• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

First test of the new law

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
Roadblocks, checkpoints, "safety zones"... they are all unreasonable and direct violation of 4th Amendment rights.

Participants should be jailed and the organizers hanged for treason. The severity of the punishment is due to the fact that they either honestly believe they are doing nothing wrong and are thereby complete idiots or they know what they're dong is wrong and do it anyway because they "can" which makes them traitors and criminals.
 

conhntr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
184
Location
, ,
Glad I'm not alone

Feeling so strongly about this. It really is a HUGE invasion of privacy. Apparently the constitution gaurantees you the "right" to have abortions but not to
be free of random searches! Geeze
 

IanB

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2006
Messages
1,896
Location
Northern VA
Roadblocks

I thought the *only* reason a roadblock could be erected was to search for "drunk" drivers. Was this the purpose of the VSP roadblock, or were they doing other hokey things like license and reg checks?

See: Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz

I ran into a roadblock 1 block from my home several years ago. Time was 5:30 PM (normal commuting hours in the evening) and the Ffx cop told me it was a check for license and reg. I immediately demanded the on scene supervisor come to my car and I asked him if there was a DUI aspect involved with the stop. He told me "No" so I proceeded to ask him about the legality of the roadblock. He didn't want to have ANY of it, he got a bit huffy and told me to get on my way. I never showed anyone my DL or registration but I'm *sure* they took down my plate as I drove off.

BTW, does this new forum have a spell check? I'm not finding it.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
I thought the *only* reason a roadblock could be erected was to search for "drunk" drivers. Was this the purpose of the VSP roadblock, or were they doing other hokey things like license and reg checks?

See: Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz

I ran into a roadblock 1 block from my home several years ago. Time was 5:30 PM (normal commuting hours in the evening) and the Ffx cop told me it was a check for license and reg. I immediately demanded the on scene supervisor come to my car and I asked him if there was a DUI aspect involved with the stop. He told me "No" so I proceeded to ask him about the legality of the roadblock. He didn't want to have ANY of it, he got a bit huffy and told me to get on my way. I never showed anyone my DL or registration but I'm *sure* they took down my plate as I drove off.

BTW, does this new forum have a spell check? I'm not finding it.

It's my understanding that they can set them up for any routine checks. They have to be approved and planned in advance and cannot be discriminatory. They have to follow the plan such as stopping every car or every third car and they can't deviate from that.

They also can't go into areas of the car that are not visible from outside.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
They also can't go into areas of the car that are not visible from outside.
Hence a "screen" instead of a "search" like that reprehensible, delusional "security" checkpoint at the Jamestown Ferry.

What a sad state of affairs for a state which was once the very cauldron of vociferous opposition to such tactics of deception.

All brought to you by the progeny of the regime of Lincoln.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
It's my understanding that they can set them up for any routine checks. They have to be approved and planned in advance and cannot be discriminatory. They have to follow the plan such as stopping every car or every third car and they can't deviate from that.

They also can't go into areas of the car that are not visible from outside.
See my post #15 earlier in this thread. (Ha ha, having post numbers is a great new feature on the forum!)

I didn't hunt down the case referenced in that post, but apparently at least for one case, deviating was OK.

TFred
 

fenneran

New member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
8
Location
Staunton, Virginia, USA
While I agree with the thread's path and discussion about roadblocks, the OP offered up to the officer that he had a gun. Why? As far as I knew, there is no requirement to do so in VA. Yes, there was one visible in the vehicle, so the officer knew about that one, but why offer up any info about the other one. Is this a change with the new laws coming on board?
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
While I agree with the thread's path and discussion about roadblocks, the OP offered up to the officer that he had a gun. Why? As far as I knew, there is no requirement to do so in VA. Yes, there was one visible in the vehicle, so the officer knew about that one, but why offer up any info about the other one. Is this a change with the new laws coming on board?
No change in requirement to notify. OP was apparently looking to see if the officer was aware of the new law allowing him to store a firearm in a secured container without a CHP. The only way to do that was to make him aware that he actually had a firearm stored in a secured container. The fact that he didn't ask for a CHP would seem to indicate he was aware of the new law.

TFred
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
While I agree with the thread's path and discussion about roadblocks, the OP offered up to the officer that he had a gun. Why? As far as I knew, there is no requirement to do so in VA. Yes, there was one visible in the vehicle, so the officer knew about that one, but why offer up any info about the other one. Is this a change with the new laws coming on board?

Actually, the last poster was right. I was fishing.
That brings up a point that is a pet peeve of mine though.
Somewhere along the way, someone got the idea that we can make rules that the rest of us have to follow.

Mike tells us to NEVER ask permission. That's really depends on the situation. One rule busted.

You ask "why" I offered up the information...again, a personal decision. Another rule busted.

It doesn't bother me to listen to that but it's a shame that newbes read it and take it as Gospel.

