cannabisnews.com: Drug Dog Gets Booted from BART





Drug Dog Gets Booted from BART
Posted by FoM on January 12, 2002 at 07:12:55 PT
By Kristi Belcamino
Source: Contra Costa Times
BART has scrapped plans to use a drug-sniffing dog on its trains after a three-day narcotics sweep drew criticism from some Bay Area residents.Officials initially touted the December sweep, which resulted in 13 citations and one arrest, as the first of ongoing efforts to gauge the extent of drug trafficking on BART trains. They said it would help determine whether more sweeps were needed and even whether BART should obtain its own narcotics-detecting dog.
Now, Thomas E. Margro, BART's general manager, has said there are no plans to use the dog again. The sweep was only a one-time activity, really a demonstration to build relations between BART and U.S. Customs, he said.The effort drew mixed reviews."Some feel real strongly it is worthwhile, while others see it as going too far," said BART Director Joel Keller. "It's a balancing act. To the best of my understanding it wasn't an ongoing thing."The sweep was a joint operation between BART police and the U.S. Customs Service. The two agencies have been working together, preparing for a closer relationship once a BART extension to the international terminal of the San Francisco airport is completed later this year, said BART spokesman Mike Healy.Mattie, a small black Labrador retriever, was brought on board Bay Area trains in mid-December. Unlike aggressive narcotics dogs who tear open suitcases, Mattie was trained to walk through the trains wagging her tail and sniffing for drugs. When she scented them, she would sit down in front of the person, said BART police Cmdr. Wade Gomes.During a three-day period, officers cited 13 people on possession of narcotics. A Concord man was handcuffed and held on suspicion of possession of marijuana for sale. Police say the 37-year-old had 13 plastic baggies filled with marijuana stuffed in his pockets.The sweep angered many.One Moraga resident called the sweep a gross infringement of constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure.While Joseph Tieger, a former civil rights attorney, was "delighted" the program was discontinued, he said the people cited and arrested deserved an apology.He questioned whether the exercise was a "trial balloon" by the federal government to see what people would put up with."People should look at what this would open the door to if it were allowed to continue," Tieger said. "Which is why we fought the Revolutionary War. As Americans we have the right to walk down the street without having government, especially using dogs or high-technology sensors, be able to sniff our underpants."Others thought the search was a good idea.Although it was a first for BART, many of the nation's largest transit police departments have narcotics detection dogs patrolling trains, including those in Georgia, New York and Pennsylvania.Detective Gary Padgett of the Metro Transit Police in Washington, D.C., said his agency has a dozen dogs, including ones that sniff for drugs and bombs.Protests against the dog in the Bay Area baffled him. "It's not unreasonable search and seizure because anywhere you as a police officer can be legally, so can the dog. The dog is just a tool that the officer uses," he said.In addition, officers with drug-sniffing dogs usually ask for the person's consent to search them after a dog "hits" on the person, he said. If the person refuses, he or she can be detained until a warrant is obtained, he said.Regardless of how people feel about the dog or why the program was scrapped, officials say they will give it serious thought before Mattie boards a train again."Because of the mixed reviews, I don't think it's anything we're going to jump into with both feet right away," Keller said.Note: Transit officials scrap plans to use the canine on trains after criticism of a three-day narcotics sweep in December. Source: Contra Costa Times (CA)Author: Kristi BelcaminoPublished: Saturday, January 12, 2002 Copyright: 2002 Contra Costa Newspapers Inc.Website: http://www.contracostatimes.com/Contact: http://contracostatimes.com/contact_us/letters.htmRelated Articles:BART Must Constrain Drug-Sniffing Dogs http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11614.shtmlDrug Raids On BART Anger Civil Libertarianshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11602.shtmlDrug-Sniffing Dog Prowling BART Cars http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11573.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #6 posted by Dankhank on January 14, 2002 at 11:55:10 PT:
Evil knows no bounds ....
