In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Though it seems to have gone unremarked upon – until now – on last week’s Ricochet podcast our own Mollie Hemingway let it be known she had once been an unwilling overnight guest in “the D.C. clinker.” Rob Long expressed the hope that the charge was Drunk and Disorderly, while I preferred to imagine her as having given some Kennedy or other a nice bop on the beezer after he miscalculated her receptiveness to the old Kennedy charm. Alas, she reported she was pinched for the more prosaic offense of driving with a suspended license.
Which got me to wondering about the member of the D.C. gendarmerie who had seen fit to slap the cuffs on a young mother of two and haul her before the bar of justice. In my own police career in Los Angeles, I’ve tried to make what we in the trade call “quality arrests,” i.e. those that serve to remove the most troublesome and dangerous criminals from the community. Not to excuse Mollie for driving with a suspended license, but on a list America’s 400 largest cities, Washington, D.C. comes in at number 22 when it comes to serious crime (PDF). This raises the question of whether some police officer’s time might have been better spent by admonishing Mollie to square away her relationship with the DMV and then going off in search of someone who presented a greater threat to the commonweal than she did.
And this brings me, awkwardly, to the topic of my most recent column at PJ Media, indeed of a few of my recent columns: What to do about people who drive without being properly licensed? California law authorizes – even encourages – police officers to impound for 30 days any car driven by someone whose driver’s license has been suspended or revoked, or who has never been issued a driver’s license. The Los Angeles Police Commission, the civilian body that oversees the LAPD, voted recently to all but eliminate such impounds on the grounds that they are unfair to those L.A. residents who are precluded from obtaining a driver’s license, i.e. illegal immigrants. LAPD Chief Charlie Beck has called it an issue of “fairness” for people who need their cars to get to work in the sprawling L.A. area.
So now we have here in Los Angeles a local policy being used to subvert a state law for the purpose of allowing people who should not be here to keep the cars they should not drive so they can get to the jobs they should not have.
Readers, your thoughts?
- Comment (25)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
I see California as a giant psychiatric clinic--a very expensive one--where privileged lunatics (those running the place) hire hospital staff (including cops) to help restrain and feed the less-privileged lunatics. And out in the California hinterlands--where the escaped lunatics hide--cured lunatics (and some illegal immigrants) grow lots of produce and make lots of fun toys for the not-yet-cured lunatics, and of course, for the hospital staff. And if you eat all your vegetables, and haven't killed anybody today, they let you play outside in the sunshine all afternoon, and go to the beach on weekends.
May '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Just pass a law that 1+1=3 and it all makes sense.
Jul '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
John Derbyshire has often remarked on what a great deal illegal immigrants have due to their "living in the shadows".
There does seem to be an awful lot of furrowed-brow concern over the possibility they will be somehow inconvenienced.
May '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Policing is going to become increasingly about nabbing who you can extract fines from. Impound the 2013 Lexus, fuggedaboud the '95 beater (unless driven by someone who looks like they can pay)
Oct '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Well, um, speaking as someone who was recently stopped and ticketed for driving with a lapsed registration, I'm glad the officer did not have my car towed away as he was entitled to, as I was 26 miles from home. So in this case, I'd be for giving a ticket, a quick court appearance, and of course a new license.
May '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
No. That's not absurd enough. It needs to be 1+1=850.
Dec '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
And Thomas Frank wants to know "What's Wrong with Kansas"?
Apr '11
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
A law unenforced because it is inconvenient for the enforcers. It's another example of the "broken windows" issue.
May '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
This is the broken window theory in reverse. We are incubating lawlessness.
May '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Jinx!
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Jack Dunphy:
Not to excuse Mollie for driving with a suspended license, but on a list America’s 400 largest cities, Washington, D.C. comes in at number 22 when it comes to serious crime (PDF). This raises the question of whether some police officer’s time might have been better spent by admonishing Mollie to square away her relationship with the DMV and then going off in search of someone who presented a greater threat to the commonweal than she did.
Two things. 1) My license should not have been suspended. The DMV accidentally flagged my license (which in itself is another horrific story about bureaucracy). Even finding out what happened wasted days of my time.