Sometimes it fits the plan and sometimes it doesn't. It all depends on the situation.
 

t33j

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
1,384
Location
King George, VA
Although there is no specific statutory prohibition against the avoidance or evasion of a traffic checkpoint, the Commonwealth refers to Code § 46.2-817, which makes it unlawful for citizens to refuse to stop their vehicles when commanded to do so by the police, and contends that a traffic checkpoint is a command by the police for all those approaching to stop their vehicles.   There is no merit to this contention.
Am I reading this correctly??? It would appear that one needn't stop for police at a checkpoint unless they make some overt action commanding you to do so.
 

vt800c

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
221
Location
Springfield,VA
It's good to hear that this went OK for you.

After the thread about the VSP website not catching the last minute change in the final version of the law, I got to thinking about how easy it would be for a zealous LEO and CA to argue that "secured" does require "locked". The word "secure" does have multiple meanings. Especially for military folks, who use it to describe the action of locking up a safe, a room or a space on a ship.

To the Army, to secure a building means there are no hostiles and the building is safe to enter.

To the Navy, to secure a building means that everything in the building is stored and locked down for the night.

To the Air Force, to secure a building means they just signed a 5-year lease.

Now let's play the 'Dumb, Devious, and Defiant'
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
To the Army, to secure a building means there are no hostiles and the building is safe to enter.

To the Navy, to secure a building means that everything in the building is stored and locked down for the night.

To the Air Force, to secure a building means they just signed a 5-year lease.

Now let's play the 'Dumb, Devious, and Defiant'

Virginia is a weak legislative intent state. One of the ways to show the intent is present evidence about what was voded down or amended. That shows what the General Assembly didn't want.

In this case it's pretty easy to show that they did not mean "Locked:.
 

mrjam2jab

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
769
Location
Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
Am I reading this correctly??? It would appear that one needn't stop for police at a checkpoint unless they make some overt action commanding you to do so.


Even more of a question...if you never make it to the front of the line "STOP"...by making a U-Turn...you were never given the stop command...how can they come after you?
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Virginia is a weak legislative intent state. One of the ways to show the intent is present evidence about what was voded down or amended. That shows what the General Assembly didn't want.

In this case it's pretty easy to show that they did not mean "Locked:.
That's what I thought, are there cases where this has actually been used in a trial?

TFred
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
That's what I thought, are there cases where this has actually been used in a trial?

TFred

I have no clue TFred. I 'm sure there are. I found out about it when I was with the state and was researching something for one of the Judges. The legislative liaison for the Department who is now the assistant Secretary of the Commonwealth I think, gave me the short course.
 

ralphb72

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
161
Location
, Indiana, USA
To the Army, to secure a building means there are no hostiles and the building is safe to enter.

To the Navy, to secure a building means that everything in the building is stored and locked down for the night.

To the Air Force, to secure a building means they just signed a 5-year lease.

Now let's play the 'Dumb, Devious, and Defiant'

You forgot the Marines, the Marines would assault the building using overlapping fields of fire, air and artillery support, and kill everyone inside.
 

hotrod

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
569
Location
Union, Kentucky, USA
When someone is attempting to avoid a checkpoint, that's enough reasonable suspicion to for a traffic stop. Had I waited to clear the checkpoint, I would have to turn around on the other side and go through it again on the way back. But he didn't know that before he pulled me over. That was a good stop.

Stopping someone for avoiding a checkpoint is not probable cause to suspect a crime is afoot. If he/she breaks no laws in turning around or driving away the courts have said it isn't cause to stop. Maybe I didn't want to wait in line. Maybe I don't want to talk to the police. Maybe I think checkpoints are unconstitutional.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
...I ran into a roadblock 1 block from my home several years ago...

The brilliant Fairfax County Fuzz in my area pulled a boneheaded manuver a few years ago.

Roadblock. After dark. Residential street. Approaching it, all the flashing lights made me think there was a car crash or something. I stopped, trying to see whether the road was open or blocked. A cop motioned me to come forward. Well, gotta obey those copper hand signals, far as I know. So, I drove forward half a block or so to the cop. Who then handed me a handbill, said there had been a very serious crime recently in the area, and asked if I had seen anything unusual.

WTF!! I was involuntarily seized in a roadblock to ask my voluntary cooperation in an investigation!?! Huh?

What were those people smoking?
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
The brilliant Fairfax County Fuzz in my area pulled a boneheaded manuver a few years ago.

Roadblock. After dark. Residential street. Approaching it, all the flashing lights made me think there was a car crash or something. I stopped, trying to see whether the road was open or blocked. A cop motioned me to come forward. Well, gotta obey those copper hand signals, far as I know. So, I drove forward half a block or so to the cop. Who then handed me a handbill, said there had been a very serious crime recently in the area, and asked if I had seen anything unusual.

WTF!! I was involuntarily seized in a roadblock to ask my voluntary cooperation in an investigation!?! Huh?

What were those people smoking?

It's for the children!
 
Top