Author Topic: Federal judge rules drivers allowed to flash headlights to warn of speed traps  (Read 503 times)

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66395
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Good. 

Federal judge rules drivers allowed to flash headlights to warn of speed traps
Published February 05, 2014
FoxNews.com

A federal judge in Missouri ruled this week held that drivers have a First Amendment right to flash their headlights to warn other motorists of nearby police and speed traps.

The order by U.S. District Judge Henry E. Autrey in St. Louis on Monday stems from a lawsuit filed by Ellisville resident Michael Elli. In 2012, Elli flashed his headlights to warn oncoming vehicles of a radar set up by police in the town of Ellisville.

A flash of headlights is a common way motorists communicate to oncoming drivers of either a dangerous situation or the presence of police — in essence, a warning to slow down.

An officer saw the flash and pulled over Elli, who could have faced a fine of up to $1,000 if convicted. Elli, was accused of "[f]lashing lights on certain vehicles . . . warning of RADAR ahead," according to court papers obtained by The Wall Street Journal.

He faced a fine up to $1,000 in addition to points on his license, according to the report.

The city later dropped the charge, but the American Civil Liberties Union sued on Elli's behalf anyway, claiming the arrest violated his First Amendment right to free speech.

Ellisville City Attorney George Restovich said the city changed the policy after the case went to court and no longer pulls over people for flashing headlights.

"The reality is that the injunction doesn't change the way the city has been operating for the past 12 months," Restovich said.

At a hearing on the lawsuit last year, Ellisville officials made the case that flashing headlights could interfere with a police investigation. But Autrey said in his ruling that the flashing of headlights "sends a message to bring one's driving in conformity with the law — whether it be by slowing down, turning on one's own headlamps at dusk or in the rain, or proceeding with caution."

“The chilling effect of Ellisville’s policy and custom of having its police officers pull over, detain, and cite individuals who are perceived as having communicated to oncoming traffic by flashing their headlamps and then prosecuting and imposing fines upon those individuals remains, regardless” of the city’s decision to change its policy, the judge wrote, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU’s Missouri chapter told the Journal's Law Blog that the judge's ruling is a civil rights victory for motorists.

"When someone is communicating in a public street, [he is] expressing [himself] in a way that’s protected by the First Amendment,” Rothert said. "Unless there is a strong reason why the government should be allowed to censor that speech, the police shouldn’t be stopping or prosecuting people because of the content of their speech."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/05/federal-judge-rules-drivers-allowed-to-warn-other-motorists-speed-traps/

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
I dunno about this one... (I mean, I always just like to argue, but...)

If the police were running a stakeout, and you ran across the street and you told the drug dealers "Hey dudes, there's cops right there, stop selling for a little bit!" - You'd be interfering with a police investigation, correct?  

If the police were secretly recording a wife arranging for a hitman and I walked up in the middle and said "Psst, he's a COP!" - Would I be interfering with a police investigation?

I guess, you have to say "I'm okay with a person interfering with THIS particular police investigation".  It's a slippery slope from there.  

(Cue the personal attacks instead of actually admitting you're cool with SOME interference)

RRKore

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2628
I dunno about this one... (I mean, I always just like to argue, but...)

If the police were running a stakeout, and you ran across the street and you told the drug dealers "Hey dudes, there's cops right there, stop selling for a little bit!" - You'd be interfering with a police investigation, correct?  

If the police were secretly recording a wife arranging for a hitman and I walked up in the middle and said "Psst, he's a COP!" - Would I be interfering with a police investigation?

I guess, you have to say "I'm okay with a person interfering with THIS particular police investigation".  It's a slippery slope from there.  

(Cue the personal attacks instead of actually admitting you're cool with SOME interference)

Yikes!  Really?  (As in "Am I really agreeing with BB?, haha)

Hell yeah it's OK to tell someone, "Hey I think that cop is watching you" if the cops aren't actively keeping folks away from the target.  Cops might not like it but, hey, try being a little more undercover then.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Good - f the cops

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Good - f the cops

imagine if the cops were about to bust obama for fast & furious, and some zit-faced punk lib college kid warned obama, interfering with the police investigation and letting him avoid getting busted. 

Roger Bacon

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20957
  • Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails
imagine if the cops were about to bust obama for fast & furious, and some zit-faced punk lib college kid warned obama, interfering with the police investigation and letting him avoid getting busted. 

ROFL

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24454
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Good. 

Federal judge rules drivers allowed to flash headlights to warn of speed traps
Published February 05, 2014
FoxNews.com

A federal judge in Missouri ruled this week held that drivers have a First Amendment right to flash their headlights to warn other motorists of nearby police and speed traps.

The order by U.S. District Judge Henry E. Autrey in St. Louis on Monday stems from a lawsuit filed by Ellisville resident Michael Elli. In 2012, Elli flashed his headlights to warn oncoming vehicles of a radar set up by police in the town of Ellisville.

A flash of headlights is a common way motorists communicate to oncoming drivers of either a dangerous situation or the presence of police — in essence, a warning to slow down.

At a hearing on the lawsuit last year, Ellisville officials made the case that flashing headlights could interfere with a police investigation. But Autrey said in his ruling that the flashing of headlights "sends a message to bring one's driving in conformity with the law — whether it be by slowing down, turning on one's own headlamps at dusk or in the rain, or proceeding with caution."


Quote
Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU’s Missouri chapter told the Journal's Law Blog that the judge's ruling is a civil rights victory for motorists.

"When someone is communicating in a public street, [he is] expressing [himself] in a way that’s protected by the First Amendment,” Rothert said. "Unless there is a strong reason why the government should be allowed to censor that speech, the police shouldn’t be stopping or prosecuting people because of the content of their speech."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/05/federal-judge-rules-drivers-allowed-to-warn-other-motorists-speed-traps/

I agree with this. Fining people is simply an oppressive intimidation tactic designed to ensure the police profit from crime rather than prevent crime or maintain road safety.
w

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Speed traps are money making venture. When coffers are low...time to hit the streets, find parking violations and speeders.
L