|
Abstract
|
There is no apparent reason why the use of checkpoint inspections to discover illegally possessed firearms--what this Article will call illegal firearm checkpoints (IFCPs)--should fall outside the scope of the special needs doctrine.
Gun violence is no longer just a crime-control problem in the United States; it is a public health crisis. This crisis is most acute in densely populated and economically challenged communities. The threat of becoming the intended or innocent victim of gun violence in these communities has become so pervasive that it only seems to make the headlines when the numbers are truly shocking to the general public. Sadly, these numbers have become the norm for the residents of these communities. Government bears a responsibility to leverage every lawful measure to mitigate this safety hazard, no differently than it does for other threats that implicate both public safety and crime control, such as the detection and deterrence of intoxicated drivers. This Article considers whether the intersection of the public health risk and government responsibility will justify invocation of the so-called special needs exception to the Fourth Amendment's individualized-suspicion requirement to develop and implement illegal firearm checkpoints (IFCPs) in areas especially impacted by this surge. While the nature of the public safety risk points in the direction of validity, the danger of the pretextual use of such checkpoints as a subterfuge to intrude upon individual liberty of the very same communities bearing the brunt of gun violence presents the most significant impediment to such a tactic. In response, this Article proposes a number of measures intended to reduce this risk and ensure any such program is carefully and narrowly tailored to the legitimate objective of detection of illegal firearm possession and deterrence of the same.
Language: en |