Gun and Terrorist Sweeps Yield Pretty Much Everything but Guns and Terrorists
The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects U.S. residents from unreasonable search and seizure - that is, from unwarranted police searches and the subsequent seizure of evidence. Unfortunately for those who like constitutional rights, the Supreme Court recently ruled that police may seize evidence and use it in criminal cases even if the arrest during which they got the evidence turns out to be illegal.
It seems that that ruling may have prompted some worrisome police action in Tennessee, Mississippi, Arkansas and Ohio.
According to CommercialAppeal.com, Tennessee, Mississippi and Arkansas law enforcers conducted an "anti-terrorism initiative" last month called "Operation Sudden Impact." The 24-hour sweep was reportedly touted as a terrorist-elimination action involving law enforcers from six counties, three states and more than 50 federal, state and local agencies.
Reason Magazine reports that the law enforcers arrested 332 people, 142 of whom were described as "fugitives." It seems no "terrorists" were apprehended. But that's kind of the problem with terrorists, isn't it? You don't actually know they're terrorists until they terrorize you.
In what greatly resembles damage control, the law enforcement officers apparently reminded reporters that finding terrorists wasn't the only aim of the initiative - cooperation between the various agencies, too, was of great importance.
Right.
This event would be disturbing by itself, but becomes even more troubling when considered in tandem with the recent "Gun Violence Reduction Sweep" carried out in Akron, Ohio. According to Ohio.com, the gun sweep was conducted over four days and led to 177 arrests, the confiscation of hundreds of grams of illegal drugs, and a variety of criminal charges.
Only three guns were found.
One officer is quoted explaining that police searches targeted people in high crime areas who were "most likely" to be carrying handguns. Like the Tennessee sweep, the anti-gun measure included many traffic stops, which police have allegedly noted can yield much more than a minor driving violation.
But even DUI check points, at which officers can stop cars at random to determine whether the drivers are impaired, have taken heat by promoters of the Fourth Amendment. Now, DUI checkpoints must be publicized beforehand so that drivers are informed - and can avoid them.
While these sweeps have yet to be challenged by lawyers, it seems likely that they might be. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court's recent ruling to allow evidence gathered during an unlawful arrest could mean that the sweeps remain permissible.