Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Those Wacky Bag Searches
Menrohm ^

Posted on 07/23/2005 6:57:04 PM PDT by toaster

These Wacky Bag Searches in New York City

Am I the only one that gets this?

New York police will conduct random searches of bags at New York City subway stations. But here is the key point as reported by the New York Times:

At some of the busiest of the city's 468 stations, riders will be asked to open their bags for a visual check before they go through the turnstiles. Those who refuse will not be permitted to bring the package into the subway but will be able to leave the station without further questioning, officials said.

From another Times story, reporting the program in action:

The presence of officers seemed to vary widely among the 468 subway stations. At 42nd Street and Eighth Avenue, a sergeant used a bullhorn to tell passengers, "If you do not agree to inspection, you must exit the system."

So if I am a terrorist and I walk into a station where there is random bag checking, I just walk away and go to another entrance?

(Excerpt) Read more at menrohm.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: bagsearches; terror

1 posted on 07/23/2005 6:57:04 PM PDT by toaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: toaster

Otherwise, it would be a "seizure" under the Fourth Amendment - it's just one little clue that they know that what they're doing is wrong and unsupportable under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.


2 posted on 07/23/2005 7:01:08 PM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: toaster
So if I am a terrorist and I walk into a station where there is random bag checking, I just walk away and go to another entrance?

Or, start yelling and make a BIG scene. When a large crowd gathers to watch, blow yourself up. The complete idiocy of this whole thing is beyond belief.

3 posted on 07/23/2005 7:02:06 PM PDT by Conservative Infidel (How come they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: toaster

So the bombers will switch from carrying explosives in external backpacks/packages to wearing the stuff - under clothes, in sneakers, or internally.


4 posted on 07/23/2005 7:06:47 PM PDT by LibFreeOrDie (L'chaim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: toaster

In terms of actually finding anything in the searches, this is probably ineffective. However, it does put more cops in the subway, and while they are there, they have to have something to do. So searching bags keeps the cops busy, and it helps the politicians to appear to be taking action.


5 posted on 07/23/2005 7:13:59 PM PDT by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
Quite the contrary. Clearly you haven't read a few dozen Fourth Amendment cases from the Supreme Court. When there is the option to turn around and leave, the search is not mandatory, and the Fourth Amendment is not triggered.

I already know the argument the ACLU will make to try to shut these searches down. But I won't bore you with that. Not even a Clinton judge will, I think, be stupid enough to strike down the searches. And if he/she does, the Circuit Court will promptly reverse.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "Re: John Roberts, Supreme Court Nominee"

6 posted on 07/23/2005 7:24:52 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob (Will President Bush's SECOND appointment obey the Constitution? I give 95-5 odds on yes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

So they've converted public-funded transportation systems into a "privelege," just like everything else.

"If you don't want to be searched, just take a six-mile hike uptown in 90-degree weather, or pay ten times as much for a cab."

Some "choice."


7 posted on 07/23/2005 7:28:07 PM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
Wow. You sound like the lib-Dems, "I'm entitled! I've got my rights." First of all, streets are "publicly funded." But anyone who argued that therefore everyone has a right to use the roads -- regardless of driving habits, insurance, etc. That argument would be laughed out of any court, and if you pushed it repeatedly, you'd wind up in jail.

The random searches will prevent some bombers from doing what they seek. It will also make general crime go down in the subways generally. Do you remember Bernard Goetz, who shot some muggers in the NY subway? Crime went down on the subway for a year after that one event.

Bottom line: the authorities are making a rational and constitutional effort to deal with the situation, and your objection is?????? You have no legal basis for your objection. But feel free to call the ACLU and they'll invent a reason for you to go to court.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "Re: John Roberts, Supreme Court Nominee"

8 posted on 07/23/2005 7:46:03 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob (Will President Bush's SECOND appointment obey the Constitution? I give 95-5 odds on yes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

Last I heard, you didn't need a license to ride the subway. Your attempt to conflate driving a car with public transit is pitiful.

Random searches will prevent some bombers from doing what they seek? Are you kidding me? Are you really that much of a sucker?

The only bomber random searches will dissuade or intercept is one with room-temperature IQ. The stated policy is such that a young Arab male toting a large rucksack on his back, looking nervously around, muttering "Allah hu Akbar" under his breath over and over again, and clutching a small device in his hand, who, when he spots the police promptly turns around and walks briskly back up the subway stairs, "will be able to leave the station without further questioning."

Does this seriously make sense to you?

Instead of random searches, with police officers wasting their time rummaging through the bags of habit-wearing Catholic nuns in rigid adherance to their one-in-five search pattern in the hopes of not offending the sensitivities of suicide bombers and their apologists with "profiling," why not let the police do what they're supposed to do, and are trained to do - look for articulably suspicious behaviour by articulably suspicious people, such as the guy in a heavy coat in summer weather jumping a turnstile and dashing for a train?

Can't you see that random searches are just a wasteful, meaningless exercise in public relations?

How easy will it be for an ascendant American Taliban to impose Sharia Law if we've already done 75% of it ourselves in our futile, flailing efforts to look like we're doing something?


9 posted on 07/23/2005 8:43:38 PM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mvpel

All these random searches will end the moment that someone continues to blow up things here. At that point they will profile the ones doingit and go after them.


10 posted on 07/24/2005 12:03:01 AM PDT by TrailofTears (Safety never comes at the price of freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson