Strip searches maximize prison security

 

A nun was strip searched after being arrested for trespassing during an antiwar demonstration. Men and women have also been subject to strip searches after arrests for driving with a noisy muffler, failing to use a turn signal and riding a bicycle without an audible bell.

On April 2, the Supreme Court upheld a ruling by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may, but are not required to, strip search anyone arrested for any offense before admitting him or her to jail, with or without evidence of the presence of contraband.

At first glance, this court ruling may appear to warrant an extremely large number of unnecessary searches and uncomfortable situations, but it is a sound way to prevent the offenders from slipping through. It is similar in that aspect to Arizona's SB 1070 ruling, which states that law enforcement officers can stop people if they look suspicious, regardless of whether they had concrete evidence. Many more innocent people will be stopped than those actually in the wrong, but it is a necessary precaution to catch those who have offended. As Justice Anthony Kennedy said, “People detained for minor offenses can turn out to be the most devious and dangerous criminals.” 

In fact, one of the terrorists involved in the attack on the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, was ticketed for speeding only a few days before hijacking Flight 93. The Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, was originally arrested for driving without a license plate before being charged with terrorism.  If he hadn’t been arrested, the police may have spent a much longer time searching for him and a criminal could have been at large in the public once again.

In addition, the safety of law enforcement and correctional officers is of the highest importance in the courts’ decisions, and anything that could possibly be used as a weapon poses a threat. For this reason, any objects that people may be hiding somewhere on their bodies should be found and removed.  

Some are concerned that the court’s ruling violates the Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens from unreasonable seizures and searches, but the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit these strip searches.  Although a strip search may not seem justified based on the original crime, the ruling is completely independent of the crime committed.  The key word in this ruling is “arrest.”  

According to the ruling, strip searches are only permitted for use on people who have been arrested and are pending jail.  The effectiveness of jails and prisons is significantly diminished when prisoners have access to contraband; strip searches allow law-enforcement officials to secure additional safety.

People who are arrested for a crime pose a potential threat to law-enforcement officers, other detainees and themselves.  It is in the best interest of everyone involved to make sure that suspects are not carrying any contraband into a jail, and the only way to ensure that is through a thorough search.