Pubdate: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 Source: Daily Pilot (CA) Copyright: 2005 Los Angeles Times Contact: http://www.latimes.com/tcn/pilot/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/578 Author: Jay B. Litvak Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/raids.htm (Drug Raids) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?225 (Students - United States) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/opinion.htm (Opinion) DRUG DOGS SNIFFING OUT LOSS OF PERSONAL LIBERTY The following is a circuitous commentary on the recent discussions regarding drug-sniffing dogs on school campuses. When I attended Van Nuys High School in the mid-1970s, there were random student and locker searches: There was no need for probable cause. Van Nuys High not only had the usual problems with drugs, although nearby schools were known to have more significant drug issues, but it was well known for its violence. These searches were meant to protect the greater percentage of students at the expense of constitutional ideals. I say ideals because constitutional principles are more easily subverted in schools than in the general population. But examples of authorities usurping personal liberties become more prevalent, and more widespread, as the problems become more intractable. In the 1950s we went from the post-World War II (i.e. Cold War), covert "investigation" of U. S. citizens to the displacement of these citizens within their own country. In Vietnam we esca-lated from search-and-rescue to search- and-destroy missions as our political and military goals became ineffective: These escalated into free-fire zones. Today, the USA Patriot Act, or, at least portions of it, is removing individual rights for the "greater good." To use a Vietnam-era oxymoron, we have to destroy it in order to save it. All of these examples have something in common: They are all reactions to situations in which we have lost control of something. Drug- and, perhaps, explosives-sniffing dogs in public schools are just another response to additional failed endeavors: the War on Drugs and the War on (Violent) Crime. Now, these, especially the latter, are the ultimate oxymorons. When I was in high school, I wasn't paying much attention to these ideas. It is interesting that, when I may have had something to hide, I cared less than I do today when I have nothing to fear from an unethical search. In conclusion, I wish to emphasize two points. First, whether I have anything to hide ought not to influence my willingness to give up any of my rights as a U. S. citizen. Second, we ought to remember that when we are asked to relinquish some of our rights, it is a sign of failed policy, and it sets a dangerous precedent. Jay B. Litvak is a Costa Mesa resident. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin