Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 08:39:12 -0400
From: freematt@coil.com (Matthew Gaylor)
Subject: Stop the War on Drugs by Tanya K. Metaksa
To: freematt@coil.com (Matthew Gaylor)


Stop the War on Drugs
by Tanya K. Metaksa

FrontPageMagazine.com | June 12, 2001

ALTHOUGH CIVIL LIBERTARIANS have hailed last week's United States Supreme
Court decision in the police use of heat-seeking technology - it is really
only a tiny step in the fight for civil liberties.  The War on Drugs has
turned federal, state, and local police across the country into
black-suited Rambo-cops, endangering honest citizens in their search for
drugs and drug assets.

An "unusual alignment of justices" stood up for civil liberties. Justices
David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, who are normally
considered more "liberal," joined conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and
Anthony Scalia in voting against overbearing law enforcement techniques.  A
Washington Times editorial stated,  "It's a good thing the majority saw the
danger presented by the unlimited use of intrusive technology to observe,
monitor and record our activities. The idea that the authorities might be
allowed to lawfully trundle down neighborhood streets, pointing their
latest electronic gear at any, perhaps all, the homes they passed, is a
creepy one indeed. Nabbing a few suburban pot farmers is not worth the
price of our right to be secure in our own homes against the prying eyes of
government."

Yet too many warrants have been issued against alleged pot farmers and drug
traffickers based on flimsy and erroneous accusations; and too many of
those warrants have been served in a manner that encourages or mandates the
use of deadly force - bringing to mind the tragedies at Ruby Ridge and Waco
that haunt us to this day.

Police departments, especially the narcotics officers, have become more
interested in the amount of revenue that can be collected through asset
forfeiture than protecting citizens' civil liberties.  Take the case of
Donald P. Scott, who owned a 200-acre ranch in Ventura County, CA and was
shot to death by an LA County Sheriff, Gary R. Spencer, in 1993, while
being served a warrant.

The warrant issued by Ventura County Municipal Court Judge Herbert Curtiss
III was based on allegations that Scott was growing marijuana plants on his
ranch.  Included in the supporting documents were statements by an
"anonymous informant" and the allegations of a narcotics agent, who had
flown over the area at 1000 feet, had taken no photographs, and later
acknowledged not using binoculars because "they made him sick."  Missing
from information given to the judge was that other efforts to confirm the
presence of marijuana on the property had been unsuccessful.

In March 1993 the Office of the District Attorney, County of Ventura,
published a "Report on the Death of Donald Scott." The report issued a
stinging indictment of the raid and concluded, "that the misstatements and
omissions discussed are material and would invalidate the warrant."  They
further stated, "It is the District Attorney's opinion that the Los Angeles
County Sheriff's Department was motivated, at least in part, by a desire to
seize and forfeit the ranch for the government Based in part upon the
possibility of forfeiture, Spencer obtained a search warrant that was not
supported by probable cause.  This search warrant became Donald Scott's
death warrant."

The Los Angeles Times of August 26, 1999 reported on a narcotics
investigation that resulted in the death of Mario Paz, an innocent man.
Te search warrant was for Paz's residence in Compton, CA, but included no
names. The cops expected to "find marijuana and cash belonging to a man who
was a suspected member of a drug ring."  Thus the El Monte police executed
a "high-risk entry" - shooting the locks off entry doors.  The police found
no drugs, but took $10,000 that Paz had withdrawn from the bank to
safeguard against Y2K bank failures.  El Monte Police have since said they
could not tie Paz or his family to drug trafficking, yet they almost
succeeded in seizing the $10,000 under asset forfeiture laws.

The deaths of Donald Scott and Mario Paz are not isolated incidents.
Stories of drug raid deaths keep appearing.  An Associated Press story last
October reported, "A 61-year-old man was shot to death by police while his
wife was handcuffed in another room during a drug raid on the wrong house."

The Supreme Court's ruling against intrusive searches is good news.  Yet,
when will they rule against jurisdictions that use tenuous information to
obtain search warrants delivered by police with drawn guns battering down
doors?  The siren song of asset forfeiture has become a corrupting
influence. The War on Drugs is a failure; dangerous drugs are everywhere,
while law enforcement has a new revenue stream.

Tanya K. Metaksa is the former executive director of the National Rifle
Association's Institute for Legislative Action. She is the author of Safe,
Not Sorry a self-protection manual, published in 1997. She has appeared on
numerous talk and interview shows such as "Crossfire," the "Today" show,
"Nightline," "This Week with David Brinkley" and the "McNeil-Lehrer Hour,"
among others.

###


Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues
Send a blank message to: freematt@coil.com with the words subscribe FA
on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week)
Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722  ICQ: 106212065   Archived at 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/