Troopers to inspect drivers and vehicles on Hillsborough, Pasco roads

The Florida Highway Patrol announced today that it will conduct random driver's license and vehicle inspection checks throughout Pasco and Hillsborough counties this month.

Troopers will look for bad brakes, worn tires, defective lights and other vehicle problems that pose a danger to drivers, authorities said. They'll also seek out drivers who are breaking state license laws.

The FHP chooses different counties and areas to conduct inspections, depending on how heavy or light trooper staffing is during a particular period of time. Troopers typically find a safe place on a certain road, FHP spokesman Sgt. Steve Gaskins said, and they flag down drivers during daylight hours.   

"We don't have an annual vehicle inspection like other states do, so this is a way to make sure people are driving safe vehicles," Gaskins said.

The annual vehicle inspections ended under Florida Gov. Bob Graham in 1981.

Inspection checkpoints will take place on the following Pasco roads: U.S. 41 and 301, State Roads 54 and 52, various county roads, Key Lime Drive, Hudson Avenue, Shady Hills Road, Pasco/Hernando County Line Road, Hillsborough/Pasco County Line Road, Thys Road, Hays Road, Hicks Road, Lock Street, Moog Road, Mile Stretch Drive, Jasmine Boulevard, Madison Street, Old Dixie Highway, Moon Lake Road, Denton Avenue, Old Pasco Road, Foam Flower Boulevard, Dayflower Boulevard, Quail Hollow Boulevard, Boyette Road and Monteverde Drive.

And they will be on these Hillsborough roads: U.S. 92, 41, business 41 and 301; State Roads 582, 597, 678, 580, 45, 600, 60, 573, 599, 676, Alt 676, 39, 674, 43, 601, 583 and 685; County Roads 587, 576, 579, 581, 672, 640, 574, 574A, 39B, 582A and 584; and these local roads: South Mobley Highway, Lutz Lake Fern Road, Wilsky Avenue, Linebaugh Avenue, Van Dyke Road, Barry Road, Livingston Avenue, Crenshaw Lake Road, 127th Avenue, Skipper Road, County Line Road, Davis Road, Trapnell Road, Jap Tucker Road, Lithia Pinecrest Road, Williams Road, Harney Road, Symmes Road, Balm Road, Magnolia Lane, North Taylor Road, Pruett Road, Rhodine Road, McIntosh Road, Turkey Creek Road and Balm Riverview Road.

Emily Nipps, Times Staff Writer

*

Comments

[Gary]

I would like to know under what Statute the FHP operates in this type of stop. There is NO traffic infraction to justify the stop. Is this legal?

[Mark]

Gary,

Its legal as long as they post where they will be doing the stops. They do this for DUI inspections as well. The Joys of Big Government.

[Kenneth]

That's just fine by me - if I'm not doing anything illegal, then I have nothing to worry about. If big government is going to do anything, it should at least keep us safe. Lose someone to a drunk driver and you'll understand.

[joebagofdoughnuts]

Kenneth, our troopers are going to be inspecting your house to make sure your safe and everything's legal. You don't have anything do hide, and you're not doing anything illegal, so you won't mind. Right?

[joebagofdoughnuts]

/me burns the 4th amendment before using the rest of the Constitution as toilet paper

[william braun]

With revenue at 2.3B under projections, the State will use law enforcement tactics to generate revenue...one way or another. Fines and costs are increasing, as well.

[Grangoire]

Kenneth,
Really? You're just going to roll over while your civil rights are stripped away? O_o
So if one female suicide bomber killed some people by concealing an IED in her vag, then you'd be fine and dandy with random internal cavity searches of your mother/wife/daughter, just because you KNOW they are not doing anything illegal?

And what about all the read endings caused by the rubber-neckers who cause hazards by overly slowing down just to gawk at the person being pulled over (for LITTLE or NO reason at all)?

Or what about the other crimes the officer could be investigating rather than wasting hard-working tax-payer's money, during this already overly taxed economic recession?

