|
|
 |
Essay on Bill Of Rights
| Date: |
06-28-00 8:28pm |
| Subject: |
Politics |
| Word Count: |
3934 |
| Page Count: |
15.74 |
Bill of Rights
How many rights do you have? You should check, because it
might not be as many today as it was a few years ago, or even a
few months ago. Some people I talk to are not concerned that
police will execute a search warrant without knocking or that
they set up roadblocks and stop and interrogate innocent
citizens. They do not regard these as great infringements on
their rights. But when you put current events together, there is
information that may be surprising to people who have not yet
been concerned: The amount of the Bill of Rights that is under
attack is alarming.
Let's take a look at the Bill of Rights and see which
aspects are being pushed on or threatened. The point here is not
the degree of each attack or its rightness or wrongness, but the
sheer number of rights that are under attack.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the
people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for
a redress of grievances.
ESTABLISHING RELIGION: While campaigning for his first term,
George Bush said "I don't know that atheists should be considered
as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots." Bush has
not retracted, commented on, or clarified this statement, in
spite of requests to do so. According to Bush, this is one nation
under God. And apparently if you are not within Bush's religious
beliefs, you are not a citizen. Federal, state, and local
governments also promote a particular religion (or, occasionally,
religions) by spending public money on religious displays.
FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION: Robert Newmeyer and Glenn Braunstein
were jailed in 1988 for refusing to stand in respect for a judge.
Braunstein says the tradition of rising in court started decades
ago when judges entered carrying Bibles. Since judges no longer
carry Bibles, Braunstein says there is no reason to stand -- and
his Bible tells him to honor no other God. For this religious
practice, Newmeyer and Braunstein were jailed and are now suing.
FREE SPEECH: We find that technology has given the government an
excuse to interfere with free speech. Claiming that radio
frequencies are a limited resource, the government tells
broadcasters what to say (such as news and public and local
service programming) and what not to say (obscenity, as defined
by the Federal Communications Commission [FCC]). The FCC is
investigating Boston PBS station WGBH-TV for broadcasting
photographs from the Mapplethorpe exhibit.
FREE SPEECH: There are also laws to limit political statements
and contributions to political activities. In 1985, the Michigan
Chamber of Commerce wanted to take out an advertisement
supporting a candidate in the state house of representatives. But
a 1976 Michigan law prohibits a corporation from using its
general treasury funds to make independent expenditures in a
political campaign. In March, the Supreme Court upheld that
law. According to dissenting Justice Kennedy, it is now a felony
in Michigan for the Sierra Club, the American Civil Liberties
Union, or the Chamber of Commerce to advise the public how a
candidate voted on issues of urgent concern to their members.
FREE PRESS: As in speech, technology has provided another excuse
for government intrusion in the press. If you distribute a
magazine electronically and do not print copies, the government
doesn't consider you a press and does not give you the same
protections courts have extended to printed news. The equipment
used to publish Phrack, a worldwide electronic magazine about
phones and hacking, was confiscated after publishing a document
copied from a Bell South computer entitled "A Bell South Standard
Practice (BSP) 660-225-104SV Control Office Administration of
Enhanced 911 Services for Special Services and Major Account
Centers, March, 1988." All of the information in this
document was publicly available from Bell South in other
documents. The government has not alleged that the publisher of
Phrack, Craig Neidorf, was involved with or participated in the
copying of the document. Also, the person who copied this
document from telephone company computers placed a copy on a
bulletin board run by Rich Andrews. Andrews forwarded a copy to
AT&T officials and cooperated with authorities fully. In return,
the Secret Service (SS) confiscated Andrews' computer along with
all the mail and data that were on it. Andrews was not charged
with any crime.
FREE PRESS: In another incident that would be comical if it were
not true, on March 1 the SS ransacked the offices of Steve
Jackson Games (SJG); irreparably damaged property; and
confiscated three computers, two laser printers, several hard
disks, and many boxes of paper and floppy disks. The target of
the SS operation was to seize all copies of a game of
fiction called GURPS Cyberpunk. The Cyberpunk game contains
fictitious break-ins in a futuristic world, with no technical
information of actual use with real computers, nor is it
played on computers. The SS never filed any charges against SJG
but still refused to return confiscated property.
PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY: The right to assemble peaceably is no longer
free -- you have to get a permit. Even that is not enough; some
officials have to be sued before they realize their reasons for
denying a permit are not Constitutional.
PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY: In Alexandria, Virginia, there is a law that
prohibits people from loitering for more than seven minutes and
exchanging small objects. Punishment is two years in jail.
Consider the scene in jail: "What'd you do?" "I was waiting at a
bus stop and gave a guy a cigarette." This is not an impossible
occurrence: In Pittsburgh, Eugene Tyler, 15, has been ordered
away from bus stops by police officers. Sherman Jones, also 15,
was accosted with a police officer's hands around his neck after
putting the last bit of pizza crust into his mouth. The police
suspected him of hiding drugs.
PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES: Rounding out the attacks on
the first amendment, there is a sword hanging over the right to
petition for redress of grievances. House Resolution 4079, the
National Drug and Crime Emergency Act, tries to "modify" the
right to habeas corpus. It sets time limits on the right of
people in custody to petition for redress and also limits the
courts in which such an appeal may be heard.
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall
not be infringed.
RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS: This amendment is so commonly challenged that
the movement has its own name: gun control. Legislation banning
various types of weapons is supported with the claim that the
weapons are not for "legitimate" sporting purposes. This is a
perversion of the right to bear arms for two reasons. First, the
basis of freedom is not that permission to do legitimate things
is granted to the people, but rather that the government is
empowered to do a limited number of legitimate things --
everything else people are free to do; they do not need to
justify their choices. Second, should the need for defense arise,
it will not be hordes of deer that the security of a free state
needs to be defended from. Defense would be needed against
humans, whether external invaders or internal oppressors. It is
an unfortunate fact of life that the guns that would be needed to
defend the security of a state are guns to attack people, not
guns for sporting purposes.
Firearms regulations also empower local officials, such as police
chiefs, to grant or deny permits. This results in towns where
only friends of people in the right places are granted permits,
or towns where women are generally denied the right to carry a
weapon for self-defense.
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house,
without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a
manner to be prescribed by law.
QUARTERING SOLDIERS: This amendment is fairly clean so far, but
it is not entirely safe. Recently, 200 troops in camouflage dress
with M-16s and helicopters swept through Kings Ridge National
Forest in Humboldt County, California. In the process of
searching for marijuana plants for four days, soldiers assaulted
people on private land with M-16s and barred them from their own
property. This might not be a direct hit on the third amendment,
but the disregard for private property is uncomfortably close.
Amendment IV
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.
RIGHT TO BE SECURE IN PERSONS, HOUSES, PAPERS AND EFFECTS
AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES: The RICO law is
making a mockery of the right to be secure from seizure. Entire
stores of books or videotapes have been confiscated based upon
the presence of some sexually explicit items. Bars, restaurants,
or houses are taken from the owners because employees or tenants
sold drugs. In Volusia County, Florida, Sheriff Robert Vogel and
his officers stop automobiles for contrived violations. If large
amounts of cash are found, the police confiscate it on the
PRESUMPTION that it is drug money -- even if there is no other
evidence and no charges are filed against the car's occupants.
The victims can get their money back only if they prove the money
was obtained legally. One couple got their money back by proving
it was an insurance settlement. Two other men who tried to get
their two thousand dollars back were denied by the Florida
courts.
RIGHT TO BE SECURE IN PERSONS, HOUSES, PAPERS AND EFFECTS
AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES: A new law goes into
effect in Oklahoma on January 1, 1991. All property, real and
personal, is taxable, and citizens are required to list all their
personal property for tax assessors, including household
furniture, gold and silver plate, musical instruments, watches,
jewelry, and personal, private, or professional libraries. If a
citizen refuses to list their property or is suspected of not
listing something, the law directs the assessor to visit and
enter the premises, getting a search warrant if necessary. Being
required to tell the state everything you own is not being secure
in one's home and effects.
NO WARRANTS SHALL ISSUE, BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, SUPPORTED
BY OATH OR AFFIRMATION:
As a supporting oath or affirmation, reports of anonymous
informants are accepted. This practice has been condoned by the
Supreme Court.
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBING THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED AND PERSONS
OR THINGS TO BE SEIZED: Today's warrants do not particularly
describe the things to be seized -- they list things that might
be present. For example, if police are making a drug raid, they
will list weapons as things to be searched for and seized. This
is done not because the police know of any weapons and can
particularly describe them, but because they allege people with
drugs often have weapons.
Both of the above apply to the warrant the Hudson, New Hampshire,
police used when they broke down Bruce Lavoie's door at 5 a.m.
with guns drawn and shot and killed him. The warrant claimed
information from an anonymous informant, and it said, among other
things, that guns were to be seized. The mention of guns in the
warrant was used as reason to enter with guns drawn. Bruce Lavoie
had no guns. Bruce Lavoie was not secure from unreasonable search
and seizure -- nor is anybody else.
Other infringements on the fourth amendment include roadblocks
and the Boston Police detention of people based on colors they
are wearing (supposedly indicating gang membership). And in
Pittsburgh again, Eugene Tyler was once searched because he was
wearing sweat pants and a plaid shirt -- police told him they
heard many drug dealers at that time were wearing sweat pants and
plaid shirts.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise
infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand
Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in
the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public
danger; nor shall any person be subject to the same offence to be
twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in
any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be
deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without
just compensation.
INDICTMENT OF A GRAND JURY: Kevin Bjornson has been proprietor of
Hydro-Tech for nearly a decade and is a leading authority on
hydroponic technology and cultivation. On October 26, 1989, both
locations of Hydro-Tech were raided by the Drug Enforcement
Administration. National Drug Control Policy Director William
Bennett has declared that some indoor lighting and hydroponic
equipment is purchased by marijuana growers, so retailers and
wholesalers of such equipment are drug profiteers and co-
conspirators. Bjornson was not charged with any crime, nor
subpoenaed, issued a warrant, or arrested. No illegal substances
were found on his premises. Federal officials were unable to
convince grand juries to indict Bjornson. By February, they had
called scores of witnesses and recalled many two or three times,
but none of the grand juries they convened decided there was
reason to criminally prosecute Bjornson. In spite of that, as of
March, his bank accounts were still frozen and none of the
inventories or records had been returned. Grand juries refused to
indict Bjornson, but the government is still penalizing him.
TWICE PUT IN JEOPARDY OF LIFE OR LIMB: Members of the McMartin
family in California have been tried two or three times for child
abuse. Anthony Barnaby was tried for murder (without evidence
linking him to the crime) three times before New Hampshire
let him go.
COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF: Oliver North was
forced to testify against himself. Congress granted him immunity
from having anything he said to them being used as evidence
against him, and then they required him to talk. After he did so,
what he said was used to find other evidence which was used
against him. The courts also play games where you can be required
to testify against yourself if you testify at all.
COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF: In the New York
Central Park assault case, three people were found guilty of
assault. But there was no physical evidence linking them to the
crime; semen did not match any of the defendants. The only
evidence the state had was confessions. To obtain these
confessions, the police questioned a 15-year old without a parent
present -- which is illegal under New York state law. Police
also refused to let the subject's Big Brother, an attorney for
the Federal government, see him during questioning. Police
screamed "You better tell us what we want to hear and
cooperate or you are going to jail," at 14-year-old Antron
McCray, according to Bobby McCray, his father. Antron McCray
"confessed" after his father told him to, so that police
would release him. These people were coerced into bearing witness
against themselves, and those confessions were used to convict
them.
COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF: Your answers to Census
questions are required by law, with a $100 penalty for each
question not answered. But people have been evicted for giving
honest Census answers. According to the General Accounting
Office, one of the most frequent ways city governments use census
information is to detect illegal two-family dwellings. This has
happened in Montgomery County, Maryland; Pullman, Washington; and
Long Island, New York. The August 8, 1989, Wall Street Journal
reports this and other ways Census answers have been used against
the answerers.
COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF: Drug tests are being
required from more and more people, even when there is no
probable cause, no accident, and no suspicion of drug use.
Requiring people to take drug tests compels them to provide
evidence against themselves.
DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF
LAW: This clause is violated on each of the items life, liberty,
and property. Incidents including such violations are described
elsewhere in this article. Here are two more: On March 26, 1987,
in Jeffersontown, Kentucky, Jeffrey Miles was killed by police
officer John Rucker, who was looking for a suspected drug dealer.
Rucker had been sent to the wrong house; Miles was not wanted by
police. He received no due process. In Detroit, $4,834 was seized
from a grocery store after dogs detected traces of cocaine on
three one-dollar bills in a cash register.
PRIVATE PROPERTY TAKEN FOR PUBLIC USE WITHOUT JUST
COMPENSATION: RICO is shredding this aspect of the Bill of
Rights. The money confiscated by Sheriff Vogel goes directly into
Vogel's budget; it is not regulated by the legislature. Federal
and local governments seize and auction boats, buildings, and
other property. Under RICO, the government is seizing property
without due process. The victims are required to prove not only
that they are not guilty of a crime, but that they are entitled
to their property. Otherwise, the government auctions off the
property and keeps the proceeds.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right
to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State
and district wherein the crime shall have been committed,
which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and
to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be
confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory
process for obtaining Witnesses in his favor, and to have the
assistance of counsel for his defence.
THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL: Surprisingly, the right
to a public trial is under attack. When Marion Barry was being
tried, the prosecution attempted to bar Louis Farrakhan and
George Stallings from the gallery. This request was based on an
allegation that they would send silent and "impermissible
messages" to the jurors. The judge initially granted this
request. One might argue that the whole point of a public trial
is to send a message to all the participants: The message is that
the public is watching; the trial had better be fair.
BY AN IMPARTIAL JURY: The government does not even honor the
right to trial by an impartial jury. US District Judge Edward
Rafeedie is investigating improper influence on jurors by US
marshals in the Enrique Camarena case. US marshals apparently
illegally communicated with jurors during deliberations.
OF THE STATE AND DISTRICT WHEREIN THE CRIME SHALL HAVE BEEN
COMMITTED: This is incredible, but Manuel Noriega is being tried
so far away from the place where he is alleged to have committed
crimes that the United States had to invade another country and
overturn a government to get him. Nor is this a unique
occurrence; in a matter separate from the Camarena case, Judge
Rafeedie was asked to dismiss charges against Mexican
gynecologist Dr. Humberto Alvarez Machain on the grounds that the
doctor was illegally abducted from his Guadalajara office in
April and turned over to US authorities.
TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION:
Steve Jackson Games, nearly put out of business by the raid
described previously, has been stonewalled by the SS. "For the
past month or so these guys have been insisting the book
wasn't the target of the raid, but they don't say what the target
was, or why they were critical of the book, or why they won't
give it back," Steve Jackson says. "They have repeatedly denied
we're targets but don't explain why we've been made victims."
Attorneys for SJG tried to find out the basis for the search
warrant that led to the raid on SJG. But the application for that
warrant was sealed by order of the court and remained sealed at
last report, in July. Not only has the SS taken property and
nearly destroyed a publisher, it will not even explain the nature
and cause of the accusations that led to the raid.
TO BE CONFRONTED WITH THE WITNESSES AGAINST HIM: The courts are
beginning to play fast and loose with the right to confront
witnesses. Watch out for anonymous witnesses and videotaped
testimony.