2) Why in the world does DC arrest people with suspended licenses? In most states you get a summons to appear in court and tell them if you've straightened it out.
As to the larger issue, the 30-day impounding seems far too much and flouting the law seems unwise, too. But couldn't there be some balance?
May '11
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
If a visitor from Mexico has a Mexican license, can he or she drive in CA?
May '11
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
I don't like seeing the police ignore a law just because the politicians want to kowtow to a vocal voting block (I mean the legal Hispanic community, of course; we all know that no illegal would ever vote, and so voter ID is racist, etc., etc. <bleh>). Still, this law bothers me. In America, isn't criminal punishment supposed to come after, like, you know, a trial? Giving the police the authority to impose a punishment, such as confiscating someone's car for 30 days, without any due process is troubling to me.
May '11
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Yeah, but they have to buy California insurance. Same thing when we visit Mexico. You have to buy insurance at the border before you can cross.
Nov '11
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
I have two reactions, one calm rational, one outraged rational:
1. What does the research say about these policies? There must be some.
Nov '11
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
2. Are you [expletive] kidding me! A 30 day impounding for driving with a suspended license? That's ridiculous and unnecessarily cruel. You're not only seizing someone's property for a minor non-violent offense, but in most cases you're depriving someone of their livelihood.
I have a 25 mile commute each way every day. There's no bus where I go, and there was one, it would take hours. I cannot take 30 days off from work and keep my job and I can't buy another car.
You're talking about depriving a person of their livelihood and their property so the state can enforce what is essentially a revenue collection scheme.
This is yet another example of state power [screwing] over working class people for the sake of collecting revenue.
How can you people be behind that?
Consider your goals, if you goal is to keep unsafe drivers off the road, there are better (and free market!) ways.
If you goal is to punish people brutally for not doing their paperwork and paying their fees in time, it is appropriate.
Edited on March 15, 2012 at 3:07pmJul '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Is there a point to licensing of drivers anyway other than generating revenue for the state? It doesn't seem to really have any safety benefits, at least not in VA. Once you take the driver's test as a teen, you never get tested again except for the occasional eye test. In fact, now we don't even have to show up in person for sixteen years since we can auto-renew online every other eight year term.
Edited on March 15, 2012 at 3:25pmJun '10
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Why do Americans stop at red lights? I used to ask this question to my high school students because the practice is not universal. In places like Egypt and Mexico traffic lights are routinely ignored. As the lesson evolved my kids came to understand that voluntary compliance to the law ensures everyone gets through the intersection faster and safer. Where a populace perceives the rule of law to be fair and equitable, the result is voluntary compliance, an orderly society, personal freedom, and a prosperous people.
Where the rule of law is based on a whim, enforcement is spotty, and the populace views the judicial system as just another government shakedown the opposite occurs. Such societies tend to be disorderly, un-free, and invariably poor. Eventually the resulting chaos invites the heavy boot of authority to quell the disorder. The result is tyranny.
In America we tend to trust the cops as fair and impartial. In other countries the cops are viewed as a nuisance to be avoided at all costs. As the rule of law erodes in LA, the place will look increasingly like Mexico. Which I guess it does in large parts of the city already.
Apr '11
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
Beautifully expressed, Paules. An important difference between the U.S. and many countries is that law officers here are perceived as honorable and well-intentioned ("Dedicated to Serve," etc.) whereas elsewhere they are apt to be perceived as threats. In such lands, corruption rules.
Apr '11
Re: In Los Angeles, No License, No Problem
My understanding of the issue (having lived off and on in CA for 30 years) is that the 30 day impound was arrived at because: arresting them seemed to harsh, and there was a very big problem in Southern CA with un-licensed / uninsured drivers.
So how do you discourage the practice without having to arrest the drivers? Since a high percentage of those stopped were here illegally anyway, a ticket or a summons to court was worthless. And arrest sometimes means finding out they are here illegally...so that was not an ideal solution for many in the community.
So the choices were arrest, do nothing, or impound cars. Impound cars seemed the best way to address the problem.
Not saying it is the best way, but I think that is how we got here. Officer Dunphy probably has more on this.