RE: How much is that doggie sniffing my car...

[curley@CYPHER.TURBONET.COM]

Let's see if I am following this "logic."  If the police decided 
that gun violence was a major source of crime and that stopping 
people on  a public sidewalk for a quick frisk would help reduce that 
violence, I shouldn't worry about that if I am not carrying a weapon 
illegally, because I am not "doing anything wrong."  And then, since 
I allow this "minor intrusion" without complaining I can legitimately 
"cry" about it when someone gets shot.  In a department store where 
theft has been a problem, it should be okay with me if the cops 
walked into any dressing room anytime just to be sure I'm not 
slipping an extra garment or two into my drawers, sleeves and pockets 
--because I'm not doing anything wrong.    Well, you say, those are 
intrusions into my personal space, different from the dogs 
sniffing--maybe, maybe not, but the puerile argument that only those 
who are doing something wrong need worry still applies.  
Suppose instead that to cut crime--and I mean real 
crimes against persons, not the victimless crime of possession of 
marijuana (please spare me the statistics and phony 
arguments about the dangers of m. j. over the "legal" drugs.   I 
don't use it and never have, but it is far less threat to the safety 
of my family than either alcohol or tobacco)--police decide to use 
"snoopy" devices to listen in secrecy to personal conversations in 
PUBLIC places.  Only those who are doing something wrong have 
anything to fear, right?  The bigger Brother gets, the less we have 
to fear because we will be approaching a crime-less society I 
suppose.  And we will be safer because more and more of our neighbors 
(certainly it won't be US because we won't ever do anything wrong) 
will be behind bars for violating the crime-of-the-day, since indeed 
there was a time in our country when you could go to jail for 
possession of alcoholic beverages with intent to sell, but not for 
possession of marijuana--or a host of other drugs.
Please excuse me for lapsing into the same tone of sarcasm you 
exhibited.  I rose to the bait.  There really isn't any need to 
attack another person when it's her/his position I disagree with, is 
there?

Signed,

Another Shaky Gripper



From:          "Cooper, Maj Philip S. CCJ1" 
<cooperps@centcom.mil> To:            "'Kenneth Gallant'" 
<gallantk@uidaho.edu>, Erikus4@aol.com Cc:            
vision2020@moscow.com Subject:       RE: How much is that doggie 
sniffing my car... Date:          Thu, 19 Nov 1998 08:06:18 -0500

Get a grip.  It's the folks who are doing something wrong that have the
worry.  Funny how people cry about  their rights being violated but when
something serious occurs, its...."How could you let this happen" and " Where
were you"....seems like everyone wants to play the "I'm a victim routine"
these days.

PC

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Kenneth Gallant [SMTP:gallantk@uidaho.edu]
	Sent:	November 18,1998 19:50
	To:	Erikus4@aol.com
	Cc:	vision2020@moscow.com
	Subject:	Re: How much is that doggie sniffing my car...

	I would be interested in determining the pattern of cars that are
	approached, at times when the police officers do not know that they
are
	being watched.  It would be interesting to see if older cars or
sites at
	which a high percentage of those present are often of Hispanic
origin and
	not well off.  Based on my (little) knowledge of the politics of the
area,
	I wonder whether this campaign is being targeted  at poor Hispanic
people.
	Or the non-wealthy in general.

	I do not recommend keeping any "smell alike" substance in your
trunk.  If
	this search program is legal (as I hope it is not but fear that it
is), a
	hit on the smell alike substance will not vitiate the legality of
the
	search.  And it will mark you as someone the cops want to continue
to take
	a look at. 

	Kenneth S. Gallant
	Professor of Law
	University of Idaho
	Moscow, Idaho 83844-2322 USA
	208-885-6541 (phone)
	208-885-4628 (fax)
	gallantk@uidaho.edu

	On Wed, 18 Nov 1998 Erikus4@aol.com wrote:

	>  >    Under the plan, the drug dogs would be able to search
anywhere
	>  >the general public is allowed to go. They wouldn't be able to
	>  >search private property.
	> 
	> Well, thank goodness for that.  Only a semi-police state.
	> 
	> The obvious answer is to find a legal substance that the dogs will
hit on, and
	> tell everyone to keep a small quantity in their trunk.  Anyone
know of such a
	> substance?
	> 
	> And please note that I'm not defending drug users or dealers.  I
just hate
	> excessive police tactics that go against everything American.
	> 
	> E. O'Daniel
	> 

Mike Curley
reply to: curley@turbonet.com
208-882-3536