4/26/00 1:15 p.m.
Is Miami Another Waco?
The somewhat apt comparison is misleading in a
broader sense.
By David B. Kopel, Independence Institute, and Paul H.
Blackman, NRA
n Holy Saturday, heavily-armed Federal
agents broke into a house, filled with persons
suspected of no “crime” other than harboring a
six-year-old refugee whom the government
wrongly called an “illegal alien.” The
government invaded even though negotiations
were making good progress (according to the
mediator picked by Janet Reno), waved
automatic weapons at a child, threatened to
shoot adults, desecrated religious items, sprayed
noxious gas indiscriminately, flouted the rule of
law it pretended to uphold, and lied about
everything.
Some critics compared the kidnapping to the
1993 attacks on the Branch Davidians.
As in Waco, the people in the household were
readily available to authorities, and regularly
dealt with them in a peaceful manner. As in
Waco, the head of the household showed a
willingness to negotiate any problems. David
Koresh invited the authorities to see his guns as
soon as he learned they were the subject of an
investigation. Elian’s Miami family was
negotiating with the authorities as the raid
occurred, and had agreed to relinquish custody
of Elian — as long as Elian’s transfer took place
slowly and peacefully, in a neutral setting.
As in Waco, the basis for breaking into the
house was a federal warrant, rubberstamped by a
magistrate with little concern with whether the
affidavit supporting the warrant was accurate or
relevant.
Although the Waco comparison is apt in some
details, it is misleading in a broader sense,
because the comparison implies that events like
Waco and the illegal Elian abduction are
unusual.
What really distinguishes the Waco and Miami
incidents from standard federal, state, and local
government practices is the amount of media
coverage. “Dynamic entries” (home invasions)
by militarized police are common in the current
“wars” on “drugs” and “guns.” Sometimes, the
subjects are bad guys who should be rooted out
by the authorities; in other cases, as in the
Denver Police Department’s slaying of Ismael
Mena last September, the invasion is based on
flimsy evidence, and the wrong home gets
invaded. Even when the right home is targeted,
the degree of violence far exceeds what is
appropriate to serve a search warrant.
Notably, General Reno’s pretext for taking Elian
by force with SWAT team waving machine guns
was the possibility the people in the home might
have exercised their constitutional right to own
and carry firearms.
Reno’s rationale is a justification for “dynamic
entry” invasions of every home in the U.S., since
about half of all households in the U.S. exercise
their Second Amendment rights, and the
government has no way of knowing exactly
which households. Indeed, SWAT team
invasions have become an ordinary method of
serving search warrants under Reno’s tenure,
intensifying a trend initiated by the Reagan/Bush
“war on drugs.” In previous generations, federal
law enforcement managed to serve search
warrants through more peaceful methods, even
though household gun ownership was common
then, too.
As many advocates of shipping Elian back to
Cuba have pointed out, Cuba is different from
America, in that Cuba has much stricter gun
control. The Batista regime had imposed gun
registration, and then Castro used the
registration records to confiscate guns from
average Cubans. Once the guns were collected,
Castro’s pretensions about democracy and civil
liberties were cast aside. As in Hitler’s Germany,
some people in Castro’s Cuba are still allowed
to possess guns, if they are deemed politically
reliable.
For those Americans who believe that a
constitutional republic is a better form of
government than a communist dictatorship (free
health care notwithstanding), the focus of
Congressional hearings needs to go far beyond a
particular instance of a violent home invasion
and its bodyguard of lies. The real question is
whether the Democrats and, especially, the
Republicans now calling for an investigation,
are going to be concerned just about the case of
Elian Gonzales and his relatives — or whether
they will tackle the bigger job of reversing
militarization of American law enforcement,
even in cases where the media are not present to
record the inevitable atrocities.
The authors of this column are speaking for themselves,
and not necessarily for the organizations they work for.
Kopel and Blackman are co-authors of "No More Wacos:
What’s Wrong with Federal Law Enforcement, and How to
Fix It," which was given the 1997 Thomas S. Szasz Award
for Outstanding Contributions to the Cause of Civil
Liberties, presented by the Center for Independent
Thought.
Is Miami Another Waco?
The somewhat apt comparison is misleading in a
broader sense.
By David B. Kopel, Independence Institute, and Paul H.
Blackman, NRA
n Holy Saturday, heavily-armed Federal
agents broke into a house, filled with persons
suspected of no “crime” other than harboring a
six-year-old refugee whom the government
wrongly called an “illegal alien.” The
government invaded even though negotiations
were making good progress (according to the
mediator picked by Janet Reno), waved
automatic weapons at a child, threatened to
shoot adults, desecrated religious items, sprayed
noxious gas indiscriminately, flouted the rule of
law it pretended to uphold, and lied about
everything.
Some critics compared the kidnapping to the
1993 attacks on the Branch Davidians.
As in Waco, the people in the household were
readily available to authorities, and regularly
dealt with them in a peaceful manner. As in
Waco, the head of the household showed a
willingness to negotiate any problems. David
Koresh invited the authorities to see his guns as
soon as he learned they were the subject of an
investigation. Elian’s Miami family was
negotiating with the authorities as the raid
occurred, and had agreed to relinquish custody
of Elian — as long as Elian’s transfer took place
slowly and peacefully, in a neutral setting.
As in Waco, the basis for breaking into the
house was a federal warrant, rubberstamped by a
magistrate with little concern with whether the
affidavit supporting the warrant was accurate or
relevant.
Although the Waco comparison is apt in some
details, it is misleading in a broader sense,
because the comparison implies that events like
Waco and the illegal Elian abduction are
unusual.
What really distinguishes the Waco and Miami
incidents from standard federal, state, and local
government practices is the amount of media
coverage. “Dynamic entries” (home invasions)
by militarized police are common in the current
“wars” on “drugs” and “guns.” Sometimes, the
subjects are bad guys who should be rooted out
by the authorities; in other cases, as in the
Denver Police Department’s slaying of Ismael
Mena last September, the invasion is based on
flimsy evidence, and the wrong home gets
invaded. Even when the right home is targeted,
the degree of violence far exceeds what is
appropriate to serve a search warrant.
Notably, General Reno’s pretext for taking Elian
by force with SWAT team waving machine guns
was the possibility the people in the home might
have exercised their constitutional right to own
and carry firearms.
Reno’s rationale is a justification for “dynamic
entry” invasions of every home in the U.S., since
about half of all households in the U.S. exercise
their Second Amendment rights, and the
government has no way of knowing exactly
which households. Indeed, SWAT team
invasions have become an ordinary method of
serving search warrants under Reno’s tenure,
intensifying a trend initiated by the Reagan/Bush
“war on drugs.” In previous generations, federal
law enforcement managed to serve search
warrants through more peaceful methods, even
though household gun ownership was common
then, too.
As many advocates of shipping Elian back to
Cuba have pointed out, Cuba is different from
America, in that Cuba has much stricter gun
control. The Batista regime had imposed gun
registration, and then Castro used the
registration records to confiscate guns from
average Cubans. Once the guns were collected,
Castro’s pretensions about democracy and civil
liberties were cast aside. As in Hitler’s Germany,
some people in Castro’s Cuba are still allowed
to possess guns, if they are deemed politically
reliable.
For those Americans who believe that a
constitutional republic is a better form of
government than a communist dictatorship (free
health care notwithstanding), the focus of
Congressional hearings needs to go far beyond a
particular instance of a violent home invasion
and its bodyguard of lies. The real question is
whether the Democrats and, especially, the
Republicans now calling for an investigation,
are going to be concerned just about the case of
Elian Gonzales and his relatives — or whether
they will tackle the bigger job of reversing
militarization of American law enforcement,
even in cases where the media are not present to
record the inevitable atrocities.
The authors of this column are speaking for themselves,
and not necessarily for the organizations they work for.
Kopel and Blackman are co-authors of "No More Wacos:
What’s Wrong with Federal Law Enforcement, and How to
Fix It," which was given the 1997 Thomas S. Szasz Award
for Outstanding Contributions to the Cause of Civil
Liberties, presented by the Center for Independent
Thought.