Try this next time you have an opportunity to talk to a PIG.Ask him why he doesn't have a sobriety check outside of EVERY BAR IN THE COUNTRY?????????????????????Seems to me that if we were serious about stopping drinking and driving that would be a good start, EH????????????How 'bout this question?  If drinking and driving is illegal and has been for a long time ... WHY DO WE ALLOW PARKING LOTS AT BARS???????????????Arguments against sobriety checks a quarter mile down the road from a bar seem to revolve around something like "It is entrapment," or some such drek ....Let me see if I understand this ... if cops go to where the crime is to be committed it is entrapment?If the pigs won't set up a sobriety check on the road by a bar, then how do they justify the dog sniffing random BART passengers?The evil nature of the bastards knows no bounds ....
Hemp n Stuff
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by isobar2000 on January 12, 2002 at 15:44:04 PT
"UNREASONABLE?"   I THINK SO!
"It's not unreasonable search and seizure because anywhere you as a police officer can be legally, so can the dog. The dog is just a tool that the officer uses," he said.In addition, officers with drug-sniffing dogs usually ask for the person's consent to search them after a dog "hits" on the person, he said. If the person refuses, he or she can be detained until a warrant is obtained, he said.Look at these two paragraphs. What is wrong with this? The dog in my opinion is searching everyone and everything around it. The police officer cannot just stop you and have you open yourself physically to him for just being in the same area. But that is what the dog is doing via his keen since of smell. There is no other reason for having a drug sniffing dog, but for to sniff out drugs. How stupid do they think we are? As for the second paragraph you might as well consent, because you will be searched anyway. You have no rights according to this statement. If you choose not to give in to them they will hold until a warrant is obtained. This shows that you do not really have any rights to your personal freedom. We might as well be living in a Nazi type government. "UNREASONABLE?"   I THINK SO!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by E_Johnson on January 12, 2002 at 13:07:18 PT
This is really bad
Detective Gary Padgett of the Metro Transit Police in Washington, D.C., said his agency has a dozen dogs, including ones that sniff for drugs and bombs.Protests against the dog in the Bay Area baffled him. Exactly how do these individuals whom we hire to protect us come to believe that it is their job to rule over us?Are we sending them mixed messages of some kind? Aren't they taught the meaning of the phrase "public service" when they are hired into their hired positions?Service -> servant -> not the boss
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by Jose Melendez on January 12, 2002 at 12:26:35 PT:
good cops
Australia: Police Slam Idea Of Random Sniffer-Dog Checks For
URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v02/n044/a08.html
Pubdate: Fri, 11 Jan 2002
Source: Age, The (Australia)
Copyright: 2002 The Age Company Ltd
Contact: letters theage.fairfax.com.au
Website: http://www.theage.com.au/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/5POLICE SLAM IDEA OF RANDOM SNIFFER-DOG CHECKS FOR DRUGSBRISBANE -- The state government's announcement it was considering using sniffer dogs for random drug checks was a meaningless publicity stunt, the Queensland Police Union said today.Police Minister Tony McGrady yesterday said he was monitoring a NSW trial that used sniffer dogs to randomly search people at hotels, dance parties and on public transport.But union president Gary Wilkinson said the initiative would have "very little effect on drug dealers" and would do nothing to capture the drug world's Mr Bigs."If the Beattie government is serious about the war on drugs they would be announcing measures to catch the drug importers and manufacturers," Mr Wilkinson said in a statement."We've been calling on the Beattie government to give police telephone interception powers for six months now."The war on drugs requires a comprehensive approach to reduce the amount of drugs available on our streets," he said. 
Free Cannabis
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by E_Johnson on January 12, 2002 at 07:46:19 PT
And Lenin never really knew Trotsky either!!
Now, Thomas E. Margro, BART's general manager, has said there are no plans to use the dog again. The sweep was only a one-time activity, really a demonstration to build relations between BART and U.S. Customs, he said.It's so nice to start the morning with a good hearty belly laugh!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Sam Adams on January 12, 2002 at 07:29:30 PT
Nice!
The cannabis community pushed back against this frontal assault and won! 
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment