I'll certainly sleep better at night with this new law in effect.  Not only is the 
premise of "combatting drugs" erroneous and unnecessary, but the broad range of powers 
it delivers is ridiculous.  How can one give such powers to agencies which have shown 
themselves to be abusers of the power they already have?  The Justice Department, 
BATF, and most Police Forces throughout the country rely upon "drug money" for new 
weapons and materiel, this gives them more power to build bigger arsenals and more 
"tactical response teams" so they can do MORE "dynamic entries" and find more ILLEGAL 
drugs, which will do nothing to reduce drug use (a goal that society has no business 
even trying anyway) and will only have as its end result bigger police forces who take 
more things and kill more people and have less oversight, and are not required to 
follow even the barest framework of the constitution and the protections this country 
was established under.
A sorry day indeed.  I would say we might have a prayer of it being overturned in the 
Supreme Court, but fat chance there since they are busy stripping away our rights 
every chance they get.



On Thu, 08 June 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>
> ..............................................................
>
> From the New Paradigms Project [Not Necessarily Endorsed]:
>
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Senate approves police searches and seizures without warrants
> Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 5:15 AM
>
> http://www.ashevilletribune.com/nowarrants.htm
>
> Senate approves police searches and seizures without warrants
> Compiled by Dana Davis
>
> The United States Congress is on the verge of passing a Republican sponsored
> bill that would eradicate the Fourth Amendment of the United States
> Constitution. Article IV of the Bill of Rights states, "The right of the
> people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
> unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants
> shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and
> particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things
> to be seized." In addition, the bill extends its authority to impede upon the
> First Amendment Right of "Freedom of Speech."
>
> The Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act, "To provide for the punishment of
> methamphetamine laboratory operators, provide additional resources to combat
> methamphetamine production, trafficking, and abuse in the United States, and
> for other purposes," has already passed through the Senate and was being
> deliberated by the House of Representatives as of press time.
>
> In effect, what the provision does is empower the Federal Government, State
> Government and local law enforcement agencies, to enter private property –
> homes, businesses, automobiles, etc. - for any "criminal searches" without a
> warrant and without any legal obligation to inform the private property owner
> that a search and seizure was conducted until months later, if at all. If the
> bill becomes law, then it would grant the Federal Government power to obtain
> "intangible" evidence -- hard-drive data, photographs or copies made of any
> documents or family or personal belongings, diaries, etc. – without ever
> having to inform the owner that their property was searched. If physical
> evidence was taken then the government could wait up to 90 days later, before
> having to notify the owner that a secret search of their property ever
> occurred.
>
> David Kopel, director of research for the Independence Institute, a Colorado
> think tank focusing on Constitutional issues, said the bill was aimed
> especially at computer hard drives, which could be copied in an owner’
> absence and examined without the owner’s knowledge.
>
> The Senate’s version of the bill (S. 486) was sponsored by Senator John
> Ashcroft (R-Missouri). The House Bill (H.R. 2987) was sponsored by U.S.
> Representative Chris Cannon (R-Utah).
>
> It’s primary initiative is to increase criminal penalties for the sale,
> production and distribution of methamphetamines, appropriate funds to crack
> down on "meth labs" where the drug is processed, and fund methamphetamine
> treatment programs. However, tucked away deep inside the legal jargon of the
> bill are two provisions which go far beyond the realm of methamphetamine
> anti-proliferation or even the war on drugs. One measure pertains to police
> search and seizure, while the other attempts to dictate Internet
> communication.
>
> Under present law, a property owner must be notified immediately of any
> possession seized in a criminal search, but the "Notice and Clarification"
> section of the methamphetamine bill (S. section 301, H.R. section 6) amends
> U.S. Code by stating, "Section 3103a of title 18, United States Code, is
> amended by adding at the end the following new sentence: `With respect to any
> issuance under this section or any other provision of law (including section
> 3117 and any rule), any notice required, or that may be required, to be given
> may be delayed pursuant to the standards, terms, and conditions set forth in
> section 2705, unless otherwise expressly provided by statute.'
>
> A source within the Senate Judiciary committee, speaking on condition of
> anonymity, admitted that the language in the search and seizure provision
> "slipped by everybody" in the Senate. "(Hatch and the Justice Department)
> buried it deep in the bill, and nobody noticed until the thing had already
> passed."
>
> "The Secret Searches measure is so outrageous that it would have no chance of
> being enacted as a bill on its own, when subjected to public scrutiny and
> debate," Kopel asserted. "So instead, the DOJ has nestled the Secret Search
> item deep inside a long bill dealing with methamphetamines."
>
> Jeanne Lapatto, spokesperson for the Senate Judiciary Committee and its
> chairman, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), said she was unaware of the specific
> provisions in question, but defended the goals of the bill. "This is a
> bipartisan bill," Lapatto said. "During hearings, no one had any problems
> with the overall goal of the bill, which is curbing the horrible problem of
> methamphetamines."
>
> Another approach the bill takes to "curbing" methamphetamine usage is by
> making it a crime to create a hypertext link on the Internet to any site that
> "directly or indirectly advertises" drug paraphernalia, or distributes
> information about the processing or purchase of drugs (S. section 203, H.R.
> section 3). Under the provisions of the act, an Internet service provider,
> who is notified by a district attorney or representative of the Drug
> Enforcement Agency, that one of their hosted sites is in violation, would be
> required to remove the site within 48 hours or face federal criminal
> penalties.
>
> On top of that, another provision of the bill would make it punishable by up
> to ten years in prison, "To teach or demonstrate… or to distribute by any
> means of information pertaining to, in whole or in part, the manufacture of a
> controlled substance."
>
> U.S. Representative Bob Barr (R-Georgia), member of the House Judiciary
> Committee, is leading the fight against this bill in the House. Barr asserts
> that the search and seizure provisions of the bill, "Have nothing to do with
> methamphetamines," and he believes that had the search and seizure provision
> been introduced as a separate bill, its chances for passage, "Would be very,
> very problematic."
>
> "These are not minor changes," Barr added. "These are substantive and
> far-reaching changes to the criminal law on search and seizure. It’s
> unconscionable that someone would try to sneak these provisions into an
> unrelated bill."
>
> A spokesperson for the Justice Department, which supports the provisions,
> declined to comment directly, but did release a recent letter from Assistant
> Attorney General Robert Ruben to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry
> Hyde (R-Illinois).
>
> In his letter, Ruben praised the bill for providing, "Important and necessary
> tools for deterring the spread of methamphetamine manufacturing and abuse in
> our nation."
>
> Speaking on behalf of House sponsor, Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah), legislative
> director Chris MacKay said the no-notice provision was necessary for, "Police
> to perform their job effectively."
>
> According to MacKay, the provision was designed to allow police to search
> with minimum risk to their safety and without suspects destroying evidence
> before they arrive, adding, "Anything we can do to win the war on drugs is
> worth doing."
>
>
> Forwarded for info and discussion from the New Paradigms Discussion List,
> not necessarily endorsed by:
> ***********************************
>
> Lloyd Miller, Research Director for A-albionic Research a ruling
> class/conspiracy research resource for the entire political-ideological
> spectrum. **FREE RARE BOOK SEARCH: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> **
>    Explore Our Archive:  <http://a-albionic.com/a-albionic.html>
>
> <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
> ==========
> CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
> screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
> sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths,
> misdirections
> and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and
> minor
> effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said,
> CTRL
> gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
> be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
> nazi's need not apply.
>
> Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
> ========================================================================
> Archives Available at:
> http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
> <A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
>
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
>  <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
> ========================================================================
> To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Om

"Welcome to the desert of the real."  Morpheus, in The Matrix

"My God it's full of stars!"  Dave Bowman, in 2001: A Space
Odyssey
_______________________________________________________________________

Why pay when you don't have to? Get AltaVista Free Internet Access now!
http://jump.altavista.com/freeaccess4.go

_______________________________________________________________________

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths,
misdirections
and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and
minor
effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said,
CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
<A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to