Posted on 12/02/2005 9:54:26 PM PST by Jay777
Random police searches of riders' bags to deter terrorism in the nation's largest subway system do not violate the Constitution and are a minimal intrusion of privacy, a federal judge ruled Friday. "The risk of a terrorist bombing of New York City's subway system is real and substantial," U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman said in a 41-page ruling tossing out a lawsuit brought by the New York Civil Liberties Union.
Citing testimony that up to 50 percent of terrorist acts were directed at transportation systems, he said the need to implement counterterrorism measures was "indisputable, pressing, on-going and evolving." He called the searches effective.
The Manhattan ruling came hours after Berman heard closing arguments in the lawsuit filed in federal court in Manhattan on behalf of several subway riders.
The judge said he had no doubt that the random searches were a reasonable method of deterring and detecting a terrorist attack. He credited testimony by police officials who said the policy might lead terrorists to choose a different target.
"Because the threat of terrorism is great and the consequences of unpreparedness may be catastrophic, it would seem foolish not to rely upon those qualified persons in the best position to know," Berman said.
In its lawsuit, the NYCLU said sporadic police searches which began in July following deadly mass transit bombings in London subjected innocent riders in New York to pointless and unprecedented invasions of privacy.
NYCLU Legal Director Christopher Dunn said: "We remain confident that this program is unconstitutional and we intend to appeal immediately."
"Common sense prevails," police Commissioner Ray Kelly said after the ruling.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Ah, yes! Only the essential liberty! Amazing. No wonder liberty never survives--humans are born to be slaves. We're so eager to live in servitude, that when saddled with freedom we look around frantically for someone to tell us what to do.
A much better answer is to require everyone on the subway to go armed. The best answer is to privatize the subway system.
Count me in as a creep. Maybe it's just the rebelliousness/anti-authoritarianism that the Jesuits instilled into me as a lad, but I don't particuarly care to have Uncle Sam nosing around in my bag. Mind your own damn business.
Matter of fact I`ll do it myself.
By the way, just a word to the wise, one of the little goodies I carry around with me is a gun. I'd suggest not trying to grab something of mine and search it.
It's amazing how many misconceptions hide behind the single word "we". If you're kicking in your neighbor's "fregging door", is he included in "we" or not? I certainly agree with the other poster that your neighbor can and should respond with deadly force in that case.
But are you even part of the "we"? If you're in the armed forces, then perhaps you are--but probably not. Most of "us" are fighting vicariously. The founders must be rolling over in their graves; they worked hard to prevent the creation of a standing army, believing instead that it's your job to take up arms in self-defense, not the job of a separate warrior class. The majority of "us" are doing nothing but talking big.
Is the administration part of "us"? You wouldn't know it from their policy toward Israel; they are apparently into appeasing terrorists. If this is WWIII, then the US is currently doing the equivalent of fighting Japan while allying with Italy.
Bottom line: the rational policy is not to bravely submit to slavery in the interest of security. It's to arm, and act personally in defense of self and others. The subway ticket-takers should be asking if you have a gun, or would like to rent one from the transit authority. The state government, if it were doing its constitutional duty, would be offering courses in gun handling, marksmanship, etc., to ensure that the militia (== everyone) is well regulated (== trained).
BRAVO!
You are brainwashed brother, you are believing in an idealized utopia that the constitution never was and was never intended to be. It is an ideal that terrorism uses against us.
I deal with 1000`s of people every year in NYC as a part of my job, and I can honestly say that 99.999999999% of them are good law abiding citizens. I am talking about pure 100% unadulterated common sense here.
The only way the war against terror is to be won is for EVERY single person to pitch in and do his part, to make sacrifices and use their head.
If I saw my neighbor having middle eastern looking people over at all hours of the night like that psycho from Brooklyn 7 years ago who wanted to blow up the subway, I would not hesitate for a second to confront that SOB. I would not do it aggressively, but by simply questioning him.
Let me ask you a question, imagine some guy named Mohammed moves next door to you, you see all this weird stuff being moved into his place, electronics, bags of chemicals, you see middle eastern men you never see before visiting him all hours of the night, what would you do? Call the cops?
