Yes, I have to admit I do see the situation of disregard for constitutional
rights by a governmental agency as 99% black and barely 1% grey.  This could
be from my past experiences or from my background as a hipppie.  I will
agree that there are times when a legitimate (strong emphasis on the word
legitimate) emergency situation warrants the temporary suspension of some
rights.  The example of the muffled cries coming from the trunk is an
excellant one.  Yes, by all means, see what's in the trunk.  However, if you
think you can then employ the same "emergency" as an excuse to do a
warrantless search of the person's home, business, locker at the health
club, etc.  you are very much out of line.
 
I personally believe that it is a very rare instance where a true emergency
exists that will not allow for the time needed to go through proper
channels.  Emergency measures is a very abused excuse and should always be
questioned.  If time exists to follow the proper steps then they should be
followed.  If there is actually a situation where there is an emergency
situation then the person should be made to explain the need for such
drastic actions afterward and be held accountable if the reasoning is
faulty.  Let's make emergency measures, like violence, something to be used
only when there is no other choice and not a power trip.
 
I actually sat in a trial where a director of public health tried to invoke
a section of city ordinance which gave public health emergency powers to
make new temporary rules to stop the spread of "dangerous sexually
transmitted diseases".  His argument was that, while rabies was not a
sexually transmitted disease, he felt that the intent of the ordinance was
to allow public health broad emergency authority in ANY dnagerous disease.
The judge disagreed.  And the attorney had a field day making comments about
sexually transmitted rabies, the bite victim having sex with the ferret, and
how nipping was considered having sex.
 
The problem is that too many people in positions of authority in the public
health community (not you Jeff) take themselves and their mission far too
seriously and tend to believe that anything they do is justified because
they are the guardians of the public health
 
I have always subscribed to the adage, "Never attribute to malice any act
which can easily be explained by stupidity".  I never assume someone in
public health to be evil until their actions prove them so.  I always start
from the assumption that they are ill-informed.  However, I find that, more
often than not, these people have minds like steel traps, ready to snap shut
at any time.  They treat any attempt to correct them as a threat to thier
authority, therefore a threat to their ability to protect the public health
( a little over zealous).
 
I firmly stand by my position that any public health official who abuses
their emergency authority by invoking it in non-emergency situations should
be held accountable financially as well as through disciplinary channels.  I
guess that makes me a hard-ass but I've been through it far too many times
(0ver 200 in the last 12 years).
[Posted in FML issue 1719]