By James Baxter, NMA President

The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution has been strangled with convoluted legal rationalizations, riddled with bullets in the form of Supreme Court decisions and drawn and quartered by “creative” law enforcement interpretations.

This old and oft referred to amendment, an attempt to protect the privacy and property rights of individuals, is dead. Driving any more nails into its rotted casket is a redundant waste of time, but the US Supreme Court persists.

For motorists, or anyone on a public road or sidewalk, the illusion of personal privacy is but a dim memory. Random searches, based on the flimsiest excuses, roadblocks, “frisking” and “patting down” passengers or pedestrians, because they “might have a weapon” and roadside interrogations are now all quite legal, or are carried out as if they are because no one dare argue to the contrary.

The US Supreme Court is currently hearing a case dealing with a Virginia man who was “arrested” for driving with a suspended license, even though the state of Virginia does not authorize arrests for minor traffic crimes, which is what driving on a suspended license is considered.

The court long ago held that once a person is arrested they are subject to being searched. If their car is within finding distance, it too can be searched. This Court ruled in 2001 that a person could be arrested for violating virtually any traffic law, including the failure to wear a seatbelt. And, once arrested you have no fourth amendment protections.

For all practical purposes, this gives the police the power to stop, arrest, and search anyone they feel like “checking out” or harassing. Arabs might be the flavor of the day on Monday, Tuesday it’s blacks in luxury cars and on Wednesday it’s young men driving sport compacts.

The options/excuses for a stop are endless; burned out bulbs, unused seatbelts, (real or imagined) failure to properly signal, touching the center line, hitting the shoulder, two MPH over the speed limit, driving too slow, rolling a stop sign, rolling a right on red, failure to yield to a pedestrian, or talking on a cell phone (inattentive driving).

If the police want to stop you, they can. If they want to arrest you, they can. If they want to search you and your vehicle and your passengers, they can.

That’s how the land’s highest court has ruled.

• 19 Interesting Driving-Related Legal Rulings From This Year
• 5 Federal Court Cases That Weakened The 4th Amendment
• 5 Things You Need To Know About Roadblocks
• It’s That Time Of Year Again…
• Use This Card To Stand Up For Your Rights At Roadblocks

By NMA President, James Baxter

The driver license should serve one and only one purpose; that is to certify that the owner of that license has proven that he or she is capable of operating a motor vehicle, on a public roadway, and in a safe and prudent manner.

The driver license should not be used as a general identification instrument. It should not be suspended or revoked unless, through due process, it is proven that the license owner is not driving in a safe and prudent manner.

Real ID is a bad idea and using the driver license for Real ID makes it a worse idea.

The manner in which the driver license is carried and used makes it highly susceptible to theft and physical loss. Under the "one national ID number" concept, the compromise of that number would expose the victim to financial ruin, malicious acts, and the exposure of highly personal information.

Having a single national ID card/number is an invitation to fraud, theft, and the loss of personal security and individual privacy. Real ID brings us within a step of becoming a “show us your papers” society. The highest courts have already ruled that we no longer have a right to anonymity. We can no longer refuse to identify ourselves if that information is demanded by a police officer, regardless of his justification.

With Real ID we’ll be forced to produce a document, on demand, that proves we are who we say we are. It is already proposed that we can’t fly in a commercial airliner, enter a federal building, or qualify for federal programs without providing a national ID. It doesn’t take a great leap in imagination to envision a society where individuals cannot travel, work, shop, recreate or socialize unless they “show their papers.”

A driver license based Real ID will only exacerbate corporate and government abuse of private citizens.

Such a system will not deter terrorists and will not make our society safer, but will make our society less free and more authoritarian. This is a bad idea whose time should never come.

Image Credit: www.farewellfreedom.com

• Grassroots Effort Needed to Stop PASS Act
• It Always Starts As A Choice…
• No More Fines: A Traffic Safety Revolution
• The Privileged Many: "Professional Courtesy" Exposed
• Tired Of High Gas Prices? Don’t Ask The Government For Help

The list was compiled from items on our site and from www.thenewspaper.com. TheNewspaper.com is an excellent source of news on motorists issues and we encourage anyone who is interested in the politics of driving to subscribe to their news feed.

10) City Rakes In $1,136 In Traffic Ticket Fines Per Resident

The city of Pendergrass, Georgia pulled in $558,020 in traffic fines despite only having 491 residents.

9) Police Wrongly Seize Car From An Innocent Woman

Police in Alexandria, Louisiana seized the car belonging to a motorist who had committed no crime. A pair of police officers ran the license plate on Ruby Wallace’s 1995 Honda Accord and found the department of motor vehicles (DMV) had listed it as canceled. Wallace was without her car for days until the DMV admitted their database was wrong. As fees mounted, neither the Alexandria Police nor the DMV would take responsibility for the mistake or pay the towing company the $430 it demanded before it would return her Honda.

8 ) Texas Toll Authorities Double-Bill 50,000 Drivers & Have No Plans To Stop In The Future

Since January, one out of every 600 vehicles was double-billed on Texas toll roads. Instead of fixing the problem, the authorities were satisfied with only reducing the frequency of the error to one out of every 2000 drivers.

7) Maryland Pushes for $2000 Speed Camera Ticket, Virginia Follows

Officials in both Maryland and Virginia are planning to introduce legislation allowing cameras in so-called highway work zones that would issue automated tickets worth $500 in Virginia and $2000 in Maryland. Lawmakers are following the lead of Illinois which last year introduced $1000 freeway speed camera tickets that have generated significant revenue.

6) Texas DOT Considers Lowering Speed Limit To Boost Toll Revenue

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) has agreed to consider lowering the maximum speed limit on a stretch of interstate highway that competes with a planned toll road. TxDOT’s agreement with the company collecting the tolls also ensures no improvements can be made to nearby roads unless the agency issues payment to the company with taxpayer funds.

5) Georgia Speed Trap Caught Using Ticket Quotas

A local television station has uncovered evidence that a notorious Georgia speed trap has been using traffic ticket quotas. WGCL-TV reports that DeKalb County Police officers are told during roll call that they must issue 65 citations a month and make 25 arrests.

4) Traffic Court Judges Caught Fixing Tickets

New Jersey Attorney General Anne Milgram announced the filing of corruption charges against nearly half of the Jersey City’s municipal court judges for “fixing” tickets for their friends and family.

3) Wisconsin Appeals Court Decision Grants Police License to Stop Innocent Motorists

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals recently ruled that police do not require a reason to stop a car registered in the name of someone with a suspended license. The court ruled that as long as a police officer makes no attempt to determine whether a spouse or other family member might be behind the wheel, he is free to pull over whoever happens to be driving.

2) West Virginia Looks to Boost Revenue with Court Costs

The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals moved to boost revenue from traffic tickets by warning lower courts that they must collect the maximum possible amount in court costs from each defendant. As a result of the clarification, any motorist charged with, for example, both speeding and failure to signal must pay the $160.50 assessment for court costs twice — for a total of $321 — even though the motorist appeared only once in court.

1) Motorists Forced To Let Officers Draw Blood Samples At DUI Stops

An increasing number of police departments are allowing their officers draw blood samples from motorists under suspicion of a DUI/DWI. The officers have limited medical training and it’s the officer’s choice between a breathalyzer or a blood test.

If you found this list worth reading, please take the time to share it with others. Click the “Share This” button below to email it to friends or submit it to a social news site.

• Maryland Police Refuse To Pay Speed Camera Tickets
• 19 Interesting Driving-Related Legal Rulings From This Year
• Motorists Forced To Let Officers Draw Blood Samples At DUI Stops
• Watch Your Wallet When Driving Through These 10 States
• Michigan Cities Break The Law To Generate More Speeding Tickets

Big Brother may be about to get just a bit bigger.

General Motors just announced a new and improved version of its OnStar telematics system that could be used to shut your car’s engine off (or at least, cut back the power) remotely.

Touted as a "safety" feature (of course), the upgraded version of OnStar would give external authorities (law enforcement – and, of course, GM) the ability to send out a signal keyed to the car’s on board computer, which in turn would ease off the gas – no matter how hard you’re putting foot down. GPS-equipped cars already can be located in real time at any time, whether moving or stationary. The "enhanced" version of OnStar would, however, be the first use of satellite technology to physically control the vehicle/supersede the driver.

