FREE ESSAY ON THE BILL OF RIGHTS

THE BILL OF RIGHTS

"Bill of Rights"
How many rights do you have? You should check, because it might not be as many today as
it was a few years ago, or even a few months ago. Some people I talk to are not concerned
that police will execute a search warrant without knocking or that
they set up roadblocks and stop and interrogate innocent citizens. They do not regard
these as great infringements on their rights. But when you put current events together,
there is information that may be surprising to people whom have not yet been concerned:
The amount of the Bill of Rights that is under attack is alarming.
Let's take a look at the Bill of Rights and see which aspects are being pushed on or
threatened. The point here is not the degree of each attack or its rightness or wrongs,
but the sheer number of rights that are under attack.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right
of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for
a redress of grievances.
ESTABLISHING RELIGION: While campaigning for his first term, George Bush said, I don't
know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered
patriots. Bush has not retracted, commented on, or clarified this statement, in
spite of requests to do so. According to Bush, this is one nation under God. And
apparently if you are not within Bush's religious beliefs, you are not a citizen.
Federal, state, and local governments also promote a particular religion (or,
occasionally, religions) by spending public money on religious displays.
FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION: Robert Newmeyer and Glenn Braunstein were jailed in 1988 for
refusing to stand in respect for a judge. Braunstein says the tradition of rising in
court started decades ago when judges entered carrying Bibles. Since judges no longer
carry Bibles, Braunstein says there is no reason to stand -- and
his Bible tells him to honor no other God. For this religious practice, Newmeyer and
Braunstein were jailed and are now suing. 
FREE SPEECH: We find that technology has given the government an excuse to interfere with
free speech. Claiming that radio frequencies are a limited resource, the government tells
broadcasters what to say (such as news and public and local service programming) and what
not to say (obscenity, as defined by the Federal Communications Commission [FCC]). The
FCC is investigating Boston PBS station WGBH-TV for broadcasting photographs from the
Mapplethorpe exhibit.
FREE SPEECH: There are also laws to limit political statements and contributions to
political activities. In 1985, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce wanted to take out an
advertisement supporting a candidate in the state house of representatives. But a 1976
Michigan law prohibits a corporation from using its general treasury funds to make
independent expenditures in a political campaign. In March, the Supreme Court upheld that
law. According to dissenting Justice Kennedy, it is now a felony in Michigan for the
Sierra Club, the American Civil Liberties Union, or the Chamber of Commerce to advise the
public how a candidate voted on issues of urgent concern to their members.
FREE PRESS: As in speech, technology has provided another excuse for government intrusion
in the press. If you distribute a magazine electronically and do not print copies, the
government doesn't consider you a press and does not give you the same
protections courts have extended to printed news. The equipment used to publish Phrack, a
worldwide electronic magazine about phones and hacking, was confiscated after publishing
a document copied from a Bell South computer entitled A Bell South Standard Practice
(BSP) 660-225-104SV Control Office Administration of
Enhanced 911 Services for Special Services and Major Account Centers, March, 1988. All of
the information in this document was publicly available from Bell South in other
documents. The government has not alleged that the publisher of Phrack, Craig Neidorf,
was involved with or participated in the copying of the document. Also, the person who
copied this document from telephone company computers placed a copy on a bulletin board
run by Rich Andrews. Andrews forwarded a copy to AT&T officials and cooperated with
authorities fully. In return, the Secret Service (SS) confiscated Andrews' computer along
with all the mail and data that were on it. Andrews was not charged with any crime. FREE
PRESS: In another incident that would be comical if it were not true, on March 1 the SS
ransacked the offices of Steve Jackson Games (SJG); irreparably damaged property; and
confiscated three computers, two laser printers, several hard disks, and many boxes of
paper and floppy disks. The target of the SS operation was to seize all copies of a game
of fiction called GURPS Cyberpunk. The Cyberpunk game contains fictitious break-ins in a
futuristic world, with no technical information of actual use with real computers, nor is
it played on computers. The SS never filed any charges against SJG but still refused to
return confiscated property.
PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY: The right to assemble peaceably is no longer free -- you have to get
a permit. Even that are not enough some officials have to be sued before they realize
their reasons for denying a permit are not Constitutional.
PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY: In Alexandria, Virginia, there is a law that prohibits people from
loitering for more than seven minutes and exchanging small objects. Punishment is two
years in jail. Consider the scene in jail: What'd you do? I was waiting at a bus stop and
gave a guy a cigarette. This is not an impossible occurrence: In Pittsburgh, Eugene
Tyler, 15, has been ordered away from bus stops by police officers. Sherman Jones, also
15, was accosted with a police officer's hands around his neck after putting the last bit
of pizza crust into his mouth. The police suspected him of hiding drugs.
PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES: Rounding out the attacks on the first amendment,
there is a sword hanging over the right to petition for redress of grievances. House
Resolution 4079, the National Drug and Crime Emergency Act, tries to modify the right to
habeas corpus. It sets time limits on the right of people in custody to petition for
redress and also limits the courts in which such an appeal may be heard.
Amendment II
A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of
the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS: This amendment is so commonly challenged that the movement has its
own name: gun control. Legislation banning various types of weapons is supported with the
claim that the weapons are not for legitimate sporting purposes. This is a perversion of
the right to bear arms for two reasons. First, the basis of freedom is not that
permission to do legitimate things is granted to the people, but rather that the
government is empowered to do a limited number of legitimate things -- everything else
people are free to do; they do not need to justify their choices. Second, should the need
for defense arise, it will not be hordes of deer that the security of a free state needs
to be defended from. Defense would be needed against humans, whether external invaders or
internal oppressors. It is an unfortunate fact of life that the guns that would be needed
to defend the security of a state are guns to attack people, not guns for sporting
purposes.
Firearm regulations also empower local officials, such as police chiefs, to grant or deny
permits. This results in towns where only friends of people in the right places are
granted permits, or towns where women are generally denied the right to carry a weapon
for self-defense.
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the
Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
QUARTERING SOLDIERS: This amendment is fairly clean so far, but it is not entirely safe.
Recently, 200 troops in camouflage dress with M-16s and helicopters swept through Kings
Ridge National Forest in Humboldt County, California. In the process of
searching for marijuana plants for four days, soldiers assaulted people on private land
with M-16s and barred them from their own property. This might not be a direct hit on the
third amendment, but the disregard for private property is uncomfortably close.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures. Shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall
be issue, but upon probable cause. Supported by Oath or affirmation, particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
RIGHT TO BE SECURE IN PERSONS, HOUSES, PAPERS AND EFFECTS
AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES: The RICO law is making a mockery of the right
to be secure from seizure. Entire stores of books or videotapes have been confiscated
based upon the presence of some sexually explicit items. Bars, restaurants, or houses are
taken from the owners because employees or tenants sold drugs. In Volusia County,
Florida, Sheriff Robert Vogel and his officers stop automobiles for contrived violations.
If large amounts of cash are found, the police confiscate it on the PRESUMPTION that it
is drug money -- even if there is no other evidence and no charges are filed against the
car's occupants. The victims can get their money back only if they prove the money was
obtained legally. One couple got their money back by proving it was an insurance
settlement. The Florida courts denied two other men who tried to get their two thousand
dollars back.
RIGHT TO BE SECURE IN PERSONS, HOUSES, PAPERS AND EFFECTS
AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES: A new law goes into
effect in Oklahoma on January 1, 1991. All property, real and personal, is taxable, and
citizens are required to list all their personal property for tax assessors, including
household furniture, gold and silver plate, musical instruments, watches, jewelry, and
personal, private, or professional libraries. If a citizen refuses to list their property
or is suspected of not listing something, the law directs the assessor to visit and enter
the premises, getting a search warrant if necessary. Being required to tell the state
everything you own is not being secure in one's home and effects.
