-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
===============================
NEWS FROM THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY
2600 Virginia Avenue, NW, Suite 100
Washington DC 20037
World Wide Web: lp.org
===============================
For release: October 5, 2000
===============================
For additional information:
George Getz, Press Secretary
Phone: (202) 333-0008 Ext. 222
E-Mail: pressreleases@hq.LP.org
===============================
Should police have the power to handcuff and jail people who don't wear
seatbelts?
WASHINGTON, DC -- The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear five
cases this session that involve the power of police to stop, search,
and arrest you for drug and seatbelt violations -- proving that such
"victimless crimes" are now the driving force behind the assault on our
Constitutionally protected liberties, the Libertarian Party said today.
"If police win the right to haul you off in handcuffs for not
wearing a seatbelt, scan your house at whim with a thermal imaging gun,
and set up random roadblocks so dogs can sniff your car for drugs then
victimless crimes will be to blame," said Steve Dasbach, the party's
national director.
"These are the issues the Supreme Court will decide this term -
- - and every one of these frightening expansions of police power is
being justified by so-called crimes that have no victims. The War on
Victimless Crimes has turned into an all-out War on the Bill of
Rights."
Starting this week, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear five major
cases to determine whether law enforcement has the right to stop,
search, test, restrain, and arrest people to enforce drug and seatbelt
laws. The cases include:
* Indianapolis vs. Edmond, which will decide whether police can
set up random roadblocks on public streets to question motorists and
use drug-sniffing dogs to inspect their vehicles.
* Ferguson vs. Charleston, which will decide whether hospitals
can secretly test pregnant women for cocaine, and turn the results over
to police.
* Illinois vs. McArthur, which will decide whether police can
restrain people from entering their homes while police are seeking a
warrant to search the premises for drugs.
* Atwater vs. Lago Vista, which will decide whether people can
be handcuffed and hauled off to jail for not wearing a seatbelt.
* Kyllo vs. United States, which will determine whether police
can scan homes with a thermal imaging gun, searching for heat patterns
that may indicate a marijuana-growing operation.
What do all these cases have in common? They all seek a
dramatic expansion of police power and they all involves "crimes" where
there is no victim, noted Dasbach.
"The criminal justice debate is no longer about what is
permissible when catching violent criminals like murderers, rapists,
and robbers -- it's now about how far law enforcement can go in
violating the Fourth Amendment to catch people who harm no one but
themselves," he said.
The cases being heard by the Supreme Court are not an
unexpected side-effect of victimless crime laws, but a natural
consequence, said Dasbach.
"There's a reason why police aren't setting up random
roadblocks to find people who have been the victims of robbery or a
violent crime," he said."In those kinds of cases, people go to the
police to seek justice. But with drug and seatbelt laws, there is no
victim to complain -- just people engaging in consensual behavior that
harms no one but themselves.
"As a result, law enforcement must engage in police-state
behavior to catch the so-called criminals. To combat victimless crimes,
police use sting operations, paid informers, anonymous tips, no-knock
raids, warrantless searches, and high-tech surveillance. Their impulse
is to always push the boundaries of the Fourth Amendment -- until they
begin to routinely violate everyone's privacy and rights."
It's that last aspect that should be most troubling to
Americans, said Dasbach, even to people who don't use drugs or violate
seatbelt laws.
"When police set up a random roadblock, a hundred innocent
people are inconvenienced and threatened for every one person who is
arrested," he said. "Your Constitutional rights are violated, your
freedom is limited, and your safety is diminished -- just so police can
catch a few individuals who engage in peaceful behavior the government
has criminalized."
These five cases give the Supreme Court an opportunity to draw
a "line in the sand" about how far law enforcement can go to fight
victimless crimes, said Dasbach.
"The Supreme Court has an opportunity to decide what kind of
country we will live in," he said. "Will it be an America where any
violation of the Bill of Rights is justified in the name of a War on
Victimless Crimes? Or will it be an America where ordinary people can
live in freedom, privacy, and safety, and where the Bill of Rights is
respected? That's the real issue on this year's Supreme Court docket."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Libertarian Party lp.org
2600 Virginia Ave. NW, Suite 100 voice: 202-333-0008
Washington DC 20037 fax: 202-333-0072
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For subscription changes, please use the WWW form at:
lp.org
Alternatively, you may also send a message to <announce-request@lp.org>
with just the word "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" in the subject line. |
