1. Police advisor says we need to reconsider use of forced entry warrants.
“It’s time to change our thinking,” says Pat McCarthy, who advises police agencies across the country. “Cops are exposing themselves to increasing danger many times over, and it’s just not necessary.” […]
McCarthy said the deadly confrontation underscores a need for police to rethink their tactics.
“The days of knocking down doors in drug cases should be over. Given what’s going on now, you have to consider other options,” McCarthy said.
He said law enforcement officials should focus more on attempting to lure suspects out into the open or simply “wait them out.”
2. An intelligent piece in the Daily Mail opposing sniffer dogs and random tests in the classroom.
Not only do these invasive and enforcement-led measures not work, they are counterproductive. Labelling those tested as â€˜drug usersâ€™ is likely to reduce their confidence, happiness and self-esteem at school. Drug testing cannot distinguish between occasional, recreational drug use and more problematic patterns of use.
So youngsters at very little risk of harm will be â€˜labelledâ€™ and drawn into the net of counselling services, â€˜treatmentâ€™ centres and the criminal justice system. The consequence of a positive test result can also involve suspension or school exclusion. Ask any parent if they want this for their child.
Drug testing also runs the risk of diverting some young people to substances which are likely to be more harmful but less easily identifiable than cannabis, such as alcohol, amphetamines or volatile substances. Some may also play truant to avoid the possibility of being tested. Gyngell herself is concerned about absence from school and it is a key risk factor in initiation into drug use and developing more risky behaviours. Why make matters worse?
Drug testing and running sniffer dogs through schools is at best an expensive waste of time and at worst money spent on harming our own children.