Editorial:
Image
of
an
Invasion
4/28/00
Adam J. Smith, Associate Director, [email protected] One photo, one image, has, in the space of a week, captured the nation's attention. The picture, of course, is the one of Elian Gonzalez, in a closet in the arms of the man who saved him, face to face with the barrel of an automatic weapon in the hands of an agent of the federal government in full body armor. Whatever one's opinion of the merits of the custody battle, it is an image that shakes the conscience and focuses our attention on the issue of the government's willingness to show and use force against individuals in their homes. That the photo is somewhat unique belies the fact that across the nation, every day, people's homes are violated, their safety and the safety of their children is compromised, and physical and psychic harms are perpetrated by government agents dressed in the same body armor, with the same automatic weapons, in the name of the War on Drugs. The difference, of course, and the victims of such raids, or at least the intended victims, are not so cute, nor is there generally an AP photographer on hand. But the truth is that our societal response to the issues of substance use and abuse has become so militarized, and the rhetoric so reinforcing, that home invasions, including the use of stun grenades, screaming federal agents and powerful weaponry are now routine. Often, there are children present in the home, and often, the inhabitants, those whose homes are stormed, are completely innocent of any wrongdoing. The justification for such raids -- the premise upon which warrants are often obtained -- is often no more substantial than the word of a "confidential informant." Moreover, these informants are often people who are trading a list of names for a reduction in sentence, or for money, or both. Sometimes, agents storm the wrong house, as was the case in Massachusetts several years ago when a 75 year-old retired minister died of a heart attack, handcuffed, face down in a pool of his own vomit. Or in Houston, where 22 year-old Pedro Navarro was shot twelve times in his bedroom. No drugs or weapons were found. William Pitt put into words a sentiment that was once considered one of the underlying principles of our nation's founding when he said: "The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the Crown. It may be frail -- its roof may shake -- the wind may blow through it -- the storm may enter -- the rain may enter -- but the King of England cannot enter -- all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement." That our government now views
the sovereignty of the home as a quaint anachronism should trouble us all.
It should raise serious questions about the loss of freedom occasioned
by the enforcement of prohibition. It should make us consider our
own children, or our children's children, and the threat that the government
now poses to their health and safety. It should give us pause when
yet another politician promises a "real drug war" and a "zero-tolerance"
approach. Because the costs, in this case the violation of the sanctity
of the home, are borne by us all. Not just by the cute little Cuban
boy with the photographer in his bedroom and the gun in his face.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