While true, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Ticketing people isn't going to fix their cars.
Who's this going to help other than filling the government's coffers?
I mean, the people who already can't afford to maintain their vehicles at 100% aren't going to be able to afford it any more after they have to pay a BS ticket.

Besides, the police aren't trained mechanics. And I for one don't want to pay to train them in those skills. Especially not when they should be learning other POLICING skills.

If the Police want to actually help (and look good doing it), they should give WARNINGS and hand out subsidized repair coupons. This would give positive incentive to the person to repair the car.
Additionally,...
The police look good and are actually doing a good service.
The people pulled over won't have to piss off money paying a ticket instead of paying for the repairs the ticket was for.
Tax payers will know that they're only paying for the coupons used, and so kinda only paying to make their streets arguably safer.

[Mark]

Great Examples Joe and Gang! ! ! People always use the excuse of "If you aren't doing anything wrong then you shouldn't have a problem." We are slowly moving towards being a socialist country and our rights are the first thing to being trampled uppon. We don't need Government telling us how to live our lives. If you remember... We The People are in charge... We need to get back to the basics of the Constitution and US Government.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

[RJHiggins]

Kenneth: I'm going to guess you're not a person of color, either. Because we know they *never* get pulled over for no good reason...

[windowsugar]

PROUD to be an American today thanks to rhiggins, mark, grangoire, etc..
yes kenneth NO ONE should mind being PULLED OVER just because they're not doing anything wrong.
We pay these guys. I think we need to stop payment until they RE READ the Constitution of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

These are no different than NAZI checkpoints.

Pity the single mothers and others who can't afford brand new tires. OH and how will they CHECK THE BRAKES??? By climbing in the car?
THIS IS A BREACH OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT I do NOT CARE how they snowed it over.
I think we should all write to charlie crist. Seriously.
Whether I'd doing anything right OR wrong I have no time to yak with corrupt public officials.

[windowsugar]

kenneth is a sheriff, cop or FHP. Funny the other night when I called them to report TWO aggressive drivers they were too bored and disinterested to even take the tag #.

Interesting how they've found their energy. Since they have my cellphone # I guess it's a good time to stay out of their WAY.
LAUGHING.

Actually I always liked FHP ... Harry Mofield was/is a very decent guy. I have run across others that aren't so great.
And, of course, there are those who were raping women when they pulled them over.
Nice.

[LOUISTHETERRIBLE]

If they take our guns away, we automatically assume more policing is necessary. Do you want more cops around or not. Dont condemn them for doing their job. There are plenty of aggressive drivers out there. On average, you are more likely to be let go. There are a couple out there who are bad. Hopefully, the Judge can help the boss with keeping track of those. Just dont endanger others. There must be a reason for checking vehicles. It isnt like it's an every day thing. They need to know what is out there too.

[Mrs. Anderson]

You have got to be kidding me. I feel violated already. What happened to my constitutional rights? What we need is protection against all the road raging thugs, car-jackers and drunk drivers. How about keeping an eye out for these guys? This is just another excuse for the FHP to pull people over, write erroneous tickets and make money off of people. Shame on them!

[devilkin66]

As a free thinking free loving atheist, among other things, without an ounce of patriotism or respect for my elders or any willingness to kowtow to anyone I may not be considered a criminal by the law but I'm absolutely sure the police would love to pin anything on me on basic blindly obedient principal alone. I will not be stopping for your checkpoints I will not submit to any search without probable cause and you will have to shoot me to get me to cooperate.

[Michael]

THIS IS A VIOLATION OF STATE LAW. Look up Florida Statute 316.610. It states:

(1) Any police officer may at any time, upon reasonable cause to believe that a vehicle is unsafe or not equipped as required by law, or that its equipment is not in proper adjustment or repair, require the driver of the vehicle to stop and submit the vehicle to an inspection and such test with reference thereto as may be appropriate.

Random stops are not reasonable cause to believe that a vehicle is unsafe.

