Pubdate: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 Source: Herald, The (WA) Copyright: 2005 The Daily Herald Co. Contact: http://www.heraldnet.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/190 Author: Attorney General Rob Mckenna DON'T SUSPEND RIGHTS IN FIGHT AGAINST METH No one can argue against the need for the state's fight, led by Attorney General Rob McKenna, against methamphetamine. However, some suggestions to further the fight, offered by McKenna's task force "Operation: Allied Against Meth," are troubling. The most problematic portion of the report is the call to allow law enforcement greater use of wiretaps, bugs and secretly taped conversations. The practice is known as "one-party consent," wherein investigators can listen with wiretaps or tape conversations without the targeted person knowing. As Doug Klunder, director of the Privacy Project for the ACLU of Washington pointed out, police already have that power - the difference being two very powerful words: "probable cause." Since 1989, if police have probable cause of criminal activity, they've been able to use wiretaps or tape conversations. The meth panel is recommending that the phrase "probable cause" be removed so police can more easily catch those in the meth trade. "Law enforcement strongly believes one-party consent will greatly aid in investigating drug crimes," McKenna was quoted as saying. Well, of course law enforcement thinks that. It is easier to bug suspects' homes and wait to hear if crime happens. Throwing out a few other pesky protections would make it easier still. It's just that we would no longer recognize what country we are living in. If probable cause is not necessary to spy on citizens, what exactly is the criteria? Suspicion? Gut instinct? Prior record? Why stop at meth? Shouldn't we throw out the probable-cause clause for all crimes, so police can catch all kinds of criminals? The panel recommends the state should increase assistance for addicts, which is an excellent suggestion. However, the task force also suggests reducing the use of time off for good behavior for those sentenced under the Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative. It would require that drug enhancement convictions be served consecutively. The goals of helping addicts with their addictions and at the same time keeping them in prison for as long as possible seem at odds. And since our corrections system is already stretched, longer sentences will mean higher costs. Most of the task force's suggestions are good, common-sense steps to slay the meth beast. But we can't let a crime and health problem cause us to lose sight of our rights, or we will face a bigger scourge than meth. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman