Wondering if anyone else considers excessive the unfocused fear that seems pervasive in much of the US these days.
Just got back from DC, where I and my family had the pleasure of being treated as potential criminals for the pleasure of visiting our capital. Worst was at the Washington Monument. First my wife got rudely shoved by failing to move quickly enough from one outside line to another. Of course, the ranger doing the shoving did not see that she was waiting for someone to pass in front of her, so he shoved her right into the other person.
Then, when confronted with the incredibly high security inside, and I asked what they were looking for, they cited 9/11. Sorry guys, I don’t have a hijacked 727 in my pocket. Nor do I intend to fly the monument into the Pentagon.
And waited for approximately 30 minutes for a line of maybe 40 people to be cleared to visit the Library of Congress. Terrorism alert! They’re coming after our books!
I go into federal courthouses nearly every day. And they have far less intrusive security than I had to submit to in order to enter the National Art Gallery.
Traffic patterns and parking are disrupted. Gotta deny terrorists convenient parking for the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials.
In Chicago Mayor Daley cites a fear of terrorism as justification for his nighttime destruction of Meigs Field.
And who - the federal government, the states, or local governments - will be able to afford these security measures? What else will need to be sacrificed to sustain them?
It seems to me that many security measures I encounter are excessive. And I dislike the change I see in which Americans are becoming accustomed to consenting to more and more invasive searches. So long as you refuse to identify exacty what you are looking for, you can justify essentially any measure.
<sarcasm>Of course, every day that I don’t get gassed, shot, bombed, hijacked, etc. by terrorists, Iraqis, or other nameless/faceless foes, adds to the success of these much needed measures.</sarcasm>