Opinion piece in the North County Times by Bill Flores
Columnist Thomas K. Arnold recently wrote (Wednesday, Nov. 2) that he feels sorry for the authorities in Escondido.
They are, after all, just enforcing the law. This thinking seems to be pervasive among those who comment or blog in the NC Times, as if a piece of legislation is monolithic and written in stone. The law is the law, right? It is an exceedingly impractical position to take. Should cities be responsible for enforcing “the law”? And what do we mean by “the law?” All laws?
Should Escondido have federal IRS agents (in addition to federal ICE agents) to check the tax status of all arrestees? What about EPA agents? Should office space be offered to them, too?
Truth be told, city police are selective in the laws they enforce, and rightly so. But which laws are chosen to be enforced is just that: a choice.
Perhaps a review of the issues Mr. Arnold discusses might shed some factual light. For example, Escondido police have been conducting unlawful driver’s license checkpoints for several years before it was pointed out to them that such a practice is specifically prohibited by peace officers (California Vehicle Code &14607.6[b]). After tens of thousands of cars had been stopped without probable cause, and after thousands of cars were towed away at great expense to the owners, the police switched and now call them “traffic safety checkpoints.”
Curiously, checkpoints dramatically increased in 2006 as the city was being torn apart by the unlawful rental ban ordinance.
The police would have us believe that the checkpoints and the obsession with the city’s undocumented residents is mere coincidence, even though these checkpoints have a disparate impact on the immigrant and Latino populations in this town.
As many others have pointed out, Mr. Arnold refers to the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety who state that unlicensed drivers are more likely to be involved in crashes. However, looking deeper into this statement, one would find that the studies conducted thus far on unlicensed drivers do not take into account a large immigrant population. The studies have focused on those unlicensed drivers who have failed to pass the driver’s test, have lost their license due to accumulated points against their driving records, or lost their license as a result of a court order.
Many immigrants in Escondido, on the other hand, have been living here for more than a decade and at one time have been licensed drivers, only to have their licenses revoked because of their immigration status. Others have been drivers in their countries of origin but are not eligible to obtain a license in California. Moreover, I would suggest that undocumented drivers may well be safer drivers than other groups because of their immigration status. The fear of apprehension, which plays a big part of their everyday lives, may encourage this group of drivers to be much more careful than the licensed population.
In any case, the data speaks for itself. There is no evidence that traffic or DUI/driver’s license checkpoints have done anything to make our streets safer. And while the number of traffic accidents has been reduced in Escondido, in reality the numbers have gone down throughout the state, even in those cities that hold no checkpoints. The most plausible explanation is the downturn in the economy, which has effectively reduced the number of vehicles on the road. After more than five years and thousands of cars being stopped and towed away, Escondido continues to find itself among the most accident-prone cities, according the Office of Traffic Safety.
Checkpoints are ineffective and inefficient when used as a traffic enforcement tool —- not to mention the divisiveness they have created in Escondido. However, Escondido has managed to pocket a sizable profit from impounding so many cars.
The city’s close relationship with ICE has caused the divide to be even greater. The controversial E-Verify and the Secure Communities Program can be more accurately described as the “Divided Communities Program.” These programs are those in which participation is a choice, and Escondido chooses to become engaged, knowing full well that the immigrant and Latino residents of this city will not approve. The concepts of community-oriented policing and community involvement in Escondido have all but disappeared.
Mr. Arnold then paints those who object to this city’s apparent obsession with immigration issues as the “open-border crowd.” He seems unwilling to accept that the city’s reputation as one of the nation’s most anti-immigrant places is well-earned. I can assure Mr. Arnold that I am not in favor of an open border.
However, I am in favor of competent, unbiased policing practices and a welcoming city government, neither of which is present for brown people in Escondido.
Bill Flores is an Escondido resident.
Popularity: 8% [?]
Twitter
Facebook
Flickr
YouTube
