Free Congress Foundation's Notable News Now Excerpts from FCF Programming and Other FCF Projects May 14, 2001 Inside Stories Paul Weyrich's "Endangered Liberties" Commentary: U.N. Trying to Confiscate U.S. Gun Rights The Free Congress Commentary Who, What, When, Where? What Has Happened to Our Privacy? by Lisa S. Dean >From the "Endangered Liberties" Television Program It seems that everywhere you go these days, you can't escape the cameras. It's as if the lives of every American citizen has become his own "Truman Show". Depending on where you live, the cameras snap a picture of you crossing the street, sitting at an intersection or driving along a highway. But is anyone watching? In September of last year, 48,000 motorists traveling along a Maryland interstate received letters from the Maryland Mass Transit Administration which read as follows: "Your vehicle was seen traveling on southbound I-95 near I-195 on Wednesday, Sept. 27. Please provide the following information: Where were you going? Who was with you? What was the purpose of your trip?" The 48,000 drivers who received the letter were not accused of any crime. The state was merely asking the questions for "information purposes" taking advantage of the new surveillance technology along the Maryland highways to conduct traffic surveys. Some have questioned the constitutionality of these systems, whether they are cameras that issue tickets or monitoring by transit administrations of motorists on highways. One of those questioning is House Majority Leader Dick Armey, who, this week, sent a strong letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton which read, "I am concerned that this may be seen as a step toward a Big Brother surveillance state, where the government monitors the comings and goings of its citizens" and urged Norton to review these systems and "take the steps needed to protect the privacy of the millions of Americans who use" them. Specifically, Armey shares the concerns of many Virginia residents who have to endure the National Park Service's traffic cameras that are situated along the George Washington Memorial Parkway, a route that many commuters as well as tourists take every day. Because the speed limit along the Parkway is much lower than the normal traffic speed, the issuance of tickets through these cameras would make an effective revenue-generating source and this of course is what the National Park Service is counting on. With the typical boldness of a federal agency, the National Park Service has established these cameras through a federal regulation, in complete disregard for the authority of the state governor, who opposes such law enforcement measures as well as without Congressional approval. In a letter to Majority Leader Armey last year, Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore stated "While there is clearly the necessity to assure public safety through effective enforcement of traffic laws, the use of cameras, operating without human judgment reduces our system of justice to trial by machinery without the presumption of innocence." And that statement is the heart of the matter. Law enforcement, in using technology to aid in enforcing the letter of the law, is changing the spirit behind those laws by not taking in to account that it's the job of police officers to issue citations to people and cameras only issue citations to objects, such as automobiles. Receiving a ticket in the mail from the county or the state with the accusation of a traffic violation, with a photograph enclosed of your vehicle's license plate, is certainly not enough evidence to prove that you're guilty of the crime for which you're being accused. In fact, by issuing tickets in this manner, the state is actually making the assumption that you were the driver of the vehicle. There's a problem in doing so. Traditional US law makes no assumptions. If it did, our court system would look radically different and the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" would mean nothing. Both Governor Gilmore and Majority Leader Armey should be applauded for taking issue with the constitutionality of law enforcement's methods and their impact on the privacy of American citizens. While the possibilities of using technology to catch criminals are endless, it is critical for law enforcement, at all levels, to use it responsibility, and that means within constitutional bounds. Lisa Dean is Vice President for Technology Policy at the Free Congress Foundation. For media inquiries, contact Notra Trulock 202.546.3000 / [EMAIL PROTECTED] For other questions or comments, contact Angie Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] U.N. Trying to Confiscate U.S. Gun Rights by Paul M. Weyrich >From the "Endangered Liberties" Television Program One of the reasons I always thought the various proposals to move the United Nations headquarters out of the United States had merit has to do with the sorts of meetings which this outfit hosts on a regular basis. Come this July, every opponent of guns in the world, legitimate or illegitimate, will be descending on New York for a conference sponsored by the UN, aimed at pressuring the United States into giving up our Second Amendment to the Constitution. As Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association suggests, the UN lacks any enforcement authority to make that happen. But this conference will be the centerpiece of a global campaign by the media to try to shame the United States into giving up her citizens' right to keep and bear arms. LaPierre is absolutely correct about that. If you have seen any coverage of the subject you no doubt have seen glowing reports about how guns have been outlawed in English speaking countries such as Great Britain, Australia and Canada. The media compares gun deaths in those nations with gun deaths in this country and, of course, they look great by comparison. What the media doesn't tell you is that deaths by other means have skyrocketed in these English speaking nations. Moreover, crime in general, while down in the United States significantly, is now up in the same proportions in those nations. Much of the reduction in crime in this country can be attributed to concealed carry laws. With concealed carry, potential felons do not know who is and is not licensed to carry a gun in Virginia. In states without concealed carry laws, there has not been a comparable reduction in crime. In any case, what our citizens, our legislators do about guns is our business. We do not need people with no morality, who claim to be acting in the name of morality, telling this nation what to do. Citizens need to talk about this conference now. We need to alert talk show hosts and other forums about what is coming. We need to be prepared to counter what is going to be an unprecedented campaign against guns. I don't own a gun. I've never wanted one. But I don't want the UN telling me or members of my family I can't have one. That is not their business. That is our business. The United Nations needs to be told once and for all to mind their own. Paul Weyrich is president of the Free Congress Foundation <http://www.freecongress.org/>. For media inquiries, contact Notra Trulock 202.546.3000 / [EMAIL PROTECTED] For other questions or comments, contact Angie Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit our website at http://www.freecongress.org This publication is a service of the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation, Inc. (FCF) and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Free Congress Foundation nor is it an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill. Free Congress Foundation * 717 Second Street, NE * Washington, DC 20002 * 202.546.3000 * Fax: 202.544.2819 Project Manager: Angela Wheeler * Copyright * 2001 Free Congress Foundation - All Rights Reserved.
