[Topspinmo]

Ok, if it's illegal to drive car or what ever without license or insurance why is it illegal to or never seen police/ sheriff blockages checking for illegal drivers? This has nothing to do with illegal alien problem but illegally driving.

IMO this is the only way to get illegal drivers off the streets to have random stop checks. Like they do for drunk driving.

[red tail]

that is a brilliant idea! set it up on morse between del mar and Martinez. that would back up cars all the way from 466 to 27.

[dewilson58]

It's all about %'s, cost/benefit, etc.

What percentage of drivers are out there illegally??? 1%?? So you stop 1,000 cars to catch 10??

They increase the percentages with drunk driving by setting up stops on the weekends, after dark.....prime time.

IMOA

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

It might have something to do with illegal search and seizures or reasonable suspicion.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

It might have something to do with illegal search and seizures or reasonable suspicion.

I'm afraid it might have more to do with politics. Checkpoints for intoxicated drivers are permitted because the courts felt that the safety of the public trumped probable cause. They can also have checkpoints for wearing seat belts, although I fail to see the "public safety" aspect in that case. However, if you want to get a significant yield on uninsured/unlicensed drivers, you would have to set up in poor/minority areas, not Key Biscayne, and that would immediately be termed "profiling". It's no different than TSA pulling little old ladies aside while letting 20 somethings of obvious middle eastern extraction walk on through. Heaven forbid we actually look for the criminals in the places they are likely to be. It's only when there is a tragedy, like the recent hit and run, that they will search for an INDIVIDUAL, while ignoring the bigger problem

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

I'm afraid it might have more to do with politics. Checkpoints for intoxicated drivers are permitted because the courts felt that the safety of the public trumped probable cause. They can also have checkpoints for wearing seat belts, although I fail to see the "public safety" aspect in that case. However, if you want to get a significant yield on uninsured/unlicensed drivers, you would have to set up in poor/minority areas, not Key Biscayne, and that would immediately be termed "profiling". It's no different than TSA pulling little old ladies aside while letting 20 somethings of obvious middle eastern extraction walk on through. Heaven forbid we actually look for the criminals in the places they are likely to be. It's only when there is a tragedy, like the recent hit and run, that they will search for an INDIVIDUAL, while ignoring the bigger problem

[newkid]

With few exceptions police officers cannot arbitrarily stop vehicles without probable cause. Mere suspicion that an operator is unlicensed does not rise to the level of probable cause. There must be a clear and articulate reason for a motor vehicle stop.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by newkid

With few exceptions police officers cannot arbitrarily stop vehicles without probable cause. Mere suspicion that an operator is unlicensed does not rise to the level of probable cause. There must be a clear and articulate reason for a motor vehicle stop.

So drunk driver and no seat belt checkpoints are two of the "few exceptions"? So why not unlicensed driver checkpoints, if not political?

[ColdNoMore]

Part of The Villages lore mentions that the use of golf carts originated with drunks who had lost their driving privileges due to DUI's...so then decided to get around in carts.

Given that TV has certainly grown since then, it would be silly to think that we don't have folks who still fit that situation.

As to arbitrary stops/checkpoints, that subject can be looked upon from several angles and I don't see a 'one size fits all' answer.

While I don't want to be sharing the road with someone who is not insured or is impaired (for any reason), I also believe that a hard look should be given the number of folks who are physically not capable of driving safely due to age and/or other medical issues.

I see (and dodge) way too many people driving around TV, that in my opinion, should have had their licenses revoked a long time ago.

Maybe it's past time to require driving tests for those over a certain age?

I'm not sure what the ultimate answer is, but before one group/demographic gets singled out for being the problem...I think all factors should be taken into account.

[biker1]

I believe that is true in many states but not FL. Here is the statute.


The 2016 Florida Statutes

Title XXIII
MOTOR VEHICLES

Chapter 322
DRIVER LICENSES

View Entire Chapter
322.15 License to be carried and exhibited on demand; fingerprint to be imprinted upon a citation.�
(1) Every licensee shall have his or her driver license, which must be fully legible with no portion of such license faded, altered, mutilated, or defaced, in his or her immediate possession at all times when operating a motor vehicle and shall present or submit the same upon the demand of a law enforcement officer or an authorized representative of the department. A licensee may present or submit a digital proof of driver license as provided in s. 322.032 in lieu of a physical driver license.
(2) Upon the failure of any person to display a driver license as required by subsection (1), the law enforcement officer or authorized representative of the department stopping the person shall require the person to imprint his or her fingerprints upon any citation issued by the officer or authorized representative, or the officer or authorized representative shall collect the fingerprints electronically.
(3) In relation to violations of subsection (1) or s. 322.03(5), persons who cannot supply proof of a valid driver license for the reason that the license was suspended for failure to comply with that citation shall be issued a suspension clearance by the clerk of the court for that citation upon payment of the applicable penalty and fee for that citation. If proof of a valid driver license is not provided to the clerk of the court within 30 days, the person�s driver license shall again be suspended for failure to comply.
(4) A violation of subsection (1) is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation as provided in chapter 318.
History.�s. 27, ch. 19551, 1939; CGL 1940 Supp. 4151(641); s. 27, ch. 20451, 1941; s. 1, ch. 69-89; s. 24, ch. 73-334; s. 2, ch. 78-48; s. 17, ch. 84-359; s. 9, ch. 85-250; s. 11, ch. 86-185; s. 49, ch. 87-198; s. 38, ch. 89-282; ss. 2, 3, ch. 90-102; s. 1, ch. 94-199; s. 934, ch. 95-148; s. 54, ch. 96-350; s. 25, ch. 96-413; s. 286, ch. 99-248; s. 30, ch. 2008-176; s. 32, ch. 2014-216.

Originally Posted by newkid

With few exceptions police officers cannot arbitrarily stop vehicles without probable cause. Mere suspicion that an operator is unlicensed does not rise to the level of probable cause. There must be a clear and articulate reason for a motor vehicle stop.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

Part of The Villages lore mentions that the use of golf carts originated with drunks who had lost their driving privileges due to DUI's...so then decided to get around in carts.


.

You just made this up, right?
Golf cart use has nothing to do with this being a golf community? Right?

[Bogie Shooter]

No, not calling anyone a liar, just misleading.
You said:
"Part of The Villages lore mentions that the use of golf carts originated with drunks who had lost their driving privileges due to DUI's...so then decided to get around in carts."

I don't think that is the reason there are so many golf carts in TV.
The real reason is the TV was/is marketed as a golf cart community.


Further, asking a question about a post is not attacking the poster.

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

Part of The Villages lore mentions that the use of golf carts originated with drunks who had lost their driving privileges due to DUI's...so then decided to get around in carts.

Given that TV has certainly grown since then, it would be silly to think that we don't have folks who still fit that situation.

As to arbitrary stops/checkpoints, that subject can be looked upon from several angles and I don't see a 'one size fits all' answer.

While I don't want to be sharing the road with someone who is not insured or is impaired (for any reason), I also believe that a hard look should be given the number of folks who are physically not capable of driving safely due to age and/or other medical issues.

I see (and dodge) way too many people driving around TV, that in my opinion, should have had their licenses revoked a long time ago.

Maybe it's past time to require driving tests for those over a certain age?

I'm not sure what the ultimate answer is, but before one group/demographic gets singled out for being the problem...I think all factors should be taken into account.

This has nothing to do with golf carts.

Why.? If I can drive around illegally with no chance of getting caught, why would I take test. When you stop everybody or every 10th car or so your not singling out certain group. They just ran out of luck!

When I was working I was subject to random tests. I got random drugs tests 26 times in 20 years. At least they told me it was random. I was tested 2500% more than my coworker.

[graciegirl]

You want drivers tests for golf carts in Florida? WHAT is the point that I am missing here?

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

You want drivers tests for golf carts in Florida?

Not me.

Originally Posted by graciegirl

WHAT is the point that I am missing here?

State of Florida automobile drivers licenses is what I was talking about.