As far as violating the 4th amendment, they can possibly use the same argument that they use for random DUI stops.

[birdie]

The intent may be good, as with many things, but we are losing our rights!!!

[windowsugar]

yes but michael you just said it's against the law. I would think (and your argument will hear no disappointment from me, this is pure question) .. that the law you cite stems from the fourth amendment. I realize they've pushed and pushed like 'the dogs' 'happen to stop by' .. which is actually a violation of the fourth amendment but on initial argument they've won some of those.

[windowsugar]

devilkin66 it's not so much blind obedience as purposeful TARGETED stripping of assets. They know who you are before they get you to their checkpoint or 'random' stop.

[windowsugar]

devilkin read about bill cooper.

[say what?]

Funny, I was taught that driving was a privilege, not a right.

[Michael]

say what? - you are correct that driving is not a right. Neither is them pulling you over without cause.

windowsugar- I do believe that this violates the 4th amendment. However, they have found ways around the 4th with the random DUI stops, and the supreme court has upheld it. They could probably find a way to do the same here. However the state statute is very clear.

There was also a recent case where a guy in Clearwater was pulled over only because he had a crack in his windshield. They found pot in his car, and he was convicted. However he filed a claim and won, saying that the evidence (the pot) should have been suppressed, because the stop was illegal. The claim was that the officers had no way to know that the crack made the vehicle unsafe, and under state law a crack by itself is actually not a violation. Only if it obstructs the driver's view and the like.

So even that case shows that these stops are illegal.

[windowsugar]

Michael, thank you. I was not aware of the clearwater case. Thanks again. I love to see when sanity and law prevail. I'm glad you understood my question because on a re-read it was difficult to understand. I think that one of the reasons that they get away with that stuff is because by then the people are out of assets to fight it. Public defenders will only take it to appeal level. Which gets kicked back and if so then the person is on their own unless they have a private atty. They make it very expensive to uphold your rights. Which didn't even matter in new orleans as they stripped guns away from even wealthy attorneys. I subscribed to your comments even though it doesn't work properly. A thoughful person I am always happy to read what they have to say.

say what? And so what do you mean by that?? Privilegs it may be. Rights are ENSHRINED in the bill of rights, yknow that crazy triumvirate of documents which includes our constitution and the declaration of INDEPENDENCE from kings?? that old stuff.

While I am exercising my privilege I am in full possession of MY RIGHTS which PROTECT me from someone stripping me of my privileges with random or selective, nazi-ish chekkpoints. Because that is what this is: chekkpoints.

[Dave]

Another account of one of these "inspections"

This morning I was out for a leisurely cruise in my Saleen S/C’d 2005 Mustang GT. I was getting on the local interstate on ramp, obeying all traffic laws, and was pulled over by a Highway Patrol Officer. After going through the usual license, registration & insurance routine, I was promptly hand cuffed ("for my safety") and cordially invited to take a seat in the back of the officer’s vehicle. Keep in mind I have zero traffic citations, outstanding warrants, etc – truly a model citizen. Within 10 minutes a DOT officer arrived. For the next hour my vehicle was thoroughly inspected top to bottom, front to back, including having the vehicle put on portable scales and weighed on the side of the road. All the while thinking WTF? Upon completion I was given a $78 equipment violation citation. Not for my off-road X-pipe but for the tire sizes not matching the door pillar Tire Information Decal. I thought they were joking – but not so. Seems I replaced the factory installed OEM 17" wheels & tires with GT 500 18" x 9.5" wheels and BFG KDW P285/40/ZR18 & P255/45/ZR18 tires.

In disbelief I went to my local Ford Dealership and started asking some questions. I asked the dealer if they had ever seen this law enforced and of course the answer was "no". Most had never even heard of this before. Sure enough it seems that when a vehicles tire size is changed from that which it was originally equipped from at the factory, the Tire Information Decal must be changed as well. There are even (2) documents notifying the dealer to change these decals – see attachments. I always thought these decals were an FYI – nothing more. The dealer had never even seen or sold one of these replacement decals. The part number on this decal is 6U5Z-1532-A and can be ordered right through the Parts Dept. List price is just under $35.

