Homeless in Arizona

This is just another tool our government masters have given their police thieves to make the cops more efficient criminals and allow the police to shake us down for more victimless crimes and of course steal more of our money.

The most common reason the police stop a car is to give them an excuse to search the car for illegal drugs and then use the RICO laws to steal the car, and any money or property in it under the RICO laws, which assume your PROPERTY is guilty of a crime, unless you spend big bucks to prove your property didn't commit a crime.

That's followed by victimless DUI crimes which police LOVE because I think the current minimum fine for a DUI crime is $2,000.

And with the current DUI laws setting .08 as the legal standard for being drunk, there isn't much difference between a stone cold sober person and a person who is at .08 after having 2 beers.

While it's almost impossible for a cop to detect a person at .08 based on their driving, chicken sh*t laws like this give the cops a lame excuse to get close to the motorist and use that a an excuse to claim the motorist is drunk.

Source

New AZ law means all brake, tail lights must work

By Howard Fischer Capitol Media Services

PHOENIX — Sometime this summer, police will have a new excuse to pull you over.

Gov. Doug Ducey signed legislation Tuesday that requires every tail and brake light on your vehicle to be working.

One of them out? That’s enough probable cause for an officer to stop you, issue a ticket — and just check out what you’re doing.

The issue traces its roots to a 2011 ruling by the state Court of Appeals.

In that case, a Tucson police officer had pulled over a motorist because the “Liddy light” — the brake light in the middle of the rear of the car — was not working. Only after the motorist was stopped did the officer conclude the driver was impaired and made an arrest.

But, the other two brake lights were working.

Arizona law until now has said motor vehicles “shall be equipped with at least one tail lamp mounted on the rear.” It also reads that if a vehicle has a stop lamp, “the lamp shall be maintained at all times in good working condition.”

Or, as appellate Judge Joseph Howard noted, one brake light is all that’s legally required.

He said police can “stop and detain” anyone for an actual or suspected violation of the state’s motor-vehicle laws. But, absent such a violation, pulling someone over is a violation of Fourth Amendment rights against warrantless search and seizure.

And, as Howard pointed out, having one brake light out did not break the law.

“The officer observed no other traffic infractions, nor did the officer articulate any other reason for the stop,” the judge wrote.

The change was pushed by Mike Williams, lobbyist for the Arizona Police Association. He admitted to lawmakers during hearings that HB 2509 was designed to give police another reason they could legally stop motorists. [The police routinely give us the BS lie that they don't make the laws, and the police only enforce the laws. But that's 100% BS, because the POLICE UNIONS, as in this case routinely push for laws to create more victimless crimes to create more jobs for cops, and raise more money for the police.]

So as of Aug. 6, the law says each stop or brake light has to be working. That includes the Liddy light, named after Elizabeth “Liddy” Dole who was the federal transportation secretary when the law was changed to require manufacturers to put that third stop lamp on vehicles.

Lawmakers did agree to add language to Williams’ original proposal to say that a first violation results only in a warning.