Pubdate: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 Source: Danville Register & Bee (VA) Copyright: 2000 Register Publishing Company Address: P.O. Box 331, Danville, Va. 24543-0331 Feedback: http://www.registerbee.com/headlines/edform.cfm Website: http://www.registerbee.com/ TRIMMING THE DRAGNET Our View: The rights that protect criminal suspects are, in fact, the same rights that protect all Americans. What's worse, illegal drugs being transported on our highways, or being stopped at a police roadblock so a trained dog can sniff your car for drugs? The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on that question this week, ruling 6-3 that those random drug roadblocks were unconstitutional. Civil libertarians hailed the case as a victory for the rights of individuals, and we agree with them. At some point - actually, at a lot of points - we as a nation have to decide just how many of our rights we're going to give up to catch the bad guys. Unlike sobriety checkpoints, which look for people who pose an immediate threat to themselves and others, the court found the drug checkpoints in Indianapolis went too far. "If this case were to rest on such a high level of generality, there would be little check on the authorities' ability to construct roadblocks for almost any conceivable law enforcement purpose," Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in the majority opinion. Indianapolis Police stopped 1,161 cars and trucks and made 104 arrests - including 55 for drug charges - at six roadblocks conducted over four months in 1998, The Associated Press reported. Society is better off when the cops catch the bad guys, but the innocent were treated to the same initial scrutiny as the criminal suspects. Cynics will call the court's ruling a victory for what is often referred to as "criminal's rights," but the rights that protect criminal suspects are, in fact, the same rights that protect all Americans. If we, in our fear, anger and disgust over this nation's drug problem allow our protections to be thrown away, then we have traded the evil of illegal drugs for the scourge of a police state. How far is too far? "While we do not limit the purposes that may justify a checkpoint program to any rigid set of categories, we decline to approve a program whose primary purpose is ultimately indistinguishable from the general interest in crime control," the majority opinion said. Getting 55 drug arrests is good news, but stopping 1,161 cars and trucks to do it is a high price indeed to accomplish a goal that most of society already supports. - --- MAP posted-by: Jo-D