NYers to NYPD: 'I Do Not Consent to Being Searched'

The Village Voice ^ | July 21st, 200 | by Chisun Lee

[BigFinn]

Spend $16.99 so you can wear this to your grave

Reacting to the NYPD's announcement Thursday afternoon that police would randomly—but routinely—search the bags of commuters, one concerned New Yorker quickly created a way for civil libertarians to make their views black-and-white. In a few outraged moments, local immigrant rights activist Tony Lu designed t-shirts bearing the text, "i do not consent to being searched." The minimalist protest-wear can be purchased here, in various styles and sizes. (Lu will not get a cut. The shirts' manufacture, sale, and shipment, will be handled by the online retailer. Lu encourages budget-conscious New Yorkers to make their own and wear them everywhere.)

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly had announced the legally obvious—that New Yorkers are free to decline a search and "turn around and leave." But Lu, who is a lawyer at Urban Justice Center, warned that even well-intentioned cops could interpret people's natural nervousness or anger as "reasonable suspicion." The possibility of unjustified interrogation and even arrest is real, Lu said.

Although police promised they would not engage in racial profiling, Lu said that, as with all street-level policing, people of color and poor immigrants would be particularly vulnerable, especially if encounters lead to arrests.

[af_vet_rr]

Fighting for freedom in Iraq,

Let's apply it even further. We are using a lot of resources in Iraq, to secure the Iraq/Syria border.

What do we do here? Stripsearch little old ladies at airports and turn our heads the other way while people walk across our borders. Oh yes, we also search bags at random in NY because of what happened in London.

It almost feels like a Monty Python skit:
----------------
Terrorist: I just walked across your border.
USA: No you didn't.
Terrorist: Yes I did. Look, I'm doing it again.
USA: Our border is over here.
Terrorist: Okay, then I'll walk over there and walk across it.
USA: No you won't, you'll try to fly into the country like everybody else.
Terrorist: No, I'm going to walk across your border, like I just did.
USA: Shut up, you don't know what you are talking about. I didn't see you walk across the border, therefore you didn't walk across the border.
Terrorist: But I'm standing on your side of the border. You don't have to see me walk across the border, in order for me to actually walk across the border.
USA: We are going to go harass some people in New York and Washington, or at an airport.
Terrorist: Fine, but that doesn't change the fact that I walked across your border.
USA: Shut up!

[beltfed308]

Did you grow up on or before September 11th?

Pot meet kettle.

[Tactical]

Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Just curious what is unreasonable about the police searching randomly for someone carrying a weapon that intends to hurt someone. It's plain common sense.

For those that want no searchs anywhere you need to get your heads out of your butts. Although these searches won't stop all terrorists events, they will stop or deter some.

The reality of terrorism is that it's happening to us and our allies around the globe. We need to secure our borders by putting US troops on them in patrols. Screw Mexico and Canada, it's our country and we need to protect it.

They can visit or immigrate like they're supposed to...legally.

Then we need to deport all of the students that are here on expired visas. No hearings necessary, just can be depoted forthwith, as they are here illegally..send them home.

We need to know who lives in our communities, our neighborhoods and when we as citizens see anything that just doesn't look right, discuss it and call it in. Nope we don't need the Hitler Youth, that crap, we need a whole lot of common sense and plain old patriotism.

We are in this together folks like it or not, so we need to quit arguing and pull together and put a stop to it.

It's way past time to contact the elected folks in mass and tell them fix it or get out. You can't tell me the FBI and CIA and NSA and all those agencies don't have a handle on who's who in the bad guy world. Fix it. Period and quit screwing around.

OK now what else needs fixing, I'll have an answer for that too.

[Sandy]

Three words -- John Walker Lindh.

Whatever. If we're going to do searches, I think it's more reasonable to go with the odds rather than the longshot. It's pretty stupid regardless.

[Stu Cohen]

Does anybody honestly believe they won't use American citizens?

If they can't get in here, then that chance is remote.

All of you folks wriging your hands over "safety" should be marching on something to have the borders clamped off. Then you can be "safe" without having someone touch your cherry flavored K-Y to avail yourself of public transit.

And really, wouldn't that be preferable?

[TheForceOfOne]

I agree with your thoughts. Repercussions? it would seem to me that instead potential violations of the Constitution we would however end up in endless lawsuits from the ACLU their ilk.

[ArrogantBustard]

Thanks. That's big; would require a lot of cops to patrol.

But NYC has a big population.

[superiorslots]

What do we do here? Stripsearch little old ladies at airports and turn our heads the other way while people walk across our borders. Oh yes, we also search bags at random in NY because of what happened in London. It almost feels like a Monty Python skit


I don't know whether to laugh or cry anymore.

[durasell]

I'm counting on the Mole People to come through for us!

[ctdonath2]

To jail? For what? objecting to a 4th Amendment violation?

[Not A Snowbird]

If they can't get in here, then that chance is remote.

If you get nothing else from this discussion, please get this:

THEY'RE ALREADY HERE...

[Alberta's Child]

Many-probably the majority of people have no choice but to ride the subway.

They can move all walk or drive wherever they need to go. And if those options are too onerous for them, they can go live somewhere else.

This silly idea that people have "no choice but to ride the subway" is precisely how a place like New York City has ended up with a mass transit system that is over-crowded with passengers who pay very low fares to get from Point A to Point B.

[Gabz]

Of course, this also requires us to treat the subway system as a fully private system and get rid of this silly notion that being "open to the public" automatically means a private business must function as if it were operating in a public space. If the subway operator wants to prohibit all packages, bags, etc., then so be it. They should also be permitted to refuse entry to anyone who "looks suspicious" or for any reason whatsoever, which means they cannot be sued just because they turned away some swarthy guy in his pajamas wearing a long beard on his face and a diaper on his head.

You make a great deal of sense here...unfortunately there are far too many nanny-staters (especially here on FR) that believe the silly notion of "being open to the public" means it is public space.

[Stu Cohen]

>Then the cops do not consent to let them on the subway.

My first thought exactly.

Someone not breaking a law, or suspected of breaking a law should not need a cops "consent" to let them on the subway.

"Hey officer, do you mind if I take a dump? I'll let you see the thong underwear I just bought from Victoria Secret if you give me your consent".

Come on, you aren't supposed to need cops "consent" in a free country to do something as necessary as commuting.

[ArrogantBustard]

[RedRover]

I'm typing this in New York City, a few blocks from Ground Zero, from the heart of a nation at war.
I went through 9-11 and I am sick of reading comments suggesting that law enforcement in this city are somehow fascists and commie thugs.

[CyberAnt]

So .. you'd rather be blown up than allow a "random" search of packpacks ..?? And .. you consider that a violation of your privacy ..?? Which privacy, by the way, is not guaranteed by the Constitution.

IF YOU GET BLOWN UP - YOU NO LONGER HAVE ANY PRIVACY!!

SHEEEEEEESH!!

[Kokojmudd]

I am considering marketing a T-Shirt which says,

"Search me! I look like an Arab!"

[Stu Cohen]

If you get nothing else from this discussion, please get this:

THEY'RE ALREADY HERE...

Fair enough. If you get nothign else from this discussion, please get this:

GET THEM *NOT* HERE, AND MAKE SURE THAT NO MORE OF THEM "GET HERE".

[gdani]

Calling people "sheeple" is arrogant and offensive.

If the shoe fits. I have little patience for so-called "conservatives" who jettison their freedoms every time they meet a little adversity. Actually, "sheeple" is too kind of a term.

Would you prefer that New York's subway riders refuse to cooperate with the police?

I know if I still lived in NYC I wouldn't cooperate. The bad part is that the cops are caught in the middle. I'll bet the majority of them hate this BS.