Following is a post I composed as a question for the SJPD Chief of Police and concerns itself with a policy he implemented at the beginning of the year which severely and, in my opinion ,unreasonably restricts the ability of officers to impound cars driven by drivers who are either unlicensed or suspended:
A few years ago, a little girl was killed by an illegal immigrant woman who was an unlicensed driver. A couple months ago, in mid-August, another illegal immigrant unlicensed driver killed a four-year-old boy in a hit-and-run collision. (http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_18721994?fb_comment_id=fbc_10150280488499476_17961737_10150281328774476#f1217d8d3e9716c)
Unlicensed to Kill”, a study conducted by the AAA Foundation investigating fatal traffic collisions between 1993 and 1997 found the following:
“Of the 278078 drivers involved in fatal crashes in the United States between 1993 and 1997, 3.7 percent were unlicensed, 7.4 percent were driving on an invalid (e.g., suspended, revoked, etc.) license and 2.7 percent were of unknown license status.
20 percent of all fatal crashes in the United States—one fatal crash in five—involves at least one driver who is unlicensed, driving on an invalid license, or of unknown license status.
Between 1993 and 1997 some 42,049 people were killed in crashes involving at least one driver who was unlicensed, driving on an invalid license, or of unknown license status.”
“Unlicensed to Kill: The Sequel” documented similar finding and further made the following recommendations as a means of combating driving without a valid license and associated deaths:
“-Implement and enforce administrative license revocation and suspension laws
-Establish vehicle impoundment, seizure, and immobilization
-Implement plate removal at the scene
-Implement special plates or stickers as an automatic probable cause for a traffic stop
-Establish mandatory jail time for multiple offenders
-Establish strictly circumscribed ignition interlock programs
-Establish a separate law enabling license status checkpoints
-Block registration of vehicles by drivers lacking a valid license.”
My question is this: In light of these events, studies, findings, and recommendations, at what point will you rescind your order from earlier this year severely limiting the circumstances under which the officers under your command can impound cars driven by people who are unlicensed or improperly licensed? The rules governing licensing and impounds were placed on the books for a reason and studies show that they have at least a degree of success in curtailing traffic-related fatalities.
In reality, the above post could serve as a follow-on to an earlier post I composed which you will find here: http://www.sanjoseinside.com/news/entries/08_10_11_police_chris_moore_mercury_news_sean_webby_homicide_rate/
Since the title is ‘Reporting Crime’, I felt that the following two articles deserved mention. The first is the Mercury News article which reported that a four year old boy had been killed in Santa Rosa in a hit and run collision committed by an unlicensed driver with two prior arrests for driving without a license.
Frankly, I think that it is gross negligence bordering on the criminal on the part of the Fourth Estate that this horrific crime received a scant six sentences while muckraking Sean Webby sees fit to devote numerous paragraphs attempting to insinuate that the SJPD C.O.P. is somehow doing something improper in taking various trips.
At least the San Francisco Chronicle had enough decency and enough honesty to write a decent article describing the incident (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/20/BAAK1KPJCV.DTL) and follow it up with an additional article (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/23/BAKT1KQCNH.DTL). Why is it that in both articles, the Chronicle is honest enough to note that the suspect is an illegal immigrant while the Merc gave absolutely no mention of this even though the information was available in the original article.
Additionally, I would like to hear where the ACLU of Northern California, Asian Law Alliance, Justice for Palestinians, Services, Immigrant Rights, and Education Network; East Side Heroes Nonprofit, Most Holy Trinity Church, and Pax Christi - East San Jose all stand on this incident. I suspect that they would either remain silent or try to convince the public that these are isolated incidents. They are not. It has happened here in San Jose, and these organizations were just as silent then. Furthermore, it would be disingenuous for them to attempt to assert that illegal immigration and gang violence in San Jose are unrelated issues. The whole Norteno vs Sureno thing is practically predicated on illegal immigration owing to the fact that Surenos are largely derived from illegal immigrants, that gang violence is generational and that Nortenos will attack anyone who they think looks like a Sureno (whether or not they are) providing that the opportunity and means are present.
Lastly, Chief Moore recently instituted a policy in which cars driven by unlicensed drivers are largely left with the unlicensed driver to be driven away. I wonder if Chief Moore was aware of the two studies (http://www.aaafoundation.org/pdf/unlicensed2kill.PDF and http://www.aaafoundation.org/pdf/UnlicensedToKill2.pdf) conducted by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety which found that 20% of all fatal traffic accidents involved at least one driver who was not properly licensed at the time of the crash. Twenty Percent. This is an average that is consistent in California. In light of these findings by a non-partisan, non-profit research organization I wondered if Chief Moore might not revisit (and hopefully revoke) this policy in the interest of public safety, which is, after all, our raison d’etre.
No comments:
Post a Comment