TO HAVE COMPULSORY PROCESS FOR OBTAINING WITNESSES: Ronald
Reagan resisted submitting to subpoena and answering questions
about Irangate, claiming matters of national security and
executive privilege. A judge had to dismiss some charges
against Irangate participants because the government refused to
provide information subpoenaed by the defendants. And one wonders
if the government would go to the same lengths to obtain
witnesses for Manuel Noriega as it did to capture him.
TO HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL: The right to assistance of
counsel took a hit recently. Connecticut Judge Joseph Sylvester
is refusing to assign public defenders to people ACCUSED of drug-
related crimes, including drunk driving.
TO HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL: RICO is also affecting the
right to have the assistance of counsel. The government
confiscates the money of an accused person, which leaves them
unable to hire attorneys. The IRS has served summonses nationwide
to defense attorneys, demanding the names of clients who paid
cash for fees exceeding $10,000.
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall
exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be
preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise
reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to
the rules of common law.
RIGHT OF TRIAL BY JURY IN SUITS AT COMMON LAW: This is a simple
right; so far the government has not felt threatened by it and
has not made attacks on it that I am aware of. This is our only
remaining safe haven in the Bill of Rights.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines
imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
EXCESSIVE BAIL AND FINES: Tallahatchie County in Mississippi
charges ten dollars a day to each person who spends time in the
jail, regardless of the length of stay or the outcome of their
trial. This means innocent people are forced to pay. Marvin
Willis was stuck in jail for 90 days trying to raise $2,500 bail
on an assault charge. But after he made that bail, he was kept
imprisoned because he could not pay the $900 rent Tallahatchie
demanded. Nine former inmates are suing the county for this
practice.
CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS: House Resolution 4079 sticks its
nose in here too: "... a Federal court shall not hold prison or
jail crowding unconstitutional under the eighth amendment except
to the extent that an individual plaintiff inmate proves that the
crowding causes the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment of
that inmate."
CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS: A life sentence for selling a
quarter of a gram of cocaine for $20 -- that is what Ricky Isom
was sentenced to in February in Cobb County, Georgia. It was
Isom's second conviction in two years, and state law imposes a
mandatory sentence. Even the judge pronouncing the sentence
thinks it is cruel; Judge Tom Cauthorn expressed grave
reservations before sentencing Isom and Douglas Rucks
(convicted of selling 3.5 grams of cocaine in a separate but
similar case). Judge Cauthorn called the sentences "Draconian."
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not
be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
OTHER RIGHTS RETAINED BY THE PEOPLE: This amendment is so weak
today that I will ask not what infringements there are on it but
rather what exercise of it exists at all? What law can you appeal
to a court to find you not guilty of violating because the law
denies a right retained by you?
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to
the States respectively, or to the people.
POWERS RESERVED TO THE STATES OR THE PEOPLE: This amendment is
also weak, although it is not so nonexistent as the ninth
amendment. But few states set their own speed limits or drinking
age limits. Today, we mostly think of this country as the --
singular -- United States, rather than a collection of states.
This concentration of power detaches laws from the desires of
people -- and even of states. House Resolution 4079 crops up
again here -- it uses financial incentives to get states to set
specific penalties for certain crimes. Making their own laws
certainly must be considered a right of the states, and this
right is being infringed upon.
Out of ten amendments, nine are under attack, most of them under
multiple attacks of different natures, and some of them under a
barrage. If this much of the Bill of Rights is threatened, how
can you be sure your rights are safe? A right has to be there
when you need it. Like insurance, you cannot afford to wait until
you need it and then set about procuring it or ensuring it is
available. Assurance must be made in advance.
The bottom line here is that your rights are not safe. You do not
know when one of your rights will be violated. A number of rights
protect accused persons, and you may think it is not important to
protect the rights of criminals. But if a right is not there for
people accused of crimes, it will not be there when you need it.
With the Bill of Rights in the sad condition described above,
nobody can be confident they will be able to exercise the rights
to which they are justly entitled. To preserve our rights for
ourselves in the future, we must defend them for everybody today.
Complete List:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
|