March 8, 2015 • CIVIL,
EMAIL NEWSLETTER,
FOURTH AMENDMENT,
ILLEGAL SEARCH,
NEWSLETTER,
RADAR,
REVENUE GENERATION,
SPEED LIMIT,
Technology,
TICKET FIGHTING,
TICKET REVENUE,
TRAFFIC STOP Most longtime NMA members understand the weaknesses of using radar to measure vehicle speeds. However, less experienced drivers and even the courts regard radar as foolproof. Nothing could be further from the truth, and we have fresh evidence that further erodes radar’s patina of infallibility. A member of the NMA Board recently attended a meeting […]
The phrase “reasonable expectation of privacy” pops up a lot when discussing issues related to motorists and privacy. But what does it mean, and how does it apply to the daily business of driving? A reasonable expectation of privacy exists if 1) you have an expectation of privacy in a given situation and 2) your […]
August 24, 2014 • ALASKA,
ARKANSAS,
CONNECTICUT,
DELAWARE,
DUI,
EMAIL NEWSLETTER,
ILLEGAL SEARCH,
MISSISSIPPI,
MISSOURI,
NEWSLETTER,
OPEN CONTAINER,
RHODE ISLAND,
TENNESSEE,
VIRGINIA,
WEST VIRGINIA With Labor Day just around the corner, many of us will hit the road for one last road trip before summer turns to fall. One often overlooked and misunderstood hazard of this endeavor concerns so-called open container laws. This becomes even more of an issue when it comes to motor homes. The issue of open […]
The civil forfeiture racket is never far from the headlines these days, and thanks to the ubiquitous use of drug sniffing dogs, it’s easier than ever for police to shakedown motorists and get away with it. Here’s how the scam works: A police officer pulls over a driver for a routine traffic stop, becomes “suspicious” […]
July 6, 2014 • CALIFORNIA,
CELL PHONE,
DNA,
EMAIL NEWSLETTER,
FOURTH AMENDMENT,
ILLEGAL SEARCH,
MARYLAND,
NEWSLETTER,
PRIVACY,
Technology,
TRAFFIC STOP Chalk one up for privacy rights, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court. In a far-reaching ruling in June (Riley v. California), the court unanimously decided that police must obtain a warrant to search the contents of a cell phone seized from someone who is under arrest—except in cases of emergency. The decision stems from a […]
