Pubdate: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 Source: Press-Republican (NY) Copyright: 2006 Plattsburgh Publishing Co. Contact: http://www.pressrepublican.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/639 KEEPING DRUGS OUT OF LOCAL PRISONS When 16-year Correction Officer Michael D. Bradish was arrested and charged with drug trafficking in Bare Hill Correctional Facility last week, speculation immediately roiled up as to whether officers entering prisons for work ought routinely to be searched for contraband. As insulting as some officers might regard the idea, it isn't a bad one at all. Of the thousands of correction officers at work in the one federal and 10 state correctional facilities in our three-county area, only a rare few make news for violating the trust the public has invested in them. When one does stray, it does make news, of course: Their professional charge is to enhance law and order; when they do just the opposite, it is as newsworthy as a doctor cheating Medicaid or a teacher abusing a student. But, occasionally, an officer does yield to temptation. There is nothing to indicate that it happens with any greater frequency than in the general population -- in fact, maybe less. And we're certainly not convicting Bradish here. But, if he does turn out to be guilty, he will have delivered a severe wallop to his profession. Franklin County District Attorney Derek Champagne has suggested that heightened security measures should be in force at the entrance to prisons -- at least, the local ones. His office and the Office of the Inspector General will be examining possibilities in this regard. Perhaps, for example, entering officers should be obliged to empty their pockets to be sure they are not carrying contraband in. This prospect would probably be opposed by the union and even by some officers. They would be inclined to view it as an unwarranted intrusion into their rights. But the security of the inmates and their colleagues is the stake in this debate. Every responsible correction officer should welcome the chance to head off another embarrassment. Their dignity relies more on certainty of a clean record than by free passage to the inside of the facility. Being searched, clearly, is not the way any of us dreams of beginning our work day, any more than we would embrace the notion of providing a urine sample. Yet, if that's what it takes to maintain our good name and the reputation of our profession after a serious compromise by an errant member, the price is not too high. More important, it would be a giant step in stopping drugs from getting into the prisons, which would surely be an even bigger step in the constant fight to retain order on the inside. For the sake of thousands of our friends and neighbors working hard in an already-dangerous setting, we endorse anything that makes their workplace a little bit safer and protects their good name. - --- MAP posted-by: Elaine