NO WARRANTS SHALL ISSUE, BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, SUPPORTED BY OATH OR AFFIRMATION: As a
supporting oath or affirmation, reports of anonymous informants are accepted. This
practice has been condoned by the
Supreme Court.
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBING THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED AND PERSONS OR THINGS TO BE SEIZED:
Today's warrants do not particularly describe the things to be seized -- they list things
that might be present. For example, if police are making a drug raid, they will list
weapons as things to be searched for and seized. This
is done not because the police know of any weapons and can particularly describe them,
but because they allege people with drugs often have weapons.
Both of the above apply to the warrant the Hudson, New Hampshire, police used when they
broke down Bruce Lavoie's door at 5 a.m. with guns drawn and shot and killed him. The
warrant claimed information from an anonymous informant, and it said, among other things,
that guns were to be seized. The mention of guns in the warrant was used as reason to
enter with guns drawn. Bruce Lavoie had no guns. Bruce Lavoie was not secure from
unreasonable search and seizure -- nor is anybody else.
Other infringements on the fourth amendment include roadblocks and the Boston Police
detention of people based on colors they are wearing (supposedly indicating gang
membership). And in Pittsburgh again, Eugene Tyler was once searched because he was
wearing sweat pants and a plaid shirt -- police told him they heard many drug dealers at
that time were wearing sweat pants and plaid shirts.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a
presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury. Except in cases arising in the land or naval
forces, or in the Militia. When in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor
shall any person be subject to the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or
limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor
be
deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private
property be taken for public use without just compensation.
INDICTMENT OF A GRAND JURY: Kevin Bjornson has been proprietor of
Hydro-Tech for nearly a decade and is a leading authority on hydroponics technology and
cultivation. On October 26, 1989, both locations of Hydro-Tech were raided by the Drug
Enforcement Administration. National Drug Control Policy Director William Bennett has
declared that some indoor lighting and marijuana growers purchase hydroponics equipment,
so retailers and wholesalers of such equipment are drug profiteers and co- conspirators.
Bjornson was not charged with any crime, nor subpoenaed, issued a warrant, or arrested.
No illegal substances were found on his premises. Federal officials were unable to
convince grand juries to indict Bjornson. By February, they had called scores of
witnesses and recalled many two or three times, but none of the grand juries they
convened decided there was reason to criminally prosecute Bjornson. In spite of that, as
of March, his bank accounts were still frozen and none of the inventories or records had
been returned. Grand juries refused to indict Bjornson, but the government is still
penalizing him.
TWICE PUT IN JEOPARDY OF LIFE OR LIMB: Members of the McMartin
family in California have been tried two or three times for child abuse. Anthony Burnaby
was tried for murder (without evidence linking him to the crime) three times before New
Hampshire let him go.
COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF: Oliver North was
forced to testify against himself. Congress granted him immunity from having anything he
said to them being used as evidence against him, and then they required him to talk.
After he did so, what he said was used to find other evidence that was used against him.
The courts also play games where you can be required to testify against yourself if you
testify at all. 
COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF: In the New York
Central Park assault case, three people were found guilty of assault. But there was no
physical evidence linking them to the crime; semen did not match any of the defendants.
The only evidence the state had was confessions. To obtain these confessions, the police
questioned a 15-year old without a parent present -- which is illegal under New York
State law. Police also refused to let the subject's Big Brother, an attorney for the
Federal government, see him during questioning. Police screamed You better tell us what
we want to hear and cooperate or you are going to jail, at 14-year-old Antron McCray,
according to Bobby McCray, his father. Antron McCray confessed after his father told him
to, so that police would release him. These people were coerced into bearing witness
against themselves, and those confessions were used to convict them.
COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF: Your answers to Census questions are required
by law, with a $100 penalty for each question not answered. But people have been evicted
for giving honest Census answers. According to the General Accounting Office, one of the
most frequent ways city governments use census informations is to detect illegal
two-family dwellings. This has happened in Montgomery County, Maryland; Pullman,
Washington; and Long Island, New York. The August 8, 1989, Wall Street Journal reports
this and other ways Census answers have been used against the answers.
COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF: Drug tests are being
required from more and more people, even when there is no probable cause, no accident,
and no suspicion of drug use. Requiring people to take drug tests compels them to provide
evidence against themselves.
DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW: This clause is
violated on each of the item life, liberty, and property. Incidents including such
violations are described elsewhere in this article. Here are two more: On March 26, 1987,
in Jeffersontown, Kentucky, Jeffrey Miles was killed by police officer John Rucker, who
was looking for a suspected drug dealer. Rucker had been sent to the wrong house; Miles
was not wanted by police. He received no due process. In Detroit, $4,834 was seized from
a grocery store after dogs detected traces of cocaine on three one-dollar bills in cash
register.
PRIVATE PROPERTY TAKEN FOR PUBLIC USE WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION: RICO is shredding this
aspect of the Bill of Rights. The money confiscated by Sheriff Vogel goes directly into
Vogel's budget; it is not regulated by the legislature. Federal and local governments
seize and auction boats, buildings, and
other property. Under RICO, the government is seizing property without due process. The
victims are required to prove not only that they are not guilty of a crime, but that they
are entitled to their property. Otherwise, the government auctions off the property and
keeps the proceeds.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public
trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been
committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be
informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses
against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining Witnesses in his favor, and to have
the assistance of counsel for his defense.
THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL: Surprisingly, the right to a public trial is
under attack. When Marion Barry was being tried, the prosecution attempted to bar Louis
Farrakhan and George Stallings from the gallery. This request was based on an allegation
that they would send silent and impermissible messages to the jurors. The judge initially
granted this request. One might argue that the whole point of a public trial is to send a
message to all the participants: The message is that the public is watching; the trial
had better be fair. 
BY AN IMPARTIAL JURY: The government does not even honor the right to trial by an
impartial jury. US District Judge Edward Rafeedie is investigating improper influence on
jurors by US marshals in the Enrique Camarena case. US marshals apparently illegally
communicated with jurors during deliberations.
OF THE STATE AND DISTRICT WHEREIN THE CRIME SHALL HAVE BEEN COMMITTED: This is
incredible, but Manuel Noriega is being tried so far away from the place where he is
alleged to have committed crimes that the United States had to invade another country and
overturn a government to get him. Nor is this a unique occurrence; in a matter separate
from the Camarena case, Judge Rafeedie was asked to dismiss charges against Mexican
gynecologist Dr. Humberto Alvarez Machain on the grounds that the doctor was illegally
abducted from his Guadalajara office in April and turned over to US authorities. 
TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF THE CCUSATION: Steve Jackson Games, nearly put
out of business by the raid described previously, has been stonewalled by the SS. For the
past month or so these guys have been insisting the book wasn't the target of the raid,
but they don't say what the target was, or why they were critical of the book, or why
they won't give it back, Steve Jackson says. They have repeatedly denied we're targets
but don't explain why we've been made victims.
Attorneys for SJG tried to find out the basis for the search warrant that led to the raid
on SJG. But the application for that warrant was sealed by order of the court and
remained sealed at last report, in July. Not only has the SS taken property and nearly
destroyed a publisher, it will not even explain the nature and cause of the accusations
that led to the raid.
TO BE CONFRONTED WITH THE WITNESSES AGAINST HIM: The courts are beginning to play fast
and loose with the right to confront witnesses. Watch out for anonymous witnesses and
videotaped testimony.
TO HAVE COMPULSORY PROCESS FOR OBTAINING WITNESSES: Ronald Reagan resisted submitting to
subpoena and answering questions about Irangate, claiming matters of national security
and executive privilege. A judge had to dismiss some charges against Irangate
participants because the government refused to provide information subpoenaed by the
defendants. And one wonders if the government would go to the same lengths to obtain
witnesses for Manuel Noriega as it did to capture him.
TO HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL: The right to assistance of
counsel took a hit recently. Connecticut Judge Joseph Sylvester is refusing to assign
public defenders to people ACCUSED of drug- related crimes, including drunk driving.
TO HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL: RICO is also affecting the
right to have the assistance of counsel. The government confiscates the money of an
accused person, which leaves them unable to hire attorneys. The IRS has served summonses
nationwide to defense attorneys, demanding the names of clients who paid
cash for fees exceeding $10,000.
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the
right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be
otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of
common law. 
RIGHT OF TRIAL BY JURY IN SUITS AT COMMON LAW: This is a simple
right; so far the government has not felt threatened by it and has not made attacks on it
that I am aware of. This is our only remaining safe haven in the Bill of Rights.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual
punishments inflicted.
EXCESSIVE BAIL AND FINES: Tallahatchie County in Mississippi charges ten dollars a day to
each person who spends time in the jail, regardless of the length of stay or the outcome
of their trial. This means innocent people are forced to pay. Marvin
Willis was stuck in jail for 90 days trying to raise $2,500 bail on an assault charge.
But after he made that bail, he was kept imprisoned because he could not pay the $900
rent Tallahatchie demanded. Nine former inmates are suing the county for this practice.
CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS: House Resolution 4079 sticks its
nose in here too: ... a Federal court shall not hold prison or jail crowding
unconstitutional under the eighth amendment except to the extent that an individual
plaintiff inmate proves that the crowding causes the infliction of cruel and unusual
punishment of that inmate.
CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS: A life sentence for selling a
quarter of a gram of cocaine for $20 -- that is what Ricky Isom was sentenced to in
February in Cobb County, Georgia. It was Isom's second conviction in two years, and state
law imposes a mandatory sentence. Even the judge pronouncing the sentence
thinks it is cruel; Judge Tom Cauthorn expressed grave reservations before sentencing
Isom and Douglas Rucks (convicted of selling 3.5 grams of cocaine in a separate but
similar case). Judge Cauthorn called the sentences Draconian.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or
disparage others retained by the people. OTHER RIGHTS RETAINED BY THE PEOPLE: This
amendment is so weak today that I will ask not what infringements there are on it but
rather what exercise of it exists at all? What law can you appeal to a court to find you
not guilty of violating because the law denies a right retained by you?
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it
to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
POWERS RESERVED TO THE STATES OR THE PEOPLE: This amendment is also weak, although it is
not so nonexistent as the ninth amendment. But few states set their own speed limits or
drinking age limits. Today, we mostly think of this country as the -- singular -- United
States, rather than a collection of states. This concentration of power detaches laws
from the desires of people -- and even of states. House Resolution 4079 crops up again
here -- it uses financial incentives to get states to set specific penalties for certain
crimes. Making their own laws certainly must be considered a right of the states, and
this right is being infringed upon.
Out of ten amendments, nine are under attack, most of them under multiple attacks of
different natures, and some of them under a barrage. If this much of the Bill of Rights
is threatened, how can you be sure your rights are safe? A right has to be there
when you need it. Like insurance, you cannot afford to wait until you need it and then
set about procuring it or ensuring it is available. Assurance must be made in advance.
The bottom line here is that your rights are not safe. You do not know when one of your
rights will be violated. A number of rights protect accused persons, and you may think it
is not important to protect the rights of criminals. But if a right is not there for
people accused of crimes, it will not be there when you need it. With the Bill of Rights
in the sad condition described above, nobody can be confident they will be able to
exercise the rights to which they are justly entitled. To preserve our rights for
ourselves in the future, we must defend them for everybody today.