovered, Frank, you and I cannot or can say it is about money.

BTW, Mr. Brown, I do like your idea of a walking patrol. However, it is not practical for many reasons. Maybe, a bike patrol.

John, I didn't like the way the Gestapo operated either.
Is walking down the street a right, or a privilege?
Should a law enforcement officer have the legal right to stop you,
and start questioning you regardless of the fact you broke no laws?
I don't think so, but that's just me.

You have the right to walk down the street Frank, thats why some properties have thing's called right of way's for the public when that property abuts public property. I fail to see what the Gestapo has to do with this though. I agree that you shouldn be stopped by police if you didnt break any laws.

John a walking patrol will still have a radio, so your point about stopping them is moot. Also I dont know if people are aware there is a vehicle patrol car that has gear on the back trunk. Do you know what that is? It's a camera system that allows them to scan every car in a parking lot or street parking, which a computer then can check against dmv file to make sure that cars on the road or in parkinglots are in a legal status and not have invalid plates or lapsed insurance an so on. So there is alot more scrutiny on vehicles so the saftey roadblocks seem a bit of overkill. They may be appropriate on drinking holidays or problem areas for speeding and/or accidents. But the random ones just seem a bit of harassment, and abuse of police power.

Wow Frank! You are really trying to go there? Talk about going over the top and way off target. Maybe you should start putting on your big boy pants. You just keep whining about something so trifling.

Let me ask you this question Frank. Do you drink bottle water? Heck I remember when growing up that my house drew water from a well and my parents never had to pay a water utility bill. Now they came that our well is contaminated and not safe to drink. So, they brought Monroe Water Authority into the area and charge the home owners. Why do we have to pay for water something that is some abundant? Isn’t your right to drink water? On second thought don’t worry yourself on answering; it may make you get more upset.

Frank did you take a driving test? What was in the introduction of the Study Book? Was there not a statement that stated, “Driving is a Privilege?” So, is walking a privilege? Really I expected better from you but, you never stop surprising me. What did going from walking on one’s hands and feet to just their feet become a privilege? In your mind I am guessing so.

Hello Kyle, how are you? Anyway yes you are right we have radios. However, you forget that, police are assigned sectors and if one sector is on foot he has to rely on a unit being close enough to detect and stop.

John, my opinion has nothing to do with boys pants, and you go off on a tangent about drinking water, just who in hell is off target here?
What if I were paranoid and scizzo, being stopped for no good reason may set off a chain of events that simply would not have happened if the police state did not exist. Just saying John, because I can.
I hope your police work is limited to military only John. If you were to pull me over for no good reason, I would ask if A) I was under arrest,
B)am I being detained, and C) if the answer to A or B was yes, I want to speak to an atty., if the answer was no, I would just drive off and dare you to pull me over again for no good reason.
I disagree that people who haven't broken the law being stopped and questioned by ANYONE, thats my opinion John, thats all it is.

Yes I did take a " road test ", and at no time during my road test was I ever informed
that driving was a privilage. It may be written in the permit test booklet.

The discussion seems to blur the various government agencies and branches and respective roles each play in law and law enforcement.

The laws are written by the state legislature and local town, village, city boards.

The laws are enforced by those police agencies within assigned jurisdiction.

The constitutionality of any law and the acceptable means for enforcing any law are tested by the courts.

I would add one additional player, especially applicable in the realm of vehicular law, the insurance lobby has been extremely influential. The No Fault Law, the seat belt law, air bag laws, helmet laws and mandatory insurance all derived from industry pressure. The push for vehicle inspections and safety standards came from AAA in the 1960s. That organization drafted two laws: National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 and the Highway Safety Act.

Despite studies by the FBI that suggest saturation patrols are more effective than random checkpoints, other studies conclude that sobriety checkpoints have reduced drunk driving by 20% since implementation in the 1980s.

The critical decision that determined checkpoints were not a violation of the fourth amendment came down from the Supreme Court. A 6-3 decision in Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz (1990), the United States Supreme Court found properly conducted sobriety checkpoints are constitutional.

My suggestion to anyone who feels safety laws are inappropriate, start a PAC and out-finance the insurance lobby.