Warrantless Random Searches
Date: 04/06/2001
Friends,
If everyone would at least "question"
this unconstitutional invasion of our rights, this outrage would stop.
Jim Hardin
From: "Will Christensen" <wnc1@quixnet.net>
Subject: Warrantless random searches.
Our thanks to Hartley Anderson for
bringing this excellent article by Daniel Newby to our attention. If you see
Daniel or have opportunity to call him, thank him for the tremendous work he
has done in defending Freedom, American Style. Freedom is our heritage and our
destiny! Will Christensen Utah State Chairman Independent American Party
************
To The Point
************
April 6, 2001
TTP 01-04
UTAH'S CHECKPOINT ALPHA
By Daniel B. Newby
On July 2, 2000, a couple days before the
anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, my family drove
up Big Cottonwood Canyon to enjoy the mountain air. Not far up the canyon, signs
appeared warning us to prepare to stop and be searched, and that search dogs
were in use. In stubborn fashion, I promptly made a U-turn and headed back the
way I had come.
An unmarked police vehicle soon pulled out
behind our car and followed us down to the mouth of the canyon. There police
lights flashed and we were pulled over. An officer in civilian clothes approached
our car, asked to see my driver's license and inquired as to why I had avoided
the search. In as rational and calm terms as possible, I reminded the officer
of the recent Utah Supreme Court decision against such random searches and explained
that I did not want to have any part in it.
The officer immediately became defensive.
He justified the checkpoint by the number of drugs taken off the street and
the safety that was being assured for people like me. I responded that it was
very concerning to me that Americans would prefer this type of security over
the risks associated with freedom.
The officer explained the difficult situation
the police are in: people go up the canyons, do drugs, and kill somebody on
the way down, and then everyone demands to know why the police didn't do something
to stop it. I could empathize with his predicament, but still did not agree
with the supposed remedy.
After some back and forth, the officer walked
away from our car and held a discussion with another officer. Upon his return,
I was given a warning ticket for making an unsafe U-turn (the officer specified
that my violation was not regarding the drug search, which I presume was to
avoid any legal action on my part).
As we concluded our debate on whether freedom
was more important than efficiency in fighting crime, I learned that we had
both served in the military and had law enforcement experience. In fact, he
had served in my birth nation of Germany, and my father had served as a police
officer in Utah. As human beings we parted on friendly enough terms, but as
Americans we parted with the strongest of ideological differences.
As a native of Germany, I had relatives on
both sides of the Iron Curtain and also frequented Berlin as a child, passing
via train or car between the walls and watchtowers. I vividly remembered the
searches, the soldiers with their weapons at the ready, and the intimidation.
I remembered Checkpoint Alpha in Helmstedt, where Americans were briefed and
prepared for the suffocating ordeal of passage. Those memories made each return
to, and moment in, America all the more refreshing and wonderful.
Until July 2, 2000. As I started my car again,
visions of East German checkpoints flew through my head and I wondered to myself,
"Has Utah really changed this much? Have we become so dependent on security
that we no longer value freedom?"
If traffic checkpoints represent an acceptable
loss of freedom today, what will be acceptable tomorrow? If a few fundamental
rights can be rationalized away to stop the bad guys today, what additional
rights will be disregarded tomorrow?
In the February 4, 2000, Utah Supreme Court
case I cited, then-Associate Chief Justice Christine Durnham poignantly argued
that:
"Broad-based, suspicionless inquiries are
reminiscent of the much hated and feared general warrants issued by the British
Crown in colonial days, where British officers were given blanket authority
to search wherever they pleased and for whatever might pique their interest.
It was precisely this type of activity that the Fourth Amendment was designed
to prohibit. Indeed, the use of general warrants was an important factor giving
rise to the American Revolution. This state's early settlers were themselves
no strangers to the abuses of general warrants ... A free society cannot tolerate
such a practice."
These eloquent words fell on deaf ears in
Utah's law enforcement community. Exactly one month to the day of this Supreme
Court decision, the Utah Highway Patrol (UHP) operated another dragnet traffic
checkpoint between Salina and Sigurd in Sevier County in blatant violation of
the Supreme Court's decision. The UHP officer in charge even ordered reporters
to leave the search area, stating,
"No media is welcome here ... This is for
troopers and officers only. This is a work area; we don't necessarily want anybody
else here."
Dragnet traffic checkpoints continue unabated
in Utah.
Two hundred years ago, American sage Benjamin
Franklin predicted Utah's growing dilemma: "They that can give up essential
liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Utah should not disregard the warnings of Franklin or those who have tasted
what it means to pass through Checkpoint Alpha.
# # # # # # #
Daniel B. Newby is Director of Operations
& Development for the Sutherland Institute, a Utah-based public policy research
institute. Permission to reprint this article in whole or in part is granted
provided credit is given to the author and to the Sutherland Institute.
For more information about the Sutherland
Institute and/or to order additional copies of this article, call the Institute
office, (801) 281-2081, or write: The Sutherland Institute, 111 E. 5600 South,
Suite 202, Salt Lake City, UT 84107. Fax: (801) 281-2414; e-mail: si@sutherlandinstitute.org.
This article is available electronically at www.sutherlandinstitute.org. Nothing
written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Sutherland
Institute, as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any legislation, or
as an endorsement of any candidate or initiative.
*************************************************
The Sutherland Institute: Shaping the Future
of Utah
Independence Square
111 East 5600 South, Suite 202
Salt Lake City, Utah 84107
Phone: (801) 281-2081
Fax: (801) 281-2414
E-mail: si@sutherlandinstitute.org
Website: www.sutherlandinstitute.org
President: Paul T. Mero
Director of Operations & Development:
Daniel B. Newby
Director of Publications: Deborah E.
Moeller
Director of Communications: Jerry M.
Young
Administration & Events Coordinator:
Miriam A. Washburn
|