“Routine traffic stop”

[justsome1]

Just a quick question, please forgive me if it has been asked before but I couldn’t find anything in the search. Ok, is there such a thing as a “Routine traffic stop”? I have always wondered if this was just bullshit or if it was real. If it is real what does a “Routine traffic stop” consist of, is it just at random? What does "Routine" mean in this instance? If it is just bull, then why use it as a reason for a traffic stop? Why not use a reason that exists like swerving or something real. What does it indicate if a “Routine traffic stop” doesn’t exist and a officer uses it as a reason for the stop?

 

[racercosmo]

I take routine traffic stop as the officer stopped the car for a VC violation, such as speeding, not stopping at a stop sign, etc.

 

[Slow600rr]

Routine has nothing to do with the violation observed by the officer making the stop. It has to do with what people perceive to be a routine event. Meaning, an uneventful traffic stop that has the same routine as the thousands of other stops you have made.

They taught us in the academy that nothing is ever routine, and in fact every instructor I had said they hated the term "routine" anything. The incident in Oakland is a perfect reason that every cop should not become complacent. ***** I don't want anyone to think I'm monday morning quarterbacking that incident. I have no first hand knowledge of how that incident went down. I'm just using it as an example for why we shouldn't take anything lightly.

 

[racercosmo]

Slow600rr, thank you. What I meant was Officer sees infraction, initiates stop, writes citation, rest of the day. Non-routine is stolen vehicle report, other APB, etc.

 

[kenpokev]

My understanding is that the initial car stop resulted in the killer opening up with an AK-47 prior to the officer's even stepping off their motors.

There are NO routine car stops. BTW: the majority of Felony arrests are made from traffic stops.

 

[mud]

Maybe that's why they call it "routine." Bad things have a way of happening during "routine" traffic stops.

They taught us in the academy that nothing is ever routine, and in fact every instructor I had said they hated the term "routine" anything. The incident in Oakland is a perfect reason that every cop should not become complacent. ***** I don't want anyone to think I'm monday morning quarterbacking that incident. I have no first hand knowledge of how that incident went down. I'm just using it as an example for why we shouldn't take anything lightly.

 

[LongGoneJohn]

Exactly.

If it's thought of as "routine," you will be complacent. I am just as guilty of this as any other officer on the planet. We all do it. It's unavoidable. Unfortunately, it's dangerous.

Think of it as driving:

Your "routine" traffic stop would be driving to your local 7-11 for some ice and Coors Light. When you do that, which you've done a million times with no ill-affect, do you enter every roadway and change lanes with the same care and safety as you did when you were 15 and a half years old with a permit? No, of course not. It becomes routine, and when things become routine, people get lax and complacent.

The media uses it for a different term though: They use it to, as stated above, to describe a "normal" violation or traffic stop. As in, a stop sign or minor vehicle code violation. Not something that would have obviously sparked the concern of the officer involved in that particular traffic stop.

 

[arnoha]

I think what the OP is mistaken about is the implication that "routine" means "for no reason at all", like a "routine drug test". This is never the case in a correct traffic stop. There must always be reasonable suspicion that some vehicle code or penal code has been violated. Without that, the stop is not legal.

Routine is not the reason for the traffic stop, it's a description of the outcome of the traffic stop.

The conversation on staying vigilant is a correct answer...to a different question.

 

[masameet]

My understanding is that the initial car stop resulted in the killer opening up with an AK-47 prior to the officer's even stepping off their motors.

There are NO routine car stops. BTW: the majority of Felony arrests are made from traffic stops.

He gave them a fake DL before he shot them.

To illustrate kenpokev's second point, here's a 2-year-old thread about a "routine traffic stop."

 

[Khatsalano]

If the primary purpose of a traffic checkpoint is to uncover evidence of general and ordinary criminal wrongdoing, it is unconstitutional. This violates the Fourth Amendment. Individualized suspicion is required. See City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32 (2000).

There are certain exceptions for special needs. Stops of vehicles for drunken driving (DUI checkpoints), illegal immigration checkpoints near the border, checkpoints for a known path of escape for a fugitive, and certain anti-terrorist objectives are constitutional.

A law enforcement officer may not use a random license/registration check as a pretext to look for evidence of general criminality. That being said, however, there has been some success in jurisdictions using, for example, a profiling approach to apprehend vehicles for drug possession. That however, is grounds for individualized suspicion. The constitutionality of profiling has not been directly addressed by the judiciary yet under the new political climate.

Ok, enough serious talk. : )

- K

 

[RolnCode3]

If the primary purpose of a traffic checkpoint is to uncover evidence of general and ordinary criminal wrongdoing, it is unconstitutional. This violates the Fourth Amendment. Individualized suspicion is required. See City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32 (2000).

There are certain exceptions for special needs. Stops of vehicles for drunken driving (DUI checkpoints), illegal immigration checkpoints near the border, checkpoints for a known path of escape for a fugitive, and certain anti-terrorist objectives are constitutional.

A law enforcement officer may not use a random license/registration check as a pretext to look for evidence of general criminality. That being said, however, there has been some success in jurisdictions using, for example, a profiling approach to apprehend vehicles for drug possession. That however, is grounds for individualized suspicion. The constitutionality of profiling has not been directly addressed by the judiciary yet under the new political climate.

Ok, enough serious talk. : )

- K

You're being a little too general with your statements. The subjective reason for the stop (checking for general criminality) is perfectly legal as long as the reason for the stop (traffic violation, equipment violation) is legal. If by "random" you mean without reasonable suspicion, then you would be correct.

 

[Rel]

No such thing as a "routine" traffic stop.

 

[}Dragon{]

No such thing as a "routine" traffic stop.

+1 ^^^ :applause

 

[masameet]

Yup, no such thing.

Here's another good example. I believe the Vacaville LEO is a motor too. :thumbup

Posted: 04/02/2009 08:00:50 AM PDT

A cell phone call taken while driving Monday cost a local man his freedom and netted Vacaville police a cache of stolen property and some drug paraphernalia, police reported. At about 11:40 a.m. Officer James Smith was at the corner of Monte Vista Avenue and Allison Drive when he saw Vacaville resident Joey Alcala drive by talking on a cell phone, according to the report. Smith pulled the 31-year-old man over and determined his driving privilege was suspended. A search of the vehicle revealed property reported stolen during a residential burglary in the Vacaville, police said, so Alcala was arrested. A pipe used to orally ingest methamphetamine was located in hip pocket, according to the report. He was booked into the Solano County Jail.

Source: Vacaville Reporter

 

[enki]

Amazing how often dope transporters get caught by bad tail lights, expired reg or something equally stupid.

If I ever run drugs, be sure that I'm doing a walkaround before heading out. And I'm gonna drive 62 mph on the freeway, too.

 

[Rel]

Amazing how often dope transporters get caught by bad tail lights, expired reg or something equally stupid.

Amazing how many stolen vehicles are recovered for the same reasons. Oh, wait... stopping someone for no red reflector or no mirrors is against somebody's civil rights.

In addition, one of the theory's why the Oakland shooter was stopped was for expired reg. A very high price to pay for a fix it ticket.

 

[afm199]

Krispy Kreme is a routine stop, while Semifreddi bakery is an exigent stop.