Why Sniffer Dogs Should Be Banned
With the growing drug culture in Australian music festivals, police presence is at an all time high. Serious questions are being raised about the state’s sniffer dogs and whether or not their bark is worst than their bite, coming under hellfire from critics questioning their effectiveness. This increasingly common, forceful tactic of the use of sniffer dogs at festivals is actually causing more harm than good, intimidating and frightening people into ingesting their whole supply of drugs, resulting in high amounts of hospitalisations, and in some cases, death. This was the brutal reality for 23-year-old Melbourne man, James Munro. James died at Sydney’s Defqon 1, after consuming three ecstasy pills. While in queue for the festival, James became
…show more content…
distraught with fear upon seeing more than 100 police and sniffer dogs at the gates of the festival. James’ father, Stephan Munro, stated, “There was a substantial police presence at the gates and James was considerably concerned he would be detected. Automatically you will cut out the number of hospitalisations due to people panicking upon sight of the dogs, and ingesting their whole weekend’s supply of drugs, if the presence of police and sniffer dogs was significantly decreased”. Not only are the risks of recreational drugs already high, but the use of sniffer dogs is intimidating, humiliating, violating and purely based on fundamental flaw, which is in fact doing more harm than good. Instead of safely ensuring a clean and enjoyable festival for all attendants, police are startling festivalgoers into consuming all their drugs in the presence of the dogs, in fear of being detected. This fear and aggression is not only causing distress in the community, but it’s triggering a string of fatalities.
Drug use in festivals is going to happen regardless, but having the dogs there pressures the drug user into a decision that will either get them caught or encourage them to take all of their drugs at once. Given the choice between doing all of the doing all of the drugs before getting into the festival or getting caught, most people will choose to do the drugs. The real evil of the use of police sniffer dogs is that they allow for the search of an innocent individual and their possessions. If a dog wrongly alerts the presence of drugs then the police can frisk, strip search, cavity search and turn all possessions upside down. The dogs change people’s behavior for the worst, not the better. Not only can the fear being put upon festivalgoers be dangerous enough, but the searches are embarrassing, and a violation of people’s belongings and privacy. It is ritual humiliation to have your pockets searched, your wallets searched, your handbags searched, all in broad daylight, and for 80% of the time, for no probable cause.
Not only are the dogs having a detrimental effect on drug users at the festivals, but they’re also casting the shadow over the people who go to festivals for pure enjoyment. New South Wales Police officers carried out 14,102 searches on people indicating they had drugs on them. Of those searches, drugs weren’t found on 11,248 occasions, meaning innocent people are being accused, harassed and violated under false allegations. Over the past decade, festival attendance has dropped significantly, at over 50%. Coincidently, police presence and patrolling has increased by 85% during that same period. However, it is no coincidence that the brutal and false accusation on behalf of the police and sniffer dogs is driving festivalgoers away. Imagine how confronting and sickening it would be to be falsely accused, strip searched, to have your personal belongs ripped through with no cause. Would you want to go back to that festival again? Festivalgoers around Australia have had enough of the ruthless police presence and the inaccuracy of the sniffer dogs, and it’s unfortunately killing the livelihood of festivals everywhere. Festivals have gone from being an entertaining day out listening to your favorite bands and just enjoying the atmosphere, to being an exhausting process of allegations, arrests, and hospitalisations, before even getting through the gates.
With the increasing in police callousness, where is the line drawn?
Police say they’ll do anything in their power to protect the people, yet with over 80% of humiliating and violating drug searches being on false grounds, is the sniffer dog really the right tool? Contrary to the beliefs of the police, the facts are that with the increasing data on the ineffectiveness of sniffer dogs, their efficiency in curbing drug use is significantly decreasing. Sniffer dogs were initially introduced to restrain the dealing of drugs, yet dealers are rarely – if ever- caught, very few people are deterred, and the risks of harm are notably increased. In one case, a 28-year-old male was found to have 2 ecstasy pills in his pocket. After handing over the pills to an officer, the officer replied to him “You’ll be able to get some more inside the venue”. If this is the police’s attitude to the issue, why have them policing the entrance at all? If drugs were getting past the dogs and the guards at the entrance, wouldn’t it be more effective if the police were patrolling inside the venue as well, if not instead? A police presence, which focuses on stopping truly anti-social behavior, violence and aggression at festivals, is all that is needed. The duty of police is to protect the people, so if there is no hostility or threatening behavior to patrons themselves or others, police strength isn't needed to be so
aggressive.
The dangers of sniffer dogs have been a significantly increasing issue in festivals for some time now, yet it only seems to be getting worse. Police continuously refuse to heed the evidence and stop stomping around festivals with their notoriously inaccurate detection tool, the sniffer dogs. Instead of ignorantly disregarding the substantial evidence, police need to step up and listen to the cries for change. If police were stationed inside the festivals, it would significantly reduce the threat and aggression that the police express and allow them to be seen on a more relatable level. This would ensure a significantly higher arrest amount, and significantly less hospitalisations and fatalities, moreover the ditching of the dogs would create much less hostility between the patrons and the police, and would allow for more communication and cooperation. Surely the millions of dollars that such operations as sniffer dogs cost could be better used in crime prevention activities that actually produce results. But the sniffer dog fiasco is just another example of the moral and policy bankruptcy of the war on drugs. We as a society will do anything, including using false accusation, because we have an obsession with drugs. Here’s an idea, what if we allowed the sale of drugs through a properly regulated, quality controlled market, which the state can tax. Not only will just doing this eradicate significantly the dangers of the underground drug market, but also it will allow for the government to finally have control over drugs. We have been fighting the war on drugs for decades on decades on decades, and obviously what has been happening just isn't working. So how about the government puts some new tactics under their belt, and then sniffer dogs can go and do something far more effective.