What the hell are cops going to do? They can`t do anything without a search warrant. You on the other hand can by simply knocking on your neighbors door and asking him what is up. If he acts like a wise ass, smash his face in, no really.
Screw the bastard. I`ve been arrested twice for assault and I don`t regret it one bit because I was right to do so. People were dealing drugs in my building and the cops had no evidence, so I took mater into my own hands, but guess what? No more drug dealing and no more a-holes hanging around my kids.
Just think, you probably do that already if your neighbors blast music at 2am, what the hell is the difference? You are comparing Nazis to common sense and reason, and you are taking out of context my point, which is these scumbags use our own constitution against us. All I am saying is the constitution can be bent without it being destroyed and it is best bent by US citizens.
You think that the US government is made up of these sadistic automatons who seek absolute power but you forget this is the UNITED STATES. One of my best friends is a secret service agent, my two brothers are cops and my cousin works for the FBI. When you say "the government" you are talking about common everyday US citizens, your relatives, your friends your neighbors.
It`s not "THEM" it is "WE". You are placing responsibilty on the military, on the cops, etc etc "because it is their job" yet you are so very eager to fight those who you deem might damage the constitution. What about those who would not hesitate to blow you up? I would think that would be a hell of a lot more important for you to focus on.
You really need to get yourself under control. One day, you're going to start something with the wrong guy and you're going to wind up laid out on the floor or maybe a heck of a lot worse.
A. Lincoln used the kind of arguments you use albeit in a better cause. We have examples of the "WE" in gov't abusing power and authority at all levels.Members of my family have at times done things I do not approve of and even seriously violated the laws;I really wish they hadn't.Neither can you be sure that your family and friends will always follow the law.
Common sense is an overused term that is hard to define,and common sense is often wrong.Common sense once held that man would never fly.
You would prefer a misquotation?
I think you should change the tag to read "We all lose".
Nope--only for you to learn English. Benjie wasn't distinguishing two kinds of liberty, namely essential and non-essential. He was characterizing liberty as essential, and then scorning those who (like you) are willing to give away some of it.
So if you suspect a neighbor is up to no good, you personally will knock his door down and start searching?
Someone tries that with me, and they'll be dead before they get past five feet into my doorway.
We fought a MUCH worse war in WWII, and didn't have such loss of freedoms.
Sure, we had blackouts, rationing etc., but the average person was secure in their possessions...
Oh well, we're heading fast towards becoming a police state, and people that were heretofore Conservatives don't seem to mind.
I thank God I lived during the glory days of this country, and I won't be around to see its demise in a few decades hence...I don't think I could take the horror of watching it.
Ed
You are a scary individual. In a bad way, not a good way.
In World War II the battlefields were distant. In this war, the battlefields are here. I'm reminded of that fact when I walk by military with M-16s nearly every day.
I recently heard an interesting analysis of fascists in a lecture by (I think) Hans Hoppe. He pointed out that the fascists of WWII were all soldiers in WWI, and were enamored of the idea of imposing military discipline on civilians in peace time. They adored the order and regimentation of the military, and despised the "chaos" of civilians pursuing a million different agendas in a million different ways.
I'm noticing the same sort of nonsense coming from "conservatives" lately. Scary.
Good luck with that in NYC...for the record, I have not heard one complaint from anyone I know -- and I know a wide variety of people -- complaining of the searches or the military.
Right--reread my earlier remark: liberty doesn't stand a chance, because most people urgently desire to be enslaved. You're merely pointing out that most New Yorkers urgently desire slavery, which is a special case of my statement.
If anything, New Yorkers are constantly testing the limits of personal freedom. What they desire is safety.
...by which you mostly mean new forms of indecent exposure. Bah. They crave slavery: they not only submit to random searches in violation of the fourth amendment, but they will submit gladly to all manner of intrusions in the future. They blabber today about how "the police should do something" about anything they'd like to see changed.
What they desire is safety.
Cure Ben Franklin again...
...by which you mostly mean new forms of indecent exposure.
No, that's not what I meant at all. I meant testing the limits of personal freedom.
For example, by gladly submitting to random searches? You aren't one of the guys working on the Newspeak dictionary, are you?
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.