From: Paul Schauble <pls@crl.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 01:21:15 PDT
To: GERSTEIN@SCSUD.CTSTATEU.EDU
Subject: Re: Warrentlesss SEarches
In-Reply-To: <940424200411.2022b905@SCSUD.CTSTATEU.EDU>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9404250123.A5886-0100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Sun, 24 Apr 1994 GERSTEIN@SCSUD.CTSTATEU.EDU wrote:

> -<Allright, I don't want to say it again, but I have to. I am not for these 
> searches, I only said that they seem like the right thing for the CHA police to 
> do considering their circumstances. Last time I checked, this country was a 
> democracy. 
> The guy who started the searches had to get permission from 
the 
> people living in the apartment to start the searches. If most of the people in 
> the building thought it was a good idea, then the majority can't be wrong, 
> right? 
> I know the Bill of Rights also, and I'm not saying they should abandon it. But 
> until they can come up with something to deal with these gangs, I think that 
> the searches are appropriate.
> 
> 
> Adam Gerstein
> 

So if a majority of your neighbors voted to have you executed and your 
property divided among them, then that would be OK by you, yes?  After 
all, you say that "the majority can't be wrong".

The problem here, as illustrated by the quote from 'A Man for All 
Seasons' is that rights must be maintained and enforced *especially* when 
it is difficult to do so. If the government is allowed to violate rights 
"because they have no other option", then such violation becomes routine, 
and soon no right exists. It's rather like being pregnant.