distraught with fear upon seeing more than 100 police and sniffer dogs at the gates of the festival. James’ father, Stephan Munro, stated, “There was a substantial police presence at the gates and James was considerably concerned he would be detected. Automatically you will cut out the number of hospitalisations due to people panicking upon sight of the dogs, and ingesting their whole weekend’s supply of drugs, if the presence of police and sniffer dogs was significantly decreased”. Not only are the risks of recreational drugs already high, but the use of sniffer dogs is intimidating, humiliating, violating and purely based on fundamental flaw, which is in fact doing more harm than good. Instead of safely ensuring a clean and enjoyable festival for all attendants, police are startling festivalgoers into consuming all their drugs in the presence of the dogs, in fear of being detected. This fear and aggression is not only causing distress in the community, but it’s triggering a string of fatalities.
Drug use in festivals is going to happen regardless, but having the dogs there pressures the drug user into a decision that will either get them caught or encourage them to take all of their drugs at once. Given the choice between doing all of the doing all of the drugs before getting into the festival or getting caught, most people will choose to do the drugs. The real evil of the use of police sniffer dogs is that they allow for the search of an innocent individual and their possessions. If a dog wrongly alerts the presence of drugs then the police can frisk, strip search, cavity search and turn all possessions upside down. The dogs change people’s behavior for the worst, not the better. Not only can the fear being put upon festivalgoers be dangerous enough, but the searches are embarrassing, and a violation of people’s belongings and privacy. It is ritual humiliation to have your pockets searched, your wallets searched, your handbags searched, all in broad daylight, and for 80% of the time, for no probable cause.
Not only are the dogs having a detrimental effect on drug users at the festivals, but they’re also casting the shadow over the people who go to festivals for pure enjoyment. New South Wales Police officers carried out 14,102 searches on people indicating they had drugs on them. Of those searches, drugs weren’t found on 11,248 occasions, meaning innocent people are being accused, harassed and violated under false allegations. Over the past decade, festival attendance has dropped significantly, at over 50%. Coincidently, police presence and patrolling has increased by 85% during that same period. However, it is no coincidence that the brutal and false accusation on behalf of the police and sniffer dogs is driving festivalgoers away. Imagine how confronting and sickening it would be to be falsely accused, strip searched, to have your personal belongs ripped through with no cause. Would you want to go back to that festival again? Festivalgoers around Australia have had enough of the ruthless police presence and the inaccuracy of the sniffer dogs, and it’s unfortunately killing the livelihood of festivals everywhere. Festivals have gone from being an entertaining day out listening to your favorite bands and just enjoying the atmosphere, to being an exhausting process of allegations, arrests, and hospitalisations, before even getting through the gates.
With the increasing in police callousness, where is the line drawn?
Police say they’ll do anything in their power to protect the people, yet with over 80% of humiliating and violating drug searches being on false grounds, is the sniffer dog really the right tool? Contrary to the beliefs of the police, the facts are that with the increasing data on the ineffectiveness of sniffer dogs, their efficiency in curbing drug use is significantly decreasing. Sniffer dogs were initially introduced to restrain the dealing of drugs, yet dealers are rarely – if ever- caught, very few people are deterred, and the risks of harm are notably increased. In one case, a 28-year-old male was found to have 2 ecstasy pills in his pocket. After handing over the pills to an officer, the officer replied to him “You’ll be able to get some more inside the venue”. If this is the police’s attitude to the issue, why have them policing the entrance at all? If drugs were getting past the dogs and the guards at the entrance, wouldn’t it be more effective if the police were patrolling inside the venue as well, if not instead? A police presence, which focuses on stopping truly anti-social behavior, violence and aggression at festivals, is all that is needed. The duty of police is to protect the people, so if there is no hostility or threatening behavior to patrons themselves or others, police strength isn't needed to be so
aggressive.
The dangers of sniffer dogs have been a significantly increasing issue in festivals for some time now, yet it only seems to be getting worse. Police continuously refuse to heed the evidence and stop stomping around festivals with their notoriously inaccurate detection tool, the sniffer dogs. Instead of ignorantly disregarding the substantial evidence, police need to step up and listen to the cries for change. If police were stationed inside the festivals, it would significantly reduce the threat and aggression that the police express and allow them to be seen on a more relatable level. This would ensure a significantly higher arrest amount, and significantly less hospitalisations and fatalities, moreover the ditching of the dogs would create much less hostility between the patrons and the police, and would allow for more communication and cooperation. Surely the millions of dollars that such operations as sniffer dogs cost could be better used in crime prevention activities that actually produce results. But the sniffer dog fiasco is just another example of the moral and policy bankruptcy of the war on drugs. We as a society will do anything, including using false accusation, because we have an obsession with drugs. Here’s an idea, what if we allowed the sale of drugs through a properly regulated, quality controlled market, which the state can tax. Not only will just doing this eradicate significantly the dangers of the underground drug market, but also it will allow for the government to finally have control over drugs. We have been fighting the war on drugs for decades on decades on decades, and obviously what has been happening just isn't working. So how about the government puts some new tactics under their belt, and then sniffer dogs can go and do something far more effective.