Sorry, but we think random stops and searches of vehicles en route to the airport is overkill, and we have substantial doubts about its efficacy, fairness and constitutionality. Today, it's Atlanta and Denver announcing the institution of the stops:

"Starting Monday, police will randomly pull over cars heading to the Denver International Airport terminal for inspection. Sally Convington says the inspections, asked for by the Transportation Security Administration, shouldn't cause any unusual delays for most travelers. Anyone going to levels four, five, or six will be subject to the random inspections. Since the nation moved to Orange alert status, any car parked in the parking garage or lot is subject to a search by authorities."

The policy is the result of an Order issued by the Transportation Security Administration, the federal agency in charge of airport safety. It has instructed local police to begin looking through cars and trucks approaching airport terminals for weapons or explosives.

We think they are going too far. The reference to Denver's "levels four, five or six" are to the passenger pickup, passenger drop off (ticketing) and baggage claim levels. So if we go to drop someone off, they now can pull us over and search our car, without an individualized reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing. We don't think so.

Roadblocks are legal ways state and federal law enforcement protect U.S. borders and assure highway safety. But they are only allowed under the law for specific reasons, such as to search for illegal aliens and to check for sobriety - not to ferret out crime.

Officials are being close-mouthed about details of the policy, which has understandably drawn the ire of civil libertarians.

''They said to give us any details at all, even the broadest parameters of this program, would jeopardize security,'' said Barry Steinhardt, director of the American Civil Liberty Union's Technology and Liberty Program, ''as if Osama bin Laden was sitting in a cave somewhere in Pakistan worrying about whether or not (U.S. officials) are advising the airport authorities to adhere to the constitution.''

The policy is already in effect in San Antonio, Philadelphia, San Jose, Oakland, San Francisco and elsewhere. Not in Seattle though--authorities there have refused to go along with the privacy invading plan:

In Washington, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport officials have rejected the inspections, saying the state constitution prohibits police searches that aren't based on suspicious behavior. ''On a public roadway in the state of Washington, a police officer needs something 'articulably suspicious' to search a car,'' said Sea-Tac spokesman Bob Parker. ''We're trying to find a way to all get to the same place, which is as safe an airport as we can make it. If (federal officials) mandate this and show us a way that it's legal under our state constitution, then we're good to go.''

At least one law professor thinks the program will pass court muster:

Constitutional scholars agree that high courts have historically granted law enforcement officials the authority to take action to protect public safety in populated settings like an airport terminal. ''I'm confident that the courts will say the necessity of avoiding bombs detonating at airports would justify this kind of search,'' said Santa Clara University law professor Gerald Uelmen. ''In this era of concern for terrorism, I'm confident the courts would strike the balance in permitting these kinds of intrusions based on public safety and necessity.''

Where is the showing that public safety requires this action--or that it will make us any safer? What are the statistics on people dropping explosives off at the airport? We haven't read of many--if any. This is definitely pushing the envelope, and we have strong doubts the policy will be executed in a truly non-discriminatory manner.

So what should you do if you see flashing lights behind you en route to the airport? Well, we don't give legal advice here, but we'll tell you what we intend to do if they pull us over. We will stop as we approach the roadblock, or pull over if reqested. We will comply with a demand to show our driver's license or proof of citizenship. We will not answer questions about where we are traveling or why we are going to the airport. We will refuse to consent to a search of our car. If they still want to search it, it will be without our approval. We think the police do not have the right to search our car unless, while we are stopped, unless specific facts develop that lead them to believe criminal activity is afoot. If we feel our right to privacy was violated, we will write a letter to the head of the local police department outlining the name of the officer, his badge number and our belief that he requested or performed an illegal search.

To avoid making a bad situation worse, we will make our refusal to waive our rights or consent to a search very clear. Then we will be cooperative and not stand in their way, even if we think they are violating the law or our rights. If we get charged with a crime based upon what they find in our car, our lawyer will challenge their actions in court.