Letter to an Editor: Drug War Erodes Constitutional Rights
Editor:
“Drug dealers should have no rights or no mercy. They should not have their freedom, any civil rights, any assets or any sympathy.”
So says Dr. Richter. It is truly frightening that we have come to the point where a significant proportion of our citizenry is apparently willing to sacrifice every basic constitutional principle on the alter of the drug war. What happened to due process of law? To innocent until proven guilty? To equal treatment under the law and a fair trial?
It is easy to condemn drug dealing in the abstract - but what happens when your sister faces the forfeiture of the $250,000 home she was renting to her son, and he faces a twenty-five year prison sentence for selling $200.00 worth of marajuana to an undercover cop? Does the punishment fit the crime? Is it proportional to the damage done society by the act?
What happens when your daughter declares she’s innocent, and prepares to fight it out in court - minus the $25,000 SUV she was driving when arrested? Or, more likely, the $2,500 Ford Escort that is her only asset of substance that she used to get to and from work?
Asset forfeiture is a perversion of justice - it is “guilty until proven innocent”, and just one more example of how the “war on some drugs” has corrupted our criminal justice system and eroded our basic constitutional rights. Kudos to the Palm Springs City Council for at least raising the question of whether continuing to participate in this process is in the best interests of the citizens they represent.
Regards,
Thomas Leavitt
***************
Greens & Friends,
Lanny is putting up a gallant battle on behalf of those who can use
medical marijuana. Also, Lanny wrote a resolution for our Green Party of
California to endorse. I forwarded it to a person who can present it to the
plenary next month.
Chuck
—– Original Message —–
From: Lanny Swerdlow
To: mappnow@hotmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 6:59 PM
Subject: LTE response
On Dec. 14, the Desert Sun published a letter denouncing the Palm Springs
City Council’s action’s in referring the issue of asset forfeiture and
continued participation in the Inland Crackdown Allied Task Force to the
Police Advisory Board. I have written a response and would appreciate your
response to it. Below I have printed the letter that was published on Dec.
14 and my response follows.
Thanks,
Lanny
Focus Letter: City Council did drug dealers a favor
December 14th, 2002 It was a real disappointment to read that the Palm
Springs City Council has put off keeping the Palm Springs Police Department
solidly in the state interagency narcotics task force. Such a task force is
the most effective means of combating these scum drug deals which ruin
peoplesā?T lives with their poisons. It is unthinkable not to have our
police active in the task force.
A task force covers a wide geographical area and brings resources together.
Drug dealers do not have a problem with geographical limitations or funding
to buy technology, weapons or sympathizers.
It is totally inappropriate to refer the matter of drug enforcement and, in
particular, the use of asset seizures for debate at the Human Relations
Commission or to the Police Advisory Committee. These city-appointed bodies
should not be in the business of debating whether or not they like a law.
Asset seizures are the will of the citizenry, enacted into law by the
Legislature and confirmed by the courts. Drug dealers should have no rights
or no mercy. They should not have their freedom, any civil rights, any
assets or any sympathy. Taking the assets of dealers or anyone associated
with them is one way of stripping them of resources.
The loud voices of a small group of people who do not like the rule of law
got the ear of the Palm Springs City Council, and so they again put off
affirming the affiliation of our Police Department with the State Narcotics
Task Force. Shame on the council folks for not seeing to the heart of this
issue. The druggies have unwitting supporters among us.
Dr. Henry Richter
Palm Springs
MY RESPONSE
To the Editor:
Not one to trust citizen involvement in government, Henry Richter’s 12/14
letter belittles the Palm Spring City Council’s decision to seek additional
information on the Inland Crackdown Allied Task Force claiming “It is
totally inappropriate to refer the matter of drug enforcement and, in
particular, asset seizures for debate at the Human Relations Commission or
to the Police Advisory Committee.”
Hearing the drug warriors’ bell, Richter’s reflexive Pavlovian response runs
to the defense of all laws sought by law enforcement with no regard to their
effectiveness or consequences.
Asset forfeiture is neither fair nor effective. Is Richter aware that the
majority of people whose assets are seized are never convicted of any crime?
Is Richter aware that asset forfeiture distorts police priorities in that
they devote more resources to crimes where they can seize property, sell it
and keep the money then on crimes like murder, rape, burglary and fraud
where there is no financial incentive?
Kudos to the Palm Springs City Council for recognizing the importance of
citizen involvement in the decision-making process and that the use of
police resources should be based on criteria other than what is financially
lucrative.
Lanny Swerdlow
1 Cordova Ct.
Palm Springs CA 92264
760-324-2972
