<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Unconsitutional Checkpoints? &#8212; DC&#8217;s Neighborhood Safety Zone Program</title>
	<atom:link href="http://legalgeekery.com/2009/05/13/unconsitutional-checkpoints-dcs-neighborhood-safety-zones/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://legalgeekery.com/2009/05/13/unconsitutional-checkpoints-dcs-neighborhood-safety-zones/</link>
	<description>An outlet for some geeks in law school</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:57:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Schnitzel</title>
		<link>http://legalgeekery.com/2009/05/13/unconsitutional-checkpoints-dcs-neighborhood-safety-zones/comment-page-1/#comment-2276</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Schnitzel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 19:03:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalgeekery.com/?p=916#comment-2276</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s it though -- the main problem was drive-by shootings, primarily rival gangs selling drugs in or near the same area.  Something like 10-15 people were killed in a few weeks leading up to the checkpoints.  So the MPD are trying to do something, but they&#039;re doing the wrong thing. 

Because the MPD were trying to make it a legitimate checkpoint program, they had to publicize it because of the significant impact on residents.  But that also served to inform the criminals.  So what happened was exactly what you&#039;d expect, the tourniquet worked to stop violence temporarily during the program, and then the violence came back when the program stopped.  It got so bad that the NSZs ran for like 11 days (# from memory) in July when the second roadblock was instituted.

Also because they were trying to make it (more) legitimate, they allowed for carve-outs like letting in those attending a religious or political meeting.  But from a driver&#039;s perspective, exercising your right to free association is contingent upon telling the officer where you&#039;re going (to the marxist rally on 9th street) and having someone at that location (say, a marxist) pick up the phone and confirm that you&#039;re going there.  I&#039;d think that&#039;d be likely to chill your free exercise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s it though &#8212; the main problem was drive-by shootings, primarily rival gangs selling drugs in or near the same area.  Something like 10-15 people were killed in a few weeks leading up to the checkpoints.  So the MPD are trying to do something, but they&#8217;re doing the wrong thing. </p>
<p>Because the MPD were trying to make it a legitimate checkpoint program, they had to publicize it because of the significant impact on residents.  But that also served to inform the criminals.  So what happened was exactly what you&#8217;d expect, the tourniquet worked to stop violence temporarily during the program, and then the violence came back when the program stopped.  It got so bad that the NSZs ran for like 11 days (# from memory) in July when the second roadblock was instituted.</p>
<p>Also because they were trying to make it (more) legitimate, they allowed for carve-outs like letting in those attending a religious or political meeting.  But from a driver&#8217;s perspective, exercising your right to free association is contingent upon telling the officer where you&#8217;re going (to the marxist rally on 9th street) and having someone at that location (say, a marxist) pick up the phone and confirm that you&#8217;re going there.  I&#8217;d think that&#8217;d be likely to chill your free exercise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Eavenson</title>
		<link>http://legalgeekery.com/2009/05/13/unconsitutional-checkpoints-dcs-neighborhood-safety-zones/comment-page-1/#comment-2275</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Eavenson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 17:37:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://legalgeekery.com/?p=916#comment-2275</guid>
		<description>Wow.  I&#039;m sure Con Law textbook authors have been looking for a new way to explain how something can be both over- and under-inclusive.  This is my favorite part:

&quot;[I]f the operator does not present a legitimate reason, the vehicle will be denied entry.  The operator may park the vehicle elsewhere and enter the NSZ on foot.&quot;

This will no doubt have a huge impact, given the number of drive-by shootings involving machine gun-rigged, James Bond-style spy cars.  

D.C. residents must be thrilled that their government took steps to move hooligans with guns onto the street and public transportation system.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow.  I&#8217;m sure Con Law textbook authors have been looking for a new way to explain how something can be both over- and under-inclusive.  This is my favorite part:</p>
<p>&#8220;[I]f the operator does not present a legitimate reason, the vehicle will be denied entry.  The operator may park the vehicle elsewhere and enter the NSZ on foot.&#8221;</p>
<p>This will no doubt have a huge impact, given the number of drive-by shootings involving machine gun-rigged, James Bond-style spy cars.  </p>
<p>D.C. residents must be thrilled that their government took steps to move hooligans with guns onto the street and public transportation system.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
