To the Editor:
Wednesday's editorial ("A Cause for Outrage?") is seriously flawed by its assertions and insinuations.
Is illegal police activity a cause for outrage? It certainly is to me and for many of my generation who were beaten and jailed for our part in protests against the war in Vietnam. Is it trivial to be outraged when the activity seeks to punish those who the police feel have disobeyed laws regulating legal or illegal drugs, like alcohol or marijuana? Come on, now! Is anyone seriously going to ask that question of the 60's generation?
Had the Hanover Police only been stopping students who were "staggering down Main street drunk," I myself would still be outraged if the students were being arrested for NH Statute 179:10, since this behavior is not a violation of that statute. But if that were all that was going on, this never would have developed into a big story.
In fact, the Hanover Police have been forcing students and other underage adults to take breathalizers not because these people appear drunk, but because the police have reason, however slight, to believe they may have been drinking at all. Your own stories confirm this. Although in last Monday's story you reported that "Giaccone said last night police only stop people if they have reason to suspect an underage person is intoxicated," by Tuesday this had changed to "He said that police only approach students if they have a reason to suspect the student is underage and has been drinking."
The issue here is not the "right to party," it is the right to remain unmolested by the police as long as you aren't bothering anyone. As New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Claire Ebel was quoted in a Manchester Union Leader story on Oct. 23, "For police to suggest they have the right to approach them [young people] without probable cause and require them to submit to any kind of search is ludicrous."
She went on to say that "If a citizen is walking down the street, not breaking any law, he is not required to acknowledge the existence of a police officer." Finally, she said that if someone were arrested for refusing to take a breath test, "Then they would have the right to file a false arrest civil suit and nail their sorry [police] butts to a tree."
Certainly she seems to feel we have genuine cause for outrage. And so do I. Unlike underage possession of alcoholic beverages (which you repeatedly misidentify as "underage drinking"), illegal police activity is a serious crime.
