Editorial: Wiretap bill infringes on our liberties

The Senate last week passed a bill that would expand the state's wiretap laws, but the legislation is an unnecessary government intrusion into Nevadans' private lives. The Legislature's upper house voted 20-1 to add attempted murder, battery and drive-by shootings to the list of crimes that police can ask the courts for wiretap authority.

Despite concerns about privacy rights, the Senate moved quickly on Senate Bill 120. Sen. Mark James, R-Las Vegas, contends the police need more tools to fight crime. For instance, James said that there have been 45 drive-by shootings in Clark County since the beginning of the year. Police have been stymied, though, by the lack of cooperation from victims and witnesses, who sometimes include gang members. This code of silence makes it difficult for police to gather evidence, James argues, necessitating the need for a wiretap in some cases.

James also argued that because just 10 wiretaps were approved in 1997 -- all in murder cases -- the wiretap law won't be abused. But James unintentionally does damage to his own case. If in fact the wiretap authority is rarely sought, and for just one type of crime, then why the need to add all the other offenses?

Police officers need the necessary tools to do their job. But taking shortcuts, especially when it infringes on civil liberties, isn't the answer. There are a number of ways that police could get fast answers out of suspects and solve a crime. For instance, police could beat a confession out of someone, but that type of "detective work" is not acceptable.

By the same token, listening in on someone's private conversations is dangerous and should be severely limited, not expanded. People in this nation have the right to expect that Big Brother isn't listening in on phone conversations they have with neighbors.

Certainly a lot of crimes could be solved with the expanded use of wiretaps, but at what price? Wiretaps are an invasion of privacy and heighten insecurity; their prospect sure doesn't make you feel secure in your own home.

Nevadans stubbornly -- and correctly -- cherish their privacy rights. The Assembly should reject this legislation before it places privacy rights on a slippery slope from which it is impossible to return.

archive