Police Work and the Constitution: A Delicate Balance

By Rich Kozlovich 

On March 21, 2021 Bob Unruh posted this article,  Sheriff sued for program that 'harasses' people who haven't committed crimes, saying: 

Deputy confirms intent is to 'make their lives miserable'

As examples of abuse he then uses the Tom Cruise movie, 'Minority Report' about arresting 'future criminals', although they hadn't yet committed a crime, and, "2001: A Space Odyssey," it was HAL, the "Heuristically Programmed Algorithmic" computer", who is ever present, ever watching, and as it turns out, ever scheming.  

 

The article shows the police got carried away with themselves, in effect being judge, jury and executioner.  Harassing people and executing searches without warrants, and generally ignoring the law they're supposed to enforce.  That's not the system we live in, and clearly something needed to be done, so they sued.

 I have to say I really have mixed emotions over this.  On the surface I can easily say I really don't like this kind of thing, and I think most will feel the same, if for no other reason so much of what they did was blatantly illegal.  

But what happens when someone moves into the neighborhood who is disruptive, troublesome, and potentially involved in drugs or other criminal activity that no one can prove?  What then?   

I know of such a case.  A biker, not a gang member, moved into a house in a quiet suburban community, and over night his biker friends were riding up and down the street on their very noisy bikes.  Instead of "walking turf", it seemed like they were "riding turf".  Back and forth, stop sign to stop sign, going nowhere, but making it clear the street was owned by them and they were going to do what they wanted to do whether anyone liked all that noise or not.  And the people living there didn't like it, and after the first week they started calling the police.  

As it turns out the owner of the house had some history with police, and rumor had it that he was involved with drugs, and it wasn't unusual for a police car to be sitting a few houses down from the owner's house just watching.  After about five years the owner ended up in jail, the house went up for sale, and the community was grateful for the attention paid to this situation by the police.  

Let's face it, more often than not the police know who the problem people are in a community.  More often than not they're deliberately paying attention to them, their friends, and what they're all doing.  More often than not these people need to be watched.  And, more often than not they'll be caught committing some crime or other.  It is unfortunate when that attention goes awry as in the case presented in this article, but let's not kid ourselves; there are people the police need to watch because they're doing things that need watching.  

How far should the police go in these kinds of cases?  I don't want to get carried away restricting the police, and I don't want the police to turn into a Gestapo, so what's the solution?  

Watching the police is the job of the rest of us. And every once in a while the police, the government bureaucrats and the elected officials, must be reminded, on a regular basis, they work for us, not the other way around, and they derive their authority from the citizenry, and that authority can be revoked.

The balance between effective law enforcement and the Constitution is a delicate one, and it's gone back and forth over the years, but community involvement makes sure that balance doesn't shift too far either way.  It will never be perfect, but once it becomes established the community is concerned, paying attention, and prepared to deal with any imbalance, a balance ensues we can live with.