This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

all this monitoring talk, now NYPD to search bags on subways — Brooklynian

all this monitoring talk, now NYPD to search bags on subways

pitu
edited November -1 in Prospect Heights
I find this very disturbing (and I don't think it will make us safer)

Police to Check Bags on NYC Subways
By SARA KUGLER, Associated Press Writer
July 21, 2005

Police will begin conducting random searches of packages and backpacks
carried by people entering city subways, Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced Thursday
after a new series of bomb attacks in London.

Authorities said the system is still being developed, but the plan is for
passengers carrying bags to be selected at random before they have passed through
turnstiles.

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly promised that officers would not engage in
racial profiling, and that passengers will be free to "turn around and leave"
rather than consent to a search.

Officials would not immediately say how frequently the checks would occur.
The checks are scheduled to begin at some stations by Thursday evening and will
be occurring throughout the system by rush hour on Friday.

"We just live in a world where, sadly, these kinds of security measures are
necessary," Bloomberg said. "Are they intrusive? Yes, a little bit. But we are
trying to find that right balance."

Searching the bags of more than a token number of straphangers may be
impossible.

New York's subways carry about 4.5 million passengers on the average weekday,
according to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

There are 468 subway stations in the system, most of which have multiple
entrances, and during rush hours, the flood of commuters hurrying in and out of
key stations can be overwhelming.

Asked whether the searches might create bottlenecks at subway entrances,
Kelly suggested the searches would be of a small enough sampling of passengers
that only individuals, rather than whole crowds, would be delayed.

"We are going to do it in a reasonable commonsense way," he said.

Similar types of random searches of subway passengers have prompted
complaints from civil liberties groups in other cities, and in some cases have been
challenged in court.

Christopher Dunn, associate legal director of the New York Civil Liberties
Union, said the searches in New York could be problematic, if not conducted
properly.

"The department can and should be actively and aggressively investigating
anyone they suspect of bringing explosives into the subway, but police searches
of people without any individualized suspicion is contrary to our most basic
constitutional values," he said.

Authorities said there is also a possibility that checks will be conducted on
some bus and train passengers.

Copyright © 2005 The Associated Press
«13

Comments

  • Subject: Re: all this monitoring talk, now NYPD to search bags on sub

    pitu wrote: I find this very disturbing (and I don't think it will make us safer)

    i call bullshit. this "initiative" will last for about a day before it goes the way of the photo ban, the coffee-on-the-train ban, etc.
  • The NYCLU quote they used in the article is not very informative. Do people have the right to decline random searches in a public facility?
  • dailyheights wrote: The NYCLU quote they used in the article is not very informative. Do people have the right to decline random searches in a public facility?
    yeah youre permitted to turn around and walk off if you dont agree to the search. but you cant pass and not agree to one of their forced... er i mean anti-terrorist searches.

    this is all smoke and mirrors. these initiatives are nothing more than a waste of time and money that irritates already harried commuters.
  • Almost makes you want to carry around a bag full of large Goatse glossies. If they searched you, it'd serve them right. The reaction would be priceless....

    You'd need a two-man team to get it on film though.

    Rhodamine, will you be my wing man?
  • I think its funny here in the US people think we can actually do something to "prevent" suicide bombings, regardless of what you think of Israel, they havent found a way to stop them and they arent dumbasses. In Iraq we have how many profesionally trained soldiers with big guns and they cant do squat to stop suicide bombings, what makes Bloomberg think NYPD of all organized forces can do anything. They had another set of bombs in london again, does anyone actually think they werent on the lookout for that sort of thing. You might as well try to strain angel hair pasta on a sewer grating.

    If you ask me this all a huge drain on money so nypd can play "cops and bombers" and fatten the pensions at our expense citing "safety from terror" all the way to the bank. In the end we will be broke, those profiting from terror will be rich, and the terrorists will have won.

    Its all pointless, the best you can do is make sure you family knows you love them when you leave in the morning and get home at night.
  • I am going to take a shit in a box. Then I am going to put the box in my bag and hope to get searched. HAH!
  • Alex wrote: I am going to take a shit in a box. Then I am going to put the box in my bag and hope to get searched. HAH!
    Taking horseycraze's advice, huh? I like it...
  • Carnivore wrote: Almost makes you want to carry around a bag full of large Goatse glossies. If they searched you, it'd serve them right. The reaction would be priceless....

    You'd need a two-man team to get it on film though.

    Rhodamine, will you be my wing man?
    Hilarious idea, in theory. However, that might remind cops of what they used to do with plungers...
  • Anonymous wrote: [quote=Carnivore]Almost makes you want to carry around a bag full of large Goatse glossies. If they searched you, it'd serve them right. The reaction would be priceless....

    You'd need a two-man team to get it on film though.

    Rhodamine, will you be my wing man?
    Hilarious idea, in theory. However, that might remind cops of what they used to do with plungers...

    I used to live down the street from a police precinct in the Bronx. I remember after the Abner Louima incident, they had just introduced their slogan "Courtesy, Professionalism, Respect" (abbreviated CPR on their vehicles). I remember someone tagged up on a police van "corrupt perverted racists" using the "CPR" printed on the van for the first letter of each.
  • who do i have to call to tell them that the way to deter future "terrorist" (and i hate using that word, it's been hijacked by our administration) attacks is to fire the policy makers, and not search the purses of American citizens.

    argh!! dah!!
  • honestly...how difficult would it to have random bomb sniffing dogs going through the trains on lines that go over/under a river? this search nonsense is just a show-face measure. some dogs would be better, they have them all over the financial district, EVEN on the weekends. think about it, dogs on trains, it would also make the commute that much cuter.
  • Subject: New Yorkers Do Not Consent to Being [arbitrarily] Searched

    "I Do Not Consent to Being Searched"

    Buy T-Shirts and Bumper Stickers @ www.cafepress.com/dontconsent

    NOTE: FLUTE has no financial interest in this company ... she just found it on-line and thought it interesting.
  • Carnivore wrote: Almost makes you want to carry around a bag full of large Goatse glossies. If they searched you, it'd serve them right. The reaction would be priceless....

    You'd need a two-man team to get it on film though.

    Rhodamine, will you be my wing man?
    oh, i would soo be down for that, hahahahaha :lol::lol::lol:
  • A friend of mine brought up a provocative question: if these are warrantless searches, isn't anything they find inadmissible? Seems like they could find a bomb and not be able to prosecute for it.
  • I know nothing about this ... but I was thinking they might cite "national emergency" or "extreme danger to the public" to get around the non-warrant issue.
  • EmilyM wrote: A friend of mine brought up a provocative question: if these are warrantless searches, isn't anything they find inadmissible? Seems like they could find a bomb and not be able to prosecute for it.
    I'm not a lawyer, but I think that if you consent to be searched, it is admissible. Also, if they have probable cause (you're breaking some other law, or you fit a desciption of a specific suspect), I think they can search you against your will and it's admissible.
  • What if they're looking for a bomb and find reefer or moonshine?
  • I find the likelihood of THAT happening highly unlikely ... :wink:
  • Captain M wrote: What if they're looking for a bomb and find reefer or moonshine?
    I think you're SOL if you consented to the search. Honestly, isn't that what all this shit is really about. This whole patriot act agenda is about using terrorism as a pretext to expand police powers to be used for things that have nothing to do with terrorism.
  • Carnivore wrote: [quote=Captain M]What if they're looking for a bomb and find reefer or moonshine?
    I think you're SOL if you consented to the search. Honestly, isn't that what all this shit is really about. This whole patriot act agenda is about using terrorism as a pretext to expand police powers to be used for things that have nothing to do with terrorism.
    I should probably be more careful about what I say now that we know that DH is in cahoots with the FBI and CIA. :x :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea:
  • " I should probably be more careful about what I say now that we know that DH is in cahoots with the FBI and CIA. "

    And so he should be, given the truly subversive nature of some of the posts we've seen lately. :!: :shock:
  • FWIW, discussion on my friend's post has turned its attention to the fact that police sometimes make up a probably cause ex post facto...
  • EmilyM wrote: FWIW, discussion on my friend's post has turned its attention to the fact that police sometimes make up a probably cause ex post facto...
    Absolutely. And if you really piss them off, they'll also trump up "resisting arrest" charges. Unless you have witnesses who can testify, it's your word against theirs.
  • Two words: Patriot Act. If its in the name of the War on Terror, then it flies.
  • This whole patriot act agenda is about using terrorism as a pretext to expand police powers to be used for things that have nothing to do with terrorism.
    Carnivore, this is an easy thing to say or believe, but without backing it up with proof, it’s just an empty statement. Show some examples and you might get a meaningful debate. Otherwise all you'll get is empty-headed regurgitation of what people hear on the radio or see on TV.
  • I have very mixed feelings about this. Actually preventing terrorism is an exercise in futility, because you can't possible anticipate all the evil things a sick mind can come up with. The subway system is very vulnerable, and the attacks in London, at least the last ones, were carried out by someone with a backpack. at least they're trying to do something here! What else is the city supposed to do?

    So what if they look in my backpack. Let them! I'd rather that than getting blown up by someone elses backpack. The city doesn't have the money to carry this on permanently. I think it's a very small inconvenience, one that I'm willing to deal with for a { maybe just perceived} feeling of safety. And I wouldn't be carrying a load of marijuana or moonshine in my bag either, if I am, I'll take a cab!
  • sje wrote: I have very mixed feelings about this. Actually preventing terrorism is an exercise in futility, because you can't possible anticipate all the evil things a sick mind can come up with. The subway system is very vulnerable, and the attacks in London, at least the last ones, were carried out by someone with a backpack. at least they're trying to do something here! What else is the city supposed to do?

    So what if they look in my backpack. Let them! I'd rather that than getting blown up by someone elses backpack. The city doesn't have the money to carry this on permanently. I think it's a very small inconvenience, one that I'm willing to deal with for a { maybe just perceived} feeling of safety. And I wouldn't be carrying a load of marijuana or moonshine in my bag either, if I am, I'll take a cab!
    i think its the concept... today they search your bag, tomorrow, its BRAIN IMPLANTS FOR ALL so they can search your THOUGHTS! :shock:

    conspiracy! conspiracy!!!!

    :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea:
  • Matt wrote:
    This whole patriot act agenda is about using terrorism as a pretext to expand police powers to be used for things that have nothing to do with terrorism.
    Carnivore, this is an easy thing to say or believe, but without backing it up with proof, it’s just an empty statement. Show some examples and you might get a meaningful debate. Otherwise all you'll get is empty-headed regurgitation of what people hear on the radio or see on TV.
    Just about every item in the patriot act was on Ashcroft's wishlist long before 9/11, and had been previously rejected by Congress for their clear violation of the Bill of Rights, specifically the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments. From the right for police to go through people's medical records and what library books they've borrowed without probable cause, to roving wiretaps, to secret search warrants allowing police to search your home without ever notifying you that they've done so, the Bush Administration has consistently sought to expand police powers from the day they took office. Just as they did in Iraq, they used the threat of terrorism to push a pre-existing agenda.

    This approach has not been limited to terrorism. The Bush administration has a pattern of using any crisis, real or imagined, to push unrelated pre-existing policies. Examples include the energy bill in response to the phony energy crisis in California, private retirement accounts in response to the impending insolvency of the social security trust fund and huge tax cuts for the richest among us in response to the recession.

    Bring it.... :x :idea:
  • somebody needs to make a button out of that :idea: symbol. cafepress, anybody?
  • dailyheights wrote: somebody needs to make a button out of that :idea: symbol. cafepress, anybody?
    I want royalties for recognizing the true meaning and glory of that emoticon!
Sign In or Register to comment.