So I’m not suggesting everyone go out and spend $35 on a decal, that chances are you will never need, but just be aware that you can receive a citation if the tire sizes doesn’t match the Tire Information Decal.

[Richard]

hmmm.... check point Charley!

good quote;

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and provide new Guards for their future security."

[Michael]

Dave - I would fight that in court on the basis that they had no just cause to pull you over.

A bit more info on that case I mentioned. See: http://blogs.tampabay.com/breakingnews/2007/07/florida-supreme.html

The court ruled that a cracked windshield was not grounds to pull the guy over, and in doing so they violated his 4th amdnt. rights. People NEED to fight these tickets the same way. I also emailed Gov. Crist last night, so it will be interesting to read his response.

[dodcontractor]

I just registered just to post a comment here. I moved to FL after living in MA all my life and wondered why there were no inspections. I wouldn't mind this happening because I had nothing to hide but would mind the time it may take to do so. Also, for those of you complaining about the cost of the fine, that's nothing compared to the result of not fixing your cars. I know that not everyone is a mechanic and mechanics are expensive and that not everyone can afford brand new cars either but think about what having bald tires on the highway can do to others, or what having no hood on your car can do to yourself even. My only two daughters were driving their car following me one day during a family move. A bus was in the lane next to us and had bald tires. The bus blew a tire and smashed into and then on top of both of my children. They were both killed instantly due to bald tires. Rather than random stops, put an inspection in place, but then you'll all just complain over the $19 every 2 years that that costs too, right? Don't worry about the young innocent people that you're killing by not keeping your death vehicles safe. If you can responsibly own a car and take care of it, don't own it; take the bus!

[dodcontractor]

Sorry, I meant to say "If you CAN'T responsibly own a car."

[barbie]

I agree 100% with DODCONTRACTOR

"If you can't responsibly own a car and take care of it, don't own it; take the bus!" I see so many cars here that should NOT be on the road. DODCONTRACTOR YOU and I should write the Gov & our reps and ask them why yrly inspections are not done & that it should be. Besides the fact that it would protect HUMAN LIVES it would be additional revenue for the State as well - maybe that would peak their interest!

I moved here from Boston too 12 yrs ago and was shocked yearly inspections were NOT done like we do in Mass (I'm also a DOD contractor as well). Hearing your story breaks my heart I am so sorry for your loss! I will write Christ & Billarakis because human life & safe roads should be #1! God Bless YOU!

[Michael]

So far no response from the Governor. Probably doing some research of his own. However I did come across this in the middle of that case that I mentioned. It was a previous case, Deleware v. Prouse. This was held by the US Supreme court. In this case the motorist was stopped only for the purpose of a license check. In this case the US Supreme court stated:

2. Except where there is at least articulable and reasonable suspicion that a motorist is unlicensed or that an
automobile is not registered, or that either the vehicle or an occupant is otherwise subject to seizure for violation of
law, stopping an automobile and detaining the driver in order to check his driver's license and the registration of the
automobile are unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Pp. 653-663.
(a) Stopping an automobile and detaining its occupants constitute a "seizure" within the meaning of the Fourth and
Fourteenth Amendments, even though the purpose of the stop is limited and the resulting detention quite brief. The
permissibility of a particular law enforcement practice is judged by balancing its intrusion on the individual's Fourth
Amendment interests against its promotion of legitimate governmental interests

So this outright states that these stops by the FHP are not constitutional. Stopping you constitutes seizure under the 4th amd. and therefor they must have cause to do so. And it very clearly and specifically states that the license checks are a no-no.

[Private identity]

Dodcontractor

Even if your story about your two kids is true, two deaths does not equal the loss of rights for millions. I'm sorry to hear about your loss, but a vehicle can blow a tire regardless of how bald it is. Yours was just a freak accident. Instead of penalizing everybody else, the bus company should and I hope, was held accountable.

