Tackling crime
Unwarranted search steals citizen rights; grants must be monitored

The Republicans have taken another step in their efforts to reverse many of the policies imposed by a two-year Democratic rule. The GOP is trying to destroy Clinton's crime bill by changing his directive for the hiring of 100,000 police officers nationwide and severely altering the search and seizure laws.

In choosing block grants instead of 100,000 additional police officers, the Republicans believe different communities have different crime problems and know best how to use federal crime bill money.

The Republicans must be commended for trying to let communities do as they please with the money they receive from the federal government, but there must be some restrictions on what the communities can spend the money on.

The money was allotted for crime prevention and that is where it should go. If given to individual communities, local officials may spend the money on pork projects such as water fountains or less urgent programs such as highway repair.

The money allotted was included in the crime bill. This would imply that the money be used to prevent criminal activities. A solution to the problem would be to give the money to the communities, but force them to spend it on crime prevention.

There are many ways the individual communities can spend this money if they do not feel they need additional police officers. Programs such as midnight basketball are one way the money could be used. The communities could also spend the money on new police vehicles or other crime-prevention equipment.

Although the changes in the distribution of money may be favorable, the changes in the search and seizure laws will be detrimental for the country and must not be implemented.

Lawmakers say that criminals escape punishment because of evidence technicalities but those cases only make one-half of 1 percent of the criminal cases in the United States. It is not reasonable to eliminate or even curb individuals' civil liberties to prevent that small number of cases.

Our forefathers said that they would rather see 10 guilty men go free before they saw one innocent incarcerated. The search and seizure change in the rules goes against that principle.

If this mood continues -- what will be next? Police officers bashing in doors and searching private buildings without warrants? In Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., there are cases of police cordoning off entire city blocks of public housing and conducting investigative "sweeps" -- public relations stunts to prove the police forces are tough on crime.

Private property rights are an essential part of the survival of a capitalistic society. To ensure the sanctity of private property rights, search and seizure rules must remain unchanged.

Congress has the right idea about allowing individual communities to make up their own minds about spending but they must place some limits on how the money is to be spent. However, their ideas about the search and seizure laws are misguided and unprogressive.