POLICE SEARCH CAUSES CONCERN

Florida Today's recent article announcing a planned DUI checkpoint has me
concerned about how our police's ability to stop random vehicles for
"safety defects" and for suspicion of "driving under the influence" of
drugs or drink may infringe upon our personal freedoms.

Although some may argue that our government, in the name of the people,
owns the streets and as such they can control whom, when, and how people
are allowed to use them, it occurs to me that the government owns many things.

This list includes sidewalks, office buildings, and parks. Does this mean
that you could be stopped while walking to the grocery store to see if you
have illegal drugs on you?

Could they still search you even if you gave no reasonable indication that
you might have drugs?

And if you have legal drugs on your possession, should you have to carry a
copy of your doctor's prescription with you?

If this seems like too big a leap from simple DUI checkpoints, a quick
check of the Internet brings up dozens of examples of how DUI checkpoints
across the country have resulted in the police looking for more things
during these stops.

For instance, in Ohio, similar checkpoints, touted as "Make Ohio DUI-
Safe," have escalated over a few years into a multi-jurisdictional
Pandora's box of random vehicle searches that include driver's license
checks, registration checks, safety inspections, insurance checks and
inspection of the car's contents.

Any of these could end up with you in a police car and your car on a tow
truck that you will pay for later.

In some Southwestern states, these DUI stops have grown to include a "show
me your papers" check to prove you are not an illegal immigrant.

My problem is that these stops are, in my view, unreasonable searches not
based on probable cause and are thus forbidden by the Fourth Amendment to
the Constitution.

Kyle Crooks, Melbourne