I recommend that anyone who is pulled over for these inspections, to hand the officer a copy of the statute (as provided by "Michael above), take down the officer's name and number, video tape (if possible) the pull over, and if asked to get out of the vehicle, shut off the car, roll up the windows and lock the doors. They CANNOT search your car without CONSENT or probable cause. You then need to ask if you are being detained and if so - DO NOT ANSWER ANY OF THE OFFICER'S QUESTIONS !!!! YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT!!!!!! Exercise it!!!

Her is a link to a video that might help you during a police encounter.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3435730304776119545
http://www.flexyourrights.org/

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
by: William Pitt (1759-1806) British Prime Minister (1783-1801, 1804-06) during the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars. Source: Speech, House of Commons, 18 November 1783)

[Nicole]

I think vehicle inspections are a good idea. But they should be performed by a professional. Half the time these officers don't even know the law, now they're supposed to be well versed in mechanics. This is just a way for them to write tickets and make money. I expect several window tint violations (even though their windows are darker than legally allowed. Ridiculous. If they have time to do this, maybe the sheriff's office should start laying people off like the rest of the country. Then more money could go to the school systems, where it should be.

[Eph]

Michael, you are certainly free to dislike this policy. However, these stops are legal under Supreme Court precedent.

In Michigan State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990) (read the opinion here: http://supreme.justia.com/us/496/444/case.html ), the Supreme Court upheld sobreity checkpoints and distinguished the 1979-case you cite, Delaware v. Prouse. Another more recent, relevant case is Illinois v. Lidster, 540 U.S. 419 (2004) (http://supreme.justia.com/us/540/419/case.html ). There, the Supreme Court explained:

"The Fourth Amendment does not treat a motorist's car as his castle. See, e.g., New York v. Class, 475 U. S. 106, 112-113 (1986); United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U. S. 543, 561 (1976). And special law enforcement concerns will sometimes justify highway stops without individualized suspicion. See Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U. S. 444 (1990) (sobriety checkpoint); Martinez-Fuerte, supra (Border Patrol checkpoint). Moreover, unlike Edmond, the context here (seeking information from the public) is one in which, by definition, the concept of individualized suspicion has little role to play. Like certain other forms of police activity, say, crowd control or public safety, an information-seeking stop is not the kind of event that involves suspicion, or lack of suspicion, of the relevant individual."

A key factor would likely be that these stops are for non-criminal inspection (traffic violations) as opposed to stops to search for criminal activity.

Additionally, the Florida Statute you cite is a non sequitur. Just because the statute permits one specific type of police stop does not mean that other types of police stops are automatically unlawful. In other words, that law says that the police can stop motorists in one circumstance, but that law does not say what the police can or can't do in other circumstances.

Also, Private Identity, you are providing very bad advice by telling people pulled over by the police to "shut off the car, roll up the windows and lock the doors." While you are correct that you have the right not to answer police questions, you do not have an absolute right to not cooperate with the police if they pull you over. You should note that Fla. Statute 322.15 provides that "Every licensee shall have his or her driver's license . . . in his or her immediate possession at all times when operating a motor vehicle and shall display the same upon the demand of a law enforcement officer or an authorized representative of the department." Also, displaying such crazy behavior as "shut off the car, roll up the windows and lock the doors" and ignoring the police when pulled over can create "reasonable articulable suspicion" to permit the police to conduct a limited search as the Supreme Court explains in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S. 1 (1968) (http://supreme.justia.com/us/392/1/case.html )

[Led Robstah]

Florida,and other lesser 'Merkin Police State,cops have historically been intrusive,abusive,goon,trouble seeking, Constitutional Rights ignoring para-military, hired gun killer apes;
"probable cause" is a laughable joke to them. They're used to doing whatever they want, however they want and rest secure in the Totalitarian realization that there are two kinds of people,Cops and The Little People.
If their skulls aren't too thick and their limited supply of brain tissue isn't too tough; then they might learn from the history of the PA and NJ State Police(Northern Dicks).
Back in the '70's Tuff Guy State Cops got entranced by an Agressive Patrol notion of "How It Should Be Done".
The short version of how it turned out for them was that one summer it looked like a contest between the PA and NJ State Goon Squads as to how many and how fast their little Goonies could get their little butts blown right away by being real Agressive and real Tuff with the Absolute Wrong Guys That were Absolutely NOT going to take their crap.
Hey Dicks!
Word to ya' Mutha...
What goes around,comes around.
Make sure that your insurance and last testaments are in order.
At least you don't want to be Dicks to your survivors.

[mike]

I don't usually post to these rants as both sides have valid points but now I have to point out that all this could be directed to the officials who are responsible for these actions. if you would contact them with your concerns it may have a positive infulence on where the manpower is used. my personal preference would be at the stoplights on us 19. they could balance the budget in about a week.
mike

[JOHN]

Driving is not a civil right. It is a priviledge. Endangering my life and the lives of others on the road by driving unsafe vehicles is infringing on my civil rights. If you can't obey the laws then take the freaking bus. They are inspected regularly and carry the required insurance. Yes it's a bit of an inconvenice, but you won't have to worry about the big bad government pulling you over. I am not in law enforcement in any way shape or form. I am just a private citizen who wants to live long enough to die of old age.

[Frank]

maybe if things get tough enough, they will start to layoff cops. Then they will have to stop the Gestapo tatics.
ah only if it was a perfect world.

[Edward Ringwald]

I am glad that FHP is out there using these checkpoints to inspect drivers and their vehicles. The last thing we need on our roads is either someone with a suspended license or a vehicle in unsafe condition.

Besides, driving is a privilege and not a right. In other words, you do not have a right to a driver's license. The State of Florida giveth your driving privilege and the State of Florida can taketh away your driving privilege - it's as simple as that.

[Ava]

I agree with most and believe that this type of action is a violation of my rights. If I am not speeding or committing any other traffic violation then I should be left alone. Obviously if I am driving a car with broken tail lights, no hood, etc. then yes but if my car is visibly in tact, leave me alone. At what times are these checkpoints going to take place, when I am going to work, taking the kids to school, or to the doctor's appointment that took me 3 months to book? I don't think a doctor nor an employer in this economy will care WHY you are late - just that you WERE late. We all know that a doctor will give your time slot up and an employer will certainly dock your pay and possibly reprimand you for tardiness.
Also, I was wondering if anyone else noticed the areas that are being targeted. Most are in lower-income or poor areas. This appears to be stereotyping as well. Yes, I am sure you will find more people in Moon Lake, Shady Hills, and even the Holiday areas that have older cars that are not perfect but I am sure Wesley Chapel or any of the so called "upper-class" areas have autos with violations as well.
If this effort is going to be made, I would rather see a focus placed on heavy duty vehicles and vehicles that haul materials and trash. A couple years ago one such vehicle dropped or had a large chunk of steel break off and fall into the road on the Hernando/Pasco County Line Road. Needless to say, several drivers struck this, including myself, and were left with a very large repair bill. I had to replace a factory rim and two tires. I know it could have been worse because I had my kids with me and this situation was perfect for a major crash. I just think that it is outrageous when these things go uncorrected by authorities and expected to accept it but then in turn not complain and possibly thank Officer Friendly for a "random" stop to measure the tread on my tires, etc.

As far as Johns comment "Endangering my life and the lives of others on the road by driving unsafe vehicles is infringing on my civil rights" is a valid point. However, is it not an infringement one's civil rights, and possible harm to the right of pursuing happiness, when being detained without provocation, especially if this interfered with one's employment?

Bottom line is this, if the state is so worried about the condition of the card that are on our roads then they need to re-establish car inspection where such issues can be taken care of in an organized and planned fashion. Yes, this is a funny thought right? This would be as likely as requiring senior citizens to periodically retake their driving test to ensure they are not endangering our lives on the either.