Keep calm and don't clench

If you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to hide. Just ask David Eckert, whose failure to fully stop at a Wal-Mart parking lot stop sign and apparent clenching of his buttocks gave police probable cause for narcotics possession, allowing them to do this:

1. Eckert’s abdominal area was X-rayed; no narcotics were found.
2. Doctors then performed an exam of Eckert’s anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.
3. Doctors performed a second exam of Eckert’s anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.
4. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.
5. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema a second time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.
6. Doctors penetrated Eckert’s anus to insert an enema a third time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.
7. Doctors then X-rayed Eckert again; no narcotics were found.
8. Doctors prepared Eckert for surgery, sedated him, and then performed a colonoscopy where a scope with a camera was inserted into Eckert’s anus, rectum, colon, and large intestines. No narcotics were found.

Eckert was never charged with a crime, though some reports suggest he did receive a bill of more than $6,000 for the hospital's "services". Not surprisingly, he is suing the city of Deming (New Mexico), several police officers and county deputies, the deputy district attorney and the Gila Regional Medical Center.

Those more comfortable with authoritarian tactics may note that Eckert has previous arrests for drug possession (though apparently many of those charges were dismissed). There are two immediate responses to such an observation: 1) That makes all the above OK? Innocent until proven guilty only applies some of the time? and 2) Why is seemingly any action by the state and its agents acceptable as long as it's in the name of ensuring "security"? The police's actions would be considered kidnapping and rape -- which is what they are -- were they done by anyone else, but because they were carried out with the imprimatur of the state, suddenly it's all OK. America's police forces, whether big or small, are becoming more and more militarized and increasingly behaving like paramilitary units. Is all this worth it, just so some fearful people can prolong their illusion of living in a truly safe world?

"But that could never happen to me", you might say. "I'm a law-abiding, God-fearing American citizen who has nothing to fear from the police!" Yes, and these sorts of things never happen to "good" people -- it's always those other, undesirable people who get mixed up in drugs and crime and whatnot. Be sure to remind yourself of your invulnerability the next time you see those flashing lights in your rear-view mirror and your sphincter starts to tighten. Reassure yourself that there's no way the person pulling you over could possibly mistake you for one of those Other People. And if, for some reason, you're asked to step out of your vehicle and keep your hands in plain sight while they perform a routine search, you'll quietly and happily do so because there could never be any misunderstandings or abuses of authority by those in uniform. After all, Dear Citizen, if you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to hide.