I've recently been contacted by a fellow LEO who expressed his disagreement (but also his respect) with my now very public opinion on why I believe enforcing Marijauna laws, as applied to ill persons using it to relieve suffering, is unconstitutional.
I'd like to cover some of his concerns here...... and will quote directly from his e-mail:
While I can certainly respect your position, I don't necessarily agree with the premise. If I were to apply that logic to every effort to appeal laws over the years it would make it virtually impossible to enforce most if not all laws.
My simple response to this is that we are sworn to uphold the NH and US Constitutions. Nowhere in the oath does it mention as interpreted by politically appointed lawyers who wear funny dresses. In fact, throughout history, politically appointed lawyers who wear funny dresses have been quite responsible for screwing over mass amounts of people. They're continuing to do it right now............ this declaration of mine is all about how I am no longer going to be a part of it. I hope more LEO's will think critically and help disarm the power that the people have quietly traded away as their rights are stolen.
Examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment (
In 1944, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion orders, while noting that the provisions that singled out people of Japanese ancestry were a separate issue outside the scope of the proceedings.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford (
........ a decision by the United States Supreme Court that ruled that people of African descent imported into the United States and held as slaves, or their descendants—whether or not they were slaves—were not protected by the Constitution and could never be citizens of the United States.)
Literally, today, the NH Supreme Court, or US Supreme Court, could say right now that it is not unconstitutional for the police to assault black people as a re-interpretation of the document (Constitution) shows -them- that black people are still 3/5'ths of a person. No more 42 USC 1983 for you, minority.
Would that make it Constitutional or right for the for the state to assault black people?
NO.Would their words on paper (court or legislature) ever violate someones constitutional rights if you and I as the tip of the sword said
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!? Simply put: no.
There have been legislative attempts to repeal current DWI laws, mandatory arrest law for RO violations, etc. Am I to understand that because all means of redress were ineffectual that officers should be allowed to disregard the will of the legislature?
With those examples, no. It is my belief that those laws are Constitutional.
Should the "will of the legislature" (two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner) clearly and plainly contrast with the NH Constitution, then their will
should be disregarded. And it is not a question of whether or not officers "should be allowed" ...... we have a sworn duty to.
I happen to believe that my job is to execute the laws passed by the legislative branch of government.
If Jim Crow laws were passed again, and the courts allowed them, would you just do your job and enforce them? I wouldn't.
It would be dangerous if we allowed officers to pick and choose which laws they wished to enforce. One may not feel that sex between and adult and a child (think 20 year old man and 15 year old girl) is wrong and decide not to investigate. Another may not believe in abortion and therefore may not wish to guard an abortion clinic that has been threatened.
Officers pick and choose which laws to enforce EVERY SINGLE DAY. You know it and I know it. If I don't want to stop someone for speeding, I wont. If I do, I will.
Do you know how many laws you disregard enforcing on a daily basis?
184:30-d Use of Milk Containers. – No milk and milk product container shall be used as a receptacle for any substance other than dairy products.
184:30-f Penalty. – Any person who shall violate any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Why on Earth have you not arrested people in Dunkin Donuts for this? In fact, why on Earth have you not arrested kids at your local high school for using milk crates for recycling club?
If it is dangerous to allow officers to choose which laws to enforce, we need to crack down on the use of milk containers ASAP.
It doesn't seem to be good public policy to allow officer to pick and choose which laws they are willing to enforce and which they are not.
Was it good public policy for Rosa Parks to be arrested? You realize that there is a sincere possibility that 40 years from now we will look back on the way we treated people who merely possessed an unapproved plant with the same disdain that we look back on the way black people were treated. How much injustice in the world could have been stopped if the people on the tip of the sword (soliders, police) simply looked back at the people making the unjust/unconstitutional laws and said to them:
NO.I have a significant amount of training relative to internal investigations couple with labor relations training and experience and and it's my opinion that refusing to enforce laws is one area that will get you into a boat load of trouble. I respect your position though and admire your courage for standing up for what you believe in.
You may very well be right............. But I will not violate my oath. Through this rather unfortunate series of circumstances surrounding my suspension, almost termination, and now return to work, I have become much more aware of what my responsibilities are as I sit on the tip of the sword.
I just want more LEO's to be as mutually aware.
And thank you for your kind words. It is very nice to hear from a fellow LEO that although they may not agree with me, they respect that I am trying to stand up for what I believe is right.