The system goes live in 2009, when GM will begin offering it on more than 1.7 million new cars and trucks. Chevrolet will lead the way – with up to 60 percent of ’09 models fitted with "enhanced" OnStar.

So what’s wrong with the idea? Is it cabin-in-the-woods paranoia to be concerned about what, after all, could be a valuable tool for law enforcement?

The answer depends to a great extent on how much you trust the government.

Certainly, the use of "enhanced" OnStar to stop high-speed car chases and retrieve stolen cars is hard to argue with. But will that be all the technology’s used for?

Consider this:

The insurance industry is at this very moment lobbying Congress to impose electronic speed governors on heavy trucks – limiting them to no faster than 68 mph.

Surprisingly, the trucking industry isn’t completely opposed to the idea – provided electronic speed limiters are also fitted to ordinary passenger vehicles, too. Fair’s fair, right?

Now add a dash of "enhanced" OnStar to the brew.

Come 2009, it will be technically feasible to make speeding impossible. A modern car is controlled by computers; the computers are now tied into GPS systems such as OnStar – which have the ability to send and receive electronic transmissions, including instructions that tell the computer how to run the car. "Smart" speed limit signs can now be fitted with transmitters; when a car with "enhanced" OnStar comes into range, the transmitter tells the car’s computer what the maximum allowable speed shall be – and ye shall drive no faster.

Welcome to the future.

"Technology should not just entertain us or make us more comfortable," croons NHTSA Administrator Nicole R. Nason. "It should make us safer." Of course. And what could be safer than making speeding an impossibility? If you haven’t heard this argument voiced openly, just wait. It’s coming as sure as Lindsay Lohan’s next DWI. The safety nags have been patiently waiting for years for technology to catch up to their agenda.

Courtesy of GM, that day has arrived.

Our friends in the insurance and safety lobbies will soon be urging that this "optional" technology become a mandatory feature on every new car. Speeding is illegal – right? Who is going to argue in favor of allowing the automakers to continue building and selling cars capable of being driven 30, 40, 50 mph faster than the highest lawfully allowable maximum?

What about the children, after all?

And if that’s not alarming enough, consider the likely follow-up. Once all new cars are fitted with in-car speed nannies, the glassy eye of government will very likely turn its gaze upon older cars – especially older pre-computer cars, which can’t be electronically controlled because there is no on-board electronic controller. The old car hobby is already (justly) alarmed by recent changes in antique/classic car licensing and registration laws – which are making it harder and more expensive to keep an older car on the road.

In Virginia, for example, changes to the laws governing antique vehicle registration now empower police to conduct what amount to "road-side safety checks." If the cop decides your antique vehicle doesn’t meet this or that jot or tittle of the law, he can seize your plates on the spot and have your antique vehicle towed to the impound lot – notwithstanding that most cops don’t have any specific knowledge of what is/isn’t "right" about decades-old vehicles.

Now the authorities have a new tool in their kit. A cudgel by which they cannot only beat speeders into submission – but which could very well be used to take older cars off the road forever. Consider yourself warned.

And remember to say "thanks, GM."

• GM’s OnStar – Fading Out For Some In 2008
• Cost Is No Object When It’s For Our Own Good
• Is Your Old Car A Classic – Or Just A Used Car?
• Is New Technology Creating Bad Drivers?
• If We Really Wanted To Save Gas…

The cameras were placed at 21 locations Sept. 12-13 along a 450-mile stretch of Interstate 35 and nearby highways – from north of Laredo to north of Dallas. This invasion of privacy was not disclosed to motorists travelling on the interstate. TxDOT justified the study as necessary for transportation planning and mentioned that they will continue to conduct similar studies in the future.

TxDOT says that they weren’t trying to be sneaky, but it certainly seems like they could have devised a traffic study that didn’t require personal information to be collected without consent.

Do you think TxDOT’s invasion of motorist’s privacy was warranted? Add your comments to this post.

• The 10 Biggest Injustices Against Motorists In October
• Ohio Cashes In On Freeway With Artificially Low Speed Limit
• How Should Speed Limits Be Set?
• How Do Gasoline Prices Affect Driving Behavior?
• Realistic Speed Limits Reduce Road Rage