Weathersbee defends seizure of vehiclesI have followed...


April 20, 1997

Weathersbee defends seizure of vehicles

I have followed with some interest Brian Sullam's recent comments concerning the seizure of vehicles which are used to facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt or possession of illegal drugs.

His main theme seems to be that such vehicles should not be seized until an investigation of the relationship between driver and owner has been established. He further tries to make several unrelated, and in my view incorrect, points about the enforcement of the drug laws in Anne Arundel County.

I encourage police to seize vehicles in which they find illegal drugs and, therefore, I fully support Police Chief Larry Tolliver's efforts in that regard. The report of such a seizure is immediately sent to my office, where we determine whether forfeiture or return of the car is warranted.

While there is some inconvenience to some owners to whom we return the vehicle, my office attempts to minimize this inconvenience to the innocent. It is unrealistic to expect a patrol officer to fully investigate the ownership of the car and the driver's relationship to that person when my office is set up to do that. Besides, as you acknowledge, what we do, we do within the law.

More troubling to me are Mr. Sullam's apparent views concerning police and prosecution drug enforcement efforts. He seems to suggest that perhaps police should concentrate their efforts in the fight against illegal possession and use of drugs within our community on those "dealing" in drugs and, therefore, seize only those vehicles belonging to dealers.

For every drug "deal," there is a buyer and a seller. Frequently, the same person is both within minutes. Unless the driver of a vehicle grew or manufactured the drugs in the vehicle, there was a deal to obtain them.

Those charged and prosecuted for illegal drug possession will not generally be incarcerated, at least the first time, but they will be prosecuted. The arrest, the prosecution, the seizure of their property and the seizure of the vehicles are risks those in possession of drugs must take to "deal" in them. I will not reduce those risks.

I suggest that drug abuse occurs in all communities of this country. If people lend their vehicles to others, they run the risk of its seizure, if drugs are found within them. Maybe Mr. Sullam should encourage readers who want to be more secure in the possession of their vehicles not to loan their cars to others without assuring themselves that the vehicle will not be used for the transportation of controlled dangerous substances. Law enforcement need not provide the only risks drug users face.

Perhaps more, rather than fewer efforts, against the "user" may be warranted. Without buyers, there are no sellers.

Frank R. Weathersbee


The writer is Anne Arundel County state's attorney.

Unanswered questions about waste transfer

Recent articles about the proposed waste transfer station in Elkridge have mentioned the one recently opened in Anne Arundel County.

Since one of the two main routes to that site runs almost entirely in Howard County, how much will it cost the county for the upkeep of Guilford Road with the heavy, constant traffic of monstrous dump trucks between Dorsey Run and Brock Bridge roads?

Also, is there some arrangement with Anne Arundel County for road clean-up from the trash that inevitably flies out of the trucks, both before and after tipping?

I travel this road daily and see the evidence already piling up.

Ronald B. Leve


Counting the real costs of building as we please

We have the knowledge, technology and resources to do it right. Yet every day we see example after example of the wrong model of development. Historic areas, irreplaceable farmland, critical wetlands, important watersheds, mature forests and rural vistas are being destroyed acre by acre. Traffic gridlock, commuter aggravation, air pollution and water degradation are increasing while the quality of life is decreasing.

We know the right thing to do. Yet we continue to do the wrong thing. The reasons are both complex and pervasive. But three factors are significant. Gaining understanding can motivate and focus our efforts to stop this unthinkable deterioration of our communities.

Rights-oriented culture

We are a rights-oriented culture, often ignoring the obligations that are attached to these rights.

Ellen Goodman, the noted columnist, lamented that we live in a culture in which the natural world has been relentlessly transformed into property. We believe we have an inherent right to receive the highest possible return for that property. But what does it mean for a person to own a 400-year-old tree, or irreplaceable farmland, or critical wetlands?

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.